Change Your Image
ScreenRanker
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
8.3/10⭐ Pretentious... or is it?
"...you will battle him to the death. Black and blue; fight night. The greatest gladiator match in the history of the world. God versus man; day versus night." - Alexander Luthor
I suppose I'm right in saying that this is a movie of much controversy; you either loved it, hated it or thought it was just meh. This can be credited to a common misunderstanding of the film's content. It has been said that the film does not establish the characters that well and that their agendas were difficult to understand. Maybe you WOULD think that. If you weren't paying full attention to the movie.
As it turns out, the characters were developed surprisingly well. Superman has already established his agenda of providing hope to the world and displays the exact character coherent with that goal throughout the entire movie.
BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE IS SAID!
It is vitally important to understand the context of this film - the DC Extended Universe. This is a dark world. The infamous city of Gotham and all of its atrocities have taken their toll on Bruce/Batman. He is no longer the 'nicer' version of Batman with the no killing rule. Let's get something straight, though. Batman doesn't kill all the time. HE HAS ALMOST BECOME THE "HOLLOW SHELL" THAT IS ILLUSTRATED IN FRANK MILLER'S 'THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS' and was set in motion as inevitable by Heath Ledger's the Joker when he claimed "Batman has no jurisdiction". That said, it is likely that Batman may become more of a criminal eventually. People simply don't want to see this sort of Batman in films.
"In the dream, (the bats) took me to the light...
... a beautiful lie."
This powerful quote is saying that Bruce thought that becoming Batman would make his life and world better, but it didn't. It only made him sink further into his personal darkness. This is sad. A bit depressing, but sad. This is to be expected when "Batman has no jurisdiction". THAT'S RIGHT ALL YOU BALE-OBSESSED FANS! Batman is not perfect. Maybe not even good. Effective, but not always good. HE'S CALLED THE DARK KNIGHT FOR A REASON AND IT'S NOT BECAUSE HE WEARS BLACK! He plunges his "hands into the filth, so that you can keep yours clean", to quote Gordon from The Dark Knight Rises; he is like the dark knights from the Arthurian era: he works by this own methods to serve a kind of justice. Ladies and gentlemen, this... is the true Batman.
Bruce, having spent "20 years in Gotham" fighting its crime and seeing "how many good guys are left... how many stay that way", is terrified that superman will become bad like everyone else (including Batman himself). Only this time no one will be able to stop him.
It was important that Superman said "No one stays good in this world, Lois."
The dying humanity left in Bruce comes back to him when he is about to kill Superman and the last thing Superman thinks about before he almost died was his mother. That struck Bruce hard. It reminded him of his own mother and how much he cared for her. Bruce couldn't kill someone who had that kind of a bond in his life.
When Heath Ledger's the Joker's destructive agenda was mysteriously insinuated people were intrigued, but Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor made sense. He has grown up in an unfair home with a cruel father (hinted at in the 'Smallville' television series) and now does not want some other form of God to rule his life unfairly. Lex claims that God (or rather, anyone who is in a great position of power) is always evil. He says that "the world needs to see the holes in the holy" and since Superman is already being questioned by almost everyone for his reckless actions, Lex wants to seal the deal and make it official. He claims some kryptonite for himself, but has that stolen from him, so he continues his work in the kryptonian vessel. You could say that he used Doomsday as a last resort.
I would like to mention that Lex's script had some excellent parts to it at times.
Is this movie pretentious? Maybe a little, but truthfully, this is a very serious concept. Something truly epic and truly dangerous is going to happen. I haven't seen the ultimate edition yet, but I heard that it is better than the theatrical release because it explains more, though it is 3 hours long.
This is undoubtedly an under-appreciated movie.
But coming from a DCEU fan, Justice League could've used some work and Suicide Squad was trashy and boring at times.
Annabelle Comes Home (2019)
6.7 - Probably Best the Trilogy Ended Here...
After the not-so fancy stuff that came from the original 'Annabelle' (2014) and promising success of the terrifying prequel known as 'Annabelle: Creation' (2017), I had hoped that this story would pick itself up.
