It's mediocre, yet also really entertaining sometimes. In that regard, the closest comparison to this is Jurassic World.
Pros:
- Visuals and cinematography.
- Conflict within the group of characters.
- The characters of John C. Reily and Toby Kebbell (although underused)
- Action, particularly the climax.
- The editing stands out a few times.
- Nicely paced.
Cons:
- Too many characters, meaning you won't care about pretty much all of them. They also don't take their time to develop them, meaning that most of them come across as Fast and Furious cartoons.
- Some iffy CGI (not with Kong, but with the other creatures).
- Some minor moments that felt out of place or coincidental.
- Besides a few gags, all the humour falls flat.
- The second act drags a bit.
- Sometimes, the colour grading is overdone.
Grade: 5/10
Yeah I mean, it is very much that movie. If you want my unfiltered opinion: it's glossy & loud, it's discount Tarantino/Ritchie, it's engineered to be forgotten about almost instantly, it's very Youtube reviewer friendly, it’s edited for people with no attention span, it’s postmodern and cringy; it's all of that. It's aiming to be a 6, and I was kinda expecting it to hit that target given how much I was into David Leitch' previous directorial effort. Unfortunately, this is hampered by the fact that it very much feels like a product of the pandemic. I'm pretty sure everything was shot on sound stages, and you can really tell, because the effects are dogshit. The same goes for the action, most of it feels like it was choreographed based on what was possible for the day. It's a shame, because good visuals and punchy action are two of the key ingredients if you want to make this kind of movie work. Now, its biggest saving grace are the characters and some of the comedy. I think most of the characters are quite well done and colorful (props to the writing and actors), especially the duo played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Brian Tyree-Henry (again, even if they feel like they walked straight out of a Guy Ritchie movie). It did make me laugh occasionally, but there's also a lot of cringe in it, especially with its obnoxious use of bathos and cameos by people I didn't need to see. I'm also getting pretty sick of the Marvelization of movie dialogue, I could’ve sworn some of Pitt’s lines in this were written with Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool in mind. The story itself is a mess pretty much right from the start and completely flies off the rails in the third act (no pun intended). I'm not sure if that's due to the writing or editing though. In true Tarantino fashion it's told out of order, but here it doesn't enhance the experience in a positive way. I don't know, I'd wait for this to appear on streaming, it's only occasionally fun and not really worth of the big screen.
4/10
Between this and Cherry, it’s becoming more and more clear that the MCU’s best director is called Kevin Feige.
Netflix clearly spent a lot of money on this, you can feel the price of your subscription going up with every new set piece that’s introduced, but the end results are still unforgivingly bland and generic nonetheless.
It’s their attempt to compete with Bond, Bourne or Mission Impossible, but if anything this feels like a poser imitation of those superior blockbuster franchises. The plot is in fact literally ripping off both Skyfall and The Bourne Identity at the same time, but forgets about any of their depth in regards to story and character.
The Russos are clearly trying to recapture that same tone and spark from their Captain America: The Winter Soldier days, but they end up making something that’s more akin to the quality of Red Notice.
In terms of directing they kinda got outdone by their own second unit director with his Netflix action flick, as I’d argue that Extraction is a marginally better film than this.
The action’s poorly done and cheaply put together, lots of annoying editing choices (heavy overuse of drone shots, quick cuts and can the Russos pick a normal font for once?), corny dialogue, distractingly bad CGI, boring visuals and music (why is everything so low contrast, foggy and muddy?); not a lot to recommend about this one.
The acting’s fine, Evans is having a blast, but I have absolutely no idea why an extremely picky actor like Ryan Gosling chose this script in the first place. It seems like a paycheck movie for someone of his caliber. Just watch The Nice Guys instead of this if you want to see Goose in an action comedy, we don’t need these 200 million dollar direct to streaming action films.
4/10
I feel like I’ve just been yelled at for 2 hours by Adam McKay. Yeah, it's on the nose and way too obvious, but still decently funny.
5.5/10
Is it just me or is there some circlejerk going on at Disney where they keep using the same group of actors over and over again for their different brands? Just stop using Taika Waititi already.
The movie itself is pretty whatever.
It reminded me a lot of Onward; you could do a lot worse, but it probably won’t be remembered within the broader Pixar catalogue.
