If you've ever felt like watching a movie that is the definition of playing it safe, you should definitely give the fifth installment of the Indiana Jones franchise a chance. There really isn't a single risk taken here, which leads to a film that is shockingly boring for long stretches. Tension or even a sense of adventure hardly ever arise in the 2.5 hours of runtime. And even the finale disappointed me, similarly to the miserable fourth part.
In spite of that, "Dial of Destiny" actually gets off to a halfway promising start. If you can overlook the fact that the deaging technology is still not truly ready, then the opening sequence during World War II is really fun. Unfortunately, it's also the last time the film is genuinely good. James Mangold is by all means a capable director, but here he fails to convey any personal style at all. The plot is pretty basic, with pretty much every twist and turn being predictable until the absurd finale.
The cast also, regrettably, didn't entirely work for me. Harrison Ford is still good, but age has definitely caught up with him. Mads Mikkelsen isn't bad as the villain either, and there are a few nice cameos as well. However, I was disappointed by Phoebe Waller-Bridge, whose character Helena is terribly written and who seemed like a miscast to me. In my opinion, she's no better than Shia LaBeouf in the fourth movie. And I don't even want to mention anything about Ethann Isidore, who plays a poor man's Short Round.
It all certainly sounds a bit more negative than it actually is. Ultimately, the film has hardly any serious lows, but it also has pretty much no satisfying high points. It's all pretty mediocre. At most, the occasional fan service moment managed to elicit a chuckle from me. But for a good film, they should have taken some risks, at least at some points. As it is, I can't really recommend "Dial of Destiny".
Yeah, this movie was fun. This is the best way to describe the positives. Regardless of how you feel about Ezra Miller as an actual person, his portrayal of Barry is very likable and he killed it by playing two of them. And the humor is quite good. I (and a bunch of others in the theatre) laughed a good amount of times, it was charming. That also applies to action which is well-shot and creative.
I am very much looking forward to Andy making the Batman movie if the rumors are true. His camerawork is nothing but amazing, I loved it. Really excited for the action Gunn and Andy can bring to the DCU. The CGI is also most of the time a clear non-issue unless you pay extra attention to it. The only time where I think it becomes distracting and uncanny is the cameos, but that takes place in the speed force so I can live with Andy’s argument here. However, uncanny cameos don't come close to ruining this movie as many people pretend it, although I'm sure none of them actually watched the movie. So let me state it clearly: I think the Flash is well-shot, looks a few times bad, but most of the time very good. There are a lot of scenes where color and lighting are very well-utilized. Personally, I have some gripes with the aesthetic of the speed force though, but maybe we can improve it in the DCU. The DCU is the perfect opportunity to overhaul the aesthetic and make something better.
If there is one thing I think could've been better, it is definitely the emotional gravitas. I think the script is solid, but there is just too much content to expand on the theme properly, but Barry's characterization also feels rushed. I think previous movies could've established that better, and this movie instead could have expanded more on Keaton's Batman and also Supergirl, because they also have regrets and scars from the past. Supergirl generally is criminally underutilized in this movie. This movie felt super short, to be honest. I guess I was well entertained because it didn't feel like I sat in there for 2,5 hours and there is so much they could've expanded on. Also, I liked the Andy cameo.
So yeah, overall, fun and charming experience, however, the movie ultimately feels rushed. Too much content crammed into one movie. The general theme of regrets and moving on is very good, but the movie didn't live up to its potential. In a DCU which has proper build-up between different movies and series, I think Andy can make something truly magical.
I gave The Avatar 2 a rating of 8 out of 10. The cinematography is incredible and really blew me away. However, the plot is a bit more of the same and doesn't have many surprises.
I can confidently say that the sequel is better than the original, although it's been some time since I saw the first movie so it might be difficult to make a precise comparison.
Overall, I recommend seeing The Avatar 2 in the cinema. If it weren't for the fact of seeing it in the cinema, I probably wouldn't watch it until many years from now when the third movie comes out. However, the cinematic experience is worth it and I believe the movie will surprise you.
