Candyman (2021) Non-Spoiler Film Review: Sweet Experience With A Very Bitter Aftertaste...

 

Anthony McCoy doesn't recall the traumatic experience he encountered as a baby when a spirt named "Candyman" abducted him and Helen Lyle saved him while sacrificing herself. As an adult, Anthony is a struggling artist in a relationship with an art gallery director. When he rediscovers the Candyman legend from the tragic story of Sherman Fields, Anthony becomes obsessed with the legend to the point of making art around it. His newfound success and fascination however becomes a problem as unexplainable murders occur and a normal bee sting manifests into something else. While it does continue from the original classic, the new film feels a lot like a reboot then a conventional sequel as it completely reinvents themes and aspects of the original to both success and failure. When the film is doing its own thing and acts as a supernatural slasher mystery, it really works. But, the third act and ending really drops the ball in regards to the lack of subtlety of the social commentary and the questionable connections to the original. I won't spoil what happens in the end, but the ending itself is far too abrupt and contrived that it almost derails the quality of the rest of the movie. The tone is also a step-back from the original. Yes, the film does take itself seriously for the most part, but Jordan Peele added way too much comic relief and horror cliches to make the movie fun for the broader audience and the jokes and tropes are just not good at all when compared to the uniqueness and class that was the original.

Yahya Abdull-Mateen II as the adult Anthony shows just how great of an actor he is thanks to the range and charisma he gives to the role. The viewer is not sure whether to fully sympathize or hate Anthony as a character depending on the circumstances, but Yahya really plays his part as a pawn and victim really well. Teyonah Parris as Brianna Cartwright is also really good as Anthony's girlfriend who is unaware of the influence and nature of the Candyman myth. While Parris knocks it out of the park, I do think that she takes away too much screen-time from Anthony, especially given the importance of his character and his connection to Candyman. The side cast is similar to that of the original in regards to performances, but their roles are a completely other question. Colman Domingo does a fine job as William Burke, a local resident who acts as a Candyman historian to Anthony and the viewer. While Domingo is a good actor, I do think that the character of Burke gets confusing by the end in regards to his motifs and role in the film. Nathan Stewart-Jarrett as Troy, Brianna's gay brother, is literally there to be the typical comic-relief that's found in all of Peele's horror films. While I don't mind the previous comic reliefs in "Get Out" and "Us", Troy is by far the weakest due to his jokes mostly falling flat and the fact that he doesn't do anything in the movie. Vanessa Williams returns as Anne-Marie, Anthony's mother, shows how great of an actress she is, but she's barely in the movie. Lastly, there's Tony Todd as the titular Candyman, or the lack thereof. While I won't go too much into detail, Todd doesn't show up until the very end and, in his place, Micheal Hargrove acts as the titular spirit appearing as Sherman Fields, an innocent victim of police brutality that becomes another name in the Candyman legend. While Hargrove does an excellent job in playing the character physically as well as his involvement being cleverly implemented in the story, Candyman acts more like a typical silent killer rather than the charismatic and seductive nature Todd gave in the original. I understand that Todd is too old to play the character and that they wrote the film to write around his age, but it still doesn't make sense why they just didn't have Todd voice some dialogue in post? Overall, the actors are all doing a great job in their respective roles, but the only characters that are well-balanced and used are that of Anthony and Sherman. The rest either take too much screen-time or not enough of it.

While Peele's name is plastered all over the marketing, it's Nia DaCosta that directed the film and she manages to knock it out of the park with this one. While Bernard Rose did a fantastic job in making a grounded and etherial film, DaCosta goes one step beyond in making this film look like the art that could be showcased in Brianna's gallery. Unlike the dirty, grimy and gothic depiction of Chicago presented in the original, Chicago comes across as a rather beautiful city in regards to how presentable it looks and the slick modern production. There are still some gothic and vivid sequences, but it's all about the composition now and the atmosphere is now pure dread and mystery compared to the dream-like feel that was found in the original. The cinematography by John Guleserian is pure eye-candy. From the opening credits to the long tracking and stationary shots, Guleserian outshines Anthony Richmond's work by a mile and I will be dumbfounded if his work isn't nominated for an Oscar. The score by Robert A.A. Lowe is on par with Phillip Glass's work from the original as he has a more eerie and tense-fuelled aura than the more gothic and theatre-esque music and choir of Glass. The use of paper puppetry to show the backstory of Candyman is visually unique and masterful in its simplicity. The make-up actually improves surprisingly from the original. While the bees are all CGI now, the gore and practical effects are more disturbing and effective from Anthony's bee sting to the various deaths in the film. Speaking of the kills, this film does double the body count and offer some gnarly deaths scenes with some outstanding directing from DaCosta to make each kill feel visually pleasing and unique from the other. DaCosta's directing is spectacular to say the least and if the rest of the film was just as strong, it would have been just as good or even better than the original.

"Candyman" is an underwhelming sequel to one of the best horror films from the 1990's. From the large departures of the original, the terrible ending that beats you to death with obvious social commentary and insulting payoffs, a tone that falls victim to pathetic jokes and horror cliches that the original never offered, the side cast being overused or underused depending on the character, and the titular character himself loses a bit of his identity by being far more silent than before. While there are problems to be found, this is by no means a bad movie. The story itself does have a great sense of mystery and dread, Anthony is an engaging protagonist in how moral-grey he is and whether or not we should feel bad for him, Hargrove manages to fill the shoes of the titular character very well for the most part, the cinematography by Guleserian is phenominal, the music by Lowe is one of the best horror scores in recent years, the make-up and kills are drastically improved on in a satisfying matter and in a technical view, and DaCosta's directing is fantastic at making this film feel like moving art and making Chicago look oddly beautiful in its appearance. It's such a shame, because all of the pieces were right there to make a film that's not only on par, but better than the original. As is, it's a well-made film that lacks the subtle and sophistication that the original possessed in its identity and legacy.

