The band, Queen, is arguably the best band to have come out of the previous century, and might even overshadow or does overshadow music that gets produced in the current century. The Film however does not do much for the legacy that Is Freddy Mercury, and also the band, Queen. First and foremost, the actors portraying these legends, do so with clear reverence for their subject matter, and as such almost disappear into their respective roles, unfortunately much cannot be said about the direction of the film. The film relies heavily on the music as a selling point, and ignores what could have been a wonderful character study of a very complex man, or even men. The story is crafted so one dimensionally that the internal strife of the band feels mundane, the relationship between Freddy and his parents do not come across as problematic, but interestingly the dynamics of the relationship between Mr. Hutton, Ms.Austin and Mercury is largely left unexplored. I find it difficult to believe that the group dynamics were pretty straight forward and was largely schoolboy quarrels, that Mr. Mercury did not struggle for acceptance from his family and by himself (He left the majority of his estate to Ms. Austin, the other half to his family and minimal to Mr. Hutton). What could have been a wonderful character study(and clearly all of the cast was ready for it) is let down by a director's personal quarrels and the PG-13 rating, I'm torn in two as film itself shows promise, the cast is on top of their game, but the original director clearly did not have the same reverence or maybe there was too much corporate interference,being careful to tarnish the reputation.
Reviews
9 Reviews
Bohemian Rhapsody
(2018)
Nobody denies the musical genius that is Queen...
20 November 2018
Warning: Spoilers
One of the best films of the year.
17 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Going through the reviews, I see an unfair bias against the film. I understand that there is a lot of reverence for the lore that was estabilished by it's predecessors. The previous film, The Force Awakens, came out of a place of nostalgia, and appeased fanboys, but majority of filmgoers found it to be too familiar, and too similiar to previous outings. This outing does the exact opposite, it strays far from the familiar, but yet, still fails to do some fan service by including Yoda (in a cameo), clearly it also fails to do this as many fans are calling for the head of Rian Johnson. What the film does well is self-conscious humor, instead of the over-serious tones of previous films, instead, actions are done which would seem out of place in any of the other films. Another point that has fans rabid is the fact that Luke Skywalker, and Yoda, seem to have a complete disdain for the Jedi faith. To me, this was refreshing, if the prior threat had been elimanated, then there clearly would have been no need for them any longer, or so I would reason. The last thing that will not appeal to fans is the fact that the helmuts have now come off, quite literally, they are no longer worn.
I personally, would recommend this film to non-star wars fans, it has genuinely funny scenes, awe-inspiring visual effects, and great throwbacks to other genres in its cinematography, relying on scenes that would feel in place in a Sergio Leone film.
I personally, would recommend this film to non-star wars fans, it has genuinely funny scenes, awe-inspiring visual effects, and great throwbacks to other genres in its cinematography, relying on scenes that would feel in place in a Sergio Leone film.
Justice League
(2017)
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
25 November 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I am a massive DC fanboy, and I haven't missed a film based on a DC character since 1997. I would stand in line with my hard earned cash on their opening day. Ironically, the first film I had the honor to see as a young lad was Batman and Robin, by Joel Schumacher. Many of you would feel pity, but compared to this, it is a masterpiece.
When Batman v Superman was released, my lifelong love affair with the Batman character came to an abrupt end. That film was lackluster at best, which is a shame as the actors was really good in their roles.
One would think that such a poor performance critically would have been met with a severance package for either Zack, or Chris, preferably both. Instead, they were awarded with a larger budget.
True to form, the film was plagued with development issues. It was supposed to have been released earlier, but the original cut was deemed "unwatchable" by test audiences, resulting in re-shoots with a new director, Joss Whedon. The Zack faithful swear that this was the downfall of the film, spoiler alert, it was not.
Snyder has a tendency to over-rely on CGI, with smaller productions, this is not problematic, but on large scale, it is very noticeable. The CGI looks like a late naughties PlayStation game. Cyborg's CGI is unconvincing, which is a shame as the actor portraying him does a very good job. The complete third act looks amateurish, and ugly. The film might have had a better chance if the production team had relied on practical effects instead of CGI.