One of the strongest points of the movie is definitely the visual creativity. The imagery is simply stunning and the special effects technology is top-notch. The attention to detail is incredible and I was really impressed with the quality of the animation.
One thing I really appreciated about the movie was the way it explored themes of environmentalism and the impact of humans on the natural world. The message was subtle but powerful and it was nice to see a blockbuster movie tackle such important issues.
However, one thing that I felt was missing was more character development between the first and second movies. While the first movie gave us a deeper understanding of the characters and their motivations, the second movie seemed to focus more on action and visual scenes rather than character development.
I hope that in the third movie there will be more time to explore the personalities and goals of the characters, as I believe this would make the story more engaging and meaningful. While The Avatar 2 is a fun movie to watch, I was a little disappointed with the lack of depth in the characters.
However, while I enjoyed the cast and the cinematography, I felt that the plot could have been a bit more original. Some of the plot twists were a bit predictable and I felt that some of the supporting characters could have been better developed.
Overall, I think The Avatar 2 is a fun and visually spectacular movie, but it could have had a bit more depth.
-- DISCLAIMER: THIS BELOW IS ENTIRELY MY PERSONAL OPINION, YOU MIGHT NOT AGREE WITH IT --
So "The Defenders" is out, or how I like to call them "Heroes for Hire" (Whatever happened to that anyways?)
The Defenders, is the endpoint of each and every single one of the stories we've seen so far in the Netflix MCU.
It puts closure on all of the characters, not indefinite, but closure of what we've seen of them so far.
Because of this, I was not going in with high expectations, and thankfully in doing so, I didn't leave entirely disappointed.
Here's the catch tho,
I believe we can all agree that - this - is Marvel trying a more "serious", a more "adult" way for their MCU.
We can all agree that we cannot expect a Netflix series on Daredevil, JJ or even the others to be action-packed, mindless punching, d!ck hard-straightfoward-nofucksgiven-whatdoesthepoliceevendoanyways as much as we're accustomed to see on the big screen with The Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy.
But let me tell you this:
There is a point - in time - where a man (or a woman) has this "we're the police let us do our job" - "you gonna end up in jail" - "You shouldn't do this, that" kind of bullshit talk so far up his butt, that it is impossible not to hate it.
The extent of milking out minutes and minutes, adding absolutely nothing valuable to the story is REALLY starting to annoy me very much. It was very light in Daredevil, it started showing in Jessica Jones and from Luke Cage it really went downhill. There's a whole new way of talking around, and around, and around pointlessly in these last shows that is really tiresome.
I'm talking about the side characters pointing out the same things, over and over and over and over, one time after one time after one time after one time.
"We are the police we can help you"
"Let us help you, you can't do it alone"
"You're gonna get in trouble"
"You're gonna go to jail"
Listen, screenwriters: shut the fuck up! They gonna do whatever the fuck they want anyways. We know it, you know it. And it showed.
I believe we can all agree (or at least try to) that Marvel won't ever (hopefully not) come up with something so profound, so intense, so serious (Maybe like we've partially witnessed with Logan) because they are too focussed on cliches, too focussed on this bullshit way of having to show how rebelious their characters are, and never focussed on the actual emotions and portraying them or conveying them to the people. I don't necessarily believe they should, that they are trying to do this, but at least... cut the bullshit a little, huh?
And I'm not adding more to that statement.
Alright, since that's out of my system, let's talk everything else.
The baseline of the show and the story aren't that bad. I like that finally we get to see the Hand entirely, for what they are and who they are without the mist of bullshit that we ingested the past shows. The action "side" of "things" isn't quite as horrible as we witnessed in Iron Fist, so that's a huge pro.
The fighting coreographies weren't really that stale, let's be honest: who doesn't enjoy watching JJ or Luke simply lifting goons, or watching Daredevil jump around and that fucking metal batoon hit sound, ohhh so good...