Verdict: 6.5/10. Decent film overall with excellent filmmaking, but the screenplay needed more time to develop and reincorporate as a far better and faithful follow-up to the original rather than pandering to modern audiences and mindsets. Still recommend, but be warned of some cringe-worthy content by the end.  

Candyman (1992) Film Review: Bee His Victim!

 

With the new sequel/reboot of "Candyman" coming out this week, it's time I talk about the original that captured horror fans attention. Helen Lyle is a graduate student studying the urban legend that is the Candyman, a vengeful spirit who will kill those that speak his name five times. While Helen believes that Candyman is just a myth, her denial and exploration of the figure draws the attention of the titular figure to make her life a living nightmare in order for her to submit to his will and become his victim. Despite its genre and premise, the story feels more akin to a supernatural thriller than a typical slasher film. There is a body-count for sure, but the story is very much fixated on Helen and her arc rather than just being a silly horror film that plays up the cliches and tropes. Even though it was written by Clive Barker who also did "Hellraiser", "Candyman" has a more sophisticated approach to its storytelling and content unlike the gory and clumsy story-telling of "Hellraiser", which tried too hard to appeal to the general horror and slasher crowd. On top of that, there is an underlying theme of social themes that can be found that, while not the main focus, adds a bit of depth to the picture. The tone is reflective of the story as well, taking the film as serious as possible with few bits of humour and levity. It's a dark and gritty movie with some uncomfortable ideas and sequences at times, but it all manages to feel so real despite the dream-like nature of the film and killer. Even if the premise alone sounds cheesy with a black, hook-handed ghost with bees killing people and trying to seduce a white woman, it never feels like a joke to the film or the viewer.

Virginia Madsen is really good as the protagonist, Helen. What makes Helen stand out from the usual batch of final girls or leads is that she's given an arc that has her get into her predicament and seeking redemption out of it. She's not like the majority of final girls that are just caught in a bad situation and need to beat their villain to be free, Helen is constantly suffering and it's all part of her development. It helps that Madsen manages to make Helen as likeable as possible in order for the viewer to feel bad for the character. However, it's Tony Todd's performance of the titular spirit that really carries the movie. Todd simply oozes charisma, presence, menace, and a seductive nature to Candyman that makes the character one of the most unique horror villains in the genre. Not only is the character given a sympathetic backstory, but he almost acts as a title or virus, wanting others to join him in the legendary status as myth or host. Even though that means he has a reduced body count compared to other slasher villains, he feels the most human for a supernatural killer. The side characters are also good for the limited roles they provide. Kasi Lemmons is fine as Bernadette, Helen's lively friend, Xander Berkley is rightfully despicable as Trevor, Helen's cheating husband, DeJuan Guy as the street-smart child, Jake, does a pretty good job for an unknown child actor, and Vanessa Estelle Williams is great as Anne-Marie, a single mom whose baby is stolen by Candyman. There are other minor characters such as the student Trevor is sleeping with and some detectives, but they don't really play that big of a role. The cast is generally talented and play their respective roles well, but it's Madsen and Todd that really outshine everyone else in regards to character and performance.

Bernard Rose isn't a famous name in the world of filmmaking or directing, but he has managed to preserve his talents and legacy with this film. It's a bit of a shame that Rose hasn't really taken off in his career as he clearly shows off how skillful he is with "Candyman". His approach to making the film more atmospheric and methodical may seem like an issue, but it is paid off brilliantly because of how etherial and almost dream-like the film gets in its somber nature. Chicago is presented as a dirty and unpleasing city, which is reflected by the apartment complex of Cabrini-Green, which alone carries themes on a visual level. The gothic and gloomy hideouts of Candyman and Cabrini-Green feel like a perfect blend of classic horror and modern horror thanks to the aesthetic and detail from the set design. The cinematography by Anthony B. Richmond mostly consists of close-ups and handheld tracking shots that help makes the film have a more personal connection to the onscreen characters. Richmond also did a great job with the opening credits as they capture the highway of the city and offering a great visual shot here and there. The score by Phillip Glass is one of the best in the genre as the gothic choir and organ music just seeps of atmosphere and dread while having notes of romance and tragedy. As for the make-up, practical effects and kills, there's not really much to add. The use of live bees and the reveal of Candyman's disfigurement is eerie, the make-up is great with the highlight of Helen's burnt body in the end, and the kills themselves feel more grisly and real than the usual slasher due to the limited use of gore and blood. The filmmaking overall is very spot-on on all accounts, which Rose should feel proud of.

"Candyman" is regarded as a modern horror classic for a reason. From the slow-burn storytelling, serious tone, Madison's Helen being a more fleshed-out final girl protagonist, Todd's brilliant performance and portrayal of Candyman, the side cast doing their best and taking the film seriously, Richmond's camerawork, Glass's etherial score, the make-up and kills are well done and executed with restrain, and Rose's directing perfectly captures the atmosphere and dream-like nature of the story while reflecting the relevant social themes in a perfectly visual matter. Even though the film may not be for everyone due to the limited amount of deaths, kind-of forgettable side cast, and the slow pace, I feel that it would have completely altered the film's unique identity and the direction Rose was trying to do in regards to atmosphere and symbology. Regardless how good or bad the new movie will be, it will never undermine what made the original so wonderful.

Verdict: 9/10. A brilliant horror flick that sacrifices mindless entertainment for an intellectual design. Just don't go in thinking it's a gore-fest and you'll be glad to behold the legend that is the Candyman!

Reminiscence (2021) Non-Spoiler Film Review: A Film Worth Remembering...

