Land of the Dead (2005) Film Review: Romero's Big Yet Satisfactory Return To The Zombie Genre

George A. Romero is best known for creating the modern zombie with the "Dead" trilogy. After "Day of the Day" initially didn't receive a warm welcome in the box office or critically, Romero took a hiatus and it seemed that we might never get another film of his again. However, twenty years after Day came out, he would return to make his grand return to the genre he helped create during the most popular decade of the flesh-eating monsters. Many years after the outbreak, a community of survivors have been able to create a secure outpost in Pittsburgh. The majority of survivors live on the streets protected by an electric fence and soldiers, while a group of volunteers will travel outside the city to grab food and supplies. The community is overrun by Paul Kaufman, the owner of an apartment complex known as Fiddler's Green, where the rich are able to live in comfort and security without worry of the dangers outside. When Kaufman denies a place at Fiddler's Green for the hard-working mercenary, Cholo, the hot-headed punk takes over a weaponized vehicle known as Dead Reckoning and threatens to blow up the building unless he's paid five million dollars. Kaufman decides to hire Riley, Cholo's former partner, in order to stop Cholo with a group of his own. While all of this is occurring, the survivors are unaware that the zombies are becoming more intelligent, as a leader of the hoard known as Big Daddy, are making their way towards the city and Fiddler's Green, seeking vengeance for their slain people. There's a lot that's happening in the plot, especially for the short runtime. While all three stories work fine enough and do all merge together by the end, the issue is that the story with Riley being hired to take down Cholo is the most uninteresting story. Not only are the characters involved in that story not interesting or engaging, but it really makes them unlikeable as they are taking orders from the villain to stop a guy with real motivation to kill the corrupt ruler of the city. It could be by design to make everyone this moral grey status, but it backfires on the characters and it just makes the viewers root for the zombies. The narrative as a whole though is still entertaining and the third act practically pays off everything that has been established. The tone is still in nature to Romero's franchise with a sense of humour and references to previous work, though still takes itself serious. It's pretty good and is accessible to those who both want a serious horror flick or a fun horror movie, though I personally think that Romero's previous films had a more solid tone.

The characters of the previous "Dead" films were generally pretty good. Not only are there plenty of fun and badass characters who take charge, but a lot of them feel somewhat realistic, given the circumstance. Not every character is likeable or very developed, but they have their share of lines and debates with other, colourful characters. Although the fourth installment brings a few, new likeable faces, there's a lot of uninteresting or even unlikeable characters that outnumber the good characters. First, I'll address the good characters. First, there's John Leguizamo's Cholo, who is an anti-hero figure who did a lot of Kaufman's dirty work in the hopes to earn a place in Fiddler's Green, which he finds out he would never get. He's both a character you want to root for as he's taking the initiative to get rid of Kaufman, but at the same time, he doesn't really care for people much and tends to be a bit of a douchebag. Robert Joy's Charlie is Riley's partner who really should have been the main character of the film in the first place. He's got a facial defect, has a nervous personality, yet he's a talented marksman with his trademark of licking his finger and placing it on the sight of his old, hunting rifle. There's also Pillsbury, the giant Samoan guard who has some good lines. Lastly, there's Big Daddy, the leader of the zombie horde. While he has no dialogue, the physical acting by Eugene Clark is so great at giving him a personality and a bit of emotion, even though all the zombie does is grunt and yell. Sadly, that's all of the good characters in the film to point out. Riley is by far the most boring protagonist in the series. Not only does he have some weird moral compasses as he takes orders from Kaufman, yet is clearly worried about the people first, but he has no fun personality. He's a stick in the mud that not only doesn't know how to have fun, but doesn't learn anything throughout the film. Slack, played by Asia Argento, is another generic female warrior archetype who doesn't like being talked down to. Not only is she a huge step-down from Sarah in "Day of the Dead", but she just comes across as a bland love interest for Riley who comes across as a bit of a douchebag for her uncalled shooting at her allies. Dennis Hopper as Kaufman does have some charisma as the slimy villain who wants to control the people of the city, but the character himself is just not that engaging, both personality-wise or hammy performance-wise. There were much better villains in previous "Dead" films and while Kaufman is one that the audience wants to see killed, he's also just not that interesting. The side characters are just there either as forgettable background roles such as the crew of Dead Reckoning, or just another number in the body count like Manolete and Motown. There are more interesting side characters in the survivor settlement such as Mulligan, but they barely do anything in the main story and it begs the question why these characters aren't the protagonists as anyone would be more interesting than Riley.

Romero's directing skills should never be doubted upon as he clearly has the love for the art of filmmaking. What is most striking of his films is that he really likes for the viewer to soak in the setting and environment. While the fourth "Dead" film is pretty dark and grimy with an emphasis on shadows and night-time scenes, you get the sense of scale that Romero is known for with the creative production and set design. From Fiddler's Green's luxurious setting to the slums where zombies have become entertainment for the poor and broken survivors, the world is fully realized and it's a more unique take on what would happen many years after the zombie outbreak. It makes sense that someone would attempt to have some feudal government that relies on wealth and power during this time. The cinematography by Miroslaw Baszak is good enough with some creative shots from time-to-time. The score by Reinhold Heil and Johnny Klimek is average for the most part, but the various nods to the thematic score of "Day of the Dead" whenever Big Daddy is leading a charge or thinking of a plan is an excellent homage. The make-up and gore effects are really good with some very gross-out moments that stand out. The make-up and visual designs of the zombies however could have gone for a more decaying look, considering that it's supposed to be years since the last film. However, if there's one issue with Romero's ambition, it would be that he went overboard with the use of CGI. While the use of green-screen for the city shots are acceptable, the fact that every head-shot or blood splatter is digital really bugs me as well as die-hard fans. There's still plenty of on-camera gore that proves really grotesque and convincing enough, but it begs the question why Romero had every head-shot be comprised from a computer, considering that his previous films made them look very grisly and effective. Regardless of how he used CGI to its effect, Romero still demonstrates a sense of vision and passion in the horror industry that is sorely missed in today's standards.

"Land of the Dead" is not going to rival the first three films that Romero had made. From the storyline of Riley being hired by Kaufman to kill Cholo hampering the characters involved, the characters of Riley and Slack being just generic archetypes of the genre, Kaufman not being an engaging villain despite Hooper's performance, the overwhelming amount of side-characters that make you stop caring, and the use of CGI blood and zombie kills remains pretty distracting. However, the film is actually good in its own merits. The overarching narrative as a whole is pretty fun to watch as you anticipate the chaotic third-act when all parties get involved, the tone is still that classic Romero feel with the cheeky humour thrown in with the serious nature of the story and characters, the characters of Cholo, Charlie, Pillsbury, and Big Daddy are enjoyable in their own right and makes you want to root for them in general, the dark, dreary landscape that is home to a distinctly creative city with its own developed functions thanks to some great production design and some shots by Baszak, the score by Heil and Klimek does its job fine with the homage to "Day of the Dad" being its saving grace, the make-up and gore effects are as good as ever, and Romero's creative and passionate direction really drives the film more into an above-average watch. It might be regarded by many as the fourth best of the series, but considering its competition from the franchise (both good and bad), that doesn't discredit the quality or Romero's skills as a filmmaker, even if there were hiccups that could've been avoided.

Verdict: 7/10. Good enough, but not in the levels of great that the previous films have reached. Watch if you're a fan of zombie flicks and Romero's work, even if the main characters and CGI blood are pretty awful at times.

