This is one of Marvel Studios’ riskier projects, the hyperlink structure combined with the villain being the main character immediately makes it stand out in the genre. It’s because of those two aspects that the film works as well as it does. Thanos is a great character with an interesting motivation. The animation is so detailed and lifelike that it never fails to bring out the emotion, in fact I’d argue that the scenes between him and Gamora have the most emotional punch (courtesy of Zoe Saldana and Josh Brolin, who both put in a really solid performance). The balancing of all the different plot lines is also quite well done as there’s a relevancy to each one, nor does the tone feel too disjointed at any point. Some transitions or the sudden pop culture riffing during serious scenes can be awkward, but it’s handled about as well as it could. The exposition is handled tastefully and kept to a minimum, it instead chooses to focus on unexpected interactions between characters from different branches of the Marvel universe, which is the more exciting part. I’m less into the action and filmmaking, however. Not a lot about the camerawork or score jumps out to me, I feel like what little vision the Russos brought to their previous MCU projects is completely lost here. The washed out colour palette (which for some reason is slightly more vibrant during scenes in space) and obvious music embellishments don’t evoke all that much. The staging and editing of the action is a little too quick for my liking, the moments that are meant to be memorable don’t leave much of an impression because the editing doesn’t take its time to punctuate the stunts properly. Some of the CGI also feels a little weightless, for example Stark’s suit looks and feels like its made from paper. The resulting scenes, such as the final battle on Titan, feel more like small scale, digital mush than the big epic scenes they’re aiming for. Once the film decides to slow down for the dramatic conclusion, I find its intent to be manipulative and disingenuous. I felt that way after watching it the first time in the cinema, and after every ‘death’ in this movie having been retconned in one way or another, it turns out I was right. Even in its riskier films, Marvel will find ways to take most of the edges off. Overall, it’s still decent but it’s lost a lot of its flavour for me over the years.
6/10
Stoner metal: the movie.
Best action blockbuster of the 2010s; a singular, visionary experience with terrific worldbuilding and a lot of viscera, testosterone and just enough story/character depth to keep things interesting.
9/10
One of the few Marvel movies where you can notice the artistry that went into it.
This feels like someone’s vision, the story is layered and the conflict is relevant and interesting. The way it’s resolved doesn’t feel safe to me, it makes a pretty nuanced statement about protectionism that might seem agreeable to some, but I can assure you that it isn’t.
The camerawork also really stands out (one of the few Marvel movies with proper colour grading), costumes are terrific, the characters are very well drawn and the acting is great.
It does have some pacing issues in the middle, some of the action is poorly handled (the climax is kinda lackluster in a sense) and looks too artificial, and the main character kinda feels overpowered when he has the suit on, but it’s still easily one of Marvel’s best just because of what it gets right.
7.5/10
Innovative in many different ways, though it also pioneered a lot of shit (from bad imitators of its style to synthetic looking action scenes to the over the top stuntwork that’s found in every blockbuster nowadays).
Not that I’m holding that against this film, it actually gets most of these things right.
I really like the action, cinematography (the green tint for the Matrix was a great choice, which I believe was something they added in later cuts), music, story and characters in this.
The philosophy stuff is a nice side dish, it’s not as overbearing or overcomplicated as in the sequels.
It’s also not nearly as deep as some people pretend it is, just complex enough where it gives a lot of people the impression that this is some mindbending, experimental filmmaking, when in reality it’s not.
It’s just a very well executed action film that’s a little more conceptual than most of the stuff that came out around that time.
The acting, however, is a bit of a mixed bag for me.
Laurence Fishburne and Hugo Weaving are excellent (which is odd, Hugo Weaving is hamming it up big time and that shouldn’t work given what the other actors are doing, but it does), but the two leads are very stiff and often miss the mark in selling their dialogue.
I imagine that must’ve been the big trade-off for the Wachowskis; Carrie Ann Moss and Keanu Reeves are great with the action stuff and a lot of what they do is in camera, but they’re not the greatest actors.
Taking that bullet was the right choice in the end, though.