 

In the not-too-distant future, climate change has made sea levels rise drastically to coastal cities and the everyman scrambles to find work in this new world. Nick Bannister is a former war veteran working at a facility that allows people to relive their memories. When a particular customer named Mae enters his store, he becomes madly in love with her and the two start a relationship together. But when Mae vanishes with no explanation given, Nick is hellbent on figuring out what happened to her and who she was before he met her. While the trailer and marketing makes it seem like it's about Nick trying to get his memory back about a particular woman, the story is really more like a crime mystery. Think "Vertigo" but with a sci-fi twist. Critics have called the plot unoriginal because of the film borrowing aspects from beloved film noir and sci-fi hits. However, I personally believe that the story manages to make these inspirations original enough to be its own thing. The story actually goes in various directions and twists that got me extremely invested in figuring out what's going on and how it's all going to end. The ending itself though, without going into spoilers, can be a bit divisive in regards to a satisfying conclusion. The tone is very much an unapologetic film noir, which means that the mystery and monologues are plentiful, while comedy and action are minimal. This is not a fast-paced action thriller, it's more of a slow-burn mystery that really only has two action sequences in the well-paced two-hour runtime.

Hugh Jackman as Nick is as good as you can for the typical Jackman role. He has his outbursts and gloom, but has a bit of charisma and charm. Nick is very much typical of the average detective protagonists in these movies, but Jackman nails the look and demeanor of one. Rebecca Ferguson as Mae is great as the mysterious femme fetale that stole the heart of Nick and is constantly questioned on her morales. Ferguson is both attractive and captivating as the lover who may be a heartless villain or a misunderstood victim. The side cast is also on par with the leads in terms of their performances.  From Thandie Newton as Watts, Nick's friend and co-worker who acts as his advisor regarding the unsolved mystery of Mae, Cliff Curtus as Cryus, a dirty cop that butts heads with Nick, and Daniel Wu as Saint Joe, a crime boss connected to Mae's past, the side characters is quite good thanks to their respective performances and interesting characterizations. There are other side characters I haven't mentioned, but that's mainly due to having not as much screen-time and their roles being too critical for the story. Overall, the cast gives it their all and the characters are fleshed out enough to give them a sense of humanity and depth, even if some are a bit on the more generic side.

Lisa Joy is known for her work on "Westworld" and was given the opportunity for her first film to be completely original and given a moderate budget of nearly $70 million. While that does seem a bit concerning for some, Joy proves that she's an extremely competent director and one that's meticulous in her work. The dystopic future is perhaps the most plausible I've seen in any film with the concerns of climate change resulting in rising sea levels, extreme humidity and working around the flooded landscape in regards to transportation. It's all thanks to the spectacular set design and visual enhancements.While the future has its gloomy details, it also offers some interesting technology that doesn't feel too far from man's advancements with the ability to look in one's memories via hologram projection either in a first or third-person perspective depending on the memory of the environment displayed by the subject. Joy also knows how to make her work as visually engaging as possible not only by the look of the future, but also the varied use of colours. While the film primarily uses more muted or darker colours for its genre, there's still some nice vivid moments and highlights throughout the movie. The cinematography by Paul Cameron is fantastic to say the least. From the long, zooming opening shot to the various wrap-around and tracking sequences to the wide artistic shots, this may be Cameron's best camerawork to date. What's not an example of anyone's best work is Ramin Djawadi's score. Djawadi has made some of the best musical compositions for his work on "Game of Thrones" and "Westworld". His offerings in this film are so transparent and bland that it seems that anyone could have made it. The CGI however is pretty good. The flooded Miami looks amazing at times and the hologram projections were done by a brand-new technology, so the effects are very top-notch. As for the action, there's only two sequences to note. While the shootout in the middle of the film is fairly average, the climatic chase and melee brawl offers some great visuals and grittiness. Overall, Joy's film debut is something to look upon and it's a shame that very few are actually going out to see it.

"Reminiscence" is a surprisingly great sci-fi film noir that will become a cult classic in many years to come. While the inspirations it carries can have its cliched baggage, the ending itself is divisive, and the score by Djawadi is painfully generic, the rest of the movie is actually really good in so many areas. The story is engaging with its twists and turns, the tone is very much a film-noir to the core, Jackson is as enjoyable of a main lead as always, Ferguson is great as the femme fetale, the entire side cast is filled with interesting characters and solid performances, Cameron's camerawork may be his best to date in ambition, the CGI is extremely good, the climatic action set-piece is creative and riveting, and Joy's direction offers a believable future environment that's both realistically detailed and visually surreal. It's actually sad that more people will go out to watch freaking "Paw Patrol" over this and the box-office disaster this will become will essentially put off Hollywood to never offer more original and unique films like this.

Verdict: 8/10. Great movie, but has its fair share of drawbacks. Please check this one out if possible, especially in theatres for amazing eye-candy!

X-Men (2000) Film Review: An Important Yet Dated Superhero Milestone...

 

With the release of "Reminiscence" this weekend, I wanted to talk about the film that launched Hugh Jackman to Hollywood fame. The superhero genre is still recovering from the 90's and while "Blade" did a decent job at the box office, all eyes were on the upcoming adaptation on one of the most popular teams in comic book history. In a not-too-distant future, the majority of humanity is living unknowingly with mutants, people with extraordinary abilities. A young girl named Rogue runs from home after acquiring a deadly ability to siphon the life out of the people she touches, joining with a cage-fighter known as the Wolverine before being saved by the X-Men, a group of mutants following the leadership of Charles Xavier, a telepath who believes that humans and mutants can live together in peace. However, he is at odds with a former friend turned rival named Magneto, a Holocaust survivor who can control metal, and his hate towards humanity after Congress is planning to enlist an act that will forcibly reveal mutants and their abilities to the public. Charles and Magneto are in a heated battle, while Rogue and Wolverine learn that their lives may be more crucial than they think. The story is great in getting the viewer to understand the type of world they are getting into. Mutants are well-known to the public, but their desire to stay hidden and wanting no problems is constantly in jeopardy. The X-Men aren't Avenger-level heroes with fanfare and reputation, but rather a secret organization that do espionage missions and hide in plain sight with a school for the gifted. The time period is never explored because the film wants to feel timeless in its themes of prejudice and identity. While the world-building is fantastic, the story can have issues regarding comic accurate depictions and Magneto's overall plan. The tone however is the perfect level of being grounded, serious, and fun at the same time. This is not a movie where one-liners are spewed nonstop and comedy is a backbone, it's a no nonsense film that is justified due to the importance of the story and circumstances.