Fantastic Four (2005) Film Review: A Fantastically Average Mid-2000's Superhero Flick

The mid-2000's was the revival of the superhero genre with various studios picking up tons of movie licenses for various characters. With Fox launching the modern superhero film with "X-Men", they would try to throw their hat in the ring with another group of comic-book characters with the Fantastic Four. While it was a moderate hit and even spawned a sequel, it has become notorious as not only of the worst superhero films of that decade, but continuing the idea that the famous comic group can never get a good movie of their own. The story has Reed Richards and his friend, Ben Grimm, reluctantly work with Victor Von Doom, a brilliant yet arrogant physicist who owns his own private company and who is currently dating Susan Storm, Reed's ex. As they go to space in order to study a wave of cosmic energy, they get caught off-guard by the sudden arrival of said wave and everyone, including Storm's brother, Johnny, get caught in. The five all start to change and get powers of their own, with Doom hiding his abilities while slowly becoming insane from his ruined reputation. The latter, after saving people from a massive accident, get named as the titular group of heroes as tensions between the four start to get uncontrollable while trying to get back to normal, from Johnny's hot-headed and attention-craving attitude to Ben's unnatural new appearance as a rock monster. The story is by far the biggest mixed-bag aspect of the film as it has both solid and poor choices. The best part of the story is really Ben's arc as he has to deal with a lot of unwanted attention and his wife leaving him due to his bizarre looks. I also like the idea of the team not being eager to be a superhero team, aside from Johnny. It makes perfect sense for the others to not act like celebrities and soak up the attention as they are not only attempting to reverse the effects, but trying to stay true to themselves. The real issue with the story is mainly relaying on Doom's portrayal, which we will get into. I think the story itself would have been more acceptable by many if the tone of the movie wasn't so over-the-top. I won't lie, I didn't mind the tone at all since it was really trying to keep up with the success of "Spider-Man" and Fox didn't want to just make the movie as serious as "X-Men". However, the movie doesn't have as much drama or seriousness as the "Spider-Man" films and mostly behaves like a Saturday morning cartoon, aside from a very graphic death scene where Doom blasts a guy's chest to expose his insides. While not a bad thing as a whole, it does alienate modern audiences who want a more grounded, serious or balanced take of the source material rather than the more lighthearted take. It doesn't help that there's not really a ton of laughs in the film, although there are a couple of good jokes.

Much like the story, the characters and casting offers mixed results. Ioan Gruffudd plays Reed Richards/Mr. Fantastic, a brilliant, but timid scientist who has the ability to stretch his body like rubber, while also trying to win back his ex. Gruffudd does a pretty good job as Reed akin to Toby Maguire's Peter Parker and looks mostly like the character, aside from the grey hair streak being much smaller. Chris Evans plays Johnny Storm/Human Torch, a womanizing playboy who is eager to use his powers of pyrokinesis and flight. While some people find the character to be annoying and terrible, Evans is having a ball as the character and the dynamic does actually work off the characters and story premise, so he's not pointless at all despite what people claim. The best character in the movie by far is Micheal Chiklis's Ben Grimm/The Thing, a rough yet gullible man who transforms into a hideous rock monster with immense strength. Not only was Chiklis perfectly cast as the character and clearly puts on the best performance of the film due to his extended role, but his dedication to wearing the heavy amounts of make-up and putting on a rough voice makes him the standout performance. There are some issues as his arc could have been a bit more expanded upon, but it's very good for the most part. Despite these solid characters and actors, there are two that really sink the film down. First, there's Jessica Alba as Susan Storm, Reed's former lover who she clearly still has feelings for, while possessing the powers of invisibility and force field projection. While Alba clearly looks the part, she doesn't act as well as she looks. You don't really get the intelligent side of the character or what makes her so special to Reed and Doom outside of her looks. Speaking of Doom, the villain is by far the weakest element of the film. While Julian McMahon is doing the best and his manipulation of the Thing is a very genius move, the real issue is that the character is not only generic, but nothing like the source material. Instead of a tyrannical leader that rules a fictional country with science and magic, we have a CEO of a private company who becomes insane once his reputation is ruined. Instead of science and magic, he gets the powers of electrical and magnetic manipulation while his body becomes metallic in the process. Instead of having very deep motivations and reasons for his evilness, he just wants to get back at Reed and the others even though he could have just acted like a hero himself. It's a terrible shame as they could have even made this portrayal work fine if they elaborated more on his background of Latveria and how he had to earn his company from having been born with nothing back home. While there are some side characters such as Grimm's wife, Ned Cecil and Alicia Masters, they only appear in a scene or two, making them simple background characters that just add to the character's journey rather than being developed characters. So, aside from a bland female lead and terrible villain portrayal, the three male leads are honestly pretty good and can just barely outweigh the two awful characters.

If you recall my review of the 2019 "Shaft", I said how Tim Story is a solid director for the most part, aside from the bland direction in the action sequences. This is mostly applied, though the action here is better than the aforementioned film. The production and set design is very good from Reed's lab in the Baxter Building to Doom's private rehabilitation centre. The costume designs are basic, though creative story-wise. Doom however could have at least looked more comic-accurate aside from the mask. The cinematography by Oliver Wood is good for the most part with the action scenes being the highlight and the scenes having the colour and lighting pop out. However, Story's decision to include the snowboarding and X-Games scene with Johnny feels ripped out of a music video from a lame rock band as it not only feels pandering to the era, but feels out of place in the genre. I understand that it's appropriate for the character, but it does add to the reason why people dislike Johnny to begin with. The visual effects is where things get interesting, both for the bad and good. The make-up for Doom and the Thing is very good, with the Thing being the highlight. There are some people who think the extensive make-up makes the character either more goofy or unrealistic, but I felt that the character looks, for the lack of a better word, fantastic, especially since they could have just made the character CGI. Speaking of which, that's where the movie gets quite a bit of slack. Although the fire effects and transformation of the Human Torch look very good given the film's budget, there are some pretty awkward effects that are debatably even dated during the film's initial release. The space station, cosmic wave, Invisible Woman's force field projections, and infamously, Mr. Fantastic's plastic-looking effects are not really good. You can debate that they did the best they could with the effects given the budget and the characters that were being adapted, but considering that the Human Torch and the Thing look great the way they do, it does add to the idea that they could have tried harder with the effects. John Ottman is well-known for his famous "X-Men" theme that debuted in "X2", so you'd think that he would create a very memorable score for another family of superheroes. However, fans of his would be extremely disappointed. It's not bad by any means, but it's pretty generic, especially for Ottman's work. Lastly, there's the action to talk about, or the lack thereof. Outside of some brief scuffles between the members and the cosmic storm sequence, there's only two real action scenes. There's the incident on the bridge where the four reveal their abilities to the public while saving people. Whether or not they caused more damage or not, I actually like this set-piece as it makes sense for the group to help save people rather than stop a crime or something. However, the climatic battle with Dr. Doom is where things get really underwhelming. Although there's some good cinematography, It's quite clear that they reached the extent of their budget during this scene and although there are plenty of effects, the fight itself is way too short with Doom getting beaten up by the Thing and the group immediately coming up with a plan to beat Doom rather quickly. This battle actually makes the final battle in the 2015 film more like an epic showdown as it at least lasted longer than this. So, yeah, Story does a decent job directing, but really should stay away from action movies as they're really underwhelming under his direction.

"Fantastic Four" is an odd movie to say the least. Despite its universal hate, there's actually quite a bit that stands out from the film. The story about the characters being reluctant to be superhero celebrities is honestly a pretty good one for this particular team, the three male leads are both well-casted and acted to have a likeable personality, the production design is pretty good, the cinematography by Wood is solid, the make-up effects are really good and ambitious on the Thing, and the Thing is by far the best part of the film, both by Chiklis's performance, design, and how he is used throughout the story. Despite all of this good though, there's an equal amount of bad. The tone can be pretty hard to enjoy for how campy it is, the jokes aren't really funny outside of a few exceptions, Alba is poorly miscast as Sue Storm, Doom is by far the biggest injustice of the film due to how much they altered his character from the comics, some CGI effects are very dated, Ottman has one of the most underwhelming scores in his career considering his work on the X-Men films, and the lack of action that leads to one of the quickest and forgettable climaxes. It's by far a mixed bag and your enjoyment is really dependant on patience and tolerance for film in general. It's perhaps the best of the films based on the Marvel group, but that's not a huge achievement to begin with.

Verdict: 5/10. A straight-up mediocre superhero film. If you're hoping to find an action-packed, laugh-fuelled adventure, this is not the film for you.