8.5/10
It’s without a doubt the most interesting Star Wars film conceptually. Most of these films are aiming to be pure fastfood, so it’s nice to see an auteur come in and try to do something that has layers, broad ideas and subtext, though one could question what the point of that is when the general takeaway of the average, illiterate film goer seems to be to simply forget about the past. Now, Rian Johnson makes some obvious mistakes with this film. Yes, his insistence on subverting the viewer’s expectations left and right lead to some unsatisfying moments, but there are also more than a few of those moments that I’m fine with. He’s also never been that great with the balancing of tone, and some of the comedy here is so silly (not to mention just poorly executed) that it conflicts with the darker, more dramatic stuff it’s trying to do simultaneously. I like the arcs that he gives to the previously established characters (yes, including Luke, I thought this was a great direction for the character), but the new characters don’t leave as much of an impression, or they’re just given really weird conclusions (Rose’s final speech is a bit cringe). There are some brilliant visual moments, but there are also lots of scenes that don’t pop, particularly the ones set inside spaceships. I think Star Wars films require a bit more flash than just bland grey and white backgrounds. He does bring it occasionally, such as during the action scenes, and all of those are excellent if you ask me. Sure, a lot has been written about the supposed bad choreography during the Kylo and Rey team up fight, but it’s the kind of stuff I don’t notice because there’s a lot going on visually and the shots are so well composed. Furthermore, I love the opening scene and climax, truly fantastic sequences. However, I’m not as much a fan of the Canto Bight and Benicio Del Toro subplot, that never went to an interesting place. In fact, you could take that stuff out and you wouldn’t lose much. All in all, kinda saved by the acting, main character arcs, bigger ideas and decent filmmaking for me, but simultaneously far from great. That being said, the amount of hate directed at people like Rian Johnson and Kelly Marie Tran because of this film is downright embarrassing, Star Wars should truly be ashamed of its toxic fanbase of emotionally immature manchildren. In that regard I’m kinda glad that we have a filmmaker at the helm here who’s willing to be as creatively bold as this ended up being, even with it being as imperfect as it is.
6/10
A testament to what casting the perfect actor as the lead can do for a movie. So much of this is carried by the riffing of the characters, it makes the entire movie work. I also find it interesting how the textures and colours of this movie are so much better compared to a lot of other Marvel films. However, you can also see a lot of the problems that would go on to define the MCU from here. Too many predictable elements, a bland score, boring villain, forgettable/unimaginative camerawork; it’s all here already. Still, it has a lot of funny, entertaining scenes, and I like how they sometimes manage to get a few more laughs out of it by making smart editing choices. The action’s pretty decent, nothing particularly mindblowing but I like how heavy and rudimentary the suit feels in this. I always thought it looked to weightless and cartoonish in the later films, this really sells the illusion of a man in an iron suit by comparison. All in all, a very meat-and-potatoes superhero movie, but one that holds up rather well.
6.5/10
A smart flip on the premise of the first film. The set pieces are brilliantly staged and imaginative, you only have to watch them once before they burn themselves onto your memory. There’s also great comedic moments, beautiful camerawork, boundary pushing effects and interesting character moments. My only real complaint is that some of the sound effects and soundtrack in the first third can feel a little dated, even for a film from 1991. There are also some minor moments of weak acting, but in the broader context of James Cameron films, the one liners and emotional resonance are so good here that I barely even notice it.
8.5/10
Damn, it must really suck to have been snapped while being on a plane.
Pros:
Cons:
6/10
I got massive GTA 5 vibes from this. Just look at it: heists, hijacking cars, more heists, criminals being portrayed as eccentric & nuts, planning heists in an abandoned urban building; hard to miss the influence.
It still feels like an Edgar Wright film though. In fact, it very much starts like one of his comedies, but then it takes a complete tonal shift around the halfway mark. It becomes much darker, and it’s suddenly driven by tension instead of jokes.
A lot of movies can’t pull that off, but this one does simply because you can look at this premise as lighthearted, but there’s nothing too ridiculous or stupid for it not to work as a serious thriller either.
The directing and editing are really stylish and inventive, the performances are good, plenty of character development (a lot of which is done visually), excellent music selection, and there are a few twists in the second half I didn’t see coming.
My only complaint is that the romance subplot starts a bit clunky, but it evens out as the film goes along.