Hugh Jackman makes his breakthrough role as Logan/Wolverine. While the character has more to do in later films, Jackman shows just how perfect he is as the character through his gruff attitude, sincereness, and aggressive combat. Patrick Stewart as Charles Xavier is also perfect as the disabled mentor for the team. Stewart has this soft-spoken mannerism and monotone delivery that makes him seem like he's always in control despite his condition. Ian McKellen as Magneto is another perfect role as the calculative villain. McKellen is great at boasting and showing high pride for Magneto and his people, while also being intimidating when he needs to, even when wearing the goofy costume. Anna Paquin as Rogue has always been ridiculed for being too young for the role, but she does a good job for being the timid and innocent mutant who doesn't know what she wants or who she is in the world. Bruce Davison as Senator Kelly is also good as the discriminative politician who only cares for the safety of humankind. As for the rest of the X-Men and Magneto's Brotherhood, they do take a sidelined role. Some good minor characters are Rebecca Romijn-Stamos's Mystique, Halle Berry's Storm, and James Marsden's Cyclops, while forgettable appearances are Tyler Mane's Sabertooth, Ray Park's Toad, and Famke Janssen as Jean Grey. The actors and actresses for these side roles aren't bad by any means, but they don't get much to work off of due to the central roles taking up the majority of the story. However, said central roles are great introductions to beloved performances and memorable characters.

Bryan Singer has recently been blacklisted in Hollywood for the various allegations he had done in the past. While he had done some awful stuff outside from his career, his overall talent as a director hasn't changed at all. What makes his direction so interesting in this particular film is that he makes the film feel more grounded and noir rather than flashy or colourful. This may have been due to the reputation of superhero films prior, but his decision to not makes things vivid or given over-the-top expressions has been debated about constantly. Personally, I think that it's the best call he could have made given how risky of a project it is. While it may harm the viewing experience for more modern fans, I personally like how different it feels to both others in the franchise and genre as an interesting time capsule of sorts.  The leather costumes, while criticized for not being comic-accurate, work for this particular film and tone. The cinematography by Newton Thomas Siegal is fine, but not anything to go crazy about. There's decent medium shots, zoom-ins and slow-mo during the action, but it's not meant to be overly flashy. The score by Micheal Kamen is extremely underrated in the franchise with a unique theme song, tiny callbacks to the animated series and an overall sci-fi thriller-esque approach that fits the film's identity more than a bombastic superhero theme that it will get in the future. The visual effects are decent, but have aged in places. The CGI aren't laughably bad or poorly rendered, but simply a product of the time. Despite this, there's some great prosthetic work with the mutant features such as Wolverine's claws and Mystique's body. The action sequences are on a more minimal side. Considering the modest budget and varied abilities, the action isn't as ambitious compared to other films and they can be seen as the weakest aspect of the film with the only highlights being the Magneto holding the police hostage and the Wolverine vs. Mystique fight offering the most creativity and effective effects. Despite the weak action, I don't watch the movie for it. I watch it because the characters, story and world-building are riveting and the film feels more like a spy thriller akin to the first "Mission: Impossible" than an action-filled blockbuster, which shows how talented Singer is to pull off something so captivating in its restrictions.

"X-Men" is an odd film to talk about in the current superhero climate. While the story has some excellent world-building and thematic depth, the tone being on the more serious side, the performances from Jackman and the others are stellar, Siegal's camerawork is well done, Kamen's score is really good in how different it is to the rest of the franchise, great-looking practical and prosthetic work, and Singer's great direction on making the world feel like our own rather than a fantastical, colourful cartoon, the film aged poorly in certain areas. Comic-book accuracy is thrown out in areas, Magneto's plan is tonally over-the-top, some of the side characters feel forgettable due to their limited roles and screentime, the CGI is dated in areas, and the action itself is not very exciting for the most part. It's a quality movie for sure and it manages to hold up well in the new ecosystem, but it has to be viewed in a different matter. It's not an epic action-fuelled superhero blockbuster, it's a philosophical, sci-fi spy thriller to an extent and that makes it stand out from the average genre flick.

Verdict: 7/10. Solid film, but can be lacking in areas other films of the genre and franchise will improve on later. Still a nice movie to revisit from time to time.

Free Guy (2021) Non-Spoiler Film Review: Freedom Isn't Perfect...

 

When a NPC named Guy  discovers that his world is an open-world online game known as "Free City", he, along with a player who is trying to take down the corrupt CEO of the studio responsible for "Free City", try to save the digital world before the anticipated sequel will cause all servers to shut down. While the premise alone has its fair share of fun, the story itself is bogged down by a sub-plot regarding some programmers who are trying to prove that their code was used in "Free City". The sub-plot with these characters has way too much techno lingo and the characters aren't that engaging to warrant the sub-plot. On top of that, you can tell that the film was edited down due to some oversimplification and cut jokes missing from the film in contrast to the trailers. Then again, the story isn't really a big deal for comedies as long as the tone and humour lands. While the tone is fantastically over-the-top, the jokes are kind of hit-and-miss. Slapstick, visual gags, and some witty dialogue do bring a laugh here and there, but the overuse of Youtuber cameos and a need to be hip and cool for younger viewers really make the film feel more dated in trying to reach towards the internet/gamer demographic.