Not a lot of depth or subtext with this one, it’s a pretty straight forward adventure (which is also fine of course).
Some good animation (lots of visual ideas are being pulled from Star Wars), decent voice acting, fine characters, story’s alright.
It’s kinda inoffensive and doesn’t really warrant some of the extreme reactions it’s gotten.
The whole ‘woke’ label is baffling to me, it just seems like a smokescreen certain people use to cover up for their own homophobia, which only emphasizes how the word ‘woke’ carries little to no meaning nowadays.
Any regular person will be fine watching this, regardless of their political leaning.
Ffs, it’s mass entertainment after all.
5/10
Heads up: I know that there are a lot of folks going into this expecting it to scratch the same itch as Game of Thrones or Vikings.
You’re going to come out extremely disappointed if you expect that.
This is way slower and artsier than your average 'manly' action movie, the tone and feel are more akin to something like The Revenant
Alright, so I did not give this its due the first time around, here are my updated thoughts.
The first thing that stood out to me during the rewatch is how much of the imagery had already burned itself into my brain, there are so many fantastic long takes that I still easily remembered months after seeing it the first time.
I love the brutal and raw feel, which combined with the score creates a very good sense of atmosphere.
The characters clicked for me this time around, a lot of their development is done in subtle and visual ways (pay attention to how cold Skardsgard’s character claims he is versus how he acts). As a result, I wasn’t bored and the pacing fell into place for me.
While the story is still a little by the numbers and predictable, I picked up on this theme of the toxicity and pointlessness of revenge, which sets it apart from similar stories like The Lion King or Hamlet.
The action slaps, but I’m still not a fan of some of the arthouse touches. For example I don’t get what that hallucination fight during the sword retrieval scene wants to convey.
But yeah, it’s much better than I initially gave it credit for, even if it’s nowhere near peak Eggers.
7.5/10
If you’d ask me what the highlights of the previous 2 Ant-Man movies are, I’d probably answer: I don’t remember much about them, but I liked those quirky scenes narrated by Michael Peña and the creative use of shrinking powers during the set pieces. For as forgettable as both movies are, at least I still remember the set piece with the train in the first movie, or the kitchen fight from the second movie. With this movie, I'm already having trouble remembering any specifics, because all of those typical Edgar Wright touches have been erased in favor of being a big CGI extravaganza. So, allow me to do a general breakdown of the three acts instead.
1st act: We get a set-up that's similar to Spiderman: No Way Home, which means it’s in a hurry to get to the main dish, making every main character look like an irresponsible dumbass in the process. Once we get to the quantum realm, we're met with a lot of cringe comedy. The design of the world is fine, it feels like a mashup of prequel era Star Wars, Avatar, The Fifth Element and Spy Kids, not like an original creation. A stronger, visionary director probably would've made a big difference here, or at least one who knows how to use the volume stages, because that might’ve avoided the Spy Kids comparisons.
2nd act: Jonathan Majors arrives to do some actual acting, and he somehow pulls it off despite the hammy, pseudo-intellectual lines given to him by the script. Michelle Pfeiffer also gets some time to shine, when she's on the screen with Majors it feels like the movie actually comes to life for a brief second. Still, the scenes with Kang feel tonally inconsistent with the rest of the movie, and I’m not sold on the idea of him being the Avengers level threat we’ve been waiting for. When it comes to the other actors, most of them are given nothing interesting to do, the supposed co-lead of this movie (according to the title) included. I don't like picking on younger actors, but it needs to be said that Emma Fuhrmann expressed more emotion during her 10 second appearance as Cassie Lang in Avengers: Endgame than Kathryn Newton did here. In terms of story, this portion of the movie is all about set-up and clunky exposition as delivered through monologues. One of the characters even gets introduced with his own 'previously on Ant-Man' recap, which I find insulting and shows what little faith this studio has in its audience. Besides, it probably would’ve been better to cut this character, because his inclusion is easily one of Marvel's worst creative decisions (the design and visual effects are laughable). Generally I'd say this act is pretty boring, and occasionally embarrassing.