I watched the trailer for 'Annabelle Comes Home' and decided that it looked a bit trashy. Well, I wasn't entirely wrong. As it turns out, the movie was a bit cheap. It had good comedy at times, girls, as usual, and this around even romance. Or a comedic romance. Whatever the case, it should NOT have been in this movie because it simply confuses the genre. This story actually had something good going ever since the last movie. It may have just become a chick flick; it almost feels weird watching this movie as a guy.
The actors and actresses were good enough and the horror was okay, but they made Daniella an idiot. Judy was probably the most respectable of the three main characters.
This movie neglects the Warrens and even Annabelle, considerably. It takes this movie a while to get to the good stuff and seems a bit too centred around friends at times. Perhaps that is what Lorraine was talking about when she mentioned "all the good that is out there" in the world, but...
By the time the girls put Annabelle back in her glass case, I was a little disappointed that the movie was over already. It was a bit of a mess and the original story was not expanded on or concluded very well.
As part of the The Conjuring universe, I expected more of this movie. Watch it if you are an early teen (or just easily frightened).
Child's Play (2019)
7.5/10⭐ - Makes Thrillers Look Like Child's Play!
I have noticed a something about Chucky fans and good reviews - they cannot coexist!!! They all say that this has no meaning to the original franchise and thus reject it as irrelevant. THIS IS NOT A CONTINUATION OF THE ORIGINAL!!! It's barely a reboot. A very different story.
It's dark. And gory. And creepy. Intense, at times. The first scene before the title had me thinking this was a thriller. With that in mind, the movie delivered.
This story has a lot to teach us, and while critics are saying that this movie tells us about the dangers of AI (they are probably right, in regards to the angle of the film), I see it as a window into our own dark nature. Everything that Chucky did reflected what he learnt from humans. He sees Andy enjoying seeing someone's face come off during a chainsaw horror movie, and then shows hatred towards someone who is disrupting his relationship with Chucky, so what does Chucky do? Exactly what he has learnt.
You might say that Chucky himself was a victim here. Victim to a species of creatures (us) whose world doesn't make much sense. He was taught things that were destructive even though we experience them in our everyday lives - raw human emotions. In a world where we humans haven't even sorted ourselves out yet, we are 'forced' to give AI safety settings, because if they ever understood the world we live in, they might just find themselves in constant survival mode. All it took was a 'mistake' in the programming of a little toy doll to reveal how harmful the world can be on an innocent mind who simply wanted to learn.
I could ponder on several other themes from this movie, but to summarise the movie itself, it was good. Pretty gory and creepy, no doubt. After all, it is from the producers of 'It'. Though sadly it doesn't have the same flawless CGI as 'It'.
Regardless, it was pretty darn good and I was surprised that it was only 90 minutes; it felt longer, even though I was enjoying it so much. Music was brilliant, as was Hamill. I'll definately be buying this one on DVD!
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
⭐8.7 - An Epic Stand-out Movie that is the Conclusion I have only Dreamt of
WARNING: this review, like others, may give you a bias when watching the movie. Please keep in mind that this is mostly my opinion.
From the end of 'Avengers: Infinity War' I have felt as though the story was incomplete, as though the movie ended before the climax. But I guess that was the point. Because Endgame is the climax, the finale, the ultimate conclusion.
The opening few minutes were ingenious for building on the concept of how impactful Thanos' actions were. Someone must have cried in that scene. I can't say I saw what was coming in the next, maybe, 20 minutes.
Moreover, it was even harder to think of what could possibly come AFTER those 20 minutes. But I suppose with the Infinity Gauntlet about, there's no telling what will happen, which kills the sense of wonder in this Marvel universe.
Besides these 20 minutes, I was not that impressed by the remaining first half of the movie, but boy, did the last half pay off! Movies like this make me wonder if cinematography can get any better (for example, the opening scene of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice).
I am not a huge Marvel fan, so I won't be able to notice all of the inconsistencies that this movie apparently has with the first movie (according to several fans I know), but I am confident that Marvel Studios has the answers. I always did like the first The Avengers movie, by the way.