8.5/10
Great storytelling and concepts, it may be weird and even inaccesible for some folks, but it’s also very creative, original and bold. The characters are fantastic and well rounded, and they all inhabit a NY that’s captured it in a very unique way. That’s mostly a result of the animation, which grasps the attention immediately because it’s so boundary pushing and atmospheric. It’s just hard to find any weaknesses in it. The comedy is strong and tasteful, it doesn’t drag, the voice acting is excellent and all of the different Spiderman add to the story in their own way. I’m not as much of a fan of some of the bland autocrooning in the soundtrack (that’s probably the biggest thing that might make this seem dated in the future), though I generally still like most of the musical choices made here.
8.5/10
It took me a while to adjust to the directing and editing of this film, but I really appreciate it now.
Great performances, well drawn characters, love the location (immediately seperates itself from Hollywood blockbusters because of the location), the action’s pretty well handled (quick cutting done right) and extremely funny.
The third act of this thing is so good; just about every minor piece of dialogue turns out to be a set up.
There’s also this Agatha Christie element woven into the first two acts that adds some nice subtext. I read the theme of the film as being about the conflict of the values of city life and country life, with the film criticizing the city side as being too stern and driven by rules, and the country community trying to maintain their idyllic facade by upholding these regressive, ridiculous ideas . I think it’s really cool that Edgar Wright found a way to integrate that idea into his big, silly action movie. It elevates the picture as a whole, I think it’s the kind of action film Scorsese would dare to label as ‘cinema’.
Maybe it isn’t objectively the best action comedy ever made, it certainly doesn’t have the biggest, most impressively filmed explosions. However, it’s the most well rounded and rewatchable one if you ask me.
Truly one of those rare films that improves when you get a better grasp of its rhythm.
9.5/10
It’s surprisingly focused considering how much it’s juggling.
I like how it continues Cap and Bucky’s arc, the central conflict about the accords makes sense for the universe (though not so much if you’d apply it to the real world).
Politically it doesn’t add up to much. You could even take most of that stuff out and it wouldn’t change much, it has that fake sheen of this movie being about something deeper.
Nevertheless, this still has some of the best, most tactile action scenes (CGI Spider-man excluded) of the entire franchise, they’re really well shot and edited.
I love how they introduce Black Panther and Spider-man in this (Spider-man’s recruitment doesn’t make all that much sense, but the writing of this film is tight enough, so I’ll let it slide).
But, the villain isn’t a very interesting character, the airport scene feels like it comes from a different movie (much lighter compared to everything else in the film), and Stark’s characterization is a bit too mopey throughout.
Its biggest problem is the directing, which is just really bland and flavourless. For example, there are long stretches in this film that consist of nothing but dialogue, and they’re not that engaging because they’re set in bland, grey locations with uninteresting camerawork. It aims for that grittier, tactical Winter Soldier style, but I don’t think that approach really worked here.
6/10
A very good sequel, it keeps a good balance between the John Hughes-esque stuff and the superhero bombast.
The action is very well handled and choreographed, it never looks tacky or fake despite being CGI heavy ( Spider-man looks a bit cartoony in the final battle, but that’s a nitpick).
The cinematography is actually really good and punchy, there are some fantastic visual moments in it, but it benefits a lot from its locations as well.
The characters are great (very good arcs for the Ned, MJ and Peter; Fury is entertaining as always; Mysterio is an interesting addition and I love how they end up explaining his powers) and the actors all do a good job portraying them.
It’s just fun, the comedy is solid for the most part, Giacchino’s score is once again great (love the Mysterio synth theme), and it’s well paced.
Its biggest problem is that it can get a bit too dumb at times, even given the kind of film that it is.
The drone strike scene on the bus should’ve been cut entirely, MJ and Ned making up excuses why Peter leaves the trip gets a bit too ridiculous, the same goes for Peter’s classmates still not being able to figure out who Spider-man is (besides MJ ).
There’s also a twist regarding Mysterio’s character that you see coming from a mile away (even if you’re unfamiliar with the source material, like me), and yet it’s played as a twist despite the set-up being so obvious.
Overall, I’d say Homecoming is the better film.
This one has higher highs and lower lows.