Terminator: Genisys (2015) Film Review: Rebooting A Franchise With Mild Success...

The "Terminator" franchise appears to be one that's very much judged to be a series that shouldn't be made, due to the first two films being able to perfectly wrap up the story. "T3" remains as the worst in the franchise as it's completely lazy when it comes to continuing the story, "Salvation" didn't portray the future as people wanted, and "Dark Fate" remains the best of the sequels, but is hated for the female leads and the choice to kill John off, which I defend until the day I die. Then, there was "Genisys", an attempt to reboot the franchise to start its own trilogy with tons of big names attached, Schwarzenegger's return and overloading nostalgia with various elements. The film was met with terrible response by both critics and audiences, and while it made quite a bit of money in the box office, it was just short of breaking even, killing the trilogy and making the franchise reboot again with "Dark Fate". Today, I want to revisit this failed reboot and see if it deserves the hate it's given. In the future of 2029, John Connor has finally lead the human resistance into victory against Skynet. When he learns of a time machine that has sent a Terminator into 1984, he sends Kyle Reese to protect his mother, Sarah Connor. However, when Reese arrives, things aren't how they were supposed to be. There's an uncalled T-1000, Sarah is not as how John describes her to be, and she's working with a Terminator herself, who she views as a surrogate father. As they realize the timeline has changed, they travel to 2017 where they need to stop Genisys, an app that links all technology, as it's in fact Skynet in infancy while a transformed John is sent to protect Skynet from the heroes. As you can tell, the story is a pretty big pill to swallow as it not only erases previous films, but also introduces the element of alternate timelines with the heavy use of time travel. To be fair, this is the more creative sequel in the franchise by going a more bold, complicated storyline that the film itself allows the audience to try to understand.  However, this results in the film to have a lot of exposition, which despite the intrigue, is still not the best way to get viewers hooked in. There is a few moments where the characters breathe or talk about themselves, but the story is full throttle on the action, spectacle, and lore that it begins to overwhelm you in a way. The story is so huge to fit in a two-hour runtime that it begs the question why isn't this film split into a trilogy of its own. Heck, the first act is by far the most engaging part of the film by many and would have been a great first installment to a trilogy if expanded upon. The tone of the movie is attempting to be a modern blockbuster akin to Marvel films. From the action set pieces, the lack of an R-rating and gritty, raw tone, and the attempts at comedy to make the audience laugh, this film sort of feels the least "Terminator"-like from the sequels. There are a few good jokes, but there are some that fall short. "Dark Fate" actually manages to get more laughs and that film wasn't even trying to be very comedic.

What can't I say about Arnold Schwarzenegger as the T-800? The aging bodybuilder once again manages to fit back in the role perfectly and takes the performance in a different direction as the T-800 is now a tough love, father figure to Sarah that is only starting to understand at being human. Yes, Arnold can offer a groaner joke with the smiling in one scene, but he can say a pretty good line in another scene. You really can't complain about his acting in any of the films as he's just perfect as these characters. Emilia Clarke as Sarah Conner is a mixed bag. On the one hand, she does look and act the part of a younger Sarah in '84 who has already been accustomed to a badass soldier. On the other hand, Sarah is just not that interesting or charismatic and doesn't go through an arc, with the only interesting thing being her relationship with Pops, the T-800, which even that feels a bit unexplored in a way. Jai Courtney as Kyle Reese is honestly not that bad as people say he is. Sure, he's no Micheal Bahn and close-up shots of his face look a bit weird given his appearance, but his role as the confused soldier who didn't sign up for a completely different mission works pretty well. He acts as the window for the audience, asking questions about what's going on and mainly complaining about how this isn't supposed to happen and his clashing attitude with Sarah and Pops. Courtney is pretty good and it's a shame that he got so much hate for his role as Reese due to diehard fans not giving these actors a fair chance. Then, there's Jason Clarke as John Connor/T-3000. It's notorious that the marketing team sabotaged their own film by giving away a mid-film twist with Connor being turned into an evil Terminator. Outside of that blunder, Clarke is just fine as the character. Playing a duel role of sorts with the wise leader turned into a manipulative villain, the performance itself is not bad, but the choice to have John as a villain is pretty shallow. If there was conflict of the character switching back and forth from being John into a machine, it would have been a far interesting character and twist of the series. But just making him a generic villain, despite a cool design, undermines Clarke's performance. There are some side characters such as J.K Simmons as police detective O'Brien, a man who firsthand saw the T-1000 and Kyle's time traveler knowledge and remains eccentric over it, Byung-Hun Lee as the T-1000, the Dysons (both father and son) who own Cyberdyne Systems and worked on the project known as Genisys with a time-traveling John, and Matt Smith as the embodiment as Skynet who corrupts John and attempts to protect his infant self known as Genisys in 2017. The side characters are perhaps one of the big blunders of the film as it's quite clear that they were supposed to be more significant in future films, aside of Lee's T-1000. O'Brien barely does anything outside of getting the characters out of bail, the Dysons are just there to show some continuity of "T2" and the physical form of Skynet is obviously meant to be the real villain that the characters were supposed to face in a sequel that we will never see. To each of the actor's credit, they all act really good. In fact, almost all of the actors do a good-to-great job on their roles, with the only one slacking from the character being Clarke, which is not because of her acting skills, but because it's extremely hard trying to top Linda Hamilton to begin with.

Alan Taylor is known for directing multiple TV episodes for popular shows and being the director to the worst MCU film, "Thor: The Dark World". While I do feel that another director should have been in charge, Taylor actually does a good job with a lot of it being due to having the scope and vision for the overly-ambitious story. The future sequences in the first act are what diehard fans were waiting for, and while the scenes only last in the first few minutes of the film, it gives off the impression of how Taylor gets the visuals, scale and tone of the future from previous Terminator films. When Kyle goes back to 1984, Taylor attempts to recapture the angles and look of the original film. Not only are a few of these scenes shot-for-shot, but the setting also has this fuzzy look to it, emulating the video quality of the original and making the film look in line to the first film. When the characters go to 2017, the film gets a crystal clear, modern aesthetic that we are more accustomed to from modern blockbusters and it looks great. The cinematography by Kramer Morgenthau is really solid, offering some nice-looking shots, especially in the action sequences. Morgenthau's camerawork is amplified by some fantastic visual effects shots, which speaking of which, the visual effects are fantastic. From the future battle with the various mechs, the fluent motion of the T-1000, the design and healing effects of the T-3000, and the T-800's look really good. The helicopter and bus sequences aren't as convincing or cool to look at, but it is rectified by the digital recreation of the original Terminator and Arnold's de-aging effects in '84 are mind-blowing. It's a shame that the effects were slept upon during its release as they are great for this current digital age and film. The action scenes are generally pretty good with the highlights being the future battle, the fight between the T-800 and T-1000 in the base, and the battle with the T-3000 in the climax, the latter having some cool highlights that make it look like a match between the Terminator and Geras in "MK11"! While there are some cool shots and moments in the other scenes such as the T-3000 being magnetized in its first fight and Pops being sent flying towards a police car, the action tends to be a bit overstuffed with too many explosions and things crashing into each other. The first fights with Pops and the T-800 and T-3000 are pretty underwhelming as it's just two robots smashing the other into various walls and things. "Dark Fate" really improves on the close, hand-to-hand combat as they manage to offer more raw strength and gunplay, and less use of smashing each other into other things. The vehicle set-pieces are by far the blandest of the action as it not only has the least cool effects, but they feel too similar to other set-pieces from "T2". The last thing to mention would be the music by Lorne Balfe, best known for his collaborations with Hans Zimmer. Although it's not the weakest score in the franchise, as there are some good renditions of the famous theme and the track "Sacrifice" is pretty good, Balfe much like others just can't match Brad Fiedel's score from the first two films.