Ryan Reynolds as the titular Guy is as loveable as ever. His naivety and excitement upon his new discoveries in life are just fun to watch and contagious in how Reynolds gives off a great level of charisma. Jodie Comer as Molotov Girl/Mille, the player Guy falls in love with and is forced to join for a bigger journey works really well off of Reynolds both for the comedy and dramatic sequences. Whenever the film is focused on the two of them, it's really enjoyable, which can't be said for the side characters. Lil Rey Howrey as Buddy, Guy's security guard friend, is fine as a Kevin Hart personality, but he's very underused in the film. Joe Kerry as Keys, a programmer who is trying to reconnect with Millie, is horribly miscast as the geeky and mild-mannered desk jockey. It's really hard to make Steve Harrington a nerd, no matter how great Kerry is as an actor. Utkarsh Ambudkar as Mouser, Key's co-worker and underling to Antwan, should have been casted as Keys himself due to being having far more of a nerdy demeanor than Kerry. Lastly, Taika Waititi as Antwan, the evil video game publisher who only cares about money, portrays greedy CEO's as a hippy millennial rather than the more realistic out-of-touch businessman. Waititi is doing his best, but Antwan is just a bad guy for the sake of being bad and his personality clashes with the overall mentality of his business. I would say that the Youtuber cameos can be considered characters since they show up way too much, but the celebrities they got are painfully wooden and misrepresented content-wise. Overall, Reynolds and Comer work really well off each other and by themselves, but the rest of the side cast are either underutilized, miscast, poorly characterized or overstay their welcome.

Shawn Levy is known for his work on various comedies and "Stranger Things", which explains his sense of skill and visual eye in this film. "Free City" is essentially a coked-up "GTA Online" where crazy antics and violence occurs every minute, which helps to the film's tone and identity. "Free City", for the most part, feels like a realistic video game that could be made. Levy also adds just enough easter eggs for gamers that it doesn't overtake the film to make it feel like a video game movie. While Levy's directing isn't extremely stylized or creative, he does inject plenty of colour and personality into every scene. The editing by Dean Zimmerman is good for the most part, but there are some odd cuts and the film has way too much of a fast pace that keeps the film from being even more enjoyable than ever. The cinematography by George Richmond is pretty good with some creative tracking and wrap-around shots. The original score by Christophe Beck is really generic and unmemorable, while the licensed soundtrack is good despite overusing Mariah Carey's "Fantasy". The visual effects are decent in that it's not meant to look extremely realistic, but good enough to blend well enough in the background. The action sequences are surprisingly enjoyable due to how creative they can be. From Guy's escape from the police, the team-up of Guy and Millie against various guards, and the hilarious and pop-culture-filled fight between Guy and a muscled-up clone. Even though Levy isn't particularly known for his directing, his work here shows that he's far better than most in his field in comedy filmmaking, even some that work for Marvel.

"Free Guy" is by no means a bad movie, but it's not as great as some critics make it out to be. On the positive side, the premise and tone are fun, some of the jokes are hilarious, Reynolds and Comer are a great comedic duo, Richmond's cinematography has its shining moments, the CGI is good for what it is, and Levy's direction shows that he has a sense of style, passion, and skill in the action and world-building. However, the film suffers on the story focusing on the programming sub-plot, some jokes fail due to trying too hard to appeal to the younglings and overusing Youtuber cameos, characters such as Buddy and Mouser are underutilized, Kerry is miscast as Keys, Waititi is struggling to make anything from a generic villain role as Antwan, the Youtuber cameos are poorly implemented and date the film, the editing by Zimmerman has its issues, and the original score and licensed soundtrack leave a lot to be desired. It's still an enjoyable film for what it is, but it can struggle from its established flaws and the dangers of being dated over the years to make it fall into obscurity.

Verdict: 6.5/10. Decent action-comedy, but could have been more tightly written and timeless if things were changed around. Still worth a watch to have some really good laughs and enjoyment!  

The Suicide Squad (2021) Non-Spoiler Film Review: One Of The Best Comic-Book Movies Ever Made???

 

The first "Suicide Squad" movie was a train-wreck of concepts and studio interference that is so bad I just never really cared to do a review of it because everything that has been said about it has been said already. So, when James Gunn was given the mantle to create a follow-up following his brief firing from Disney, he wasted no time in making a movie that not only surpasses the first film in every way, but make a proper adaptation of the titular comics. The story follows the titular squad or Task Force X as they are given a mission to infiltrate an island nation that is enemies with the U.S and destroy whatever secret weapon they have locked up in their secret base. The squad of villains, of course, have their banter, cooperation and skills that are put to the test as things get out of hand in an unexpected way. The premise alone is what the characters are suited to do, unlike in the 2016 film where they needed to save the world from the Enchantress. There are world-ending stakes of course, but only as the film progresses and the mission derails in a natural matter. Obviously, the tone is both identifiable and all trademarks of Gunn's, which is both silly, over-the-top and vulgar, but offers a lot of heart, depth, and clever commentary. It's not the funniest film Gunn has ever done, but it's not really meant to be. The film is more in spirit to the comics, which offers its share of fun and comedy, but ultimately acts on a shared theme about the U.S's role in international affairs and politics mixed in with the graphic violence and colourful characters. Speaking of which...