7.5/10
Deadpool returns with a more ambitious sequel and a director who’s in over his head. Structurally this thing is almost completely broken, right from the start it immediately becomes too convoluted. The prologue takes a risk by stripping away one of the best things about the first film, but it doesn’t follow up on this grief arc and resolves in a way where it doesn’t feel like it reaches a real pay-off. In between it focusses on two different threads. The stuff with Russell and the school principal doesn’t get the proper emotional development it should, with Julian Dennison giving one of the most annoying child performances of the 2010s. On top of that it also wants to rip off The Terminator, which worked for Days of Future Past, but here the motivations of characters quickly become muddled or they’ll just switch sides whenever the script needs them to. By the time we reach the end of act 2 it’s a total mess that reeks of studio interference, rewrites and re-edits. Now that doesn’t need to be the be all and end all for a Deadpool movie. However, the comedy becomes stale due to how many jokes it’s rehashing from the first one, nor does it know when to cut back on Reynolds’ improv. Most of the humour here is quite eye rolling, though there are a few new bits I enjoyed here and there (the ‘pay-off’ to the X-force, calling Cable a racist for no reason). Finally, the aesthetic is a pretty major downgrade from the first film. The cinematography and general production values look cheap (with a lot of the CGI being blatantly unfinished), while the ironic use of shitty needle drops quickly becomes tired. It’s like they didn’t learn their lesson from the third act of Deadpool, because all the action is turned up to the point where it looks ugly and unmemorable. The entire time I kept thinking about how much rather I’d watch an entire film of the action montage that’s shown during the prologue. Instead this favors being a bigger, dumber Hollywood sequel that isn’t really about anything. It tries to sell you on this idea that it’s about family, but that somehow rings even less true than during every Fast and Furious movie. I honestly don’t see why this one gets a pass from most people, to me it’s one of the most overrated comicbook films ever made.
3/10
Actually has one of the better stories of any MCU film, I like the Total Recall/Bourne Identity angle that they’re working in here and there are more themes at play than your average MCU fare. The comedy is also quite solid, with a lot of the humour coming from the 90s references. Most of the characters, as per usual with Infinity Saga MCU, are well defined and interesting. The movie even manages to pull off some genuine emotion when Larson and Lynch are acting together. The main character doesn’t work, however, as Marvel seems to be too afraid of putting her through the ringer in any significant way. The moment that completes her ‘arc’ in the third act doesn’t feel earned at all. Technically the movie sorta gets by, I think it’s generally lacking in style. Visually it looks way too drab and underexposed given its budget, occasionally the synths pop (and other times it uses generic strings) and the needle drops vary between cool and way too on the nose (e.g. the Nirvana and No Doubt ones are super lame). The action is pretty disposable, a lot of it is shot like basic coverage and not very memorable. All in all, it’s not an awful watch, but the movie at its core doesn’t entirely hold my interest.
5/10
Here we have the MI franchise kicking it up another notch. Brad Bird’s cartoonish sensibilities from the Pixar days show up all over this film, and it’s a welcome addition. It’s the funniest installment of the franchise, which is probably a result of the extended role given to Simon Pegg. Jeremy Renner and Paula Patton are both given a lot of moments to shine as well. It’s also the moment where Mission Impossible truly became the quality popcorn franchise it’s known as today. No longer does it care about incorporating popular trends, instead it looks back to classic movies for inspiration. The set pieces are incredible, with the sequence in Dubai being the very clear highlight of the film. It knows how to build this sense of constantly escalating tension, and it uses every trick in the book to achieve that effect. Gadgets malfunction, new obstacles are constantly thrown at our protagonist, things rarely go as planned, etc. The camerawork is sleek & polished, Michael Giacchino’s score is excellent, the acting from the entire cast is solid, it’s clever and just the right amount of nutty. As for negatives, it kinda suffers from having a bland, unmemorable villain. Moreover, I think it would’ve been better if the story was structured in a way where it ends with the Dubai sequence. The section in India isn’t bad, but it feels like a comedown after the perfection that is the second act of this movie.