"Terminator: Genisys" is never going to be considered in the top three films of the franchise. From an overwhelmingly, huge story that's heavily reliant on exposition to help people understand what's going on, a modern tone that's akin to a Marvel film with less grittiness and more failed attempts at comedy, Emilia Clarke's performance as Sarah Connor can't match Linda Hamilton with a pretty sub-surface personality, John becoming the villain could have been more interesting or complex with a dual-personality or more attempts to fool the audience that John could be saved, the side characters are very underused and are mainly there for sequel-bait or to advance the story, Lorne Balfe's soundtrack is kind of generic, aside of "Sacrifice" and the renditions of the main theme, and some of the action sequences can be underwhelming with the overuse of explosions and breaking through walls. However, there's actually so many good things in the film that really keep it from being a waste of time. The story is engaging enough and does offer a more unique experience to the average "Terminator" film, the tone does, to its credit, offer some fun and laughs for the average blockbuster, Pops and Reese are solid characters helped by their fantastic actors, the cast in general never throws it in when it comes to their acting at all, Taylor's directing shows the same ambition as the writers with the various looks and feels of the film depending on the setting, the cinematography by Morgenthau is pretty good, the visual effects are excellent with only a few scenes having lower quality effects, and the action is very engaging and off-the-walls with a handful of cool sequences and moments in the action. I gotta say, I actually think this movie got better the second time I watched it. I will always prefer "Dark Fate" as the true continuation to the franchise and an amazing film in its own right, but "Genisys" acts as a big-budget fanfic that, although flawed by its vision and scope, you can't help but admire the effort put into it.

Verdict: 6/10. An above-average watch that will satisfy action-lovers and people who want a spin to the beloved franchise. Personally, it's my 4th favourite film of the series and doesn't deserve half the hate it regularly gets.

Tron: Legacy (2010) Spoiler-Filled Review/Rant: More Originality Doesn't Equal A Good Movie

Over the years, it has been apparent that Disney wanted "Tron" to be a big franchise like "Star Wars". However, as the first film only made a modest hit at the box office, the company held back for nearly 30 years until giving the cult hit a sequel. Going with a new, somewhat bold direction, a large budget, and a story that's not copying "Star Wars", the sequel seemed like a surefire hit. However, it still resulted in a modest hit and left Disney uncomfortable producing another sequel in the meantime, until recently that is. "Tron: Legacy" is a very divided film with some thinking that it was a disappointing follow-up while others think it's visual eye candy that does right to the original. For me, well, let's just say I'm neither.

Positives:

• The visual effects. While the CGI isn't going to break ground like the original, these are some very top-notch effects that has dated really well. Heck, even the de-aging effects on Jeff Bridges are pretty impressive for a decade-old film. I will agree that the eyes on Bridges and the filmmaker's prideful act of showing off the effects are a bit too much, but I can't lie that for this type of movie, the CGI is fantastic.

• The production design. Not only have the costumes been upgraded to be more slick and modern, but the programs can wear unique outfits that represent their personality. I also like how they not only fleshed out the world of the Grid, but made it more mysterious and neo-noir compared to the more colourful, blocky aesthetic of the original. I also like how they updated the games from the original such as the ring battle and lightcycles.

• The directing by Joseph Kosinski. Considering that this is his directorial debut, it's pretty impressive. His work on CGI trailers for video games gives him the ability to make some cool-looking shots with the effects. It feels both modern and stylized, which is helped by the cinematography of Claudio Miranda, which never comes across as flat whatsoever. At times, the film comes across as a surreal music video with all of the inventive and crazy shots, which is perhaps the best way to sum up the film, which is both a good and bad thing.

• The score by Daft Punk. The perfect duo to be associated with the film. The techno music that they are famous for is beyond brilliant to be paired with a film that's set in a digital world with a neo-noir setting. Although this soundtrack isn't close to their best work, they never put out any bad music though.

• Micheal Sheen's Zuse. The only character I actually liked in the film mainly helped by Sheen's kinetic energy and fun-loving personality. I will also add though Bruce Boxlietner did a good job as Alan from the first film, giving the character some humble wisdom and heart.

Negatives:

• Once again, let's talk about the story. The film follows Sam Flynn, the son of Kevin Flynn from the first film who has disappeared many years ago. When Alan finds a response signal coming from the abandoned arcade Kevin used to own, Sam traces it and gets sucked into the Grid, where he finds his father and his apprentice known as Quorra. Quorra is the last of the ISO's, a race made entirely without any programming from Kevin, who have the potential to answer life's greatest mysteries without actually displaying this ability whatsoever. Kevin's look-alike program, Clu, becomes tyrannical however as its motive is to make the perfect world which the ISO's are not a part of, resulting in the genocide of these people and Kevin to remain stuck in the Grid. Now, Sam, Kevin and Quorra must get back to the real world while stopping Clu from taking over humanity as that is deemed imperfect. Now, what's the problem with the story this time? It's by no means copying "Star Wars", heck, even the newer films produced by Disney copies some key moments and plot aspects from this film alone! The problem with the story is that it's all over the place and incoherent. For one, the introduction of the ISO's is unnecessary as they barely play a part in the film and Kevin never gets into detail as to how or why these beings can be crucial in the real world. There's also the use of the ENCOM corporation and Sam being a shareholder that really goes nowhere, as unlike in the first film, the Grid isn't tied to ENCOM in the sequel and the subplot in the beginning with Sam sabotaging his own company is just pointless in the long run. Then, there's the subplot with the characters finding Zuse, who is said to be able to help them out, only for him to betray them and barely help out whatsoever. And although the film isn't based by luck compared to the first film, there's still some big plot holes such as how Clu hasn't been able to track Kevin for 20 years, what weird powers Kevin has in the Grid by defeating Clu and how did he get them, why can't Kevin destroy the disk to prevent Clu from taking it, or why this film is even called Tron to begin with, since the titular character is barely in the film or even the focus, which it deserves its whole paragraph.

• The characters. Where to start? Well, let's begin with Sam, played by Garrett Hedlund. Sam is by far the most boring and unlikeable character in the film, and that's mainly due to Hedland's performance. Sam barely shows any emotion outside of mild angst. When he first sees his dad, both by the mislead of Clu and his actual father, there is no emotion from this guy. No anger, sadness, or happiness whatsoever. Hell, even when he gets transported into the Grid, outside of a brief moment of shock, he's not blown away or worried about anything. The only time this guy gets any emotion is when he's shooting down some ships with excitment. Outside of the awful acting, the personality doesn't help as Sam is just your angsty youth who wants to a rebel like his father from the first film and get the babe, but there's just no personality to him at all. Jeff Bridges returns as Kevin, and while he's doing a good job, he's not that engaging to begin with. From the random abilities he possesses, the important disk he possesses, and both the story and lead's primary focus of the journey, the guy is essentially a living plot device, which wouldn't be bad if he had a more interesting personality. Maybe he still retains his cocky attitude or have a completely altered, destructive personality from the decades being imprisoned in the Grid, anything will be intriguing. But instead, we just get the willowed, wise mentor that has given up hope due to the failure in his past despite never really having any emotional breakdown from it. While the effects on Clu are good, that doesn't equal a good villain. To be fair, he is miles better than the MCP as he does have a personality, but he just comes across as generic bad guy wanting to take over the world with not much energy driving him. It doesn't help that the dude never points the helmet back on, so instead of having this cool-looking villain, we just have a dating CGI effect for the majority of the runtime. Last character to address is Quorra, played by Olivia Wilde. Although she looks amazing and does a good performance, she's practically made to be eye candy. Her role as the most important being in the world could have been interesting, but the personality doesn't really make sense. She's curious of Earth's culture and reads esteemed literature and longing to see the sun rise, but we are told that she is able to ask all of life's greatest mysteries, so how does that work exactly? If she was just a program who wanted to experience the real world, that would be great, but considering the importance of the character and what we are told, it completely backtracks on her character and barely explains how she can learn the mysteries of life if she needs to learn basic stuff about the Earth to begin with. It doesn't help that Sam and her have barely any chemistry together. At least they don't have a pointless kiss like the first film. There are some side characters such as Jarvis, the second-in-command, and Gem, a sexy program who works with Zuse and appears to be helpful to Sam, but these characters get killed off so unexpectedly and with their limited screen-time, there's barely any value to talk about them.

