X-Men: Days of Future Past

The summer blockbuster turn continues with my favorite X-Men movie to date, X-Men: Days of Future Past. 

 

One of the main things I feel the need to talk about is essentially what this movie accomplished, though I'm not entirely sure how in a few cases, as others like me are confused. The film served as a reboot to the x-men film franchise, or so it seemed, but I'm not sure what cast they'll be going with for the forthcoming X-Men: Apocalypse. As in, I'm not sure if they will return to the original cast, or stick with the first class cast, or again, do both somehow. The current cast list seems to suggest, as of right now (May 24, 2014), that it's just the first class cast.

I can't speak much to the storyline of the comic, as I'm not exactly familiar with how it goes, I do know the basics given that I've only read it once, but there are quite the lot of differences, but not that it matters too much. No comic book movie has been a direct adaptation, everything, so far, has fallen more along the lines of an appropriation to the stories of the comics. I don't mind the changes made, that I can recall, but being a bigger fan of pretty much every one of the X-Men, over Wolverine, it gets tiring seeing him take center stage all the time, which is perhaps why I enjoyed First Class so much, he only had one scene in the whole movie. A pointless scene, but still, only one. Don't get me wrong, I still like Wolverine, just not as much as every other X-Man.

The two most notable changes are the fact that Wolverine becomes the main character of the story, and not Kitty Pride (Ellen Page's character), and that the Sentinels are so damn small.

Here's a future Sentinel (only slightly smaller than the movie's past Sentinels) fighting Colosus.

 And here is Wolverine and Cyclops fighting three Sentinels from the comics.

That's possibly my "biggest" pet-peeve with the movie, the sentinels aren't the towering monstrosities that they once were. They are still regarded as a threat in the movie, very much so, killing off the majority of the future team, a few times. I also kind of hated the fact that the new X-Men of the future were just kind of thrown into the film, Warpath (two lines, maybe), Blink (who doesn't have a line to my recollection) and Sunspot (for that matter, neither does this guy) were just kind of there, they had no character development and no real character to speak of other than being X-Men and that they don't like the Sentinels. The audience never cares for these new characters, so when they die, a few times, no one cares. Further, (a new) Toad, Spyke and Havok are all at a military base and are rescued by mystique, but for no reason, they serve no other purpose to the narrative than Mystique wanted to rescue them and Jennifer Lawrence can have more screen time (not that I'm complaining about that).

 

More J-Law is never a bad thing.

  

She, and Peter Dinklage sort of steal the show, but the later show stealer could just be due to my personal bias and love for that man. 

 

Peter Dinklage has been stealing the show for years. He's my favorite character in Elf, and Game of Thrones, But here, he places somewhere around third place. Because J-Law and M-Fass (I feel like I should have just wrote Michael Fassbender, but there's no going back now, I'm dedicated to the M-Fass) are too amazing. Michael Fassbender is like my favorite actor right now, so he'll always be my favorite character in whatever he does, even when he's whipping slaves and just being a despicable human being.

 

Don't mind me, I'm just levitating.

 

With just a swing of my arms, explosions!

 

Piss off knaves!

It's only fitting that Magneto is the best character to come out of these X-Men movies, regardless of the movie. Whichever one it is, Magneto is the best damn character there is. Ian McKellen was the best thing going in the first three films, and Michael Fassbender is just the best thing going anywhere. Also, i didn't hate Quicksilver as much as I thought I would, and it's nice to know that Magneto is still his father, or at least it's implied to be that way, through a joke - but where the hell is Scarlet Witch? She's Quicksilver's twin sister, and is no where to be seen, the girl he was holding while watching the TV is apparently, just his younger sister. Apparently a scene alluding to her, perhaps even featuring an image of her (it's hard to tell with this guys vague wording) was cut from the film (source). So not only was a scene featuring Anna Paquin actually doing something cut, but so was Scarlet Witch, not that I care much, neither was necessary - but hell, at least mentioning her existence would have been nice.

I also thoroughly enjoyed the mixture of shaky and steady cam. Shaky cam only coming in when we take on the perspective of a 70's camera man looking through the camera. It's magnificent, because it's kind of snubbing the way action movies use shaky cam all the time, and saying you can only use it when you are taking on someone's point of view, through a camera. It was marvelous and I loved it, especially the fact that it took on the old Academy aspect ratio of 1.375:1.