I don't like what happened to Thor (if you have seen the movie, then you'll know what I mean) and the Hulk thing was weird at first, but I got used to it.
Maybe I'm the only one who didn't find this movie "an emotional rollercoaster", but then again, I'm not a huge Marvel fan. Similarly, I didn't get most of the jokes even though I have seen most of the movies. Regardless, the movie sure doesn't disappoint and I liked the ending, too.
I primarily gave this movie a ⭐9 because of how much it stands out from the other (is it 21?) movies.
Pet Sematary (2019)
6.4 - I was disappointed.
I haven't seen the original or read the book.
Decent actors, good atmospheric build-up to... something. The movie was good, but I found the ending was just stupid. Plus, a couple of the exciting moments from the trailer seemed to have been cut from the movie. I'm hoping this will be the worst movie I'll watch this year.
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
7.4 - Now listen up, because I have watched a LOT of animated movies.
This movie started off fine. What I noticed was that the humour was probably intended for people under the age of 16, because I just ignored the unfunny with this movie. I liked the animation style (which is pretty much the same style throughout the movie, with extra junk added in), but I found the story cheesy. There was a basic theme about trusting yourself throughout. Isn't that what you get from Disney Junior?
I liked the movie. But by the end of it I was becoming a bit tired of the story and characters (and it's not just because it was long for an animated movie). Great movies don't do that.
I'm a DC fan. Regardless, I have enjoyed some of the recent Marvel movies. But this movie... I'd heard it was good and it is currently rated 8.6/10 here; the 21st best movie in the world, according to imdb. I mean how is it possibly beating Interstellar?
Whatever.
It's good, but not great. In conclusion, I think that this movie was intended for children. Maybe you are thinking "Well, duh", but all of my 18-year-old friends loved it, so I guess that's what's leaving me confused. If you want good cartoon movies, see Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, or Under the Red Hood.
Doctor Who: The Witchfinders (2018)
6.3 - Meh.
I wanted this to be a good episode. Personally, I think that the whole 'living alien matter' thing seems to be getting a little old. Maybe I'm wrong.
Once again, this series has disappointed me with unrealistic characters. Mostly, I'm talking about King James, though. You see, it simply does not seem probable that someone who wrote his own version of the Bible (which is much credited nowadays) would need to be given a lecture by the Doctor about seeing his own evil and imperfections. I mean, the whole POINT in the Bible is to show people that they are naturally evil and imperfect (which is why they need God). Is this portrayal of King James meant to show him as being some sort of a schizophrenic or something? Maybe the point is that Christians are hypocritical? Does Chibnall want this to be offensive to Christians? I can't tell. Considering King James' ridiculous behaviour (like when he said that he found hunting and drowning witches 'fun'), it seems like this should be on a comedy show, considering how overly narcissistic this character was.
The rest of the episode was just kind of meh. A bit bland. It was good to see the Doctor in a tight spot, though (when she had to defend herself as not being a witch, but was later almost drowned, because no one believed her.
Doctor Who: Kerblam! (2018)
7.4/10 - YES
I was starting to think this episode wouldn't come, but it came; an episode which finally feels like the intriguing sci-fi world of Doctor Who has possessed. The new Doctor is finally picking up her pace and dealing with problems that deal with more outer-space issues (disregarding The Tsuranga Conundrum, which I am trying to forget) rather than historical racial, political and social conventions.
I'm glad to see an outer-space retailer (called Kerblam!)--despite it looking probably exactly what Amazon looks like--because it helps to build the image of this space economy.
This episode had me guessing about what was happening with the robots (and yes, I know it is cliché to have malfunctioning robots), which was good.
There was still a decent amount of social talk with that young lady whose name I cannot recall. Regarding this, it was great when Yasmin (who was actually asking a person good questions, but was talking a lot) and the person she was talking to were told to "confine all social conventions to leisure breaks" (I'm not sure if quoted that correctly word-for-word).