While the 2016 film can be debated if the characters were good or not, the 2021 film completely ensures that the characters are both well-written and characterized. There are so many characters that I have to skim through one by one. Bloodsport is the team leader and central protagonist played by Idris Elba, who is forced into the mission by Waller. While Bloodsport is very similar to Deadshot in concept, Elba's performance offers both humour and heart while having a different type of charm Smith is known for. Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn is as perfect as ever and continues to function as the wild card for the group, which makes her all the more enjoyable. John Cena as Peacemaker is both hilarious and bad-ass in how he holds his life-long mission of achieving world peace while also being a symbolic theme of the film's commentary. Joel Kinnaman as Rick Flag manages to be far more likeable in this film as Flag is allowed to be far more loose and humanizing compared to the 2016 film. Viola Davis as Amanda Waller is just as good as ever as the ruthless mission director who continues to show how evil and inhuman she can be to achieve her goals. Sylvester Stallone as the voice of King Shark is just so loveable as the child-minded creature that has an appetite for human flesh, David Dastmalchain as Polka-Dot Man is both goofy and sad in his characterization, and Daniela Melchoir is great at being the heart of the team as the morally uncorrupt Ratcatcher 2. There are a ton of characters I haven't got into such as the other Squad members, the Colto Maltese citizens and leaders, and Waller's employees, but they aren't as developed or interesting as characters, despite all serving a sense of purpose to the commentary of the film. This does make the human villains (The Thinker, Silvio Luna and Mateo Suarez), feel one-note in personality though, which is kind of an issue, but it does all click together by the end once you understand what the movie is trying to say. Regardless, the central characters are extremely charismatic and likeable thanks to the talents of their respective actors and actresses along with Gunn's writing.

For those who don't know, Gunn started out working at Troma Entertainment, a company known for their exploitation films and overabundance of over-the-top violence and vulgarity. While the "Guardians of the Galaxy" films don't have that type of aesthetic due to Marvel being Marvel, Warner Bros lets Gunn go all out on the things that he loved to do for film, only with a massive blockbuster budget. There are the usual personality-filled visual gags such as the scene headers being comprised of things from the environment. Colours are far more muted and unfiltered as colours only comes out from the costumes, blood, and action sequences. Gunn clearly has inspiration from certain war films as well as the 1970's aesthetic to have the Squad feel like they are taking part in Vietnam, but also has an independent, Troma feel to it. Case in point, this is perhaps the only time where a Troma-esque project feels mainstream and commercialized. The cinematography by Henry Braham has a more hand-held approach that tries to feel both gritty and stylized at the same time with the occasional eye-candy shot. It manages to feel both cinematic and indie-inspired at the same time. The score by John Murphy is very standard as it's pretty generic action beats. The music that plays in the third act with King Shark and Ratcatcher stand out however thanks to a good use of choir and how perfectly well it fits with the respective scene. The licensed soundtrack however is a real banger though, which is not only thanks to Gunn knowing what songs fit well with each scene, but also trying to pick a more selection of songs than just 80's pop or even ones that are overplayed/popular. While the CGI is pretty good in its own standards with the detailed King Shark being the highlight, it's the use of practical gore effects that really steal the show. Not only is the film gorier than any R-rated comic-book film of its kind, but the practicality of the gore and kills help make it stand out. While there are cases where kills and gore are CGI, they still look visceral and Gunn tries to use as much practical effects as possible, even when a CGI character is doing the killing. The action sequences are unique in how each one is structured and shot differently while offering a variety of scale and ambition. I can't really describe any of them without going into spoilers, but the action is engaging thanks to the creativity of Gunn and the charismatic characters that work off on one another. 

"The Suicide Squad" is constantly being called as both the best DCEU film and one of the best comic-book films ever made for plenty of good reason. While the human villains don't really offer much character and the score by Murphy can be hit-and-miss, the rest of the film is fantastically put-together. From a story that feels ripped out of the original comic books with its mission and political commentary, the crazy Gunn tone and humour now cranked up to an eleven with a R-rating and vulgarity, the returning and new faces of Task Force X being extremely likeable and developed thanks to their respective actor or actress, Braham's camerawork giving a more personal yet stylized feel that has a throwback feel to it, a fitting and memorable soundtrack, the CGI is well-rendered and animated for the characters that are applied with the effects, the practical gore and make-up is just great to see for those wanting a return to Gunn's more independent projects, the action sequences are all given a unique flair and identity along with stand-out highlights and kills, and Gunn's direction allows him to be at home with himself with an independent and 1970's inspired aesthetic that complements the bizarre nature of his tone and the original comic run of the infamous supervillain team. There's so much that I haven't even discussed because I want to keep this review spoiler-free in order to make your viewing feel as fresh as possible. It's surprising how great this movie is and I do hope Gunn returns to DC to make more movies that can breathe new life to the genre.

Verdict: 9/10. A fascinating blockbuster that has endless entertainment while offering great commentary on the side that makes it both philosophical and mindless at the same time. On par with "Man of Steel" in regards to flawed excellence. 

Inception (2010) Film Review: Nolan's Masterpiece?

 

Christopher Nolan is one of the most celebrated filmmakers of the modern age and it's no question as to why. One question that many fans and critics will debate time and time again is what will be his defining project to date. Is it "The Dark Knight"? "Memento"? "Interstellar"? Well, personally, I believe that his best film to date is one of his more mind-bending and original projects he has made so far in his career. Professional dream thief, Dominick Cobb, is a man with a tragic past and is exiled from his home country because of it. When he is given a job opportunity that will clear his criminal records by one of his latest targets, Cobb recruits a team and starts to plan the seemingly impossible task to influence the heir to a giant company to willingly dissolve in his own doing via the "inception" theory. This one last job however may prove too dangerous and potentially life-threatening if unprepared, something that Cobb and his team will be forced to deal with. Much like Nolan's other works, this film is stuffed with a complicated narrative and world-building that must be stated to the audience in precise doses with slow pace and long runtime of nearly two-and-a-half hours. While I feel that some exposition in the first half could have been placed in the second half for better pacing, it never drags the film or feel like filler. That's the best thing about the majority of Nolan's work, he rarely has filler in his films. The tone is as usual of Nolan's filmography as ever. It takes itself seriously where consequences are dire, yet there's still a touch of humour or levity to not feel like melodrama.