The story is almost non-existent, there is never the feeling of real urgency. Steppenwolf is at best, a C-grade villain, the majority of the viewing public would've never encountered this character before, and why should they? The reason for this thin story line is the splitting of a single story that would've worked well as a film into two boring films. It has never worked, and has always left me feeling cheated.
If I hadn't seen the previous mess, I might have given Chris Terrio the benefit of the doubt. He is by no stretch a bad writer, but he is definitely not suited for this genre.
The actors is the best part of this film. They were clearly recruited by a very good casting director.
As a DC fanboy, I am disgusted, and repulsed by this film. I don't want to see another incoherent extended cut, and I sincerely hope that we will vote with our wallets, and bury this franchise. It is a revoltingly bad story-line with bad visuals (because of a director that hasn't worked without it since his second feature). Steer clear, there isn't a better cut, let's bury this, and forget it happened.
When Batman v Superman was released, my lifelong love affair with the Batman character came to an abrupt end. That film was lackluster at best, which is a shame as the actors was really good in their roles.
One would think that such a poor performance critically would have been met with a severance package for either Zack, or Chris, preferably both. Instead, they were awarded with a larger budget.
True to form, the film was plagued with development issues. It was supposed to have been released earlier, but the original cut was deemed "unwatchable" by test audiences, resulting in re-shoots with a new director, Joss Whedon. The Zack faithful swear that this was the downfall of the film, spoiler alert, it was not.
Snyder has a tendency to over-rely on CGI, with smaller productions, this is not problematic, but on large scale, it is very noticeable. The CGI looks like a late naughties PlayStation game. Cyborg's CGI is unconvincing, which is a shame as the actor portraying him does a very good job. The complete third act looks amateurish, and ugly. The film might have had a better chance if the production team had relied on practical effects instead of CGI.
The story is almost non-existent, there is never the feeling of real urgency. Steppenwolf is at best, a C-grade villain, the majority of the viewing public would've never encountered this character before, and why should they? The reason for this thin story line is the splitting of a single story that would've worked well as a film into two boring films. It has never worked, and has always left me feeling cheated.
If I hadn't seen the previous mess, I might have given Chris Terrio the benefit of the doubt. He is by no stretch a bad writer, but he is definitely not suited for this genre.
The actors is the best part of this film. They were clearly recruited by a very good casting director.
As a DC fanboy, I am disgusted, and repulsed by this film. I don't want to see another incoherent extended cut, and I sincerely hope that we will vote with our wallets, and bury this franchise. It is a revoltingly bad story-line with bad visuals (because of a director that hasn't worked without it since his second feature). Steer clear, there isn't a better cut, let's bury this, and forget it happened.
One for die hard fans alone.
17 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
One of the highly anticipated releases of the year has fallen flat on its face. It tries to be a fan-service, but rather than feeling like a satisfying ending, it rather feels like a rehash of a tired old formula. A lot of its plot elements have been borrowed by previous entries in the franchise. The two mismatched lovers going on an adventure with the drunkard pirate. The story starts with a boy searching for the ship of his father (the flying Dutchman), he encounters his father (Orlanda Bloom reprises his role as Will Turner) and is instructed to return home. Fast forward a few years and the boy has grown into Brenton Thwaites. Henry Turner, son of Will Turner and Elizabeth Swan, is an uninspiring bore of a character and is portrayed more wooden than the black pearl's floorboards and gives Sofia Coppolla a run for her money. The uninspired dullard somehow has studied all the fisherman's tales and addresses the captain directly, an evidently treacherous act. He lands on the Isalnd where an evidently bored Johnny Depp reprises his role as Captain Jack Sparrow. The character is not essential to the plot and serves as an irritation this time around. He robs a bank and sleeps with the governor's wife in true Jerry Bruckheimer style. An interesting chase ensues that leads our young Turner to cross paths with Jack Sparrow and a lady named Miss Smyth. Miss Smyth is a woman ahead of her time and is deemed to be a witch, the character is related to a another character of the series.