3rd act: The movie decides it wants to be Aquaman instead, so we're getting an extended battle sequence of stuff fighting other stuff, with plenty of flashes, lasers and more stuff. It's big, it's loud, and I check out. Every cheesy crowdpleaser deserves its fair share of deus ex machina moments, but this movie spams the action movie trope of 'our main character is in peril only to get saved at the very last moment' to death at this point. Furthermore, the cringe comedy makes a big return, with Corey Stoll delivering a line so bad that it will become a meme (you'll know once you see the movie). More punchy stuff, more pew pew, more 'comedy', and thankfully the movie finally decides it has wasted enough of my time. We get a final montage that includes the first good joke of the movie, and the credits roll. Nothing is achieved, absolutely nothing. This is a cynically conceived advertisement that does not deserve your time.
3/10
It’s honestly starting to feel like the seventh season of GoT.
Yes, the action is bigger and better than the previous season, but any of the fantastic writing with a mystical/mysterious/philosophical edge, that was present in the first season, has vanished.
It’s still good, of course, but this straight forward human vs robot continuation isn’t I was hoping for.
It’s not a movie.
It’s just another bland, soulless mass product that’s primarily aimed at the Chinese market.
Now that WB is the only real studio releasing big movies, it really shows what a joke of a studio they’ve become during the last 5 years.
Not that they didn’t release crap before that, but at least there was something like a good Mad Max, Harry Potter, Matrix or Lord of the Rings film somewhere to be found in their slate.
It would seem Villeneuve and Nolan are the only real talents that are left at the studio.
For nearly every other film they make, they seem to think that appealing to the lowest common denominator will give them the biggest return on their investment.
I.e. the action scenes are more important than the story or the characters, and the scale needs to be huge, even if it looks tacky and fake.
3/10
Starts very well, the way they handle the death of Boseman is very tastefully done (so many well executed emotional beats) and I like the new conflict that they set up, which is a little more grey and intelligent than the usual blockbuster, like the first movie. The new villain is an interesting character, and I quite liked the creativity that went into the design of his powers and world, but for the love of god, never show me those goofy wing boots again. From the second act onwards, the movie starts to get bogged down by the Marvel machine, i.e. the movie slips out of Coogler’s hands. It’s unfortunately forced to function as a backdoor pilot for Disney + shows and used to drive the corporate machine forward, instead of focussing on the development of its own premise and character arcs. The way it rushes through the arcs of Okoye, Shuri and Namor leaves a lot to be desired. Meanwhile, cutting/writing out Riri, Martin Freeman and Julia Louis Dreyfus would improve the overall cohesion and pacing a lot. What doesn’t help either is that the action and visual effects get increasingly worse and worse as the movie goes on, to the point where we again have an ugly third act on our hands, which includes some of the most hideous looking costumes the MCU has ever put out. Moreover, the soundtrack is kinda bland this time around. It’s not like Kendrick et al. were putting out their best material for the first film, but the music here is just so vanilla and forgettable. Finally, I’m not enitrely sure what the script is trying to communicate on a deeper level, besides being a general statement in favour of diplomacy. If it’s meant to be just that, I don’t think this is anywhere as bold as the first movie. Not that it needs that in order to be good, but it’s another layer stripped away from what made the first movie special. What saves the film ultimately is a lot of its craft: the directing, worldbuilding, acting, score, cinematography, costume and set design (underwater world looked great, much better than Aquaman IMO) are all very well handled and stand out in the blockbuster field. It has those strong foundations in place that make it hard to produce a flat out bad Black Panther film, but man does this movie also show that Marvel is its own worst enemy at this point.
5.5/10
.
The most corporate movie I’ve seen in a while.
2 hours of pure unadulterated cringe.
The funniest thing about it is the performance by Chris Diamantopoulous (the “this guy fucks” dude from Silicon Valley), whose acting kept reminding me of Eddie Redmayne in Jupiter Ascending.
3/10
Jonathan Majors , love the dude, but that performance was godawful. He kinda reminded me of Jesse Eisenberg in Batman V Superman
The Meg.
Alternative title: Everything wrong with contemporary Hollywood in 2 hours.
Alternative title II: This one’s for you, China.
Just shut up, Meg.
