Today's Review: Logan

Weinig filmsterren zullen hun doorbraakrollen zo trouw zijn gebleven als Hugh Jackman. De acteur kruipt in Logan voor de negende keer in de huid van de mutante mannetjesputter Wolverine. Hij heeft deze rol zo'n zeventien jaar lang gedragen, te beginnen met X-Men, de film die de aftrap vormde voor het niet meer uit de bioscoop weg te denken superheldengenre. Sindsdien hebben we zo veel superheldenfilms voorbij zien komen dat de beperkingen van het genre zich opdrongen. Logan bevestigt die beperkingen maar haalt ze eveneens hard onderuit, in een film die het 'super' uit haar superheld haalt, maar daarmee paradoxaal genoeg een nieuw hoogtepunt vormt voor de superheldenfilm. Hugh Jackman speelt de onsterfelijke mutant voor de allerlaatste keer, als nooit tevoren. Hij bewijst daarmee dat we Wolverine zullen missen.

Anno 2029 is de maatschappij er niet al te best aan toe. Postapocalyptisch is het nog net niet, maar fijn is anders. In deze naargeestige wereld slentert een gebroken Logan door het Texaanse landschap. Hij zuipt, hij vloekt en heeft weinig op met de wereld om hem heen. Hij slijt zijn dagen met een lullig baantje en het zorgen voor een stokoude, dementerende Charles Xavier (die andere grote X-veteraan, Patrick Stewart). Zelf is hij fysiek niet veel beter af: zijn genezingsgave geeft langzaam de geest, de ouderdom haalt hem rap in. Vechten voor de goede zaak is niet meer aan de orde, de andere X-Men zijn dood en het mutantenras is vrijwel verdwenen. Als het mysterieuze meisje Laura zijn hulp nodig heeft, wijst hij haar nors de deur. Wanneer Logan geconfronteerd wordt met de Reavers, een groep cyborghuurlingen onder regie van een schimmig geneticaconcern, blijkt dat het kind behept is met bovenmenselijke krachten die beangstigend veel op de zijne lijken. Vervolgens slaat het trio op de vlucht met de onvermurwbare schurken in hun kielzog, die vastberaden zijn ook deze laatste mutanten uit de weg te ruimen.

Wolverine was altijd al een ruige kerel, maar in Logan is hij lomper en asocialer dan ooit. Hugh Jackman speelt diens laatste aria met meer bezieling dan ooit. Al die jaren heeft hij zich feitelijk moeten inhouden, maar nu mag hij helemaal los gaan dankzij een voor de X-franchise ongekende leeftijdskeuring. Die 'R rating' (tot en met zestien jaar uitsluitend toegang onder begeleiding van een volwassene) is volkomen terecht. Liefhebbers van het explicietere hak-en-snijwerk komen ruim aan hun trekken; de ledematen vliegen ons om de oren en het taalgebruik is grover dan ooit. Zelfs de altijd zo correcte Xavier maalt niet om een krachtterm meer of minder (tot zichtbaar plezier van Stewart). Logan lijkt wat dat betreft geïnspireerd door het vorig jaar verschenen anarchistische Deadpool, met het verschil dat hier een serieuzere toon wordt gehanteerd. Ouderdom is immers niet om te lachen en in deze grauwe toekomst is sowieso weinig ruimte voor relativerende humor. Laat staan voor superhelden.

Regisseur James Mangold heeft weinig op met de stereotiepe superheld. Ook in voorganger The Wolverine toonde hij meer affiniteit met de menselijke kant van Logan dan met diens krachten. Als Laura hoop put uit X-Men comics - een originele sneer naar het bronmateriaal - spot Logan hiermee door te beweren dat het allemaal een verzinsel is, geen realiteit. Superhelden bestaan niet. Toch werpt hij zich op als haar beschermer, in een parallel met de meermaals geciteerde klassieker Shane. Logan voelt inderdaad meer als een western dan als een superheldenspektakel, wat nog onderstreept wordt door de zuidelijk-Amerikaanse setting vol stof en kogels. De twee genres laten zich onder Mangold treffend kruisen. Uiteraard kent Logan de nodige shootouts met de bad guys, hoewel de eenzame strijder gewapend is met klauwen in plaats van een revolver. Die booswichten laten zich overigens erg makkelijk in stukjes hakken. De Reavers zijn dan ook bijzaak voor Mangold, die niets opheeft met clichématige malle schurken zoals cyborgs.

Logan is bovenal zijn eigen ergste vijand. Zijn haperende genezingsfactor zorgt voor een langzame adamantiumvergiftiging en zijn eigen bloed wordt tegen hem gebruikt door hem te klonen. Het is dit diep persoonlijke conflict met zichzelf dat Logan zijn meerwaarde geeft, want de film weet met haar plotlijn over een bedrijf dat gekloonde mutanten als supersoldaten wil inzetten een gevoel van déjà vu niet te vermijden. Dat gegeven zagen we alleen al in de X-films tig keer voorbijkomen. Logan teert niet op het wat voorspelbare plot, maar vooral op de menselijke personages. Beide generaties gooien hier hoge ogen, want de jonge Dafne Keen geeft formidabel tegengas aan Jackmans heerlijk onsympathieke ouwe knar. De verwantschap tussen Laura en Logan is onmiskenbaar, het stokje mag gelijk aan het jonkie doorgegeven worden. Toch is het Jackman die de meeste indruk achterlaat, voor het laatst in de rol die hem groot maakte, maar hier zo anders gespeeld dan gebruikelijk. Schrijnend, dat we juist dankzij diens zwanenzang toch meer van Wolverine willen zien.

Today's Review: X-Men: Apocalypse

Still behind on all the stuff I wrote, but slowly gaining.

X-Men: Apocalypse - Recensie

'Third one is always the worst' says Jean Grey when leaving the theater after watching Return of the Jedi back in '83. She was right about that one, and conscious or unconscious (I doubt the writer intended for this movie to be the weakest in the second X-trilogy), she's also correct about X-Men: Apocalypse. However, also like Return of the Jedi, Apocalypse still is a whole lot of mutant fun for those who didn't expect the franchise to reach new heights anyway.

Granted, it's not the story that provides the mirth, since it's the stuff of repetition, variations on themes and lack of narrative evolution. Basically, another all-powerful mutant rears his head and threatens to destroy the world for mankind so that its stronger successors can take over. And once again, the X-Men, fighting for peace between man and mutant, must get together to stop this megalomaniacal scheme from becoming reality. This time, it's not Magneto who has hatched the diabolical plan, but rather a 5,000 year old ideological predecessor, an ancient Egyptian once worshiped as a god, with the modern moniker Apocalypse. Magneto, once more masterfully performed by Michael Fassbender, merely provides some muscle to help Oscar Isaac's semi-god with his evil shenanigans. Isaac does a decent job playing an age old villain, but he's no Fassbender and his Apocalypse is nowhere near as intimidating or intriguing as the much more relatable Magneto.