• The tone. While the first film had an unbalanced tone that leans towards awkward fun and goofiness, the sequel has the opposite problem where the tone is too serious with barely any fun to be had. Although Zuse is the exception and Sam attempts to have some fun when shooting down ships or participating in the games, all of the characters are just too serious. This would be fine if Sam had an enjoyable charisma or wonder when exploring the Grid, but we got none of that. There's barely any humour, and whatever humour there is, it's really unfunny outside of Zuse being enjoyable to watch.

• The action. Don't get me wrong, it's not unwatchable, but considering Kosinski's directing, it's very underwhelming. While the game sequences are pretty cool, the action scenes are pretty lackluster as it's either just generic hand-to-hand combat or a fighter plane sequence that's perhaps the only scene that is ripped out of "Star Wars". Maybe if we got to see some cool weaponry or technology, it would be more eye-popping. Even if the writers weren't creative like that, at least have the fights give off some sort of impact either due to how gritty it is or having some really cool shots or hits. And while the action that we do have looks good, it doesn't feel good.

• The character of Tron or as he is called in the movie, Rinzler. I never really cared for the character in the original, but I do understand that he's supposed to be built up as this great hero of the film, therefore the movie is named after him. So, considering that he's supposed to be the main character of the franchise given he's the actual name of it, you'd think that he might be of importance in the sequel. Well, he's not. In the film, he was believed to be killed by Clu, but by the third act, it's revealed that the silent, second-in-command known as Rinzler is actually a brainwashed Tron. While this could be a mind-blowing twist, there's too many issues with the handling of the character. First off, Kevin finds out out the truth because Rinzler is holding Tron's disc as a weapon. While you can argue that if this character is holding their belongings, it would mean that it's actually them, I find that argument really silly. After all, Rinzler could have nothing to do with Tron and Clu could have just given Rinzler Tron's disc as a weapon. Second, we never see Rinzler unmasked at all. While this might be just to keep the character look badass for the entire film, it's a problem as not only do we never see Tron in the frontline, but keeping him masked throughout hides his emotions, which is not a good thing when we need to see their act of changing alliances or seeking redemption. Clu is unmasked throughout the film as not only to show off the de-aging effects, but to have Bridges emote and attempt to have some depth with the character. We never get this with Tron. Lastly, there's his redemption arc. Wait, did I say arc? I should say the lack thereof. Seriously, after Kevin finds out about Tron, during the fighter pilot sequence, he attempts to connect with the brainwashed ally. Not only is the use of slow-motion in the scene very oddly used as Kevin speaks normally during the process, but we still can't see Tron emote from under his helmet. The weak sentence Kevin said to Tron shouldn't have done anything, but for some reason, Tron manages to betray Clu and attempts to slow him down only to get killed and sent into the Sea of Simulation, where his bad guy colours turn into the heroic blue. The guy didn't even kill Clu in the end and whether he betrayed him or not wouldn't have changed the outcome of the story. What an embarrassment!

"Tron: Legacy" is definitely better than the original, but that's not saying too much. While there are some great-looking effects and production design, Daft Punk's score is really good and appropriate for the style of the film, Kosinski's directing has style and talent, and Zuse is an enjoyable side character with Alan being improved as well, that's all that can be said that's really noteworthy. The story is still incoherent and filled with logic gaps, the characters are just not that interesting regardless of the actor's efforts in their performance, Sam is by far one of the most blandest protagonists I've seen in a movie, Tron's role in the film is both laughable and insulting as it almost feels like he was never supposed to be in the movie to begin with, and the action is just not that memorizing despite Kosinski's best efforts. It's a sequel that does attempt to improve on the original, but the fault is that it had to be connected with the original to begin with. Whether or not you enjoyed it, I just hope that the third film in this franchise actually manages to an above average watch compared to these disappointing entries.

Verdict: 4.5/10. A better sequel doesn't equal a better movie overall. Honestly, don't bother with these films as it's mainly just meant to be eye candy flicks.

Tron (1982) Spoiler-Filled Review/Rant: Groundbreaking Visuals Stuck In A Bland Movie

With news of a Jared Leto-led "Tron" sequel being in development at Disney, I felt that it was time for me to finally watch the movies. I knew that the first film was a beloved classic with groundbreaking CGI and thought that this might be a good watch. Little did I know that this movie was actually a steaming pile of crap disguised with a cool aesthetic...

Positives:

• The effects, which is what can be described as the saving grace of the movie. Not only was the CGI groundbreaking at the time, but the use of 2D animation and matte paintings are very impressive and blend into the distinct environment the film creates. Sure, the CGI is pretty dated, but the effects shouldn't be looked down upon whatsoever.

• The set designs and colourful world. While a lot of the film uses green-screen, there are times where a set is created and given some added effects to make it look apart of the world, which looks really good. There is the issue that everything looks the same and that there's no distinction between locations or environments, but the world is so visually creative that it does distract you from asking that question throughout the film. I also liked the shot of the ENCOM helicopter with its red colours blending in the night sky. The games that the combatants have to play such as the light cycles and ring battles are creative in their own right and lent to inspired arcade games.

Negatives:

• Let's start with the story. Kevin Flynn used to be a programmer in the company known as ENCOM, where his boss stole Flynn's ideas for video games and took credit for the success. Flynn, along with his friends, attempt to hack into the database in order to find the evidence he needs, but the evil program known as the MCP sends him inside the digital world. As Flynn attempts to escape, he is joined up by Tron, a security program that was made by his friend who is destined to take down the MCP and free the world from its control. The problem with the story is that it's both really generic and all over the place. You can tell that Disney was trying to make their own version of "Star Wars" before they would buy the franchise decades later. From your typical chosen one story to the evil force that's dictating over the system to the sci-fi technology, it's really attempting to be like "Star Wars". However, the story is also incoherent at times. Flynn went from trying to find the file he needs to prove his worth to needing to escape the digital landscape. You think that he would have to be the one to destroy the MCP, seeing that he's not only the main character, but a user who are the gods to the programs. But, no! Tron is the one who needs to take down the MCP, leaving Flynn to just doing his own thing until the story needs him to be relevant. What also sucks is that the film never shows us what's going on back in the real world with the CEO and Flynn's friends. When Flynn comes back in the end, it's clear that he's been in the digital world for the entire night, but we never see his friends react or even do anything that affects the digital world during the movie. I understand that the filmmakers wanted us to be very invested in the world they created, but we also need to know what's happening to the other characters in the real world as they are still on a mission of their own. It doesn't help that the story is mainly fuelled by luck most of the time mainly with Flynn just so happening to stumble into the right place at the right time in multiple instances throughout the film.

• If the story has the typical basis of "Star Wars", the characters straight up copies the famous leads from the franchise. Flynn, played by Jeff Bridges, is a cocky, one-lining, spewing dude who not only looks like Han Solo, but basically acts like him too, even copying the character's role as a sort of sidekick to the lead who doesn't really offer much to the plot. Tron, played by Bruce Boxleitner, is supposed to be the Luke Skywalker of the film, but he doesn't have an interesting personality and barely shares time with Flynn. He's just made to be the typical hero for the film and the world. The Leia Organa role is filled by Yori, played by Cindy Morgan. Yori is by far the blandest character of the film as she just serves as the girl character who is only there for the main character to ogle at, which I will get to in a later point. The silly-looking Dumont, played by Barnard Hughes, looks a lot like Obi-Wan, but is there to act as another ally for Tron. Sark, played by David Warner, is clearly meant to be the Grand Moff Tarken as he fills the second-in-command role to the hilarious, derpy-looking MCP. Ram, played by Roy Kleinberg, is just there to have a friend for Flynn in the system and to have a death scene that makes no sense at all time-wise. There are the human characters played by the established actors such as Alan, Lora, Walter and Ed, but they might as well not be in the film. The love triangle between Alan, Flynn and Lora is only there so that it can be used in the digital landscape, Walter is just there to establish the laser that is used to send Flynn to the digital world, and Ed barely does anything as the evil CEO of ENCOM and his realization that the MCP is hacking into the Pentagon and the Kremlin goes absolutely nowhere in the story. As you can see, these characters are just archetypes to push the story and sub-plots are just thrown in to add shallow-level details for the story. It also doesn't help that the acting is just awful. While Bridges and Warner are doing their best bringing some character in generic roles, the others really aren't trying in their material.