2/10
Despite not wanting to pull the trigger for a genuine emotional pay-off, this does have the most heart and emotion out of any Marvel movie throughout. I think people will be surprised by how dark and emo this gets, which is established straight from the opening credits. Unfortunately the rest of the movie is a bit of a mess. Adam Warlock and the villain are bland, the plot has a strong ‘we’re making it up as we go along’ feel to it, the tonal shifts and needle drops feel more jarring than cohesive and the action (despite a cool hallway fight) isn’t handled with the same care as the previous 2 (or The Suicide Squad). It’s probably the worst looking Guardians movie, however that incidentally still makes it the third best looking MCU movie. The characters and acting are the two main things that keep it watchable (especially Mantis, Drax and Nebula get a lot of time to shine here), but the entire picture feels unbalanced.
5/10
Round 3 of Gareth Edwards proving he’s a great visual director that doesn’t know how to breathe life in his scripts. Its best asset is easily the worldbuilding, combining influences from other science fiction material to create a new world that feels fresh. The technical execution is also really well done, with its cinematography and CGI being among some of the most visionary stuff I’ve seen since Avatar 2. Unfortunately, the sci-fi concepts this is working with are stale, it’s all stuff you’ve seen before and the movie doesn’t know how to put its own creative spin on it. Add to that a bunch of characters that aren’t written in the most compelling way (as well as bland, understated performances that will keep everyone questioning whether JDW is actually a good actor), and you have a movie that’s already pretty dull from the start. Now, a big saving grace of Rogue One and Godzilla were their strong climaxes, however that’s not the case here. Instead, The Creator starts to rush to the finish line, which leads to the big emotional beats not hitting the mark. It’s like the pacing of this movie is constantly either rushing or dragging, annoying my inner Terence Fletcher in the process. Overall, while I’d love to champion this as the savior of original science fiction, there’s not much more originality here than a typical franchise film. I don’t want to call Edwards another Zack Snyder, because I think he’s certainly more talented, but he’s suffering from the same problems and doesn’t seem to learn from his previous mistakes.
5/10
Wow, how the mighty have fallen. Was this season produced by the Hallmark channel? The schmaltzy music that plays in the background every other scene, the forced feel-good vibe, the corny jokes, the cringy musical interlude during this episode, that fucking Ed Sheeran montage…. it’s all so incredibly lame and cheap. Any of the sharp wit and quirk from the first two seasons has completely disappeared from the show. Instead this entire season felt like a bunch predictable, bland, sentimental nonsense made for the broadest of audiences.
Tom Hardy, all by himself, almost makes this a good movie.
And, it's hilarious at times (which I believe was intentional, I think this movie is self-aware), way funnier than say Ant-Man and the Wasp.
There was just something about the banter between Eddie and Venom that worked extremely well.
But: the script is awful, the dialogue sucks, the production values are terrible, and anyone that isn't Tom Hardy comes from a much blander film.
So I cannot really recommend it, even though I kinda want to.
This is one of those films that is just impossible to hate.
It’s such a well made crowdpleaser; from the acting, to the score, to the camerawork.
From the very first scene, you know you’re in the hands of a filmmaker who knows what he’s doing.
It’s long, but you don’t feel its length at all.
The predictability of the story is the only real issue.
7.5/10
Normally, I like Charlie Kaufman, but this is him at his most pretentious.
Not that it’s all bad, I actually liked most of the first long scene in the car.
It’s the kind of scene that will make many casual viewers dismiss the film right away (due to its length), but I thought it set up both of our leads very well.
Then they arrive at the parents’ house, and my opinion on the film did a 180.
It does what every annoying art movie does (not saying all art movies are like that, I like a lot of them): everything starts to get weird for the sake of trying to be interesting, but without any artistic reasoning.
For example, the acting becomes a nonsensical mix of very grounded performances (our leads) on one side, and extremely heightened, cartoony perfomances on the other side (the parents).
Also, the cinematography is pedestrian at best, and I fail to see the reasoning behind the chosen aspect ratio (unlike films like The Lifghthouse or Mommy).
Just stick to writing, Charlie.
4/10
Assuming that this is intentionally meant to be camp is doing it a service it doesn’t deserve, I think.
Yes, there’s goofy and trashy stuff in it, but they play it mostly straight with the presentation, i.e. most of this feels like it’s trying to be an actual movie. It’s not as over the top and entertaining as it needed to be, like it’s certainly no Malignant or Drag me to Hell.
Instead, it’s one of the dullest experiences I’ve had in a long time.