I find myself stuck in another hard place as I'm now recalling how much I didn't like Godzilla's treatment of Elizabeth Olsen's character. And now that I know how the film has treated two, and potentially three female characters, I have to admit that I am not happy with this. I didn't really think much of it until now, and honestly it isn't coloring my opinion of the film, but more of my opinions of Hollywood in general. I feel as though this is the main reason I'd rather work in the independent sector, because scripts that treat women properly and don't just toss female characters aside - but I'm also getting the feeling that Hollywood is the place I need to be, so that I can have a hand in changing this. How well that will go however, is impossible to know.

The film reminded me a lot of what Joss Whedon did with The Avengers. It was filled with in jokes, and some subtle humor, though admittedly not quite to the quality that Whedon is capable of. It felt like a comic book movie, and that's all that really matters to me. I've had my misgivings about the direction that the non-marvel studios movies may be heading, but at least I know now that the X-Men films, as long as they remain with Bryan Singer, are in good hands. As it is, we don't know anything about Singer's personal life aside from the accusations, accusations are just that, accusations. They have no immediate merit in truth, and frankly should not be taken as such until they are proven to be true. Even then, I'm not sure I'd want the X-Men film franchise in the hands of anyone else, except for maybe Matthew Vaughn.

So again, I have the same basic qualms that I've had with movies for years, they just don't seem to know how to treat women as characters. Ellen Page (Kitty Pride) does not interact with Halle Berry (Storm) or Fan Bingbing (Blink). There is no female X-Man in the past for J-Law to even interact with, so there's that, on that basis alone this film fails the Bechdel test. But as I've always thought, a films failure to meet the requirements of the test never correlate to how good said film is. As is the case with this film, as so far it was my favorite movie in the X-Men franchise, and my favorite of the summer blockbuster season so far. However the 30th's A Million Ways to Die in the West. may change that, despite it's not being a "blockbuster" so to speak.

X-Men Days of Future Past gets an enthusiastic 9/10.Go see it yourself if you don't believe me.

Now we play the waiting game for X-Men: Apocalypse in 2016. That Teaser, at the very end of the credits, got me all hyped up for it. Seeing the aforementioned young Apocalypse and his four horsemen in the background. I just can't wait.

So until next time, here's a video to help you along the wait for Seth McFarlane's next picture.

Godzilla (2014)

Sorry for the brief delay in this one, I did see Godzilla on Friday, May 16, but I also graduated from college on the 17th and used the 18th to rest. So here's my return to form. The Amazing-Spider-Man 2 review got me back in practice, but this is where I step it up. Here we go, with a review of the aforementioned newest Godzilla film.

 

I loved this movie, from start to finish it was like I was reliving my childhood days of watching those old Godzilla Kaiju fighting movies, only with a bit less camp.

No, sadly, this does not happen.

The campiness came primarily through the dialogue of the film, which was easily the biggest flaw of the movie. Sure, there weren't any, "that's a lot of fish" lines, but there was the whole "let them fight" line (delivered magnificently by Ken Watanabe) which was followed immediately by the first encounter between the Muto male and Godzilla. If that isn't a campy line I don't know what is. I can't fault the actors for their lines, however cheesy and ridiculous they are, there were a lot of fun lines sprinkled throughout the film that made it all the more enjoyable to me, and the excellent deliveries from Watanabe and Cranston made some of them all the more worth it.

Perhaps the only other qualm I had with the movie was the mild constant shakiness of the camera. It seemed to be handheld throughout the film, which was a bit ridiculous, especially when the monster fights came around because the camera became no more shaky than when we were standing in the Brody's apartment. It's an odd stylistic choice that's a little confusing, but not all too noticeable or off putting to the average viewer.

Like I said, the only thing that saved the dialogue was the manner in which the actors delivered their lines, all except for Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who was given nothing, and Elizabeth Olson, who no one cared about. Don't get me wrong, nothing was wrong with these characters, just the way they were portrayed on the screen left myself, and seemingly the rest of the audience, without a care for them. And with one of them being the main character, that's kind of an issue. I like Aaron Taylor-Johnson for the most part, but he seems to need the right director to get him to perform well. Just look at Kick-Ass he's at least able to act in those. But again, he was given crap to do in those movies, and lines that weren't boring and pointless. He does one thing in the narrative that is smart, and I'm 90% sure that's why his character is "the main character." That and being Bryan Cranston's characters son.