As luck would have it, the terrible threesome share most of the scenes. Geoffrey Rush returns as Captain Barbossa and gives an excellent performance equalled only by the brilliant Javier Bardem. Bardem and Rush are the only reasons to watch this film and when the two share the screen it is magical. Bardem stars as a Spanish Captain that seeks revenge on Jack Sparrow.
I don't want to give away too much of the plot as there is still a reason to watch this film and those two are the reason. Orlando Bloom also gives a good performance for the two scenes that he has been given and Kiera Knightly does not speak any words. Despite this, they easily overshadow the two wooden and chemistry less couple that we have the misfortune of being introduced to. Another reason to watch this is for the few seconds that Sir Paul Mccartney does a scene stealing cameo.
All in all, the main characters are boring, lifeless and wooden. It is their co-stars that make the film worthwhile. I would have loved to have seen the film focus on Rush, Bardem and Mccartney.
As luck would have it, the terrible threesome share most of the scenes. Geoffrey Rush returns as Captain Barbossa and gives an excellent performance equalled only by the brilliant Javier Bardem. Bardem and Rush are the only reasons to watch this film and when the two share the screen it is magical. Bardem stars as a Spanish Captain that seeks revenge on Jack Sparrow.
I don't want to give away too much of the plot as there is still a reason to watch this film and those two are the reason. Orlando Bloom also gives a good performance for the two scenes that he has been given and Kiera Knightly does not speak any words. Despite this, they easily overshadow the two wooden and chemistry less couple that we have the misfortune of being introduced to. Another reason to watch this is for the few seconds that Sir Paul Mccartney does a scene stealing cameo.
All in all, the main characters are boring, lifeless and wooden. It is their co-stars that make the film worthwhile. I would have loved to have seen the film focus on Rush, Bardem and Mccartney.
The most important South African film (yet it will be ignored).
31 January 2015
The Film went on the circuit sometime last year or at the beginning of the year, it was shown in select cinemas, unfortunately the cinemas in my so-called city were not apart of the lucky few. Such an important film about the system in South Africa and how it has failed so miserably had been left largely ignored.
The 204 referred to in the title is a reference to section 204 of the South African Criminal Procedure Act which states that the prosecution can enter into agreement with the accused that in exchange for a truthful testimony, the accused will be exempt from prosecution. The film is essential viewing for students of Law right across the world even if it is purely for comparative purposes. It portrays the flaws in the South African justice system perfectly using the Brett Kebble murder case as the prime example.
If there is one thing that bothers me about this film is that it will fade into obscurity, become largely forgotten, much like the murder case it refers to; However filthy South African trash thinly veiled as comedies will be remembered. It's a shame really.
The 204 referred to in the title is a reference to section 204 of the South African Criminal Procedure Act which states that the prosecution can enter into agreement with the accused that in exchange for a truthful testimony, the accused will be exempt from prosecution. The film is essential viewing for students of Law right across the world even if it is purely for comparative purposes. It portrays the flaws in the South African justice system perfectly using the Brett Kebble murder case as the prime example.
If there is one thing that bothers me about this film is that it will fade into obscurity, become largely forgotten, much like the murder case it refers to; However filthy South African trash thinly veiled as comedies will be remembered. It's a shame really.
"this is how you end a revolution"
22 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
"Catching Fire part 1" is not only the worst of the series, it is arguably one of the worst films released ever. It reeks of greed and the worst thing is that it is actually making money.