• The weird tone. Much like "Star Wars", the film attempts to have this action-sci-fi adventure with stakes while also making it fun for the whole family. The issue with the tone is that I can't take it serious nor find it funny at all as the film never takes itself serious to begin with and it tries way too hard to be funny, even more so than "Star Wars". From the MCP's ridiculous design to Flynn's cocky attitude to the awkward acting to moments in the action where bad guys literally kill themselves in order to not fight Tron, the film almost acts as a satire at times. However, the story is supposed to be serious in nature, resulting in a messy, unbalanced tone that doesn't get you invested in the lore and the only humour it delivers is unintentional.

• The directing from Steven Lisberger. To be fair, Lisberger did a decent job for this kind of film, but it doesn't excuse some lazy filmmaking. Not only are there some shots ripped out from the aforementioned "Star Wars", especially the opening scene from that film, but there's also a lot of awkward editing. The opening credits seem like they will lead to a cool shot of the city, but it just skips right to Flynn's Arcade, mainly due to the lack of ambition. It doesn't help that a lot of the cinematography is pretty standard and flat with a lot of medium-shots with the characters in the middle of the scene. I know that the film is mainly all green-screen, but there needs to be more variety.  The action is also very bland and uncreative, outside of the game sequences. It doesn't help that for some random reason, there's no music during the action scenes, making it more hollow than necessary. The costume design is also really silly as the costumes look really soft and cloth-like for a supposed metal-like shell. Dumont's first apperance is just laughable as he's just stuck in a giant foam block. There's a bit of charm to be had in the costume design, but it gets to the point where you ask why bother, as the sequel even ditches the costumes and cosmetics of the programs from the first film to make it easier on them.

• The music by Wendy Carlos. I really wanted to like the music as Carlos made a great soundtrack for "The Shining", but it doesn't really stand out much. Half of the music sound very John Williams-esque, which makes it seem like it's just imitating "Star Wars". The other half does lean into the techno/video game aesthetic that the film is trying to get across, but it sounds a bit generic. The only pieces from the score that sound really good to listen to is "Anthem" and the music that plays during the end credits. Even the main theme feels underwhelming to listen to.

• Behold! The most unearned kiss in movie history with Yori and Flynn. Where to even begin with this awful romance? Well, for one, the characters only meet by the beginning of the third act, where they not only have any chemistry, but only find each other attractive for different reasons. For Flynn, Yori resembles his ex-girlfriend, Lora. For Yori, it's mainly due to the fact that Flynn is a user. There's also the fact that Yori is established to very much be in love with Tron. So, the group gets separated with Tron going to stop the MCP and Flynn and Yori being held captive. When Yori and Flynn manage to escape, Flynn has the idea to jump into the MCP as he might be able to give Tron the opening to destroy the program. Since this is set up as a heroic sacrifice, the two kiss after barely knowing each other with a lack of chemistry and having just met literally ten minutes ago. What's worse is that after the MCP is defeated and Flynn goes back to the real world, Yori goes to kiss Tron, ignoring the fact that for a bit of the runtime, she basically cheated on him with Flynn. This romance is so lazily-handled that it seems I'm making it up just to hate on the movie. But, this romantic sub-plot is actually in the movie! The only reason why I think they went with this bizarre love triangle is perhaps because, once again, Star Wars did it with Leia, Luke, and Han. However, that movie at least made it so that Leia kissing Luke was out of spite and to make Han envious, where with the kiss with Yori and Flynn is just so the movie can have the big dramatic kiss scene despite there was no established romance with the two to begin with!

I honestly had no idea what I was getting into with this movie. "Tron" is a classic that's only remembered for visuals alone with an extremely pathetic screenplay bogging the reputation of the cult hit. While the effects are great and well-deserved to be acknowledged, the digital world is distinctly creative and visualized, and there's a few pieces of music that's very nice to listen to, that's all that I can say that must be praised. Everything else is an embarrassing attempt to imitate "Star Wars" that it makes the film have, outside of the visuals' to have an empty husk for an identity. From a random, generic, incoherent story that's relayed on luck, a tone that's more awkwardly funny than epic or fun, characters that are extremely generic and only serve archetype roles or to slightly advance the story, bland acting with Bridges and Turner being the only competent actors in the film, lazy directing from Lisberger, some awkward editing, flat cinematography, silly costume design, unimaginative action, really underwhelming score by Carlos, and one of, if not, the worst on-screen romances and kiss I have ever seen in film history. I don't understand how some people can find the lore or story interesting or unique, despite being so clearly piggybacking the success that is "Star Wars". While the film does have credit for creating some groundbreaking CGI along with a pretty creative and distinct world, the actual story, characters, and filmmaking comes across as lazy or copying the formula from a popular sci-fi franchise.

Verdict: 3/10. The definition of eye candy with no substance. If you want a visually groundbreaking film with an engaging story and characters, just watch "Star Wars" as this movie is just so clearly trying to be like it that it completely ruins itself in the process.

Alita: Battle Angel (2019) Film Review: The Best Hollywood Anime Adaptation To Date!

As much as 2019 appeared to be the flawless year for Disney as many of their films broke billions of dollars, the year wasn't kind to many other films or studios for that matter. While some are moderate hits and few manage to actually be huge successes in their own right, many underperformed or straight-out flopped in the box office. One of these box office disappointments had a long history in developmental hell. The film based on the beloved manga and anime was always meant to be directed by legendary filmmaker, James Cameron, but as he believed that technology wasn't ready for the film along with his obsession with Avatar sequels, he eventually gave up the directors chair and remained as a producer and co-writer. Although the film did manage to break even in the box office and had a decent home media release, the domestic box office results proved disappointing to Fox/Disney that a sequel is still up to debate whether or not it will get made and continue the story. Speaking of said story, we should actually get into that right now. The year is 2563, 300 years after the war known as "The Fall" ravaged the Earth, leaving Zalem the only sky city on the planet, with the masses living in the giant city underneath known as Iron City. A scientist and bounty hunter, Dr. Ido, finds a cyborg head and core while in the scrapyard, which he manages to assemble the being back from the dead. The cyborg, Alita, wakes up with no memory of her past life as she explores the city and bonds with Ido and a boy named Hugo, while also making enemies as well as rediscovering her hidden past. The story essentially borrows elements from both the manga and anime, which while making it very faithful to the source material, proves a bit messy for the movie. Although the film does manage to juggle plenty of storylines and characters well for the most part, you can also tell that they are clearly stories and characters that are left unresolved or explored as the filmmakers hope to cover them in the sequel. These include the city of Zalem, Alita's past, the Motorball championship, and the story behind "The Fall". While these story elements do leave intrigue for the viewer, the fact that a sequel might not even be made can make people turn off from the experience. The tone however is very much like Cameron's work on "Avatar". While there are plenty of scenes with the literally wide-eyed Alita enjoying the company around her and discovering things about herself and the world, the film can suddenly offer intense sequences of action, death and drama. It's a perfect in-between for audiences of many ages, much like how accessible "Avatar" was to audiences back in its release.