Still, the villain suffices for the cause of bringing together two generations of X-Men, the First Class lot and the new batch of young recruits, including novel takes on classic X-characters Cyclops, Jean Grey and Nightcrawler. Their performances and their chemistry make us hopeful for the future of the franchise, should the studio feel like using them for the next installment Apocalypse seems to be building up to. For although it's meant as a conclusion to a trilogy, the ground work is amply laid for more to come and these young stars succeed in making us curious about what lies ahead. The new additions to the cast are aided by snappy dialogue and light humour, making the shortcomings in the plot not nearly as blatant as they would have been in lesser hands. Nevertheless, it's clear director Bryan Singer, who has made his fourth X-movie with this title, has run out of ideas for the X-universe. Though we appreciate his work on both trilogies, new blood would be equally welcome in the creative room as it proved in the cast.

Today's Review: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice

It's been a while, but I finally wrote another review for FilmTotaal. And this time, for a particularly big blockbuster movie, my first for this movie site:

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice - recensie

FilmTotaal is the biggest movie website in the Netherlands (no, really!), and in its case, users actually respond to critics' reviews. Often not in the most gentle manner, as there's quite a few trolls and/or generally loudmouth, obnoxious people haunting the site. Reviewers posting their opinion of overhyped blockbuster films like this one usually know they can expect to be firmly hated upon. However, for BvS, I gotta say there's only a few posts illustrating strong disagreement - to put it mildly - with what I wrote about the film. In fact, it seems the majority of users agrees with me: BvS is rather a disappointment. Not entirely bad (it still looks great and there's some good performances and lovely action, you know), but definitely a letdown.

Maybe the cause of its shortcomings is its director, Zack Snyder. He's been known to favour heavy topics surrounding flawed, traumatized characters living in unpleasant worlds filled with violent death. Even though he usually flavours said realms with a visually appealing, grandiose style of filming and fabulous artistry and dressing. Man of Steel, the movie to kick off this new DC Cinematic Universe which is meant to deliver some heavy competition at Marvel's doorstep, fit that bill perfectly, making the generally colorful and optimistic Superman a brooding alien refugee given near omnipotent power over his new neighbours, the human race. I liked Man of Steel. It made this God like character that much more identifiable by focusing on his lacks rather than his strengths. In its many philosophical moments, Man of Steel felt less like a superhero movie and more like a character study of a God living among man and contemplating his relationship with those who in all respects are so obviously inferior to him. Of course, that relationship is still explored in BvS, as the world now needs to cope with the existence of this powerful presence, a potential saviour to man. However, another type of hero has already been active for decades, it turns out.

For in BvS, the DC universe is supposed to be up and running for decades already. No starting from scratch here, as was the case for Marvel. For every character introduced, there is a long backstory that is teased, which in many cases frustrates more than it intrigues. Ben Affleck's Batman has been fighting crime for twenty years, and it has only made him darker. Crime has not been reduced, while his war on bad guys preying on the everyman has cost him dearly. No wonder he's grown so angry he's not averse to maiming and even killing criminals left and right. The Batman we've grown accustomed to was never a true killer, but Snyder's Caped Crusader has no such moral qualms anymore. And now there's this all powerful extraterrestrial policing the planet. A being Batman holds responsible for the invasion that laid waste to Metropolis and cost him employees and real estate. Affleck does a fine job portraying the sombre, disillusioned vigilante, but it cannot be denied that his explicit aim of killing Superman, who has since amply demonstrated he's on the side of justice, just feels wholly unjustified.

Meanwhile, as if the lethal rivalry between both tormented good guys was't enough to fill a two hour movie, Snyder introduces a younger version of classic villain Lex Luthor to pester them both. This evil tycoon, too, is haunted by a trauma involving his father, which is not enough to fully explain his demonic machinations in this film. What's more, Jesse Eisenberg's performance in the role is devoid of the 'wow' factor we would have hoped for. Applying a typical neurotic hyperactivity, Eisenberg is basically playing a nefarious version of his own Mark Zuckerberg. It doesn't make for a convincing baddie. Nor does Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman leave a lasting impression, which is also due to a lack of screen time (though 151 minutes certainly makes for a long piece already). Again, a shady past is implied but not explored. And so she leaves us confused by her transformation from uncaring socialite to warrior princess fighting for good.

Of course, with a subtitle like 'Dawn of Justice', adding more spice to your duo of core characters for a broader context is expected. So we also get this evil genius and a strong female heroine. But wait, says BvS, there's much more yet. A number of other super heroes is teased. But for ow, we simply cannot care. Worse, the still fairly investing story line of the titular protagonists is hindered by awkward attempts to set up bigger things to come, including an Apocalyptic nightmare of Batman wherein he's plagued by visions of a ruined world ruled by Superman (including insect warriors, I kid you not). Succeeded by a scene in which that same Batman is confronted with a temporal vortex and a warning from the future to stop someone doing something, totally out of the blue. Pointless material, as we already knew Batman was out for Superman's blood and this doesn't motivate him any more. Despite all the useless interruptions provided by DC's self-advertisement for coming attractions (to which we simply are not attracted), it's amazing we still at least care about the two iconic superheroes battling each other.

And their fight proves quite spectacular. Brutal, despite a lack of blood (PG-13 rating and all). But oh so dark and serious. Even Nolan's Dark Knight films, also not particularly light, optimistic fare, never lost sight of the need for a bit of humour and witticism. But Snyder tells such a gritty tale, there's simply no space left for those elements. Unfortunately, after the epic Batman/Superman throwdown, he however feels there is space left for another half an hour of three good guys battling an ugly digital monster. But this climax never feels near as climactic as the fight we expected to see and at least felt somewhat gratifying. As is usual for his approach, Snyder goes over the top much further than we would like him to have gone. Maybe he's not fully to blame for BvS' many shortcomings, a fair bit of it can likely be chalked up to DC interference for setting up the future. But that future does involve Snyder to a great extent, as he's already working on Justice League. We better hope he takes the failures of BvS to heart and lightens up a bit. There's gotta be more to the DC universe than angry heroes beating each other up...

Today's News: Jurassic's wonder posters

It was a good week for Jurassic imagery, but not so much for the production of Wonder Woman.