8/10
A very nice bounce back after MI2, Abrams’ energetic direction breathes some new life into the franchise. The smart choices made by the script are also where Mission Impossible truly found its identity. It’s a little tropey, but it outsmarts a lot of spy content from around that time period. For example, I love how the film acknowledges that the Rabbit’s foot is just an unimportant plot device, a macguffin. The introduction of Ethan’s personal life was another great choice, it’s that little character arc that seperates him from other action movie protagonists. Philip Seymour Hoffman gives a tremendous performance, he’s not even in it a lot and it’s a highly memorable villain. Simon Pegg is a great addition (though underused), and Laurence Fishburne is just here to deliver some weird lines. The set piece in Rome is a lot of fun to watch and very tense (still love the bathroom scene), so is the stuff in Shanghai to a slightly lesser extent (that extended running shot!). I’m not a fan of the Berlin sequence, however. It’s easily the most conventional set-up, it does little for the story and there’s some messy directing in it. That brings me to the biggest problem with the film, which is the presentation. I don’t have much of a problem with Abrams’ use of lens flares or shaky cam, but he overuses close-ups here. Much of the action would look better if he cut to a wide shot more often. That being said: I still like the distinct lighting and colour palette.
6.5/10
Probably Villeneuve’s most conventional film, but still pretty good. There’s not a lot of experimentation going on with this one, but the score and god tier cinematography still elevate this far beyond your average thriller. Emily Blunt’s pretty great in it, but it’s Benicio del Toro who ends up stealing the movie. It’s also pretty well written; the characters are well defined and it has some good twists. It’s just lacking a little bit of something else to make it truly special. Maybe it could’ve used a bit more action, or challenging storytelling/subtext. Nevertheless, it’s still quite a feat for a director to have this as his most accesible film, as it doesn’t feel watered down in any significant way.
7.5/10
Denis Villeneuve is the man!
There’s only one word that came into my mind after watching it: finally.
Finally, a blockbuster that isn’t afraid to be primarily driven by drama and tension, and doesn’t undercut its own tone by throwing in a joke every 30 seconds.
Finally, a blockbuster that puts actual effort in its cinematography, and doesn’t have a bland or calculated colour palette.
Finally, a blockbuster with a story that has actual substance and themes, and doesn’t rely on intertextual references or nostalgia to create a fake sheen of depth.
Finally, a blockbuster that doesn’t pander to China by having big, loud and overblown action sequences, but relies on practical and grounded spectacle instead (it has big sand worms, you really don’t need to throw anything at the screen besides that).
Finally, a blockbuster that actually feels big, because it isn’t primarily shot in close ups, or on a sound stage.
And of course: finally, a blockbuster that isn’t a fucking prequel, sequel, or connected to an already established IP somehow.
(Yeah, I know Tenet did those things as well, but I couldn’t get into that because the characters were so flat and uninteresting).
This just checks all the boxes. An engaging story with subtext, very well set up characters, great acting (like James Gunn, Villeneuve's great at accentuating the strengths of limited actors like Dave Bautista and Jason Momoa), spectecular visuals and art design (desaturated but not in an ugly washed out way), pacing (slow but it never drags), directing, one of Hans Zimmer’s best scores: it’s all here.
I only have one real criticism: there’s too much exposition, especially in the first half.
It can occasionally hold your hand by referencing things that have already been established previously, and some scenes of characters explaining stuff to each other could’ve been conveyed more visually.
Other than that, it’s easily one of the best films of the year.
I’ve seen some people critiquing it for being incomplete, which is true, but this isn’t just a set up for a future film.
It feels like a whole meal, there are pay offs in this, and the characters progress (even if, yes, their arcs are still incomplete).
8.5/10
What do you call a movie in which fantastic beasts have 15 minutes of screentime, and a character named Grindelwald commits 1 or 2 crimes? Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald? That’d be weird, right?
Pros:
- JK’s imagination. Even when a movie messes up as much as this one does, it’s still one of the most charming and imaginative universes put to screen.
- Pretty well directed with great performances
- Newt (gets more development here) and Jacob
- Queenie’s storyline (if you pay close attention, I think it all adds up)
- The beasts, who are reduced to tools for Newt here, are a fun and creative addition
- The climax, Grindelwald’s speech and motivation
- Visuals, score and CGI (this was especially improved after the first film)
- Action scenes (opening scene and bookstairs chase)
Cons:
- Incredibly incoherent (they really should’ve scrapped a lot of characters and their storylines, in my opinion: Leta, Nagini, the black wizard, and even Dumbledore, as they don’t contribute a lot to this particular story).