But then... here comes THE LIVING WEAPON. HURRAAAY!
No. Definitely no hurrays for him.
Let me tell you this, chaps, and I won't put spoiler marks on this part because there's nothing new to this:
Danny Rand - did not - evolve from his standalone show, his character depth and importance is just words in the wind, his appeal is just as strong as watching a golden retriever with his face out the car window and his dribble splattered all over.
He's A FUCKING NOOB, and yes, I did scream that out loud, a few times. (Same goes for his girlfriend).
Someone needs to explain to me why Danny got a scar on his chest tattoo in the first episode and then it disappears for the rest of the season.
Plus, someone needs to explain to me if elektra can punch JJ and Luke so hard that it makes them shake a little bit, why doesn't she destroy Daredevil or Iron Fist with the same punch? How can they sustain a damage that can make Luke Cage feel pain?
And that's really most of what's wrong with this show.
Believe me tho, once you see it, you'll understand why I can get so upset.
What more could be said?
Music was good, I enojyed the few pieces, they were well placed.
The colors are always fucking cold and stale, the light almost always dark.
Sigourney Weaver is a great actress portraying a terrible, empty character, but ehhh, whatever.
It is definitely worth watching if you liked Daredevil and Jessica Jones. I could bare Luke Cage more here, he was kind of different, in a good way.
You know what's missing from this show?
A FUCKING GOOD ASS VILLAIN. BRING ME FUCKING KINGPIN.
Jesus christ I fucking hate Danny Rand and his stupid fisting duracell fetish.
For me, the main question I wanted to know going in was, "Is this going to be better than Kingdom of the Crystal Skull".
Happy to report that, yes it's vastly superior in almost every area to Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
But with that out of the way, does it compete/equal the originals, to which the answer for me was no.
But it had its moments and felt way more in line with "an Indiana Jones" movie than Crystal Skull and had it's share of flaws. I still think Hollywood should use younger actors or makeup/prosthetics instead of "de-aging CGI" as it continues to look horrible IMO, or at least use it the same way the used emerging CGI in the late 90's early 00's by keeping it in shadow/not the focus point.
The cast, both legacy and new are solid across the board, soundtrack and score work well, plot was a big fun dumb adventure that actually felt like following the breadcrumbs in a good way.
Not at all a bad film, but one that probably won't make my top 10 of the year, but unlike Crystal Skull this probably also won't make my worst 10 of the year either.
This movie's opening few minutes were the best it had to offer. It really pulled me in, but unfortunately, by about the half way point, I'd gotten tired of hearing the cast of misfits, troublemakers and convicts talk about themselves. There weren't enough of the actual predators around to keep things interesting.
Adrien Brody doesn't work very well here. Neither does Alice Braga. They're decent enough actors but they just seemed out of place in this violent, Action/Sci-Fi flick.
There were a number of twists and turns here and they were surprising at times, but frankly, weren't all that interesting. I won't write about them as I don't want to spoil anything, even though they only affected me slightly.
"Predators" looks pretty good. I liked the alien landscapes but at times the fight scenes seemed confined to what must have been a rather small set. It felt a bit like Kirk fighting Kruge on the Genesis planet (a monumentally corny scuffle that I still laugh at).
This is the weakest of the "Predator" movies. The original is a total classic while "Predator 2" is a really fun B-Movie romp. I'm not counting any of the "Alien Vs. Predator" movies. They don't exist in the same Humans Vs. Predators domain to me.