Nieuwe poster Jurassic World

Wederom nieuwe poster Jurassic World

That's what I'm talking about! Less logo (awesome and iconic though it may be) and more striking visuals to entice folks from visiting the new park. Two down, one more to go, and the second trailer just around the corner. Even though the creature is wholly incorrect from a scientific viewpoint, I cannot help but drool over the Mosasaurus one-sheet. The thought of a giant marine reptile - not a dinosaur, as the studio would like you to think - in a tank is such a simple concept, but it totally works. I feel as excited as the little boy on the poster beholding this critter. The shark, less so, I imagine. From what I hear from the script going round, these fish have to be cloned to serve as the Mosasaur's food, since they're on the endangered species list. A fun little side notion with little to no plot consequences, but also a delightful little inside look at the awkward logistics of a dinosaur theme park. The I-Rex poster serves as a decent reminder of the whole man versus nature dichotomy, basically the franchise's philosophical routine. I like the set-up, though if it was applied to hide the appearance of the Indominus Rex, it's a wasted effort, considering the merchandise and I-Rex action figures are already available in many stores around the globe. Of course, the general audience may not be aware of that fact (yet), but it's also not very courteous to misdirect them into thinking the I-Rex is as large as suggested on this poster, as it actually isn't judging from the trailers. But hey, it's a fantasy creature, so some artistic license are allowed, not to mention copyright is installed on the creature's name and likeness. So what's on the third poster? It's gotta be the T-Rex. I guess many fans will still feel it needs to reassert its dominance as the Tyrant Lizard King after JP III, even though that's a moniker bestowed on it by man rather than by nature. Obviously the T-Rex is gonna kill the I-Rex in some spectacular climactic battle, as it doesn't take kindly to people cloning rival superpredators. So it does deserve a poster of its own, and tomorrow we may find out whether JW's plot and promotional campaign are that predictable. But it's gonna be awesome regardless.

Regisseuse Wonder Woman stapt op

And then there's this less predictable story. Sucks too, as I considered Michelle MacLaren the finest choice to direct Wonder Woman, if a female director is obligatory. Someone who helped make The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones to be as great as these shows are would have been a damn fine asset to this picture. But of course, the studio had to screw it up by restricting her input over the story. The usual creative differences ensued, and the best choice departed the project. So who did they pick as her replacement? Patty Jenkins of all people. Ironic to say the least, considering she herself walked off the set of Thor: The Dark World a few years ago because of the same creative differences. Who's to say Jenkins will know any greater liberty directing for DC than she did for Marvel? Then again, she likely knew this when she signed up for WW, so maybe she has finally grown to accept the restrictions placed on the creative input of directors picked for these pieces of the larger superhero cinematic universe puzzles. Man or woman, when working for Marvel or DC, a director must know his or her place, subject to the whim of the studio. No room for emancipation here.

Today's News: Aquaman won't settle for a Razzie

The slow week continues with only minor bits of news, in anticipation of the big Oscar bang no doubt:

Catan gaat bioscopen koloniseren

I've heard worse ideas for adaptations of games, board or video. Though most of either still fail to deliver decent movies, it's hard to deny. But at least Settlers of Catan seems to have more cinematic ingredients from which a proper movie can be distilled than the likes of Ouija or Tetris. You've got an enticing historical look, the potential of a sweeping plot of heroism and rivalry against insurmountable odds and the force of nature, plus dramatic elements like knights and bandits to spice things up a little. And of course, there's somewhat of a franchise potential, too. If the movie does become a success, there's the likes of expansion sets (Seafarers) or variations on the theme (Prehistory, or even more outlandish takes like Starfarers) to explore. And these days, every studio is aching to find franchises. Settlers of Catan might prove to become a solid movie. I just hope they don't throw in a silly random element that might alienate audiences from the original premise of the beloved game itself. Remember the response when Battleship felt the need to include aliens in the plot? I'd say Settlers of Catan has enough material going for it to do without such extra obstacles.

Jason Momoa's Aquaman onthuld

Now that shows like The Big Bang Theory have made a little too much fun of DC's King of the Seven Seas usual appearance and abilities, it comes as no surprise Aquaman needed a different, tougher look to overcome such popcultural bias. Casting Jason Momoa was a right choice in that regard, since you wouldn't want to get into a conflict with him about his style of dressing, it might be bad for your health. So no orange shirt, no green pants, and no riding sea beasts as a mode of transportation. You get a darker, grittier Aquaman, a regal appearance that screams 'don't screw with me!'. Basically it ends up looking like Khal Drogo with a Poseidonic motif, trident and fishy scales and all. It works I suppose, though it's not particularly coulourful or inspired. As for the meaning of the mysterious tagline 'Unite the Seven', beats me. I'm not into DC's comics enough to care to unravel its intentions. I'm a Marvel guy. I'll wait and see what exactly Momoa's Aquaman will be up to when he does his thing in theaters.

Winnaars Razzies bekendgemaakt

It appears the Razzies have found a new filmmaker to victimize. Though Michael Bay still won his fair share of awards, as is usual, it was Kirk Cameron that took most of the beating for his apparently dismal Saving Christmas, which was fortunately spared a Dutch release. I've never heard of the movie or the actor behind it, but when I see this flick on IMDb's Bottom Top 100 on the number 1 spot with a rating of 1.5, I get the picture. Okay, so there might be some hating hype surrounding the project that I don't know the details of. I'm not into Christmas themed films anyway, so I'll refrain from checking this one out. I've seen enough of these Razzie nominated movies for one year. I had to sit through both TMNT and the latest Trannies flick, which was quite enough of a borefest for me. Other than that, there's no real surprises among the winners here. Obviously Ben Affleck redeemed himself in the eyes of the Golden Raspberry Award Foundation, as he has already done so in the eyes of everybody else. Who knows, maybe Kirk Cameron will do the same some day, as the Razzies find somebody new to pick on.

Today's Review: Big Hero 6

Told you there was more where that came from?:

Big Hero 6 - recensie

Well, this movie was totally fun! But I cannot say in all honesty it was any bit original. Much of the story and character development felt formulaic, but that never got in the way of the fun to be had. Especially since it was the Marvel formula. Heck, at times the movie nigh made fun of its own narrative make-up - best example: when the nerdy character exclaims 'ooh, it's an origin story!' - but I doubt much of the audience would care they might have seen most of this stuff before. Especially the target audience of kids won't mind, inexperienced with the inspirational material as they likely are. Interestingly enough, despite being a (successfully Disneyfied) Marvel adaptation adhering to a typical plot routine, the characters differ an awful lot from their comic book counterparts. In fact, the excessively cute articial Baymax, the character that singlehandedly raised this film from a three-star flick to a four-star sensation, looks nothing like the dragonlike droid from the original source. Major characters like Sunfire and Silver Samurai are missing, since Disney doesn't own the rights to those (they're presently part of Fox's X-universe). Thankfully, we're getting a new one in their place, namely the fictional city of San Fransokyo, which immediately suggests the uncanny mix of American and Japanese animation styles present throughout and makes for a wonderful looking backdrop for these characters to have their little adventure in.

But above all else, Baymax makes this movie work. The apparently minimalistically but on closer look brilliantly animated character provides the beating heart of the movie, as a healthcare robot created by the protagonist's deceased older brother, who finds himself ever more transformed into a heavily armoured battlebot by the main character out for revenge, until the emotionless but caring robot reminds him there's more to life than abusing your talents for mindless anger. Plus, he makes for 80 percent of the jokes and they all work. And that's even despite his hilarious attempts at catching a football from the trailer didn't make in into the final cut. Don't expect to be surprised by Big Hero 6, but like Baymax and his ball, just roll with the robot for good times' sake.