Elizabeth Olson on the other hand, despite being extremely talented and one of the most sought after younger actresses today does literally nothing in this movie that is redeemable and just comes off as the pointless wife/love interest to Taylor-Johnson's character. She literally just camps herself in LA, while the monsters are fighting, she doesn't let her son leave the area, until the last fucking minute, and she does all of this why? Because for some reason, the screenwriter thought it would be a good idea for Ford Brody (Taylor-Johnson) to ask his wife to wait there for him, and for her to say "okay" in response.

 

Godzilla does not like your treatment of women in his movie!

All of that being said, this isn't much different from the norm in Hollywood, and I'm only really upset about it, because it's the god damn norm and I don't understand why. Not only do I not understand why it's the norm, I don't know why it doesn't bother other people. Her character could have been written out of the entire movie, along with the son, and literally nothing would have changed. Ford would have went to Japan to bail his dad out of Jail, then he would have went to Hawaii, then Vegas, Then LA for the climax because all he was doing was following the Kaiju on his way to LA. He wasn't going to LA to get to his family, he was going there because that's where the monsters were. Having his family in LA only served to add some bullshit lines about how he "has to get to LA, because his family is there." If he cared about his family's safety he would have said something like "hey, LA isn't safe babe, get out. Love you, bye." But no, he tells her to stay there and wait for him, the big strong army man to come rescue her from the monsters that are taller than every skyscraper in the city. Sure, Godzilla's a nice guy, but those Muto's certainly are not. Further, even though Godzilla is a "nice guy" he still destroys countless buildings fighting these things. How would Ford Brody have felt if his wife were in one of those hundreds of buildings that got crushed in the final climactic fight? The narrative seems to tell me he wouldn't have cared. 

I got to tell you, if this film is any indication of the chemistry between Taylor-Johnson and Olson, I have some bad news for Avengers: Age of Ultron, even though the two of them are only siblings in that movie, it still doesn't speak well. But Whedon can likely direct the two of them a lot better than the relatively unknown Gareth Edwards, whose pretty much known for this Film and one other called Monsters that he did back in 2010.

The lighting reminds me a lot of Pacific Rim, and that's a good thing. When it's dark you can still see everything going down, nothing is to obscured in shadow. The cinematographer was the director of photography for the Avengers as well, Seamus McGarvey. It kind of shows in the ease of following the conflict while still being in a big city and moving through skyscrapers. Though most of the fight can be shot from above them, as both Godzilla and the female Muto are bigger than every skyscraper in the city, the male Muto, not so much, but he can fly. 

 

Something I just remembered about the silliness of the military in this film was their inability to understand what an EMP can do. The Mutos launch EMP strikes with their Talon's and this is apparently forgotten when the military decided to send Jets after them, more than once.

Despite all of my qualms with the minor issues of the film, I couldn't help but be left in awe of the spectacle that I was watching. This wasn't the 1998 Roland Emmerich Godzilla, nor was it in any way similar to what we would have gotten if it were Michael Bay's Godzilla. It was still a well made monster movie, with a rather poor human script, but in all honesty what Godzilla movie doesn't have a rather poor human script? I can't really think of one that isn't at some point weak, aside from maybe the original 1954 Gojira. The nods to older films were nice, especially those that we haven't seen in a Godzilla film not made by a Japanese studio. It was very nice to see the tail start to light up, and the pay off of said tail lighting up, as well as the nods to the destruction of the trains, neither by Godzilla though, because he's the good guy.

All in all I enjoyed myself, more so than I did with The Amazing Spider-Man 2 a few weeks back. I'm still having trouble with this whole x/10 rating system. I'm not sure if it's because I don't like doing that whole thing any more, or if I have to see a movie more than once in order to justify a number based rating. But as of right now, Godzilla (2014) receives an 8.5/10.

And in other news, a sequel is already in development (source). Godzilla apparently dominated the box office this past weekend grossing roughly $93.2 million in just the U.S. alone as well as taking home another $103 million from the international market. The box office success has apparently persuaded Legendary pictures to promise that a sequel is in development. Personally I wouldn't buy into the other hype in the article about a Pacific Rim and Godzilla crossover. One, it wouldn't make any sense, and two I would only imagine that Godzilla would be fighting Gypsy Danger or another Jaeger only to lose because we are man and we destroy monster with mighty robot. Though I wouldn't mind seeing separate sequels for both films, especially if the main cast of Pacific Rim sticks around for the sequel. Godzilla can recast for all I care.