One of the best parts about Highlander is how despite itself, it somehow manages to work. The plot has inconsistencies all over the place, the accents are terrible and the cast seem split on whether to take it all seriously or ham it up. But that is part of its charm in many ways. The filmmakers wisely keep much of core mythology vague, doling out key elements that develop the central character, whilst ensuring the larger backstory remains mysterious. Its a lesson the sequels failed to heed. It’s also clear the filmmakers expected no future franchise with the film providing a satisfying closure for the characters and the themes explored. Indeed this focus on the central character is what makes the film work so well, with the location and historical setting lending the film an epic quality that would otherwise be absent and the core idea that immortality is as much a curse as a gift brought to the fore. For all his difficulties with the accent, Lambert takes the character seriously and whilst he endlessly broods in the present, its the exploration of his past that works to make the audience care and relate to his isolation. Both Sean Connery and Clancy Brown ensure the audience doesn’t take it all too seriously and provide some much needed humour and fun. It helps that the film also has a killer soundtrack from Queen.
It's perhaps the weakest of all Star Trek shows of that era. It didn't age well. It can't be remastered in HD (which is sad, 'cause production was probably more expensive than TNG) and the virtual absence of coherent story arcs doesn't meet the new standards of the streaming era. Instead, Voyager has this predictable pattern of recurring topics: one "Kim the Lover episode", one "let's get our hopes up, we're about to get home", "the silly holo novel" episode, the "holo character becomes sentient and endangers the crew" episode and so forth. This pattern becomes very dull very quickly. It's perhaps an unfair thing to say because that's how 2000's TV show were structured (for a good reason) but this prevents the show from being binge-watchable in the modern streaming era (it's a "reverse DS9" so to speak: DS9 never worked within the constraints of programmed TV schedules but gained popularity in the era of streaming). They never capitalized on the fact that they had a natural, clear story arch: a long journey back home. It's almost a perfect premise. But too often you feel that the show runners never wrote down a coherent vision and overarching story that is told throughout all seven seasons. The overall show is worse than many of its episodes. Ideally, it should be the other way 'round. But it's still classic Star Trek and I'd prefer to watch some selected episodes over Discovery or Picard every time.
Let's not talk about the first three seasons. They are weak. That's all I have to say 'bout them, but every new Trek show struggled in the beginning (not as badly as Voyager though). Seasons 4 to 7 are solid. 6th season maybe the best. Seven saves the show. She and the Doctor are responsible for the best moments in this show. All other main characters are kind of dull. Some have potential (Janeway, Tuvok, Kes, B'Elanna) but the writers never really knew how to tell their stories. Some characters are annoying most of the time: man-child Paris (originally some sort of renegade character), useless Mr. Vision Quest and the clown loitering in the mess hall. Worst character is maybe Kim: I couldn't care less whether he's there or not. He's just a dull guy and letting him appear in various romantic stories makes it all worse.. Most characters never show any kind of character development. They always seem to forget what has happened to them the previous week. Only exceptions are the Doctor and Seven (and perhaps Naomi) who exceed expectations and grow with every scene. Seven is remarkable. What probably was a desperate (and condemnable) attempt to infuse some one-dimesnional t&a tailored to nerds into the show, grew into one of the most complex, most funny, most interesting characters in Star Trek ever (before they murdered her in Picard) Plus, Voyager is very bad in telling romantic stories. They never got "Kim, the Lover" right, they tried various other romantic relationships (Paris/Kes, Neelix/Kes [that was outright disturbing], Janeway/Chakotay) but nothing worked. And the relationship they ultimately came up with (Paris and Torres) never felt credible, logical, emotional or romantic. Even worse, I often don't feel a basic chemistry between most members of the main cast. (Like the characters, the ship is invariable too. It virtually never shows permanent signs of degradation.)