All of the actors are instant razzie frontrunners (especially Allison Williams, holy shit what a trainwreck of a performance) and the writing constantly veers between human dialogue as interpreted by aliens (or M Night Shyamalan), and unintentionally (yes, unintentionally) funny garbage. I know it’s unintentional, because the intentional jokes that are worked into the script aren’t funny at all.
The story is of course laughable and completely predictable. So many unnecessary, boring scenes, as well as quick bits that are clearly aimed to just be memes on TikTok. Even the crazy stuff felt fairly restrained to me, it’s not nearly bonkers enough to become entertaining. For example, don’t go into this expecting more of the dance sequence, because all of the best bits are in the trailer.
Finally, the filmmaking and visual style are instantly forgettable. Not a single interesting shot or artistic choice in the whole thing.
In short, nothing fun or clever about it, just very typical January horror kitsch that was probably only greenlit as a tax write-off for Jason Blum.
1.5/10
A bit of a nothing burger, it doesn’t really get interesting until the final 20-30 minutes.
There are a few entertaining bits inbetween (e.g. there’s a fun scene with Paul Rudd in a Wallmart), but there’s not nearly enough going on.
It’s just mostly bland: some decent acting and directing, but there’s not a lot of action, mystery, charm, clever comedy, drama or characters to get invested into (besides McKenna Grace).
For example, Finn Wolfhard gets as much development as the older brother from Jurassic World, he’s a teen and he wants to get laid. That’s all you get, and it’s not that interesting.
There are, of course, a lot of ‘member berries, which add nothing besides empty nostalgia.
The original Ghostbusters leave the biggest impression with just 5 minutes of screentime, and they clearly didn’t even give a shit about being there.
It’s not the worst thing ever, but this falls short of the benchmark for this kind of movie.
Just watch the original, or anything directed by Spielberg and Cameron in the 80s/90s.
5/10
Rian Johnson is starting to turn into the white Jordan Peele. He's another one of those filmmakers that loves to work in this niche of subversive genre films that include a heavy dose of social commentary, and I'm all here for it. Specifically, with this franchise we’ve gone from satirizing old money with Knives Out to satirizing new money with this new film (chances are Knives Out 3 will center around a group of homeless suspects). Now, a lot of films in that same vein have been released recently (Triangle of Sadness, The Menu), but I think none of them do the satire as well as this film. To me it’s too easy at this point to simply aim your commentary at these people by making a statement about how stupid and incompetent they are. It seems like low hanging fruit to me, because everyone with a brain knows that these types are vapid and contribute nothing to society. Luckily, Rian Johnson understands this too and goes one step beyond that, filtering all of his commentary through this idea of the glass onion. These people aren’t just stupid and incompetent, but they’re using a veil of eccentricity and ‘complexity’ to hide that. This is a brilliant deconstruction that rings very true for today’s society, and of course you can’t quite escape the obvious parallel with Twitter’s manchild CEO firing himself this week. This subtext is woven into a lot of elements of the film (character, location, plot, even some props), which means that some things are a lot dumber and simpler than they appear to be. I think that will annoy some people, but I think it's quite clever. Like the first film, you get a great cast of colourful characters. Some of them are given depth, some of them are just playing funny caricatures. Daniel Craig owns the whole movie again, but Janelle Monáe comes pretty close to outperforming him. Even people like Dave Bautista do a great job, and it’s because Rian Johnson knows how to use these actors despite their limited range. There are plenty of twists you won’t see coming and the filmmaking is again terrific. It looks very cinematic with the blocking, lighting and compositions, and the score feels very 60s (lots of strings, some minor baroque orchestration), which reminded me of The White Lotus and a certain Beatles song. In the end, what puts it over the first film for me is the fact that the tone feels more consistent here. The more tense and dramatic moments of Knives Out didn’t really hit home for me when you have Daniel Craig doing a really campy accent, and this one just fully embraces that it’s a silly comedy. And it’s a great one at that, nearly all the jokes landed for me. Maybe could’ve done with a little less shouting from Kate Hudson, but ok, it makes sense for the character. Probably the most fun movie of the year next to Top Gun: Maverick, and definitely one of the most well constructed.