Here have a trailer for another one of my most anticipated movies of the Summer, coming in August:  Guardians of the Galaxy.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

So this is the start of my "new" format, that I talked all about in my previous post. From here on out the focus is on critiquing visual media. And what better time to kick that off than at the start of the Summer movie season with the sequel to one of my favorite comic book movies, The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

I went to see it last night, May 2nd, with the girlfriend for my Birthday - despite it being a few days early. We went to Outback first, then to the movie. She payed, because, in her words "I love you very, very, very, very, very, very, very much."  We also got free popcorn, so that's a plus.

 

Let's start with the basics, the plot.The film centers on the relationship between Peter and Gwen, in sort of a will they or won't they remain together. This narrative arc wraps around the development of Electro and the Green Goblin,  while also dealing albeit briefly with the mystery behind the deaths of Mary and Richard Parker, Peter's parents. Ultimately the film boils down into a simple idea, self identity. Peter and Gwen, as previously stated spend most of the film trying to figure out who they are and where they belong, this isn't particularly uncommon for comic book films, as that was the central focus of the first Iron Man and every single time the Hulk is used, that's the focus on his character. Peter knows he's Spider-Man, and damn does Garfield knock it out of the park again (but more on that later), but he doesn't know how to be both Spider-Man and Peter Parker, this is the journey he must go through, and the realization he will come to be the films end. Gwen on the other hand, is offered an interview and opening at Oxford, her decision is whether or not to take it, or remain in New York with the man she loves.

Now onto the damn good special effects. I'm normally not one to boast about how good something looks blowing up, or how nice lightning looks shooting from someone's finger tips, or how blue that guy is. But the visual effects in this film were just fantastic. They knew just when to hit the slow motion and just when to pick it back up so you weren't being bashed over the head with slow motion. If you're not sure what that's like, watch 300: Rise of an Empire, people stand still in slow motion - it's ridiculous. By the way, on a complete side note, I burnt my finger, and it hurts, that is all.

  

Zap. Zap. Zap.

 

Seriously though, Electro looks great, once he turns blue and stuff. Before that, he's just some weird guy with a comb-over. Props to Jamie Foxx though for being able to play such a convincing Spider-Man obsessed creep.  Though we are supposed to sympathize with him, he's lived his whole life as just another face in the crowd, nobody remembering his name from day to day, going so far as to make himself his own "Happy Birthday Max" card, just so someone might notice that it's his birthday. So when he's finally noticed, and put in the spotlight, only to have a heroic deed by Spider-Man take it away from him, making him yet again another overlooked face, he snaps becoming the villain and wanting Spider-Man dead.

 

I'm just going to casually flick lightning at you, no big deal.

 

I glow red when I get angry.

Electro's suit, when he gets it, is just plain awesome. Though where he gets it is totally unexplained. Does he just spontaneously make this amazing looking suit? Was there one in Ravencroft where he was being held? Did Harry make it for him? It looks nice, but it comes out of no where. Then there's Harry.

\

Sleep well, children.

Harry becomes the Green Goblin this go around as opposed to the usual Hob-Goblin, and he looks worse for the ware. Say what you will negatively about Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films, but at least the costumes there, Emo Peter Parker aside, wouldn't give children nightmares. I'm an avid Dane Dehaan fan, the kid can do no wrong in my eyes he's a brilliant actor and steals the show in literally everything he is in, this is no exception. He is the best thing about this movie, and to a lot of people (not including myself), the only good thing. So yeah, not only are the VFX top notch, that make-up department killed it with Dehaan's Goblin design.

Garfield is still the perfect Spider-Man, whether or not he's a perfect Peter Parker is another story, for another day, between people who aren't some guy and myself. He's still a better Peter than Maguire ever was, and I'll keep touting that to the grave if I have to. Perhaps it's just the better writing, and a better standard for acting in this type of film, but God, looking back the only redeemable quality of that original trilogy was Doc Ock in the second film. Many are claiming that no one can do Otto Octavius better, so I guess we'll have to wait for the Sinister Six film, or Amazing Spider-Man 3, whichever comes first. The Sinister Six, through the teaser within the credits, appear to be Rhino, Doc Ock, Green Goblin, Vulture, Kraven the Hunter, and either Mysterio, The Lizard, or Chameleon; that last one is a bit ambiguous (source).