On paper, Voyager was a good idea: a whole new and exciting quadrant to explore. A motley crew with lots of conflict potential (Marquis vs. Starfleet): An epic journey through hostile space with an uncertain outcome offered all the potential to bond with the characters by watching them working as a team and overcome enormous obstacles. A very intimate setting: the small crew was trapped on that ship and this offered the chance to show people socializing when off-duty. They never really capitalized on this setting. Instead they were limited by it: Star Trek was great when they told about the interconnected alliances, diplomacy, politics and trade. A utopia we created around Earth. Individual characters and ships were always embedded into the fleet and an interplanetary network. Every ship always represented this system and mankind.. Voyager is so distant from Earth, they often forget about the whole philosophy behind Starfleet. Writers could have used this in their favor though: the crew could have become more desperate, cornered, more ruthless but the writers were not willing to explore this idea (they only used the U.S.S. Equinox as a proxy to explore this dark possibility). Plus, the Alpha and Beta Quadrant (and thanks to DS9 even the Gamma Quadrant) offered this rich lore: Dozens of well-established species and unique empires. Voyager faced the monumental task to create all of this on their own... and they failed. All species and civilizations they invented were either uninteresting or they never invested enough time to explain how powerful/threatening they really are, what role their civilization/empire really play in the Quadrant and how complex their culture really is. They are all just one-dimensional "monsters of the week". Generic foes you know very little of. That's why they are so dull. When that became clear, writers resorted to the Borg as Voyager's main foe and isolated guest appearances of traditional characters (Barclay, Deanna, Ferengi, Zimmerman, Q, Klingons and Romulans). Don't get me wrong, the borgification of Voyager was perhaps a wise decision, given how lackluster every other race in the quadrant was, but the show also became almost too Borg-ish. Not only that: as if there were no other fascinating aspects of the Borg, most stories (just like Seven's story) were focused on the possibility of individuality within the hive. In turn, this demystified the Borg and in the end they were a minor nuisance necessary to get home. It's almost like they "sacrificed" the Borg in order to limp to season 7 and avoid early cancellation of the show.
Seeing it just after, I can't help comparing it with Iron Fist.
Iron Fist was cheap but fun. Can't say any effort was put in any particular aspect. Story, acting, visuals, nothing stands out, nothing is really good. Nobody will praise it for its artistic or intrinsic quality. Yet it's fun and the watching pass by pretty fast.
On the other hand, Luke Cage is shit in very expensive make up. A lot of work has been put into it. Clearly. And yet watching it "please god let it end" is what goes through your mind most of the time.
The visual, the atmosphere, the soundtrack, you can really see and feel the effort to create something here. There is a real style and identity. Not really one I particularly enjoyed (jazzy's not my sound, yellow's not my color), but can't help but have respect for that.
However it was a little, I don't know, out of place ? It actually did not fit with the show.
For the biggest part, the Cottonmouth arc, it is a neighbourhood gangster story. Not a Luke Cage story or even a Marvel story. It is the most cliché gangster story you can think of, everything is a total cliché. The setup, the plot, the characters.
:arrow_right: The local gangster. He hides behind a sophisticated facade, but make him angry and he can't control his rage and beat people up.
:arrow_right: The dirty politician that hides her criminal dealings behind a neighbourhood spirit front.
:arrow_right: The OG gangster that turned his life around and tries to keep the kids off the street
:arrow_right: One of said kids, that became a cop
:arrow_right: Her partner, who is dirty
Every single one of them is more cliché than the other, to a point that is barely believable. And every one of their interaction follows the exact schema you expect in a story you already saw 20 times. Luke Cage is barely an element in the story, replace him by whatever cliché protagonist you'd get in that story, guy coming back to see his young days neighbourhood has changed, maybe the father looking for vengeance for his daughter, and you get the exact same story.
Again not saying it's badly done, it's mostly good or even top level performance for Mahershala Ali. He's really good. BUT. He is not on the Luke Cage set. He's playing in his own unrelated gangsta movie. And despite the performance, everything is so cliché and expected that it's rapidly boring as fuck.
On the other side of actor's performance spectrum is Mike Colter. He looks the part. He has a great back to stop bullets. And that's it. Anything that requires a little bit of acting, he sucks. It can mostly pass as being a stoic guy, so it's actually not an issue most of the time. But there are a few times where it is painful.
Meeting one of his idol in a shop ? Would have been a fun cameo scene, but can't sell it.
His whole life turned upside down when he learns that Stryker is his brother or that Reva has been working on the experiments all along ? Barely registers.