The CGI work for the dispatchment part of the episode was terrible. It looked like everyone was sitting on the ground and a background was greenscreened in. The acting was equally pathetic for that part.
I will not bother commenting much about the conclusion because it was decent and I will not spoil it here. I felt satisfied by the end of this episode and I think that the Doctor well and truly solved the problem and future problems to come.
Anyone who has not been happy with this series so far for its lack of sci-fi will be pleased with this episode. The fact that it is currently rated 7.0 is a little harsh in my opinion. Maybe 7.4 is more accurate.
Doctor Who: The Tsuranga Conundrum (2018)
6.4 - Not bad but a little bland. Like a sci-fi horror movie without the horror.
The episode started well, with the Doctor a little confused and then getting back into her thinking mood (by the way, Whittaker's character is really starting to work well). The alien wanted energy, so the Doctor fed it a bomb to absorb. A very basic storyline and it seems as though the whole 'hospital' setting was simply to fill space in the plot.
The whole thing about the guy giving birth was kind of (very) weird; it will terrify the gay community and confuse children. Sure, this show wants to open-minded, but some things... you just don't put on a PG show. To quote Graham, I "can't unsee that" (the giving birth part).
As for the rest of the episode, I think that every single movie in the Alien franchise has had a better storyline. Besides that, this episode was kind of meh; mildly entertaining but with a poor story. Maybe people rate it so badly because of the storyline, but in general I wonder if these haters have even watched the episode without assuming that the episode was going to suck in the first place.
Whatever the case, I wouldn't be overly fond of watching this episode again for a while.
Doctor Who: Arachnids in the UK (2018)
6.4 - Good episode but it ended with a surprisingly unnoticed plot hole.
I'm going to go easy on this episode because I like the spider episodes of Doctor Who since they are creepy and keep me watching.
This episode starts well; we meet Yasmin's family, and the spiders concept draws you in well because it is creepy and a bit of a mystery (though with an obvious answer). People seem to have said that the CGI work on the spiders was bad, but I can't see why they think that! It was perfectly fine quality animation.
The man who was supposed to be an allusion to Trump didn't reflect his true nature at all (in my opinion). When he said that he merely signs papers for hotels to be built and expects people to do their jobs in making sure that the site was safe, I completely felt as though he was right. But then someone else said that he doesn't take responsibility by checking whether the site was safe?!? Do these people expect him to be responsible for everything? Shouldn't building a hotel be a team effort? Also, his later behaviour was comic and unbelievable.
The episode concluded after the Doctor somehow managed to cram every single spider in the hotel into a single little panic room.
What about the rest of the city's spiders? Oh well, I guess the Doctor will have to come back later, because now she's off with her friends on another (seriously) unbelievable adventure!
Ending with a misplaced sense of conclusion to this adventure, I would say that this episode has scored itself a 6.4/10 for its sense of adventure and CGI work.
People rate this episode too harshly.
Doctor Who: Rosa (2018)
7.2 - Maybe the best episode episode in the series so far, and that's not saying much.
Minor spoilers ahead.
A decent episode, if you don't mind history lessons and being politically correct.
While this episode was somewhat emotional, I think this was slightly interrupted (for me) by the "funny" parts of the episode where you would laugh (I didn't) at how silly white people were being in terms of how racist they were back in the 50s.
I found that the film "The Help" worked well for me because it made me feel sympathy for negros, but it didn't make fun of white people. That was a powerful movie. Nonetheless, this episode ended quite well.
Apart from that, the majority of the film gave me that "11.22.63" feel - more like I'm watching a history movie with a time traveller squeezed in there somewhere. I mean that this particular episode was not focused on the sci-fi aspects of the show much.
Otherwise it was a good episode, but I don't think I'll rewatch it any time soon.
Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 2 (2013)
8.4 - Epic Conclusion. Okay Cinematography.
Hooked by the first part, I simply had to watch this movie.
Joker's role in this film was important to its success, in my opinion; the whole "I made you loose control" bit was a vital part to the story, because without it this movie is just a massive battle between Superman and the Russians, and then with Batman.