Mini-tease confirming at least Doc Ock and Vulture.

The visuals themselves weren't all that striking. There weren't any amazing camera angles or shots that blew my mind. There weren't any crazy lighting choices or anything in the mise-en-scene that seemed peculiar or notable. Peter's scene with Gwen atop the bridge was rather beautifully shot, but it's nothing that hasn't been done before or better.

The melodrama this go around was definitely heightened, Peter's struggling with hallucinations, his relationship is on the rocks, and as stated before he suffers from an identity crisis throughout most of the film, especially in the closing ten or so minutes. I'm not going to spoil what happens for the people that actually want to see the film for themselves, but I will say that you probably already know the big spoiler from other dicks on the internet, or just by knowing the source material. 

Okay I lied, there is one sequence that was fantastic, and it was the tower sequence you can see above. The camera for the most part takes either two positions, looking up at Peter in Spider-suit, or down at Gwen. When it takes a different position, neither of them are seen in the frame. The camera, at one point focuses on Peter's web as Gwen is falling, and the end of the webbing takes on the appearance of a hand, and the camera stays on that for a decent amount of time. I just think the sequence was done masterfully.

There isn't much action in this one, and to be honest I don't think there was in the first, I can't recall just how much action there was in the first. There are three big sequences here, four if you count the last two minutes. They're spaced out quite a bit, about half an hour a piece, there's your opening sequence with Rhino, minus the suit, the first confrontation with Electro, then the battle with Electro/Green Goblin, and the final confrontation with a suited up Rhino. The action, as par for the course, was executed beautifully. The fights are choreographed well and work like a charm. And while the rest of the film for the most part is without "action" that isn't to say that nothing happens, because a lot happens in the near two and a half hours of Spidey-goodness. There just aren't that many fights.

My only real complaint of the film comes with the storyline of the parents death and research. My main issue with this stuff as it does literally nothing for the advancement of the plot, or narrative. It only serves for more melodrama and suffering on Peter's behalf. There's even a scene with Aunt May, where she tells Peter to stop caring about this stuff because it's only going to hurt your feelings and stuff. He basically tells her, "I know, but I don't care I want to know anyways." I will say, however, that the lab he finds was pretty neat, despite its being there not making much sense.

 

There was also this great scene at the start, where Peter is trying to get to his high school graduation, but he forgets to take his mask off and almost walks onto stage wearing the mask. That's about as spoilery as I plan on getting. I felt the need to mention the scene mainly because of this meme, so you can thank the meme for that little tangent there.

All in all, I'm not sure if I can say that The Amazing Spider-Man 2  was better than the first one. Rotten Tomatoes certainly doesn't think so. To be honest, I'm even having trouble deciding. There isn't much a difference in the way the two films were made for me to say one was definitely better than the other. With the other three films already telling Spider-Man's origins the first one did come off as a bit of a retelling, despite ten years separating the first films of both respective franchises (and five years separating the horrendous Spider-Man 3 from The Amazing Spider-Man). 

I'm starting to dislike giving movies a score out of ten, because the scores change over time. I could give the movie an 8/10 this week, and then after my third or fourth viewing, on Blu-Ray of course, it could be a 6,7, or 9. So where does that leave me, because I've got this whole summer season thing coming up, and everyone rates things now-a-days, how will people know that I enjoyed the film despite its minor misgivings. Maybe I should just stick with the good ol' */10 rating system and just keep my revisions to myself.

As of right now I'm going to give The Amazing Spider-Man 2 the aforementioned 8/10, which is about where I would rank it predecessor at the moment despite having initially loved the first one enough to give it a rather high ranking spot on my top ten of Summer 2012 (I believe I gave it the #1 slot actually.) To be fair I judge movies differently than I did back in 2012. Hell, I judge them differently every month, or so it seems.

So the rest of the summer holds quite a lot in store for me. I likely won't review everything that I see, but I will more than likely discuss the good stuff, or the horrendously bad if I end up seeing something that is just straight-up terrible this summer. Next week is, hopefully, Neighbors, with Godzilla following the week after. I'll see you then. Have a video.