The flirting, first with Misty then Claire ? Makes for a passable awkward one night stand flirting, but who could ever buy that as romance ?
And what's worse ? The second arc is actually a real Luke Cage story instead of a copy paste gangsta movie, and boy does it turn bad as soon as they don't copy an existing story.
Diamondback might be one of the worst villain ever.50% corny lines, 50% daddy issues. He's pretty pathetic and uninteresting, certainly a downgrade from Cottonmouth,while not being that much of an upgrade in a fight against Luke.
The problem with Luke is that he has three moves and that's it. Just grab a guy and throw it. Turn his back to stop bullets. And make a ball out of guns. So you hit a limitation in action scenes pretty quick. He seems to have trained in boxing as a kid. You definitely don't see that in his fighting technique. Combined with that the difficulty of finding an antagonist that can actually hurt him.
You get three choices.
1⃣: something more fantastic than these Netflix shows allow.
2⃣: make him fight while full of kryptonite shrapnels. It's done, this plotline is passable but still full of holes
3⃣: give the baddie a supersuit. Done also, it's pathetic. I mean, the final fight needs sitcom like crowd shouts to be watchable
On the good points ?
Claire. She's not as fun as in Iron FIst, and totally sucks, by no fault of her own, as a love interest, but still.
Shades. By far the best character that appears to be a part of this show (unlike Cottonmouth).I liked almost
every single one of his interventions (not the prison part, but that actually shows the character's growth. Great that he stays for season two, certainly more interesting than Mariah. Though we're still missing someone to fight Luke.. I'm still not sure if I genuinely enjoyed this character or if it was the lack of competition that made him shine.
Wu Tang's Method Man's "Bulletproof love" rap is the best moment of the season. But here I know that it's by lack of competition.
This takes Nolan's Batman style to the next level, I love the cinematography and how they capture the grit of Hell's Kitchen in this show, especially during the scenes that take place at night.
I'm also seeing a lot of influence from Breaking Bad in how they handle Fisk's crime organization.
Whenever there's action on the screen, it's absolutely phenomenal. The choreography and camerawork easily beat every other tv show, and most films as well.
The characters are all very strong and interesting (Foggy was a bit hit and miss for me in the early episodes), and Charlie Cox and Vincent D'Onofrio give career best performances.
What D'Onofrio's doing is especially bold: every scene he's in he's about to cross the line of going into campy territory, but he never does, and it's amazing to watch.
The plot is also very strong: you could take the superhero aspect out of this show and you'll still be left with a very decent legal drama. It's constructed in a very smart way: you essentially have the main characters investigating a crime syndicate, and every episode they find a new character that's a little higher up in the organization, until they eventually get to the final boss. It's a great format for serialized storytelling, and we've also seen it work before in the earlier seasons of Arrow.
Judging it as a whole, it does feel a little stretched out though.
It loses a bit of steam and focus in the middle, often going into side stories that aren't all that important for the main plot, or giving the main characters more development.
This would've probably been perfect if it was just 10 episodes, which would've made the pacing a little tighter and given each episode a little more action.
8/10
Such an amazing season of television. The cinematography was impeccable, I loved the fighting choreography and the visual storytelling which defined this show, particularly Fisk and the white wall, and Matt and boxing. The storytelling was great two, I loved watching Matt, Nelson and Karen edge closer and closer to unraveling the criminal doings of Wilson Fisk, as the learned more about more about the crime syndicates of Hell's Kitchen. The characters, besides Karen, were amazing too. I loved watching Matt/Daredevil's inner-struggle about the kind of man he is and will become as he continues on this path of vigilantism. And man, Wilson Fisk was one terrifying villain throughout the show, a calm composed man who has full control over everything and everyone, yet will become emotional and erratic over the people he loves, particularly his lover Vanessa. And man did the actors sell their performances, I loved seeing Vincent De'Onofrio act out this larger than life villain, and Charlie Cox perform Matt Murdock and Daredevil. And man, did I love the ideological and physical battles between the two, with both men wanting to rebuild Hell's Kitchen into a new city, and rid it of everything that's corrupt. And man, the setting felt for gritty and real, like it really was apart of New York City, and I really felt like the main cast was shaped by their upbringing in said environment.