Today's News: big bad breaking! And then some

It's been a good start of the week for movie news, mostly because of one single bomb Marvel dropped.

Marvel past releaseplanning aan voor Spider-Man

And here it is. Or rather, here's the follow-up, as the main news item that Marvel has gotten Spider-Man back in the fold was posted by a colleague of mine (bastard!). But here's the first few ramifications for Marvel's Phase 3, with many more likely to follow in the next few years. Good thing about such major nerdgasmic news is it gives one inspiration for a column (or two), which I hope to pen this weekend. So I'll reserve my actual opinion on whether Spider-Man at last joining the Marvel Cinematic Universe is a good idea or not - for it's definitely not all sunshine in Marvel land with the webhead swinging his way through his fellow superheroes - for that opinionated piece to follow. Unless one of my colleagues beats me on that front as well. Not an unlikely scenario, since anything Marvel has a tendency to get people talking or in this case typing. That said, I am looking very much forward to seeing what take on the new webslinger will be applied to the new movie(s). I wasn't a fan of the way Sony handled the Amazing Spider-Man movies, nor of how they ended Raimi's trilogy. My nerd sense is telling me there's plenty of room for improvement. From the details, it's likely Marvel will turn to their Ultimate Universe for inspiration, a move I don't lament at all. I'm currently re-reading Ultimate Spider-Man - coincidentally, as I started doing so two weeks before this news broke - and it once again proves an utterly delightful and catchy read, that also goes to illustrate many an excellent possibility of hooking up Spidey with other Marvel names, without hurting any of them. I can only hope the new movie, plus Spider-Man's appearance in those of others, will turn out half as well as those comics did.

Eerste trailer serie Bloodline

Looks decent, but I have a hard time envisioning this as a long running show. The concept seems too limited to continue for more than a season or two, and from what I gather, it's Netflix' intention to keep it going as long as desirable. Then again, I once had similar reservations about this series called Breaking Bad, and look how positively that turned out against everybody's expectations. Of course, every character has a background you can delve into, but it feels like there's only so many startling family secrets you can reveal until it eithers gets boring or ludicrous. But what do I know, I've only seen this trailer, which no doubt totally limits our imaginations for this show. There's undoubtedly more to it than what's pictured here. Still, I can't help but get a distinct Festen vibe from this. A family tearing itself apart when the black sheep of the bunch starts digging up shady past events certainly sounds very familiar to those who'll recall the classic Thomas Vinterberg film. However, even if the basic premise is remarkably similar, we can expect there to be a lot more going on in a 13-episode season than in a two-hour movie. There better be, if Netflix hopes to keep this show going.

Lawrence en Pratt beoogd voor Passengers

Here's a premise that probably is better suited for a two-hour movie than for an entire season of episodes. Man accidentally wakes up in cryosleep on a spaceship during a voyage that ought to take decades. Man knowingly wakes up woman for companionship on trip. Whatever happens, happens. As to what happens exactly, I dunno. I can think of a thing or two, either involving bloodshed or sex, or both. It's one of those intriguing notions that gets the mind working after only two sentences of conceptual layout. But as for me, a Sci-Fi geek, you had me at 'spaceship'. As for who can play these characters, Lawrence and Pratt are decent choices, at least one of them sizzling with talent. However, I would have gone for someone else than the current go-to, default hot actor and actress in Hollywood. Both of them seem kinda omnipresent today. For a movie that largely revolves around two people only, I'd say it's better not to cast movie stars, but "real actors" instead, to avoid getting that feeling of seeing Pratt and Lawrence talking to each other for hours (even though that is what is going on, but we need to be able to suspend our disbelief and pretend they're somebody else). A project like this seems better suited to lesser known (but not necessarily lesser talented) actors. Even though that would make it a tougher sell to most audiences, who just want to see Pawrence and Pratt talking to each other for a few hours. But that's what people invented talk shows for.

Lionsgate wil meer Hunger Games

Speaking of Jennifer Lawrence, Lionsgate wants to see more of her. Or at least, they want to see more of that precious dough she keeps making the studio doing her Hunger Games thing. Or they want more material that carries the Hunger Games signature, potentially without the principal talent, since I imagine Lawrence is kinda done with the series when it ends. But studios are never done making huge piles of cash. So when something sells, you keep it selling as long as you can. And so the studio is looking for new ways to "flesh out" (read: ruthlessly exploit) their top franchise after it has properly come to an end. They're looking at both prequel and sequel opportunites, it's stated. Meaning, they don't care about the actual contents, they're just considering any and all ways that keep the franchise running for longer than the source material allows for. It works for Harry Potter and Warner Bros, their argument reads. We don't know that it does actually, since Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them hasn't been released to popular or financial acclaim (yet). Plus, author J.K. Rowling is in full cahoots on that new series of films, while it remains to be seen whether writer Suzanne Collins is as enchanted by the notion of more Hunger Games. So for now, it's only a studio's dream of more money without any material to back up the reality behind that line of thinking. May the odds be ever in their favor.

Eerste trailer Hitman: Agent 47

Or they can just start their franchise over again entirely. Seems to be working for Hitman, since this trailer already looks better than all of the previous film. Of course, that film wasn't a hit in any way the first Hunger Games was, hence the option for rebooting. There's (fortunately!) a form of unwritten decency protecting the audience against rebooting a franchise the moment the first take on it has been completed. Otherwise we would have had three more Lord of the Rings trilogies by now. But when a film failed to connect to its audience strongly enough to warrant a sequel, yet still holds potential for making more money, a reboot is always just around the corner. Often for the better, since in many cases a reboot improved upon its predecessor and ushered in a new era for the franchise. Time will tell whether that holds true for Hitman: Agent 47 as well. It's still a videogame adaptation too, after all. They usually have more running against them than films based on other media properties.

Today's News: It's a Marvelous world

It's a tumultuous week in terms of Marvel movie news.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157762/marvel_maakt_black_panther

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157763/marvel_kondigt_infinity_war_aan

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157764/titels_captain_america_3_en_thor_3_bekendgemaakt

Quite the stirring live-event that was, when Marvel announced its new five-year plan. It looks like the Marvel Cinematic Universe will undergo a lot of upheaval soon. Old characters get tossed around and in some cases, likely killed. Fortunately, fascinating new characters will step in to even the score a bit. Question of course, is whether these new kids will prove to have an equal amount of staying power. Marvel sure has listened to the fanbase's loudest requests, while at the same time opting for diversification of characters. A black superhero film, a female heroine carrying her own movie; the sky is the limit as it is in the comics. Time to kill of all the chauvinist blond male characters while we're at it, they must have thought. And so Cap is marching towards Civil War. It killed him in the comics and, just as in the case of the source material, his successor is already in place to take over the shield. At the same time, Thor is facing Ragnarok and the end of all things, which also doesn't bode well for him, not to mention the universe. The universe is in deep trouble already as Thanos is finally stepping up out of the shadows of cosmic villainy to assume his place as ultimate bad guy, as he at last acquires that Infinity Gauntlet with which Marvel has been teasing us for a few years now. A single movie wasn't enough to tell that epic tale of heroism and sacrifice, so it's split into two parts. It may even be enough to throw the Guardians of the Galaxy into the mix - as they have plenty of ties to Thanos too - though both movies are explicitly labelled as Avengers flicks. Shit is swiftly hitting the fan.