Usually I would take the time to talk about the plot however this film has a very thin plot, it is a 2 hour film completely based on a side plot. It is mostly about Katniss and her obsession with Peeta. Of course Peeta being in the "Capital", however I do have a vague recollection of that being mentioned at the end of the second film. This films' plot could have easily have been 10 minutes in a full length proper film based on the novel. One would think that a cast of such heavy hitters might redeem the film however here is the problem, Phillip Seymour Hoffman has roughly about 4 minutes of screen time, Donald Sutherland round about the same, Woody Harrelson round about one minute, actually no character except Katniss has more than 10 minutes of screen time. There are literally scenes of Katniss merely walking around, scenes of Katniss crying and scenes of Katniss crying. One cannot deny that Jennifer Lawrence can sometimes deliver a moving and riveting performance however in this film, she seems bored, wooden and downright silly in some scenes. Juliane Moore seems disinterested in the plot and is not even convincing herself of her character.
The acting, bad as it might be, is nothing compared to the camera work. I started feeling nauseas during the film because of the constant shaking of the camera. Another thing is there are certain scenes that will most definitely affect people with photo sensitive epilepsy however there is no warning attached to the film.
I enjoyed the second film, I did not feel that the first one was a bad film, I just did not enjoy it. My girlfriend on the other hand is a major fan, this morning started out with her being excited and full of zest, ready for the day. At the end of the film she was in a foul mood. However she soon returned top her happy cheery self, whistling the mockingjay sound and ending it with a fart sound. I must admit that is the best description of this film, you keep on believing that a plot will develop but it never does. Do not waste your money and I beg of you to please stop seeing part ones, there has not been a good one as of yet.
Usually I would take the time to talk about the plot however this film has a very thin plot, it is a 2 hour film completely based on a side plot. It is mostly about Katniss and her obsession with Peeta. Of course Peeta being in the "Capital", however I do have a vague recollection of that being mentioned at the end of the second film. This films' plot could have easily have been 10 minutes in a full length proper film based on the novel. One would think that a cast of such heavy hitters might redeem the film however here is the problem, Phillip Seymour Hoffman has roughly about 4 minutes of screen time, Donald Sutherland round about the same, Woody Harrelson round about one minute, actually no character except Katniss has more than 10 minutes of screen time. There are literally scenes of Katniss merely walking around, scenes of Katniss crying and scenes of Katniss crying. One cannot deny that Jennifer Lawrence can sometimes deliver a moving and riveting performance however in this film, she seems bored, wooden and downright silly in some scenes. Juliane Moore seems disinterested in the plot and is not even convincing herself of her character.
The acting, bad as it might be, is nothing compared to the camera work. I started feeling nauseas during the film because of the constant shaking of the camera. Another thing is there are certain scenes that will most definitely affect people with photo sensitive epilepsy however there is no warning attached to the film.
I enjoyed the second film, I did not feel that the first one was a bad film, I just did not enjoy it. My girlfriend on the other hand is a major fan, this morning started out with her being excited and full of zest, ready for the day. At the end of the film she was in a foul mood. However she soon returned top her happy cheery self, whistling the mockingjay sound and ending it with a fart sound. I must admit that is the best description of this film, you keep on believing that a plot will develop but it never does. Do not waste your money and I beg of you to please stop seeing part ones, there has not been a good one as of yet.
Maleficent
(2014)
Maleficent is the exact opposite of all the hype
13 June 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I went to watch this film because of all the hype and the reviews deeming it to be magnificent, either they are mistaken or I am mistaken. The film starts off with the fairy "Maleficent" being the most kindest and good hearted fairy of them all finding a man in her side of the woods, she happens to fall for him spectacularly. Right of the bat, we have a problem here as the definition of the word "maleficent" is "doing evil or harm" or "harmfully malicious", her name is absolute irony as she is never portrayed to be as such but rather a woman scorned, who's only fault was that she fell in love.
In this adaptation of the story, Maleficent falls for king Stefan but is betrayed by him. He cuts off her wings after she falls asleep, she wakes up with her wings gone as well as Stefan nowhere to be found. I strongly believe that this is meant to be commentary on the concept of premarital sex. Maleficent instantaneously develops regret and anger towards Stefan, so much so that she is willing to curse his daughter at birth.