Leonardo DiCaprio as Cobb is one of the actor's better performances in his lengthy career. DiCaprio knows how to channel this wounded soul who is trying to save face to the people around him and act like he's on top of everything. His character arc is also brilliant in terms of embracing guilt and seeking redemption, especially with the characters of Mal and Saito. He can be both an action guy and a dramatic lead, which makes Cobb one of, if not, the most developed characters in any of Nolan's films. It's actually shocking that he wasn't even nominated that year for Best Actor. The rest of the ensemble cast are also nearly on par as DiCaprio. Joseph Gordan-Levitt as Arthur, Cobb's friend and partner-in-crime is great in being this stone-faced and calculative ally who feels the most critical in both executing the mission and Cobb's remorse. Elliot Page as Ariadne is a prime choice to not only be the connective link to Cobb and his character arc, but also as a character that acts as the viewpoint of the audience as she get pulled into the world and rules of dreaming. Tom Hardy as Eames provides some comic relief and awesome action moments as the calm under pressure impersonator, while Cillian Murphy is fantastic as Fischer, the son and heir to a energy corporation who is manipulated and thrust into the dream world by Cobb. Marion Cotillard as Mal, the deceased wife of Cobb who haunts his dreams is great at playing both a physical and emotional obstacle to Cobb, and Ken Watanabe as Saito is as brilliant as ever in playing the collective and down-to-business employer of Cobb and the team. There are a few characters I chose to leave out due to a lack of screentime or memorability, but I can assure that even these more minor characters are acted well and important in the story. The cast and characters deliver outstanding performances and likeable personalities, but it's DiCaprio that really makes the film his own.

Nolan's directing never seizes to underwhelm moviegoers as he knows how to make a one-of-a-kind cinematic experience. Even if you're not a fan of some of his work, there has to be at least one film that has blown your mind. With the case of "Inception", Nolan captivates the viewer by making you dive into a fantastical yet realistic concept of entering dreams. The dreams themselves are not goofy or over-the-top like dreams can be, but feel rather ordinary despite a factor of surrealism. The world-building is creative in how something so abstract like dreams can have a layer of grounded reality to them. Much like his other films, Nolan obsesses with muted and grey colours while still offering some visually outstanding and pleasing sequences. The Oscar-winning cinematography by Wally Pfister is perfectly edited and paced by how much the shot lingers on a subject or environment, offering a sense of scope and level of human connection to the characters. The score by Hans Zimmer, while not anywhere near his best work, fits the somber tone of the movie and remains memorable in the shifts between bombastic spectacle to emotional pieces. The Oscar-winning visual effects hold up well for the most part, mainly due to how Nolan tries to keep everything in camera. While the quality of the effects can range from time to time, the CGI is still visually interesting or surreal to not take your eyes off it. The action sequences are also a huge highlight, despite Nolan upping the action in every consecutive film. While the shootouts can feel oddly artificial or staged in regards to the weird way enemies get limped from one bullet, it actually helps both the action and film to achieve this dream-like feel. The use of practical effects also help out in making the action feel visceral such as Arthur's fight in the zero-gravity hallway, a train crashing through a LA street, and the climatic set-piece of a mountain fortress ripped from a "Call of Duty" game and an explosion achieved by miniatures. Overall, Nolan's filmmaking is simply excellent and it's surprising that he wasn't nominated for Best Director for his efforts.

"Inception" may have its quirks or motifs that will not be a film for everyone, but it is undeniably Nolan's best film to date. From a unique and original story, well-executed tone, DiCaprio's performance as Cobb, the rest of the ensemble cast being on par in their acting talents and ensuring you can have more than one favourite character, Pfister's Oscar-winning cinematography, Zimmer's epic and emotionally-packed score, CGI that holds up on a visual level, action sequences that are engaging and memorable thanks to the practical effects and pre-existing world-building, and Nolan's creative writing and direction to make dreams both visually surreal and narratively logical at the same time. While other Nolan films can potentially have better individual elements compared to that of "Inception", it doesn't take away how everything about the film is perfectly executed to some degree, not unlike the mission the characters endure.

Verdict: 10/10. Truly Nolan's one and only masterpiece as of late. Can't wait to see if any future projects can be on par of this modern classic.

Godzilla vs. Kong (2021) Film Review: The Best And The Worst Monsterverse Film At The Same Time?

 

The "Monsterverse" has had a rocky road to success. While the 2014 "Godzilla" film continues to be the highest grossing entry, it has been since looked down upon by critics and fans for failing to deliver on its premise and marketing. 2017's "Kong: Skull Island" had issues regarding the over-bloated human cast and odd story decisions, and 2019's "Godzilla: King of the Monsters" failed both critically and financially for its slow pace and human characters. The latter film performed so poorly that it's almost a miracle that this potentially final installment even got released. Surprisingly, the long-awaited crossover match-up not only got far better critical reception, but even managed to earn a profit in the box office, despite being on HBOmax. So, did this surprise hit managed to secure its place as the best of the franchise? Well, let's start with the story. Five years have past since Godzilla killed Ghidorah and the king of the Titans suddenly attacks a private facility belonging to Apex Cybernatics, causing Monarch to believe that Godzilla has turned its back on humanity. The CEO of Apex, Walter Simmons, recruits a former Monarch scientist named Nathan to journey inside the Hollow Earth in order to find a power source that will be able to defeat Godzilla. Nathan is eager to explore the Hollow Earth, but needs a monitored Kong to act as a guide and defence towards potential monsters found inside. Meanwhile, Madison Russell believes that Godzilla must have had a motivation to attack Apex and finds a conspiracy theorist and employee of the company, Bernie, to get the evidence needed that Apex is responsible for provoking Godzilla. As the two plot-lines converge, the ancient rivalry between Godzilla and Kong reignites as a ruthless showdown will come to place. Despite having the shortest runtime of the franchise, the story manages to make it feel longer than it really is as the narrative feels the need to act relevant. Conceptually, the plot-threads aren't bad as the Apex conspiracy, the reveal of Mechagodzilla, the exploration of Hollow Earth, and Kong wanting a place to belong could work really well. However, the issue is once again related to the characters, which I will go over soon. On top of that, the tone is at its most campy and unapologetic. Any sense of weight or seriousness is kept mainly to the monsters as the humans are either acting like cartoons or just not interesting to care for them. The forced humour is also pretty poor at times, though is salvaged by the character of Bernie.