8/10
Ever since the mid 90s, Roland Emmerich has attempted time and time again to repackage and recapture the ideas from Independence Day. After many failed attempts, I wonder why there’s still a theatrical market for films like this. Or rather, it’s odd that Hollywood thinks there’s still a market for it, given that all of Emmerich’s films since 2012 have flopped at the box office. And, he’s about to add another one to his resume. This should’ve gotten a streaming release at best, as it belongs in the same category as a film like The Tomorrow War. It’s background noise you throw on while you’re doing the dishes or folding the laundry. It's too disposable, phony, poorly acted and boring to pay any serious attention to, let alone pay money for. There's a sense of authenticity and fun to dumb action movies like Independence Day that you're never going to capture with the way these kind of films are made now. You have to applaud Emmerich for making a big, original studio film, but it’s still generic schlock that doesn’t have a single ounce of personality. Fuck whoever financed this.
Edit: after a little bit of digging I found out that the primary investor of this thing is a Chinese company called Tencent Pictures. They’re also responsible for financing other great films such as Terminator: Dark Fate, Warcraft, Kong: Skull Island, Men in Black: International, Monster Hunter and the 2 Venom movies. To put it mildly, it appears that it’s this company’s sole purpose to flood the market with trash, and not exactly the fun kind. Now I know what you’re thinking: maybe their involvement helps with receiving a Chinese release from the CCP? But here’s the problem: Venom 2 was banned in China. So, they’re clearly just a bunch of incompetent investors, given that all of their films (the Venom films excluded) have been massive financial and critical flops. The takeaway for Hollywood should be pretty simple: if Tencent wants to invest in your production, cancel all plans before you have another Moonfall on your hands.
2.5/10
Watch it if you’re a fan of Toto, or genuinly laugh at any point during the first scene.
Can somebody go and check on Jared Leto?
His performance in this is so fucking funny to me, I’d be surprised if this isn’t a shoe-in for a Razzie nomination.
Every artistic choice this guy makes has to be the most overblown and ridiculous thing ever, whether that’s in his acting or his music.
I wonder if he’s still capable of delivering a good performance when he doesn’t get to hide behind make-up and eccentricities.
Not to say that the other actors are faring much better, pretty much everybody sounds like they’re doing a parody of an Italian accent, it sounds ridiculous.
Some sound like they’re trying to imitate Mario, it’s that classic “ah, mamma mia, pizzeria” shtick that everyone does when they make fun of Italians.
The only problem is: this isn’t a parody film, and the only actor that seems to get that to some extent is Adam Driver.
You’d assume that most of these conversations were in Italian in real life, so nobody would care if you’d ditch these accents in an English language film, because it isn’t going to be completely realistic anyway.
I just don’t get creative choices like this, especially from a legend like Ridley Scott, who seemed to understand this idea in his last film, which came out only 2 months ago.
As for the film itself, I’d advise anyone to simply pretend that this is meant to be a campy comedy, because it’s not that good as an Oscar drama.
Just watch Succession if this seems intriguing to you.
Even with the soapy melodrama, occasional bad acting and a considerably lower budget (probably 2% of the budget of this show per episode): Arrow managed to create better characters and more visceral, memorable and coherent action scenes in its first 2 seasons compared to this show. I’ll even go as far to say that it looks better, despite using incredibly basic set ups and filmmaking techniques. Getting Hailee Steinfeld was a great choice, but her character isn’t leaving a very strong or likable impression. In comparison, Joss Whedon managed to make you care about Clint’s character within 15 minutes of screentime. Well, enough to make you care as a side character.
Moreover, this feels like a studio giving their impression of a Marvel Netflix show, like Daredevil or Jessica Jones, but it doesn’t understand what makes those shows good. It’s so tame and uninspired. It seems to aim for 80’s cheese at points, but even those old action movies had some bite to them (despite how silly they could get). The comedy is mostly flat out lame and cringy, with the role playing scene probably being the lowest low of the entire MCU so far. The recent Marvel projects have had such a weird shift in terms of comedy. They used to be great at making mass product films that were at least a little bit clever and subversive. It’s no surprise that a lot of people who worked on Community also work behind the scenes at Marvel. It’s like they fired those writers after phase 3 ended, and hired the Friends team instead. Their quality control is spreading very thin.