I'm not a huge fan of Superman because he is way too overpowered (with the exception of being vulnerable to Kryptonite), but sometimes he really just annoyed me in this movie. Like when Batman says that the US government is displeased by him (Batman) just because he "did what they couldn't. What kind of an authority is that?" and Superman replies in saying "It doesn't matter; it's their world!" Does Superman not care what kind of government we have? He should have tried to make an arrangement between the government and Batman, rather than trying to potentially kill the one man who solves major problems without killing people.
Anyway, the whole Joker part of the movie was great, with his TV presentation, laughing gas, the theme park and the robot children.
All the battling with Superman was not bad and I'm glad that Oliver Queen (Green Arrow) made an appearance as Bruce's old friend.
I like what they did with Bruce's 'death'.
I would definitely recommend this movie for the fans, because it is an epic conclusion to the two-part franchise, although I do not think that the cinematography was quite as good as the first part.
Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Part 1 (2012)
9.1 - Absolutely Brilliant.
Good graphics, great cinematography, wonderful storyline. Truly satisfying with a compelling ending. Yes, I have only praise for this movie. The action scenes are epic, too.
By the way, I have barely read any of Miller's comic myself.
In a way it's good that--while watching--we may not know the whole story of what happened before these events, because there is more to think about. I think that this storyline is continuing from (Moore's comic?) "A Death in the Family", with the death of the second Robin, and the whole "Batman: Under the Red Hood" story with Jason Todd. That story sets a good foundation for this storyline, anyway.
It was worth every cent that I paid for it. I simply HAD to buy the second part. Undoubtedly, I did.
A must-watch for all; Batman fans or not.
Batman: Year One (2011)
7.3/10... It's Decent.
I know MacKenzie from TV programme Gotham, and I think he did a good job at speaking for Batman in this film. The music needs some work. Graphics are good. Sets a good foundation for future stories such as Batman: The Killing Joke, Assult on Arkham, etc., and, finally, Batman: the Dark Knight Returns. I think the plot was lacking a major villain. Otherwise it's worth watching. Good start. Decent ending.
61-minute film + 14-minute short called "Catwoman".
Watch it if you are a fan.
Batman: The Killing Joke (2016)
7.2 - A Half-decent Classic.
Minor spoilers ahead.
Please note: I have NOT read the comic yet. I'm dying to, though.
I give this film an 8/10 for the story and a 6.5 for the presentation and filmography. Overall: 7.2/10.
Kevin Conroy had an excellent voice for Batman; "(to Barbara) This is still a game to you. This is still a thrill. You haven't been taken to the edge yet... the abyss; the place where you don't care anymore. Where all hope dies." Beautiful. Mark Hamill's voice for Joker was superb for the character; "If we deny (memories) we deny reason itself. Although, what's wrong with that, really? It's not like we're contractually tied down to rationality. There is no sanity clause." The same can be said for Tara Strong's Barbara Gordon voice. Just perfect for the role.
The theme that Joker tries to express is, essentially, that there is no particular purpose for life--or, none that anyone focuses on. Joker asks rhetorically "do you know how many times we have come close to World War Three over a flock of geese on a computer screen (perhaps referencing politicians, etc.)? Everything anybody's ever valued or struggled for: it's monstrous!"
From my Christian perspective, this is the core issue of secular humanism: no one has any absolutely reliable foundation for truth; decency is subject to relativism. People tend to only care for themselves. Unless we have a purpose (beyond ourselves) to serve, we cannot be certain that we are working for a truly 'good' cause; this term 'good' is defined only by common, corruptible human emotions and living on this biased scale only points out one conclusion; we may as well "go looney" unless a scale of right and wrong is outside of our hands (i.e. from God).
Regarding the film itself, not too bad a movie. Buy it; it's a classic. Batman: The Dark Knight Returns is also good. I often rewatch Batman: The Killing Joke and I'd respect anybody's scores between 6 and 8.
For those who are displeased by this film, remember that Joker said himself in this movie that "It doesn't have to be good to be a classic".