The characters are the most problematic, especially when you realize how salvageable it could have been. Alexander Skarsgard as Nathan Lind is one of the most forgettable lead roles I have seen in a movie, due to how he barely feels involved in the story and his personality is nonexistent. Rebecca Hall as Dr. Andrews, the caretaker of Kong and former fling of Nathan, also doesn't help much in standing out as an likeable character, despite Hall clearly doing her best in her performance. Kyle Chandler as Dr. Mark Russell is barely in the film and he's unlikeable in being dismissive of his daughter's concerns. The villains are perhaps even worse than the lead characters. Demian Bichir as Walter Simmons is just the stock CEO bad guy you've seen in countless shows or movies who is strictly evil because he hates Godzilla. Eiza Gonzalez as Maia, Walter's daughter and an executive of Apex, is a bratty henchwoman whose connections to her father barely amount to anything even when she's killed by Kong, and Shun Oguri as Ren Serizawa is insultingly bad as the evil hairdo son to the deceased Ishiro whose family connections never come up and his reasons for wanting to destroy Godzilla is never explained. Despite all of these boring or awful characters, there are a few that actually work. Jia, a little girl who connects with Kong, is a nice supportive character whose communication via sign language to a bit of heart and charm, Milly Bobby Brown returning as Madison actually improves a bit from the previous film as she spends the film being a Godzilla loyalist, Julian Dennison as Josh is enjoyable as the fearful friend to Madison who constantly worries about their current predicament, and then there's Brian Tyree Henry as Bernie. Bernie is probably the best character in the film due to Henry's charismatic performance, his jokes actually being able to make you laugh, and the scatter-minded underdog role he plays as the whistleblower to Apex. Bernie is so good that it begs the following question: Why wasn't he the central protagonist of the film? It may be challenging, but I think it was quite possible that they could have made Bernie the lead protagonist throughout the film who could tackle both plot-lines at the same time. But no, Nathan is the main character because every other film from the franchise needed to have a bland, brunette, white man as the leading role. As for Godzilla, Kong, and Mechagodzilla, they continue to give these creatures the ability to emote and carry a type of personality to the point that you can understand their motivations is shocking, specifically that more care was put into the CGI monsters than the majority of the human cast. It's sad that they could have easily fixed the character issue if more time was spent on the villains to flesh them out and to just make Bernie the primary protagonist rather than a secondary one. 

Adam Wingold has recently been given various projects and responsibilities for his work on this film, even going far as to potentially continue the franchise and be a returning director. This is all due to how he delivered the promises and expectations fans and critics were wanting and show some skill as a great director. Wingold manages to make this film feel the biggest in scope yet in comparison to the previous films, while carrying over the motifs laid out by Micheal Dougherty from the previous film such as the vivid colours. Aesthetically, the film feels brighter, not only because the action manages to take place in the day for once, but it reflects the more light-hearted tone the film offers. The Hollow Earth is a unique landscape with the mirror-esque design and the use of gravity being visually interesting. After all of that build-up, the Hollow Earth feels real to that world and makes sense as the origin for all of the Titans, despite what is shown being only the tip of the iceberg. The cinematography by Ben Seresin is great during the action and exploration sequences in terms of creativity and playing around with the scaling of the battles in contrast to the size of the humans and various environments, but does feel a bit bland in the conversation pieces. The score by Tom Holkenberg is no match for Bear McCreary's offerings, but it's pretty decent with the third act using various themes and pieces to have an epic feel to the film. The use of classic songs to associate with Kong at times are also spot-on in quality and context. The visual effects are as great as ever with more and more detail being put onto the fur and scales of Kong and Godzilla when reacting to water or snow and the various environments such as the ocean, Antartica, and Hong Kong react with such extreme detail to the carnage or movement being taken place. Mechagodzilla, on the other hand, feels the most artificial of the Titans due to its design and it does drag the effects down a bit from being exceptional. The action sequences are probably the best in the franchise, if one can tolerate the pacing. Not only can you see the monsters fight for once, but it's so deliciously over-the-top that it makes the action really memorable and chaotic. The titular fight between Godzilla and Kong doesn't disappoint as the environment around them is used cleverly to aid or hinder the Titans along with creative camerawork that makes the fight feel more realistic despite the cartoonish premise and abilities. The hits and collisions have impact and everything about the fights just feel satisfying. While he's not the most stylized director we've seen from these films, Wingold does a great job in choosing what worked and what needs improvement, while making the final "Monsterverse" film go out with a bang. 

"Godzilla vs. Kong" is the definition of a hit-and-miss film. The issues with the movie are crippling with an over-stuffed story that can be sluggish in the first third, a far more cartoonish tone in comparison to the more serious entries, boring lead characters, and laughably awful villains. These issues are even worse when you not only appreciate the positives, but also know how they could have improved the movie in a drastic way. Bernie is the best character in the film due to Henry's performance and the engaging characterization, Madison, Josh and Jia are enjoyable side characters who don't overstay their welcome, Godzilla and Kong are given even more character than ever both in comparison to the human cast and the previous films, Seresin's camerawork is riveting during the action set-pieces, Holkenberg's score is pretty decent by the third act, the licensed soundtrack that relate to Kong are aspired choices, the visual effects improve even more so in detail and authenticity, the thrilling action sequences are the highlights in both the film and the franchise in how creative and kinetic they can be, and Wingold's direction continues to grab the strengths of Dougherty's work and adds upon the creative Hollow Earth and visual clarity overall. The strengths alone can make it rival with the other films, but the weaknesses are just as bad or even worse than its competition.

Verdict: 6.5/10. Can easily fit as both the best or worse of the franchise depending on your view. However, it's the best in pure entertainment alone, regardless of the negatives.