Maleficent also grows to regret this as she starts to realize that his daughter is nothing like him. This part of the film does not really make sense as it happens so quickly and with haste that you don't really get the time to understand why, the princess comes across as dim witted and of low intelligence rather than a loving person.
Maleficent's curse can only be broken by true love's first kiss. At the start of the film, you can already predict the outcome of this statement as there is no such thing as true love's kiss according to Maleficent. Yes, it is exactly what you think, that is the "plot-twist", it is as cringe-worthy as it sounds. the only way they could have made this scene more cheesy is by playing savage garden's "truly, madly, deeply" in the background. ( if you have not guessed it as of yet, Maleficent's kiss awakens her from the curse.)
The CGI of the film varies from scene to scene with portions of absolute beauty to scenes more at home in a commercial than in a big budget film. The dark scenes are beautifully rendered and the lighter scenes are badly done, it feels like they were running low on cash somewhere during production.
Angelina Jolie looks perfect as Maleficent and the general costume design is brilliant, this is the only aspect of the film that I can give true praise. However the costumes alone cannot act, at times I did not feel like I was watching a film bur rather a "days of our lives" episode based on sleeping beauty, that is how bad the acting seemed to me.
Now I am not a Disney fan but there has been Disney films that I enjoyed, I thought that this film would appeal to Disney film fanatics. My girlfriend happens to be a Disney fan of note, I wanted to walk out but remained seated as not to spoil her evening, I thought she was enjoying the film. The first thing she said to me after the film was that "that film was horrible". If you are still not convinced, her sister's television is always on the Disney channel and enjoys repeat viewings of the classics regularly. She found it laughable.
I really looked forward to the whole premise, the idea of a film based on an antagonist of note and seen out of their viewpoint . Sadly this is not what this film is, it might have started out with this premise but somewhere along the line they chickened out and rather gave us a film where they change her into the misunderstood hero of the film. Do yourself a favor and skip this, if you have a Disney craving rather buy or rent the dvds, stream or download (legally, of course) the classics, you will be more satisfied with that experience.
In this adaptation of the story, Maleficent falls for king Stefan but is betrayed by him. He cuts off her wings after she falls asleep, she wakes up with her wings gone as well as Stefan nowhere to be found. I strongly believe that this is meant to be commentary on the concept of premarital sex. Maleficent instantaneously develops regret and anger towards Stefan, so much so that she is willing to curse his daughter at birth.
Maleficent also grows to regret this as she starts to realize that his daughter is nothing like him. This part of the film does not really make sense as it happens so quickly and with haste that you don't really get the time to understand why, the princess comes across as dim witted and of low intelligence rather than a loving person.
Maleficent's curse can only be broken by true love's first kiss. At the start of the film, you can already predict the outcome of this statement as there is no such thing as true love's kiss according to Maleficent. Yes, it is exactly what you think, that is the "plot-twist", it is as cringe-worthy as it sounds. the only way they could have made this scene more cheesy is by playing savage garden's "truly, madly, deeply" in the background. ( if you have not guessed it as of yet, Maleficent's kiss awakens her from the curse.)
The CGI of the film varies from scene to scene with portions of absolute beauty to scenes more at home in a commercial than in a big budget film. The dark scenes are beautifully rendered and the lighter scenes are badly done, it feels like they were running low on cash somewhere during production.
Angelina Jolie looks perfect as Maleficent and the general costume design is brilliant, this is the only aspect of the film that I can give true praise. However the costumes alone cannot act, at times I did not feel like I was watching a film bur rather a "days of our lives" episode based on sleeping beauty, that is how bad the acting seemed to me.
Now I am not a Disney fan but there has been Disney films that I enjoyed, I thought that this film would appeal to Disney film fanatics. My girlfriend happens to be a Disney fan of note, I wanted to walk out but remained seated as not to spoil her evening, I thought she was enjoying the film. The first thing she said to me after the film was that "that film was horrible". If you are still not convinced, her sister's television is always on the Disney channel and enjoys repeat viewings of the classics regularly. She found it laughable.