Eternals, the film where Robb Stark and Jon Snow find themselves in a love triangle with Sersi.
Besides that piece of ironic casting, I’m not seeing the hook with this film.
I’ve seen some people arguing that it’s boring because of its slow pace.
It’s not, it’s boring because it’s an empty wet fart of a film that doesn’t have one ounce of personality.
It feels like one of those long, drawn out, indulgent college lectures where you’re constantly asking yourself what the point of learning this stuff is, and you’re still not sure by the end of it.
The cinematography is great, it looks like a Denis Villeneuve film with its use of natural light, but that’s pretty much the only thing I can praise about it.
Most of these films are entertaining because of their interesting characters, comedy and ocassionally the action (if it doesn’t look like artificial crap).
This film doesn’t really have characters in the first place.
It tries to balance 10 leads, which results in most of these characters being reduced to archetypes.
Most of them have one or two quirks, but none of them develop into well rounded or engaging characters.
Even some of the acting, which is the one thing these films usually get right, is a little wonky and one note.
It tries to compensate for its lack of action with drama, which I’d welcome if it wasn’t the same, generic ‘monster bad, we have to fight them’ shtick we’ve seen time and time again.
The philosophical questions that it tries to pose feel tacked on and have no meat to them, not unlike a Zack Snyder DC film.
There’s also so much handholding in this, the amount of exposition is kinda insane.
You don’t need to dumb your film down to the point where your exposition dump that starts the film repeats itself two more times during other dialogue scenes.
The third act, as expected nowadays, looks like plastic and is filled with effects that already look dated.
Is it that hard to give us something subversive like Doctor Strange again, and to stop having these fake and obnoxious cgi battles?
Then you wouldn’t have to underpay your visual effects artists to animate a battle for which most people close their eyes during.
There’s still one good thing to come out of this: we can now definitively reject this narrative (which was floating around in some circles) that critics will go easy on a film because of diverse casting, the director being an Oscar favorite, the brand or a film being ‘woke’.
So at least there’s that, though I wouldn’t be surprised if these morons find a way to twist it into their narrative regardless.
I can already see some of them claiming that critics hated it because there wasn’t enough gay sex in it.
Frankly though, I agree: where was the sex scene between Angelina Jolie and Gemma Chan?
3.5/10
It’s funny to know that this movie was intended to come out before the pandemic, because by releasing it now it might provide some unintentional food for thought for the morons who believe that a certain virus was actually conceived in a lab.
I genuinely wonder if those people will read that far into this film, I’d find it deeply amusing.
The good news is that there are definetely a lot of things this does better than Spectre.
The action is memorable and way more visceral (though it doesn’t quite surpass the Mission Impossible Fallout bar) and the characters are generally more interesting.
I loved the women in this in particular, they all have distinct personalities and they’re not flawless human beings or overpowered (e.g. Ana de Armas is bubbly and fun, but at the same time she’s inexperienced and chaotic), like some blockbusters tend to do.
At the same time, we shouldn’t pretend that this film invented strong female characters for Bond, especially after we’ve had Eva Green and Judi Dench.
Meanwhile, James Bond himself has a very satisfying arc in this film, which isn’t too dissimilar to Tony Stark’s arc in Avengers Endgame , with a bold pay off in the third act. I’m happy that this film gave us confirmation that Mads Mikkelsen didn’t end up castrating Bond during that scene in Casino Royale.
It’s paced very well, more like a traditional action film and less like a drama, which was the case for Skyfall and Spectre. Don’t let the runtime intimidate you, it doesn’t feel longer than 2 hours.
And finally, the whole thing just looks great, it’s produced excuisetely. The cinematography isn’t quite Skyfall level, but Roger Deakins is an impossible bar to clear for any cinematographer.
Unfortunately, this film really struggles with its tone, bouncing between some cartoony stuff and very dark, dramatic moments.
It wants to honor the traditional Bond stuff, but at the same time it can’t let go of the roots of the Daniel Craig iteration, which makes it feel like an uneven artistic vision, because the foundation of Craig’s Bond rests on this idea that this isn’t the traditional Bond.
It’s going for the same tone as Skyfall, meaning its pretty serious, while also incorporating some campy stuff with the plot and the villain (but never going into straight up silly territory, like Spectre).