The movie is visually stunning, and the world-building is incredible, but the plot is plain at best. Some plot points that should have been epic end up feeling cliché and predictable. The stop-aging serum is too on your face to resonate as a pertinent social commentary. We expect the whale hunter to his left arm almost as soon as he appears on screen, but that no longer feels poetic when it actually happens. And, the rejection of the outcasts is as standard as it could be.
However, my biggest issue with the movie is the characters. Most of them are unlikable, flat, and static. The emo girl who feels like an amalgamation of every teen character Winona Ryder has done before. The golden boy with no other personality trait. The middle child feels like he is disappointing everyone. The little sister serves as a comedy relief. And the wife who sacrifices what she knows to support her husband. It plays out like a collection of stock characters got released on Pandora. Diminishing all the momentum created by the world-building and the cinematography.
Pandora, for a community that is all about balance and spirituality, they have a very rigid social structure. At the begging of the movie, Zoe Saldaña's character begs her husband to stay home and fight. But he convinces her to run away instead... Three hours later, she loses her son and community and has been living as a refugee. It's then that Sam Worthington's character says he now knows better and they should stay and fight. It feels misogynistic and makes the plot meaningless as we finish where we started. But now he got the idea of defending themselves all by himself, not from a woman. The worst part may be how little the Sully clan cares about Spider. A human that loves the Na'vi and sees them as family. He is loyal to them under extreme circumstances. Yet, none of the Sully spends a second of their time thinking about him. He has every reason to betray them, yet he never does.
Despise the flaws, the movie is a visually immersive adventure that makes Pandora feel alive and very real. Definitely worth the trip to the movie theater.
For any who have pondered what it would look like in our post-Lord of the Rings, superhero blockbuster era if somebody tried making The Princess Bride, Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves is your answer. It's an ambitious swing that results in a solid hit, if not a classic. And while it falls short of being a viable launching pad for a new universe of IP-based media content, it is an all-around fun watch that will entertain and perhaps even delight you, so long as you don't stare too hard at some of the frayed plot edges. The cast is all aces (though Chris Pine is - surprisingly - the weakest link among them), and the script from Jonathan Goldstein, John Francis Daley, & Michael Gilio is solid. Even when they're making jokes at its expense, the filmmakers show a deep respect for the source material, though they're not always interested in being 100% faithful to it. Genre films that don't take themselves too seriously can be lots of fun. See the afore-mentioned The Princess Bride or Eric the Viking (which clearly had an influence here) for great examples. But the flip side of irreverence is a deprioritization of world-building. Case in point, there's no sense of place, as the team jumps from region to region and nothing is explored. Another issue is magic- one moment we're getting an explanation of why magic can't just solve everything, and - literally - the next we get the introduction of a new magic MacGuffin. ("See? You can magic your way in!" one character says.) Magic has rules, apparently, but they are almost never explained or followed- except when they serve to present an obstacle for the characters to overcome. There's an order of spies & supposed defenders of justice that one of the main characters was once a part of, but we never see any of them. At the center of the plot is the fact that there's a vast kingdom bordering the region of Neverwinter that's ruled by an all-powerful cadre of Red Wizards who command an army of the undead. Yet why isn't the entire society on a war footing? All of this and more is glossed over in favor of jokes and madcap adventure. To be clear, the madcap adventure is fun and the fan service is subtle enough to be accessible to novices (a really neat trick, that), but as I was watching I just kept feeling like this could be so much more.
Tolkien's work demands dedicated, detailed craftsmanship from the people who want to translate it to the big screen. Why is it that Dungeons & Dragons doesn't warrant the same kind of effort? And what would a movie (or prestige TV series) from this talented team of filmmakers look like if it did? I hope that we can find out someday.