I really looked forward to the whole premise, the idea of a film based on an antagonist of note and seen out of their viewpoint . Sadly this is not what this film is, it might have started out with this premise but somewhere along the line they chickened out and rather gave us a film where they change her into the misunderstood hero of the film. Do yourself a favor and skip this, if you have a Disney craving rather buy or rent the dvds, stream or download (legally, of course) the classics, you will be more satisfied with that experience.
Resident Evil: Retribution
(2012)
Why is this so popular?
15 September 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I have fond memories of every Resident Evil game in the main series and I am a fan still clamoring to play Biohazard 1.5. I still remember renting the directors cut of the first game way back in the 1990's. Of course back then we had the rumours of a George A Remero directed film that would be released after the commercials starring Brad Renfro started airing in Japan. For awhile we were under the mistaken belief that the father of zombie films would be bringing one of the best zombie video games to the silver screen. In 2002 we were unfortunate enough to see the first film of a truly bad what would become movie franchise. It saddens me to see that the franchise will most probably see a sixth entry.
The film starts off with a slow mo scene played in reverse, then just played, what should have been the ending of the last film is the beginning of the new film and I wouldn't be surprised if it was the ending of the previous film as we are then treated to a recap by Alice herself of every other film. What a waste of time and money. A homage to the zombie films of the 70's is the best scene in this film where Alice is now living in Suburbia with a husband and an kid. the zombies pile in and Michelle Rodriguez is reintroduced as the most worthless character, unsurprisingly it is a clone. the scene ends and we return to an truly awful storyline. It tries to imitate Operation raccoon City or the mercenaries play mode by having different scenarios in Moscow, New York and Suburbia, it is explained by the crap story point that umbrella tried to sell the virus by showing potential buyers what the T Virus is capable of. It also introduces Ada Wong at this point looking very much like the character in the game, not very well acted by the actress but that has become an trademark of the franchise) so it is an surprise when the Kevin Durand actually makes an decent Barry Burton and it is a joy even for a few remote seconds to be treated to an character that was in the video game that is actually done justice. Leon s Kennedy also appears but he is not given much screen time and unlike Kevin does not stand out and it is all to blame to the fact that Alice should be kept alive and invincible (could this be due to the fact that the director is married to Milla Jovovich). Albert Wesker, let me just stop there i don't want to talk about that butchering. Aside from the overall acting with an few exceptions, the backgrounds especially in the 3d version seems like it was done through the age old method of playing a film behind the actors and actresses, this does not do much especially in 3d, it looks crap and it does not have the charm other bad movies have or the old time horrors have. the film is bad in every aspects, the trailers is better than the film hell, the trailer for devil may cry had better story line than the entirety of this film.
the sad thing about this all Resident Evil return and so will Alice. Paul WS Anderson will get richer though he has an less than stellar career and has made mediocrity into a industry that is profitable. Stop these kind of films now and in the future we might have an industry based on quality rather than quantity. As for my love of the games, can't wait for Resident Evil 6 (once again clarification the game not the film.) but please no more spin offs.
The film starts off with a slow mo scene played in reverse, then just played, what should have been the ending of the last film is the beginning of the new film and I wouldn't be surprised if it was the ending of the previous film as we are then treated to a recap by Alice herself of every other film. What a waste of time and money. A homage to the zombie films of the 70's is the best scene in this film where Alice is now living in Suburbia with a husband and an kid. the zombies pile in and Michelle Rodriguez is reintroduced as the most worthless character, unsurprisingly it is a clone. the scene ends and we return to an truly awful storyline. It tries to imitate Operation raccoon City or the mercenaries play mode by having different scenarios in Moscow, New York and Suburbia, it is explained by the crap story point that umbrella tried to sell the virus by showing potential buyers what the T Virus is capable of. It also introduces Ada Wong at this point looking very much like the character in the game, not very well acted by the actress but that has become an trademark of the franchise) so it is an surprise when the Kevin Durand actually makes an decent Barry Burton and it is a joy even for a few remote seconds to be treated to an character that was in the video game that is actually done justice. Leon s Kennedy also appears but he is not given much screen time and unlike Kevin does not stand out and it is all to blame to the fact that Alice should be kept alive and invincible (could this be due to the fact that the director is married to Milla Jovovich). Albert Wesker, let me just stop there i don't want to talk about that butchering. Aside from the overall acting with an few exceptions, the backgrounds especially in the 3d version seems like it was done through the age old method of playing a film behind the actors and actresses, this does not do much especially in 3d, it looks crap and it does not have the charm other bad movies have or the old time horrors have. the film is bad in every aspects, the trailers is better than the film hell, the trailer for devil may cry had better story line than the entirety of this film.