—> Also, a lot of scenes are pointless (like the underwater creature)
- Two characters are still incredibly annoying (in my opinion those are Credence and Tina), although I’m not sure it’s the writing or acting that makes me hate them so much
- The ending feels like bad fan fiction; good twists should have subtle hints, JK should know this above anyone else
- Too much exposition
- A few scenes are underlit, or too dark
- Some continuity errors (and no, I’m not just talking about the one that has already been reported everywhere)
- The CGI on those cat creatures wasn’t that great
4/10
Nothing to say really besides: that’s how you do it!
This has without a doubt the most impressive stunts of the franchise, and it really knows how to use its characters and challenge them. There’s a lot of propulsive energy, lush cinematography and great editing. Lorne Balfe does a great Hans Zimmer impression, and Chris McQuarrie does a great Chris Nolan impression. Alright maybe I’m oversimplifying there, because I have to commend McQuarrie for doing another stylistic reinvention of the franchise, the cinematography and general feel aren’t just that of Rogue Nation 2.0. I’m not even sure if the constant evolution of this franchise comes from a place of creative ambition or commercial opportunity, but at least it keeps the films fresh. Some of its core elements will always remain the same, however. For example, the plot’s once again just a vehicle for all the juicy stuff. You could call it out for being generic or basic, but they find so much creativity and fun in these tropes that it becomes very entertaining (intrigue, the mask sequences, the craziness and constantly rising intensity). Sure, there’s a very predictable twist at the end of the second act, but more often than not, it managed to surprise me. Henry Cavill is a great new addition, bringing back Rebecca Ferguson was the best choice they could’ve made, and Pegg & Rhames remain the reliable anchors that add some heart & humour. It’s all exceptional stuff, it could very well go down as the best action franchise in history if the next films stick the landing.
9/10
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
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
Great movie, but what exactly are you trying to say, Peele?
How do I make sense of the weirdness in your film?
Are you trying to say that those who unite to build a wall, those who use their scizzors to divide other people in half, can’t see the light in the ‘US’?
Is the twist meant to indicate that we can’t be sure who’s on which side?
In other words: is this a big political metaphor, a critique against republicans?
Then again, you can also find themes about capitalism and class here, it’s so ambiguous and broad that it’s not being very precise on a subtextual level. Not that a movie has to, but this is a little too broad for my taste.
Still, great craftsmanship, really well acted, memorable, scary, funny, it’s very good.
The whole 300 million people are living underground reveal might be a little too much of a leap, I don’t think the movie was that fantastical up until that point (a similar problem that I have with Get Out, where the brain replacement twist kinda feels a little too out there compared to the movie preceding it).
7.5/10
Probably the best Thor, but still massively overrated.
5/10
There's a part of me that wants to like this movie more than I do.
Spiderman 2 is a film that improves on its predecessor in nearly every way, which is good, since that fist film has its fair share of flaws.
Sam Raimi's direction is much tighter, resulting in a film with better pacing. Moreover, this film has some praiseworthy, iconic action set pieces (e.g. the train scene and the bank robbery) that are still remembered nowadays.
As for the acting, I always thought that Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst were pretty bland in the first one, and that their chemistry doesn't work. That still remains the same here. On the other hand, J.K. Simmons and Alfred Molina are amazing, and both their characters have some awesome moments that have been used as memes ever since (once again: iconic is the right label).
The biggest problem of this entire trilogy is still the tone. I am fine with a good amount of cheese, as long as it isn't dumb or non-sensical. Moments like these are scattered throughout the film, and are incredibly bothersome. When Spider-man yelled "I'm back" while jumping from one rooftop to another without having his powers, and as a result fell down, I literally shook my head. Furthermore, I feel like there needed to be a clearer definition of the vulnerability of the hero, as he is smacked by various deadly objects without being damaged.
What ultimately saves this film are the emotional moments. This film goes deeper with its characters, and has some good emotional beats, which is makes it stand out in the 'bigger is better' field of sequels. It's not the perfect film some make it out to be (and I think I would've been kinder to it if I saw it when it came out), but it's one of those rare sequels that's actually better than the first.