What will remain for Marvel's Phase 4, one cannot help but wonder. The Infinity War seems a very tough act to follow. Though it appears unlikely the very popular founding Avengers like Cap, Thor and Iron Man will be retired for good, it seems the Marvel Cinematic Universe will have to make do without them sometime soon. New heroes will rise, but a team consisting of Ant-Man, Doctor Strange, Black Panther and Captain Marvel will find itself with the task to fill some very big boots. Diversity is key, possibly enticing a broader audience, while also adding more room for relatable conflicts and engaging character dynamics, the type of things Joss Whedon excels at (I doubt the Avengers movies will lose him as showrunner anytime soon). Of course, such a group will only be as good as its separate components. Captain Marvel remains to be cast, but it's now very likely Benedict Cumberbatch will assume the mantle of Doctor Strange. Though he was not my first choice, casting such a fine actor definitely won't hurt. I'm less sure about the casting of Chadwick Boseman as Black Panther, simply because I'm not familiar with the man's work. He's rather unknown, which is probably for the best, as to the general audience the same can be said for Black Panther himself. It wasn't like Chris Hemsworth was such a wellknown guy before he became the God of Thunder, yet that turned out pretty well. Seasoned actors and eager young dogs, a potent combination as ever. Fortunately the Marvel veterans will still be around for a movie or two to guide these newbies, nevermind their acting experience, into the Marvel fold. I bet we can expect a situation along the lines of that old saying, 'the more things change, the more they stay the same'. And though I'm a strong proponent of change in movies, I would like to stay the Marvel Cinematic Universe equally exciting at is it, if not more so. Seems that's exactly what's gonna happen.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157724/eerste_poster_fast__furious_7

This franchise, too, has hardly changed since its inception. New faces come and go (and usually come again), but the core ensemble remains the same, as does the recipe of fast cars, tough guys, sexy dames and plenty of action. Paul Walker's untimely death has not changed that, though whether the studio feels the need to make another movie without him after Furious 7 remains to be seen (though I know the answer, if the boxoffice will be any indication). It's safe to say Furious 7 is the most ambitious entry in the franchise so far, even though the ingredients have not been altered. Virtually the entire main cast is back, while several popular actors have been added to the mix to spice things up even more. A director hardly familiar with the genre but quite proven in another has so far steered this project succesfully around its many pitfalls, including the loss of Walker. This conservative teaser poster is a clear indication little has changed to the franchise's success formula despite everything thrown at it. The audience will get what it wants, and a lot more. It's just those shorter titles people will have to get used to, since nobody has time anymore for long titles these days.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157735/nieuwe_posters_exodus_gods_and_kings

Which didn't stop the producers of Exodus: Gods and Kings to add a redundant subtitle to the name of the film. Exodus itself would definitely have sufficed. The addition is just there to hit the character struggle at the core of the movie's narrative home that much harder. It seems to be a classic story of brohter versus brother, one of them being the Pharaoh/King, the other his closest friend who ends up defying him because God tells him to do so (ah, the destructive power of faith running rampant!). I think these posters oversell that point and focus a little too much on these characters, even though I know full well it's all about them. I guess the supporting cast wasn't interesting or vital enough to warrant posters of their own. No one-sheets with grand actors like Ben Kingsley or Sigourney Weaver, or younger, more popular ones like Aaron Paul. Too bad, but at least we get a good chance to admire the detailed work that went into making Bale and Edgerton's fabulous period armour.

Today's News: more and more

News just keeps piling up. At times it seems like I'm the only one posting any on MovieScene lately. Which is one of the reasons my blog is witnessing a decrease in updates. Oh well, at least all this news means there is always something to post on my blog when there is time available.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156615/marvel_voegt_nog_vijf_films_toe_aan_huidige_planning

Seems overkill, to announce movies so far ahead without anything to go on but a title (at least, I hope Marvel has some to fill in those release dates, though they're not spilling those beans just yet), and of course, a plan. However, this is not so much about the movies, as it is a show of strength and confidence. Marvel flexes its muscles to let the world know they're totally prepared to accept DC's recent challenge in annual cinematic universe crafting. DC has so far revealed they're planning ahead up till 2019, now Marvel does the same. You didn't think it was a coincidence this latest planning of the House of Ideas ran until 2019, did you? Plus, DC so far sticks to one movie a year, while Marvel eagerly doubles that amount, and in case of 2017 even triples it. With this slate of release dates, Marvel is making a statement they mean to stay the biggest player in terms of superhero movies. And backed up by the ever expanding might of Disney, they can make good on it. However, unlike DC, Marvel hasn't named any properties yet that can fill those slots. They better put their money where their mouth is soon, because (most) people don't remember release dates, they remember names. Like The Batman in 2019. I wonder what marvel hero gets to go up against that one, DC's strongest franchise still. Ant-Man 2 maybe?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156632/nieuwe_comic-con_poster_jurassic_world

The first real Jurassic Park poster since 2001. And it's both beautiful and bad news. Of course, this is a great mix between the old - the thrashed Explorer vehicle, the beloved Velociraptor, the Isla Nublar setting - and the new - Jurassic World being built on the bones of the previous park in the background, but it also displays a disturbing, deeply rooted conservative attitude towards the JP dinosaurs. This is 2014. No respectable paleontologist will back that retro dinosaur as being an accurate representation of a Velociraptor. It worked in the early Nineties, but today's Raptors don't have arms like that and they are covered in feathers. However, Colin Trevorrow seems more adamant to recapture the glory of the first Jurassic Park film by reintroducing that vintage dinosaur look than by adhering to one of the elements that made JP great: making realistic animals of what otherwise would have been typical movie monsters. Say about Jurassic Park III's narrative quality what you will, at least it dared to show progression by adding feathered dinosaurs, and thus up-to-date science, to the mix. It would be a definite step back if Trevorrow chickened out on that just because audiences didn't think that much of JP III. Why? Because JP's representation of dinosaurs resonates strongly through popular culture. It's basically the dinosaur franchise that all others tend to copy. So if JP gets it wrong (and they admittedly have a few times), others will copy those mistakes and audiences are spoon fed the wrong notions about actual dinosaur looks and behavior. After two decades, Dilophosaurus is finally showing signs of ridding itself of that nonsensical neck frill and venom spitting action in the collective mind of the general audience. Does Trevorrow mean to reuse such silly concepts too, just because they look cool? If so, Jurassic World's dinosaurs are just that indeed: living theme park monsters, not actual animals. Maybe I'm just jumping to conclusions here though. I know that Raptor image on the poster is copied from a still of the kitchen scene from the first movie. It's probably too early to apply one of the final dinosaur designs for Jurassic World on any promotional material yet. So for now I'll keep my faith in Trevorrow. And I want one of those posters, but I'm not gonna get it as I don't care to visit San Diego just to pick one of these up.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156631/eerste_trailer_the_imitation_game