Rosa Salazar as Alita offers a great show-off for the rising actress. Keep in mind that her performance is based on motion-capture and Salazar manages to give the character so much subtle emotions and personality. You can buy Alita as both a curious, caring girl who wants to fit in, and the ruthless,  charismatic warrior that emerges from her past. Outside of some awkward dialogue at times, Alita shines as one of the best, modern female protagonists in film. However, she doesn't outshine Christoph Waltz's Ido, who is simply fantastic. Waltz is a wonderful actor and he brings so much charm and drama to the character that he would make for a great protagonist in a separate film, which is helped by the character's backstory and his battle of finding peace after becoming a bounty-hunter to kill criminals much like the individual that killed her daughter in the past. Keean Johnson plays Hugo, Alita's love interest who, although cares for the cyborg, hides his shady practices of scrapping parts from living cyborgs in an attempt to raise funds to live in Zalem. While Johnson did a fine job, Hugo's portrayal is the weakest in the film as it changed the character to be not as intriguing as the source material. There's also a variety of villains with their distinct, albeit shallow, personalities, such as Dr. Chiren, the wife of Ido and a scientist working for Motorball in order to get back home to Zalem played by Jennifer Connelly, Vector, the smooth, deal-making overseer of Motorball played by Mahershala Ali, Zapan, an arrogant, bounty-hunter who welds a deadly blade played by Ed Skrein, and Grewishka, a giant cyborg who works as the personal assassin to Nova, the tyrannical ruler of Zalam. While all of these performances are great and they do work out well for the film, these villains aren't really relatable, with exception to Chiren, and they won't be that memorable outside of their looks, designs and the actors portraying them. With that said, the cast are all very talented with the best being Salazar and Waltz's performances as Alita and Ido.

Robert Rodriguez is widely known for his stylish, low-budget films such as "Spy Kids", "Sin City", and the "Mexico Trilogy". So, it seems like a weird choice to have a director known for making some of the most cheapest box office hits being in charge of a film with a James Cameron-sized budget. However, it's honestly a brilliant match and the main reasons why are the world-building and effects. Iron City is a very unique setting with a mixed culture-pool, a giant landscape filled with skyscrapers that look like they were made from scrap, as well as a Spanish aesthetic to the architecture. The production and set design is very good with the use of technology in the city, which is helped by Bill Pope's really good cinematography, thanks to his experience with CGI-heavy films. There's both colour, dirtiness, and darkness in the world, which allows Rodriguez and Pope to have some stylish shots. This is mainly where Rodriguez's directing shines as he brings a sense of reality to the environment as the tech doesn't feel extremely futuristic, despite the year being in the 26th century. I also give massive credit to Rodriguez for never showing off the city of Zalem, outside of its appearance, as it does give questions to what this utopia must be like for a citizen of Iron City. However, it is the visual effects that take the crown for making the film stand out. While Alita's giant, anime-esque eyes can make some people not engaged, the character is a visual marvel as every aspect of her design is made from a computer, including her hair and clothing, which is extremely impressive. After a few minutes, Alita perfectly blends right into the world. It helps that her amazing design makes the film and her character stand out visually. The effects also help give Iron City more depth and offer some very creative designs for the cyborgs such as Zapan, Grewishka, and a female assassin named Nyssiana. Not every effect is convincing per se, but there's enough detail and creative imagery to make you believe the characters that are onscreen. The score by Junkie XL is also really good, being one of his more memorable score. While he does offer his signature rock aesthetic, he also has some good instrumentals for the softer moments and some nice action/epic music in the action sequences. Speaking of the action, it's really well choreographed and looks both brutal and stunning at the same time, which is rare for a film using CGI. A lot of CGI action scenes, although cool and engaging, can feel pretty weightless at times, where hits feel underwhelming to view. Although all of the action is mainly with CGI, it never comes across as weightless and it comes across as a gritty beatdown at times. The action can get so violent at times that it pushes the PG-13 rating to the max. Overall, Rodriguez helped pull off not only a fantastic job directing, but making it almost rival Cameron's own skill.

"Alita: Battle Angel" is a film that deserved a much better job at the box office and the sequel that it deserves to continue the story. It's not flawless with a somewhat overstuffed story that teases some sequel-bait, Hugo's character not being as interesting as the source material, and the villains are somewhat generic with not a lot of intriguing motivations behind their diverse personalities. Outside of these issues, the film fits amongst the quality of Cameron's work despite it not completely being his film. From an engaging story that fans of the source material will love, a tone that's both intensely mature and tame for general audiences, the very talented cast bringing their respective characters to life with Alita and Ido being the highlights, a wonderfully-detailed world that breathes with life and style with some great cinematography and effects, CGI that gives so much detail and distinct looks to the lead character as well as the inhabitants of the already-detailed city, a memorable score by Junkie XL, and action sequences that captures both the brutality and visual flair that both Cameron and Rodriguez are known for. It's a shame that such a long legacy of development hell resulted in a financially disappointing film. However, it's hopeful that the film will find new life, much like Alita herself.

Verdict: 8/10. A great movie that's only hampered by a few issues with the characters and bloated narrative. Please support this film by buying a Blu-Ray copy and giving it a watch!

8 Mile (2002) Film Review: The "Not Biopic" That Has The Quality Of A Biopic.

Eminem might been the most popular artist in the late 90's and early 2000's. So much so that the rapper even considered getting into acting. While there have been roles that the star turned down, he wanted his debut to be one he can not only relate to, but that has a lot of heart put into it. "8 Mile" follows white rapper, B-Rabbit, a young man who grew up in a rough trailer park home and who has doubted their skills of freestyle rapping after chocking on stage. As his friend books him for a rematch next week, we follow Rabbit's journey as he tries to find ways to succeed in the hopeless city of Detroit, a place where love, work, and self-worth are challenging to hold. This is by no means a story about Eminem's life, but rather incorporates elements of his struggles in life before stardom as well as the reality of the people living in the city with dreams of making it big. This is a very small-scale story as the ending itself doesn't have the lead get a record deal or anything, but rather have him humbled in his life and learning to never give up hope. The film, with its gritty tone filled with anguish and profanity, has a very strong message of forging your own path to success without relaying on others. While that's a great theme and it effectively ties into the small stakes story, it will leave some viewers underwhelmed, as they might have expected for the movie to be about Rabbit's rise to stardom or a film that emulates every aspect of Eminem's life, to which this film was never truly about.

Eminem does a really good job as Rabbit. To be fair, he is basically playing himself in a nutshell, but he clearly has so much devotion and heart into the performance. There's never a moment where the audience thinks he's phoning it in or not caring for one scene, Eminem stay so committed to the role that it's such a shame we never saw him in any more films where he's front and centre, as he has the talent to be a good actor. Kim Basinger plays Stephanie, Rabbit's alcoholic mother who relays on poker and her abusive boyfriend to keep afloat financially. Basinger does a surprisingly great job with the character and her acting makes Stephanie a very realistic portrayal of single mothers who feel emotionally weak to provide. Her character also helps amplify the film's theme of being successful with independence. Brittany Murphy plays Alex, Rabbit's love interest who wants to be a move to New York and become a model. Although Murphy acts well and the character is supposed to mirror people who do the opposite of the film's message and attempt to rely on others to fuel on one's success, there's just not much to Alex. The chemistry between her and Rabbit seems mostly be physical attraction with a shallow bit of liking their personality and we never dive deep into her mindset as the audience just has to accept that she cheated on Rabbit with Wink in order to go to New York. Mekhi Phifer plays Future, Rabbit's closest friend and the host of the underground rap battles. Although there's not too much of his character, I really liked Phifer's performance as you can get by his acting alone how this character failed to be a someone and now chooses to host the rap battles in order to find talent, as well as his chemistry with Rabbit being captured really well. There are also plenty of side characters from Lily, Rabbit's little sister who Rabbit cares so much for, Greg, Stephanie's abusive boyfriend who freeloads off from the family played by Micheal Shannon, Wink, a radio DJ who has "connections" that can help Rabbit land the deal of a lifetime, the "Three-One-Three", who are a group of Rabbit's friends, and the Leaders of the Free World, a rival rap group that Rabbit needs to take down in his rap battle. All of the actors do a great job and give off enjoyable or hatable personalities that the audience buy into. However, it's Eminem and Basinger that steal the spotlight with the former's acting debut being a strong stand-out and the latter's excellent performance that should have been acknowledged by the Academy for Best Supporting Actress.