5.5/10
Fantastic, it’s one of the very few superhero/blockbuster films that succesfully elevates itself beyond just entertainment as a result of its challenging themes about terrorism, anarchy and counterterrorism.
Right of the start, it fixes the two main problems of Batman Begins. The action is much more well choreographed, shot and edited, and the camerawork in the dialogue scenes is a lot more dynamic.
In fact, the directorial approach is very different in general. It’s a lot more serious, and it feels more like a crime thriller than an action/adventure film, taking some obvious influence from films like Heat. I love how it builds tension through the intercutting montages that are used throughout the film, accompanied by that nasty Hans Zimmer score.
The characters are all fantastic once again, including the new characters.
Every actor nails their part, Heath Ledger in particular, but I also think that this film belongs in part to Aaron Eckhart and Gary Oldman, who both deliver career best performances as well.
As for the story, I think that its pretty well plotted and balanced in general. The character arcs are unpredictable and very satisfying, and there are plenty of memorable scenes throughout (interrogation, opening scene, Joker introduction, etc.). It’s logic can be a little too thin in places, however. The Coleman Reese subplot feels like a gigantic loose end, Dent killing Maroni’s driver while being in the car himself is a little too ‘movie-ish’ for a film this self-serious, the same goes for Joker blowing up the police station while being at the police station himself. That’s really the only flaw I can find in it, besides that it’s a masterclass in acting, directing, pacing, action, music, sound and cinematography.
9/10
A brilliant stripped down thriller filled with memorable characters, amazing performances and scenes that manage to shock and amuse at the same time. I like how Tarantino challenges himself by leaving a lot of stuff to the imagination. It’d be easy to hook the audience by showing the heist, and most filmmakers would probably open their film with that, but Quentin doesn’t do things the easy way. It’s so exciting to see the birth of this style of filmmaking, and I think it still holds up perfectly. The camerawork is expressive and interesting, the postmodern riffing in the dialogue is actually funny and fresh, the soundtrack is cool, its out of chronological order storytelling choices keep the film engaging and the characters are brewing with their own distinct personality. It’s a movie that reminded audiences that B-movies can be more than simple entertainment for the masses. It’s so creative that it doesn’t even need to rely on big, conceptual stuff in the way that the Coen brothers did with their films around the same time. Moreover, it paved the way for indie filmmaking becoming a dominant cultural force during the 90s. It took a few times to finally click with me, but once you recognize its brilliance it’s hard to deny it’s one of Quentin’s best.
9/10
Very nutty, yet extremely entertaining.
It’s sometimes on the border of becoming schlock, but it never passed that threshold for me.
However, make no mistake about it: this is clearly meant to be a pulpy movie, it’s not about depth.
There are themes in it about media perception and some dark satire about marriage, but in the end it’s not very profound about either of those things. I’m fine with that, because the twists are so good. It’s such a tightly written, unpredictable plot that includes some hilarious, dark dialogue. Rosamund Pike is amazing, she’s absolutely perfect for this role, and I love her trashy narrator voice. Ben Affleck is also quite good, but his part isn’t as flashy.
Filmmaking’s flawless, the score is perfect and there isn’t a single moment where this movie drags for me.
I wasn’t a fan of the ending at first, but it’s grown on me with subsequent viewings. When you think about the further implications of what happens, it’s super messed up and therefore the perfect conclusion to this story.
9/10
Easily the most well directed and well shot Marvel movie.
The art design for this movie is truly excellent as well, combining 60’s psychedelia with 80’s cheese.
I really like the character arcs (though Rocket’s arc feels a bit like a repeat of the first film) and the emotional beats it hits, Yondu being the clear standout.
James Gunn nails the soundtrack again, though his comedy isn’t really my style, there are some really cringy moments in the first hour specifically.
The plot and the villain are kinda serviceable, they don’t really stand out in any way.
I could’ve done without the ravagers subplot for example, it grinds the film to a halt every time it cuts back to that stuff.
Some of the overacting is also kinda bad. Karen Gillan hadn’t quite found her footing as Nebula yet, while Sean Gunn and Chris Sullivan are a bit too silly.
Ultimately, this thing is saved by the visuals, soundtrack, action, main cast and its emotional heart, because it’s nowhere near as tight as the first one.
5.5/10