Benedict Cumberbatch adds another socially awkward genius to his repertoire. This time it's Alan Turing. And once again he excels in playing such a character, it would appear. This trailer makes me very interested about the actual movie. There's some terrific actors in there and a fascinating historical background to serve as a dramatic narrative. I'm not at all familiar with the director - the Norwegian Morten Tyldum - but this type of film seems to suit him. Or the studio's had some great trailer editors working on it, that's also a possibility. And already there is Oscar buzz generated around this film. Kinda obvious; solid actors, war story, gay emotional conflict, all typical Academy Award ingredients. I'm always put off by people dropping the word 'Oscar' around a movie that is still so far from its release date. It goes to show just what a political game the Oscars are. Then again, people suggested Oscar buzz for The Monuments Men well in advance too, but they haven't been doing that again since its release. Was it because it was a disappointing movie, or maybe because there was no homosexual aspect to any of it? Nevertheless, this trailer suggests a good film to me, so until I see it in theaters, that will suffice. But I'm not prematurely jumping on the Oscar bandwagon until the nominations are in. I am increasingly getting in on the Cumberbandwagon though. Ever since Sherlock, I developed a much more appreciative sentiment towards the man, and I'm even willing to forgive him his transgressions partaking in the further exploitation of the Star Trek franchise.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156643/nieuwe_trailer_star_wars_rebels

Speaking of exploitation, Star Wars has experienced that ever since 1978. And since Disney has bought the franchise, exploitation has been turned up a few notches. However, the more things change, the more they stay the same. Disney scrapped the then running animated series The Clone Wars and is now replacing it by Star Wars Rebels, which is... another animated series from the same creators! And it's set only a few years after Clone Wars, allowing the series to reintroduce some of that show's characters (like Obi-Wan Kenobi, as this new trailer shows). Other than that, the sense of adventure in a war torn galaxy remains the same, though this series does go for a slightly younger target audience. However, both this show and its predecessor feature a young Force sensitive protagonist, while the style of animation hasn't changed a bit. It basically makes you wonder why Disney didn't just pick up with Clone Wars where it left off. It makes little difference to me. I didn't watch Clone Wars, I have little interest in Rebels either. I prefer to stick to the big screen, even though I'm dreading what J.J. Abrams is doing to the franchise.

Today's Triple News: magic Aquaman of the galaxy

There's news, and then there's more news:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156134/meer_character_posters_voor_guardians_of_the_galaxy

Got a mail from my editor at a quarter to midnight. Marvel posted the last two character posters online and he though I should finish what I started by posting them on MovieScene. I couldn't agree more, even though I was about to go to bed instead (that'll teach me not to check my e-mail at so late an hour!). All part of the job, even though it's only a voluntary position. This pair of posters continues the eye catching colourful, flashy and distinctly space opera vibe carrying trend the earlier two (of Rocket & Groot and Gamora, if you recall) started. Drax ominously has his back turned to us, amply revealing his daggers, while enemy warships approach in the distance. It obviously isn't the most inspired piece of advertising (compare the final poster for The Chronicles of Riddick for instance), but it looks decent enough and adequately showcases his muscles and (to my mind, lousy) war paint. In Star-Lord's case, battle has commenced and he's resorted to using his futuristic double ray gun in the heat of battle, his ship flying in the background. Am I glad Drax already is the muscleman on this film, so we don't get to see a topless pin-up of the protagonist in an attempt to cater to the female demographic too obscenely. Of course the obligatory shirtless scene will follow somewhere in the course of the movie, as it's all part of the Hollywood strategy to draw girl audiences to what is otherwise (unjustly) considered a largely male attracting movie experience. At least the trailers indicate Gamora can't keep her shirt on all the time either. They better keep that bit in to ensure a sexually equal atmosphere.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156165/game_of_thrones_schrijver_pent_magic

If you've done one fantasy gig you can do another. I bet that's what Hollywood was thinking in this scenario. Of course, there's an epic difference between Game of Thrones and this upcoming Magic: The Gathering movie. One's based on a series of books, the other on a roleplaying card game. One is better suited for television, while the other gets the silver screen treatment. One has conquered the hearts and minds of a global audience, while the other still needs to prove it can attract bigger audiences than just its loyal fanbase, shedding its 'nerd' stigma. The latter starts with a good writer, and at least Cogman has proven himself just that on Game of Thrones. Still, his resumé is more or less confined to those writing credits only, so he can't be called the most experienced of screen writers. You'd think he'd feel like doing something other than fantasy for a change, but apparently he prefers to stay in that comfort zone, even though this is a wholly different kind of fantasy (or so I think, since I don't know jack squat about the Magic card game; are there any cards with depictions of twincest or overtly gruesome dismemberment?). Or maybe he's just not comfortable or interested yet in expanding his so far genre restricted mindset. Could be for the best, since there's still a fair bit of writing on Game of Thrones to finish and we wouldn't want him to be distracted by the real world too much.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156168/jason_momoa_mogelijk_aquaman

Someone who has seemingly already finished on Game of Thrones - he's not the only one - is Jason Momoa. Khal Drogo has been dead for three seasons now, so Momoa has moved on, and as it appears, in the right direction career wise. His involvement with some DC project or other has been the stuff of whispers and speculations for seven months now and it's doubtful he can maintain claiming ignorance for much longer. Is he gonna be Aquaman? That seems most likely, though other characters have been suggested too. Momoa certainly doesn't look like Aquaman, but in this digital age that is not much of an obstacle to speak off. Bradler Cooper doesn't look like Rocket Raccoon after all. I'm sure an expert make-up job alone would suffice to mask any dissimilarities with what fanboys perceive to be the 'good look' for Aquaman. I'm more worried about the many character set-ups that are currently slated to appear in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (such a unnecessarily lengthy title!). If I'm not mistaken, this now makes three additional super heroes in a movie that largely revolves around two others. And then there's still the supervillain(s) to contend with. Already feels like an overly padded and crowded movie, which unfortunately is a prevailing tendency in contemporary comic book adaptations, done by studios driven by grandiose ideas of universe building. Several recent Marvel movies suffered in terms of quality due to these tactics, and as DC is in haste trying to keep up with its rival, the same mistakes appear to be made in the process. Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to take a note from Game of Thrones when the number of characters becomes too large to manage properly? Though it would be a bit unfair to Momoa if he suffered a similarly untimely demise once more.