The late Curtis Hanson is mainly known for his work on the acclaimed "L.A. Confidential" with this being his second and only other popular film before his death. Hanson showcases a great job with his directing as he captures the city of Detroit with all of the ugliness, but bursting with personality. This is a very grey, almost depressing, looking film that effectively captures the essence of the location. However, even with the bleak, rundown city being the environment that the characters are surrounded by, it's oozing with character. While there are meat-headed fistfights and attitudes that show the lack of education the people carry, the rap battles act as the main demonstration of strength, boldness and talent rather than the physical fights. Although the use of rap battles might seem silly outside of the nightclubs, it honestly works in showing how these acts are basically the only way to get actually reputation in the city. It sounds too fictional on paper, but is effectively displayed on screen by Hanson. It is also helped by Rodrigo Prieto's cinematography that's not only kept grounded and handheld, but feels like an actual character in its character as we go back and forth in conversations and making it the audience's window into the bleak city. It's a great mixture of professional and artificial amateur-like work to make a realistic display for the film. Eminem of course did the music for the movie, and while I can't at all remember the original score, it's the rap songs that really make the music stand out. Not only do you have various rap songs playing on the radio of Rabbit's run-down Delta, but the multiple rap battles are written extremely well to suit the characters and the vocabulary they possess. They aren't songs you'd listen to per se, but they sound very good and also work effectively as verbal battles to the death. However, I think everyone knows of the Academy Award-winning song that plays at the credits of the film. What's there to say about "Lose Yourself" that hasn't been said before about how excellent it is. Although the song itself is more attached to Eminem's life compared to the film as a whole and the fact that it only play at the end credits, it practically has no effect on the legendary status of the song, which has many proclaimed to not only the rapper's best single, but one of the best original songs in film history.

"8 Mile" is a film that, although outshined by an Oscar-winning song, holds up as a very good movie. It has its issues as Alex is a pretty undeveloped love interest and the film could have focused more of Rabbit's rise to stardom rather than the small-scale story that we got, but these are really scrapping the bottom of the barrel. From an effective subtle story that holds a really well-meaning message, a bitter tone that matches the environment of Detroit, the strong cast of characters with solid performances by Eminem and Basinger, Hanson's down-to-earth direction and portrayal of the city, Prieto's solid cinematography, and the rap soundtrack that companies Eminem's Oscar-winning song. I'm surprised by the lack of flaws the film has, which goes to show how dedicated and how talented the filmmakers and cast are for a film that seems like a cash-grab product that seems only relevant due to Eminem's popularity. However, even if you remove Eminem's involvement, this film still works as a great watch to this day.

Verdict: 8.5/10. A great film that is somewhat underrated due to one fantastic song. Give it a watch and lose yourself as the film captures your attention.

The Little Mermaid (1989) Film Review: A Geniune Classic With One Huge Flaw...

Since "Hamilton" is now on Disney+ and I'm in a musical mood, I guess it's time to look back on one of Disney's most beloved hits and the film that practically saved the company. It helps that this is one of the only 4K Blu-Rays I have in my collection. I think everyone knows the story by now. A young mermaid princess who dreams of exploring the human world falls in love with a human prince, to which her father forbids her from encountering. She makes a deal with the villainous Ursula by granting her legs while trading the ability to speak in the process, giving her a small window of time for her to get a kiss from the prince before she returns to the sea. It's a love story that works fair enough, but has one huge issue regarding the romance in question, which will be discussed later as I cover the characters. Even though I don't like one of the characters as you will find out, I do think that the romantic scenes in the film work as Ariel is both experiencing the surface world with joy while trying to win the heart of her crush without uttering a single world. The pacing is very good with no filler at all, and the film allows to have a bit of comedy and stakes. However, it must be clarified that the movie is mostly about Ariel and her desires to learn and love, which might not make it the most riveting story out there.

Ariel is regarded as one of the more divisive princess characters. Some claim that she's too whiny, stupid and just desires to fall in love with some handsome guy, which makes her character seemingly weak. However, given her age and circumstance, I think she's one of the most likeable, mainly due to her bubbly personality and sense of wonder. And while she does make some questionable choices, it's in her nature to rebel against her demanding father as well as taking the opportunity to explore the surface world. She's not the best princess or female lead Disney has created, but she's in the upper tier for sure. I also give credit for the fact that despite being voiceless for a part of the film, the personality really shines through without one piece of dialogue. Ursula is like a more comedic take on Maleficent as it's this evil witch who shuns the kingdom, but thinks highly of herself and has fun with her deviousness. She's not the deepest villain with understandable motives, but she's an enjoyable villain in her own right. The side characters are all fantastic in their own right and all have likeable personalities. From the caring, musical-loving Sebastian, the very protective and arrogant King Triton, the loyal childish Flounder, the goofy, dim-witted Scuttle, the crazy Chief Louis, and even the rational Grimsby are all enjoyable in their own right. Despite all of the enjoyable characters, it's time to acknowledge the weakest aspect of the film, Prince Eric. I hate this character for plenty of reasons. First, he has no defining personality other than that he loves beautiful girls. I know that's a trait in every dude, but he has no character aside from this. Even when they try giving him some type of character such as him rejecting the statue of himself being too valiant, he would ironically act like this when defeating Ursula. This follows into the second issue, which is the fact that he shouldn't be a prince. Not only is his attire not at all royal, aside from the wedding outfit, but we barely learn anything about his kingdom. We don't even see his parents, but we're supposed to believe he's a prince of some sort of nation? And the last reason why I hate the character is that the romance surrounding him is so contrived and laughable. Like, Ariel only falls in love with him not because he's the first human she lays eyes on, but because he's handsome and was playing with his dog. That's it. I know you can attribute this problem to Ariel, but I still blame the character as it would be so easy for the writers to give some kind of trait that Ariel latches on to that's attractive. Maybe she sees that he cares about animals or the environment or a really nice guy from his interactions from the crew, just something that gives this guy an ounce of depth. The only way I personally watch the romantic scenes with the two is for me imagining that Eric is just an animated Bruce Campbell by looks alone. Point is, Prince Eric is the worst love interest in Disney animation and is the stain in what should be a perfect film. In fact, if they just tweaked this guy to have a personality, the film would be an instant masterpiece.

The animation is great to say the least. This film was one of the first in a while that had the company put a lot of money and effort in order to pull off the effects and scale of the story, which hadn't been done for nearly 30 years up to that point. Not only is the character animation fantastic with unique designs and movement that matches their personality, but it's the environments and special effects that really shine throughout the animation. Considering that a good portion of the film is set underwater or around the ocean, the animators did a fantastic job in creating realistic movements of Ariel's hair, bubbles, waves, dynamic lighting and the ocean itself. The storm sequence is perhaps the best demonstration the film has to offer for the animation with the dramatic effects used perfectly. There's even small uses of CGI in the film that blend well with the hand-drawn aesthetic. While the animation holds up extremely well as time goes on, it shouldn't be forgotten how impressive it was during the time of its release. However, it is the songs that are perhaps remembered the most from the film as Alan Menkin's first collaboration with Disney made him a main-stay in the company. Although the soundtrack isn't near my favourites of his work, that doesn't discredit how catchy and memorable the songs are. While "Under The Sea", "Les Poissons", and "Kiss The Girl" are decent songs although they don't serve much meaning as a whole, it's "Poor Unfortunate Souls" and "Part Of Your World" that are the highlights, with the latter being one of the best princess songs from the company. While Menkin's work will improve with each film, his first outing is honestly a pretty good start.

"The Little Mermaid" kicked off the Disney Renaissance with a bang and remains one of the period's best films. From the cute love story, lighthearted tone with its share of stakes, Ariel being a loveable protagonist, Ursula being a fun villain, the side characters being enjoyable for their personalities, wonderful animation that holds up extremely well, and a solid soundtrack with a couple of fantastic songs. The only problem with the film though is the character of Prince Eric being very bland, unrealistic, and overall not a good match with Ariel as he's just a dude who loves pretty girls. It really holds the movie back from being a masterpiece, but other than that, this is still a great watch and my second favourite Disney Princess film, aside from "Princess and the Frog"

Verdict: 8/10. Outside of a terrible love interest that derails aspects of the love story, the film is still a classic in its own right. I'm looking forward for the remake, mainly because of my hopes of Eric being an actual character for once.