the sad thing about this all Resident Evil return and so will Alice. Paul WS Anderson will get richer though he has an less than stellar career and has made mediocrity into a industry that is profitable. Stop these kind of films now and in the future we might have an industry based on quality rather than quantity. As for my love of the games, can't wait for Resident Evil 6 (once again clarification the game not the film.) but please no more spin offs.
The Avengers
(2012)
Avengers, the most overrated superhero movie to grace our screens.
1 May 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The hype regarding the avengers movie has proved to be just a fan-boy created hype. The movie is all style no substance and the best of the characters and the best actor by far, Mark Ruffallo as Bruce Banner gets a backseat ride as marvel poster boy (although better as Sherlock Holmes) Robert Downey Jnr. tries to make it a one man show. Chris Evans has grown as an actor, he is no longer a sarcastic wise cracking idiot, he is now the leader struggling to find his place in other words depressed a'la Kirsten Stewart in twilight. People that find the time to whine about the voices with regard to every Batman actor ever gracing the silver screen will delight in Chris Hemsworth's attempt at Asgard as a province right next to Queensland, Australia, a more irritating growl hasn't been heard since Christian Bale took over the mantel. Tom Hiddleston seems bored and irritated by the role which he perfectly played in Thor, it seems the paycheck was large enough to get him to appear but not large enough to make an effort. Hawkeye, why even include him? he is a character best left killed off every second week in a marvel comic. Samul L Jackson, remember him for Pulp Fiction, forget him for everything else, David Hasslehoff has never seem to be a better choice for any role until it was announced that the ultimate fury would be played by Samuel. Black Widow, wow more useless than the Power Pack, less Russian than the state of Kentucky and more wooden that south African oak. You should be thanking you're lucky stars that the nude photos actually leaked, it gave you somewhat of a career. Let's get to the actually headache inducing story, David s Goyer should be knocking down doors at Marvel Entertainment, threatening to sue them if he does not get his royalties cheque. It is almost like they tried to take every superhero movie ever made and bash it into one script, American City in trouble, Check. Everything falls to the front, Check. The heroes do not get along ala Fantastic four but love each other as they are, check. Josh Whedon influenced sci-fi, oh check check and more check. I am rooting for the next film to include a scene where Kolkata is attacked or maybe even better, Johannesburg, South Africa. The Cap lands in hillbrow, all of a sudden a Nigerian drug dealer arrives, aims for his head but shoots him in the leg (they can steal another idea because plagiarism seems to be the only method they make movies, "you should have bought American" just before he falls into a coma). You get the idea (maybe hawkeye stand on top of a tower in Chicago or Port Elizabeth, and a gust of wind takes him tumbling into oblivion where he belongs. To sum up the story, Armageddon (the city Scenes), every marvel movie ever produced, steel magnolias and every David Goyer script. Simple as pie. give this a skip, don't give into the hype that every teenager wants you to believe, they are the same guys that transformers to the top of the box office while movies like Senna, Drive rotted in obscurity. I am looking forward to one Josh Whedon venture though, Much ado about nothing and I cannot wait for a stand alone film of Mark Rufallo as Bruce Banner.
Tell Your Friends