Today's Triple News: it's a Marvelous world

Here's a few more news flashes, all Marvel related (coincidence, or a sign Marvel/Disney is slowly but surely taking over the world):

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156092/eerste_character_poster_guardians_of_the_galaxy

Character posters! Always fun! Attractive pieces of marketing and usually very collectible in the long run. Not often very imaginative though (all they need to do is display a character after all, without giving too much plot away), and this one proves little different. It does what it needs to do, showcasing a dynamic pose of an intriguing pair of characters in this case, designed to entice the audience to go see the movie to learn what their deal is. We're talking about a talking tree and dito armoured raccoon, so I suppose there's quite a deal to be talked about here. Otherwise this poster leaves little clues as to the movie itself. You can wonder about the affiliation of the two different types of star fighters in the background, but that would be a bit too nerdy even for me. This is one fine piece of advertising, but it doesn't make me want to watch the Guardians of the Galaxy movie any more than I already did. The new Gamora poster however... check back later for more on that.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156083/ant-man_vindt_nieuwe_regisseur

Sick and tired about all the Ant-Man buzz of late? So was Marvel I guess, and that's why they finally settled on a director. The job goes to Peyton Reed, reponsible for such noted classics like Bring It On and Yes Man. That's a joke of course, as those are not at all memorable movies. Decent enough fare for gloomy Sunday afternoons perhaps, but not something people will talk about in twenty years time. Nevertheless, if the whole departure debacle of Edgar Wright on this project showed, Marvel does not want visionary directors for their films. They want stooges that know how to direct a decent film but also know when not to interfere with studio planning, especially when it concerns long term universe building the like Marvel is currently engaging in. Wright likely did not fit in as much as Marvel at first had hoped, having too much ideas of his own that might not have sat well with the studio (came you blame the guy, he worked for nigh a decade developing this project!). Wright just isn't a gun-for-hire as much as all his potential successors, including Reed, are. They all have a background in directing contemporary basic comedies, but none of them share Wright's distinctly British finesse, or in fact, any sign of true character. However, they do know how to follow studio orders no doubt, as is the case with the majority of the Marvel directors thus far. Louis Leterrier, Jon Favreau (before he got too big for Marvel after having done two Iron Man movies, at which point he was replaced), Shane Black, Alan Taylor, Joe Johnston, the Russo Brothers... all capable directors, but none of them fan faves because of their originality, likable offbeat approach or signature style, unlike Wright. The only exception to the rule seems to be Joss Whedon, but who knows for how much longer? I'm also a little disturbed by Marvel's tendency to actively search for a comedy director only for Ant-Man. Does a movie about a shrinking superhero talking to ants have to be a comedy per se? After all, this is a man with a very serious and dark side to him. He beats his wife for crying out loud! Please don't let that comedic element dominate the others. The last thing we need is the Avengers' very own Jar Jar Binks.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156114/vincent_donofrio_gecast_als_daredevils_doodsvijand

What we do need is an enemy that gives the devil his due. In the case of the Daredevil comics, that has always been Kingpin. Sure, the stupendously obese mobster plagued Spider-Man on many occasions, but he was not his most recognizable or memorable villain (I'd say that would be Doctor Octopus, like or not). Daredevil himself may not be as recognizable or memorable a superhero as Spidey, but most people that don't know him from the source material will know him from the 2003 Ben Affleck movie, where he was also confronted with the might of the Kingpin of Crime, then played by the late (and surprisingly, African-American) Michael Clarke Duncan, who proved more fun to watch in that role than Aflleck as the titular character. This time a white guy has been casted (casting another black man would probably have invited accusations of racism, not wholly unfounded) and it's Vincent D'Onofrio. He's shown he knows how to pull off comic book baddies, if you recall the hideous Edgar (the bug) in Men In Black. Of course, Kingpin is a whole different animal. Decidedly human, supremely intelligent but utterly ruthless, cold and calculating, shadowy, out for monetary gain but still not adverse to taking over the world in a fashion... that's all Kingpin. Fortunately D'Onofrio has done enough episodes of Law & Order to know the workings of those on the opposite side of the law through and through. A fine bit of casting if you ask me, less likely to stir fan feelings in both directions than casting a Brit as an American superhero.

Today's News: we have a Thanos but when will we see him?

One of MS's latest scoops was posted there by my reliable self:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155978/josh_brolin_speelt_marvelschurk_thanos

The biggest revelation in this bit of news is not that Marvel has enticed yet another powerhouse actor to play a major villain role (and in terms of baddies, they don't come much bigger than this one!), but more so the fact that we still won't see him in this, his next "appearance". The message is clearly that Brolin, for now, will be limited to voice acting Thanos in Guardians of the Galaxy only. Of course they didn't cast him solely for his voice talents, evident as they may be, but with plans to make more overt use of his acting capabilities for later projects. Just when we will get to see those remains unclear. Certainly not in Ant-Man. Likely not in The Avengers: Age of Ultron, where Earth's Mightiest Heroes already have bad guys Ultron and Baron Von Strucker to contend with. They may tease him in the post- or midcredits stingers in that film, but, as was the case with the first Avengers film, it will reamin limited to a teaser so not much will be shown of him. Other future Marvel projects are still a bit sketchy thus far. Thanos doesn't seem the stuff of Captain America 3 or Dr. Strange. My money is on The Avengers 3 at the soonest, and that won't be until 2018 at the least. Gives Brolin a lot of time to prepare for the role, while Marvel is allowed the opportunity to make the Avengers and the Guardians of the Galaxy coherently join forces to fight this cosmic evil together. At least, it sure seems like that is the studio's intention, as they're teasing him in both their respective movies, and if Guardians of the Galaxy turns out to appeal to the audience, that's the type of überteam-up the fans will be aching for.

As for Brolin, he's solid actor, capable of playing a wide range of characters, in projects as diverse in range and scope as The Goonies and Planet Terror to No Country for Old Men and Milk. So I have no doubt he can do this splendidly. I'm more concerned with how they're gonna pull him off other than by Brolin's acting. No doubt the voice will be changed, probably lowered in volume, to accomodate the expectations that come with such a heavy, bulky and larger-than-life extraterrestrial character. As for his physical appearance, I'm quite convinced it's gonna be CGI. If I'm not mistaken, he already was a digital character in The Avengers, and we only got to see the side of his face in that one. Motion capture seems the way to go, giving Brolin more to do and exploiting his talents to their fullest. They would be building on Guardians' character Groot in a technical aspect, who is similarly brought to life by Vin Diesel supplying both voice and bodily motions. Not to mention Marvel's expertise on doing the Hulk, who's very similar in terms of body proportions to Thanos. But all of this is speculation and conjecture at this point and will remain so for quite a few years longer. Let's just wait what Thanos sounds like first. We'll get to know him bit by bit at this rate, before the big final reveal, whenever that may occur.