The problem is that you could still take the villain and the plot seriously in Skyfall (Bardem is still scary despite the camp, the hacking plot feels grounded), and that isn’t the case here, the plot goes too much into sci-fi territory for that.
Also, Rami Malek didn’t leave much of an impression on me, the accent is wonky and he feels like a stock villain (very much like Waltz in the last film). There’s not really an interesting motivation there, or an interesting evil plan. It’s a campy and theatrical plan, and it feels very familiar.
Finally, this film can be fairly predictable at times (for example: Matilde being Bond’s daughter was extremely obvious, but they still try to somewhat play it as a twist. The same goes for Lea Seydoux being framed in prologue.).
So, it’s good, it pushes the creative boundaries of what a Bond movie is in some ways, which is the best stuff.
But I kinda hope they bring in someone with a fresh, fully realized artistic vision to really shake things up again for the next reboot.
7/10
Ps for the Bond producers: please, please make a spin off with Ana de Armas’ character.
This is mostly stuck in second gear for the entire runtime, it’s very bland and poorly directed. Interestingly, despite having a different director at the helm a lot of the problems from X-Men Apocalypse carry over. There’s once again visible cheapness in the costumes and make-up, Lawrence phones it in, Sophie Turner can’t pull off what she’s asked to do and the story feels muddled. The new elements it adds on top of that don’t really work either, for example Jessica Chastain gives the most lifeless performance of her career as the villain of this film. Generally, it just looks and feels like a cheap tv show, Kinberg clearly wasn’t ready for this. Due to it’s smaller scale it never becomes as schlocky as the worst moments in Apocalypse, X-Men Origins Wolverine or The Last Stand, but this movie feels unambitious next to all of those films. I’d be fine with the approach if it had genuine good writing and interesting direction, but what’s being served here is not cerebral, emotional or exciting.
3.5/10
Another Bond pastiche from Matthew Vaughn, and once again it’s worse than the last one. Here we have what is basically another Kingsman film, but this time it’s made for the wine moms who had found their new favorite film with The Lost City. The plot is quite bonkers, it's so dense and the amount of schlocky plot twists indicate that Vaughn’s at least somewhat aware of how tasteless it all is. Sometimes you can still find traces of the cleverness you’d expect from him, but generally it favours being loud and cringe. I understand that he’s targeting a different demographic here than with Kingsman, but the end result is so tame and commercial that it feels more like typical streaming filler (Red Notice, Ghosted). Some of the acting is atrocious. Obviously Rockwell puts in the best work, but it doesn’t make up for the stiff performances by Cavill, Howard and Lipa (though she gets a pass for being Dua Lipa). The directing is also noticeably a step down compared to Vaughn’s previous stuff. It doesn’t feel like he put much heart and soul in this, because besides some good stuntwork it looks like shit. There’s just so much plastic sheen (artificial bright lighting, tacky CGI, unnatural compositions and camera movement) that it becomes incredibly ugly to look at. You could pass that off as ‘well it’s meant to be cartoonish’, but I’m not going to make that leap when there’s this little artistry to it. Vaughn needs to stop making these, the whole thing feels predictable and played out.
2.5/10
An underwhelming effort from a company that seems to have fallen behind the curve. Creatively it’s pulling too much from Zootopia and Inside Out while not adding much of its own flavour, almost every choice in this movie is predictable. Sure, the racism/prejudice commentary is more aggressive now that we’ve entered the post-Trump era (seriously, you should go back and look at how Zootopia handled that same topic, it feels quaint now), but besides that it doesn’t bring much to the table. The worldbuilding lacks the clever intricacies of Zootopia, the pretty animation style has some unique textures but it’s no Across the Spider-verse, and emotionally it feels more like Illumination than Pixar. It’s a very straightforward, cheesy romcom with a formulaic set-up for the main characters (think Notting Hill, Crazy Rich Asians, and countless other movies your mom loves), some ok comedy (bad puns notwithstanding) and a boring adventure (fixing pipelines, how exciting). The score’s pretty interesting because it seems to pull a lot from Indian folk music, on the other hand the songs sound generic and overproduced. Overall, I’d easily recommend this over some other animated films from this year, as this does genuinely try as a movie. However, that doesn’t change that I expect both children and adults to be mostly bored by this.
4.5/10