Today's News: daredevils and dinosaurs

Hot off MovieScene!:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155944/netflix_vindt_zijn_daredevil

Despite the sudden change of guard in showrunners (see yesterday's news), the Marvel/Netflix show seems to be picking up speed. Most importantly, a principal actor has been cast to assume the mantle of the Man Without Fear, and it's Charlie Cox. Pretty good choice, even though some people might be annoyed they went with the safest route and opted for an Englishman to play a (fairly iconic) American comic book vigilante. If he can throw a convincing Irish accent, like he did on Boardwalk Empire to great effect, US slang ought not be an issue. He fits the bill in most other respects - apart from not being blind, obviously - as he's the right age, charming but able to switch to a darker, more distressing persona effortlessly. Okay, so he looks in no way like Matt Murdock as in the comics, but that's something easily remedied I reckon. I think a good casting choice was made for this show. Cox's general '(dare)devil may care' attitude would suit the show, which is still only as good as its writers. There's talent in that regard as well. For the moment, I have little doubts as to the quality of this upcoming Marvel television series.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155955/regisseur_onthult_details_jurassic_world

Douts I have aplenty about the plot of Jurassic World though. But not about its director. Most of the plot has been leaked online, and instead of firmly denying everything (which in Hollywood irrevocably ends up being an act of blatant lying), Colin Trevorrow takes his time to acknowledge unavoidable fan doubts and reassure them he respects the armies of dinosaur devotees eager for another Jurassic bite. Whether they want to hear about the plot contents he just gave away is their own affair. I for one am trying to steer clear off spoilers insofar as at all possible for someone moving in the circles I do. My duty as a movie news poster sometimes leave me little choice in the matter. Do I like what I hear about JW? Not all that much, to be quite honest. The notion of a park open for visitors, where dino shit again hits the fan in that finest of 'jaws and claws' tradition, is hardly the stuff of originality. Even though it would be nice to see the original island of Isla Nublar again (though you cannot help but wonder how anyone could be so stupid as to repeat such dreadful past mistakes: all of Ian Malcolm's ramblings seem to have fallen on deaf ears, alas!). Velociraptors I have found to be overrated in this franchise and the idea of training them to establish a 'relationship with humans' is too vague to make any impression: surely both species already have a relationship, as hunter and prey? They're not gonna train them as watchdogs or bioweapons or something silly like that, are they?

The concept I'm most uncertain about, as is the majority of the fanbase, is the 'genetically modified dinosaur', by which Trevorrow hints at a made up species rather than an existing one. Of course, this was hinted at in the books where the idea of dinosaurs suited to human needs was touched upon - like Sauropods reduced to dog size to make cute pets - thus further underscoring the notion of humanity playing God. Also, none of the dinosaurs so far were actually supposed to be accurate live reflections of the fossil record, as they were already 'theme park monsters', equipped with frog DNA to fill the gaps in their genetic code as well as those in the plot. In this case, the shady corporation pulling the strings has seemingly ordered a theropod that does justice to the popular conception of giant carnivorous dinosaurs as scary monsters rather than actual animals, allowing for the creation of a 'Diabolus Rex'. Sounds ludicrous, but in terms of the Jurassic Park ideology, not wholly without merit. On the one hand it's a logical next step in man's messing with nature, on the other I would much prefer up to date paleontological accuracy to be felt as well. Maybe we'll have both. Until such time as any of the dinosaur animatronics or digital effects shots have been revealed, don't blame me for being on the (electric) fence about this one. But my faith in Trevorrow remains.

Today's News: devils and beasts get some, lose some

More news from everybody's favorite movie website (for those who have heard of it, that is):

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155901/deknight_vervangt_goddard_voor_daredevil

Apparently Marvel and Netflix traded talent for talent here. Both writers/producers have had their fair share of hits, and both stem from Joss Whedon's pool of creative talents. Both Goddard and DeKnight worked on Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. Similar backgrounds must yield similar results, the powers-that-be at Marvel probably thought. They're probably right. Personally I lamented the loss of the ingenious mind that came up with The Cabin in the Woods - if you haven't seen that hilariously inventive movie, that's something you ought to remedy - but I can surely live with the showrunner of Starz' delightful Spartacus series tackling a Marvel project. I would wager coin it won't be as vulgar as those raunchy Romans, but with DeKnight's evident capability to write intriguing character and plot twists, Daredevil doesn't necessarily take a turn for the worse. Also, DeKnight didn't burn his fingers on that one show called Lost, which might otherwise have left a sour taste in his career. And of course Goddard won't be gone entirely, as his scripts for the first two episodes will remain in use, plus he'll stay on as a 'consulting producer', whatever the hell that's supposed to be. So there's definitely gonna be a touch of Goddard to be felt at first. For now, I see more gain than loss here. And either way it's more likely to give the Daredevil his due than Ben Affleck's less than daring flick back from 2003.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155926/alfonso_cuaron_wijst_fantastic_beasts_af

Too bad, but I kinda saw it coming. Cuaron has spend the last five years working on Gravity, after all. To great effect to be sure, but I'm positive he's in definite need of a creative break from all that digital blue-screen material. Cuaron cares about characters and drama far more than about effects, as his quote makes abundantly clear. I'll say Gravity is the odd-one-out on his resumé in that regard: even though it was basically about two people trapped in space, the technical element to that film far outweighed the acting component. It was the effects that made the experience, not the story. So it's about time he changed back to his former routine, where the opposite held true. Even though not much is revealed about the specific plot contents of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, its very title suggests it's all about the fancy creatures and the exotic locales they inhabit, which are heavily dependant on visual effects to make them come alive on screen. Characters clearly seem to come second here. So that really doesn't sound so appealing to a director who has spent half a decade exploring the digital realm. Cuaron is better off returning to his roots and doing something small for a change, or indeed spending time with his actual biological kids rather than his silver screen babies (I've heard from parents that you have to make time for children for their own sake). And even though Cuaron is out for the first installment of this upcoming fantastic franchise, there's nothing that stops him from expressing his interests for one of the already announced sequels somewhere in later years. In the realm of Potter - which still is where we are in this otherwise Potterless project - anything is known to be possible by now.

Today's News: it's Marvel versus DC on the small screen too

Here's some fairly new news from MovieScene I wrote in recent times:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155681/logo_marvelserie_agent_carter_uitgebracht

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155696/eerste_trailer_en_clip_nbcs_constantine

It seems DC is not letting Marvel outdo its rival on television as easily as it does on the big screen. Marvel is still a relative newcomer to the scene, currently hosting only a single show, though with great plans for the future of the medium both on telly and online. DC accordingly was all too eager to grab a corner of that reinvigorated market too (remember, DC has a much more encompassing history with television than Marvel: consider shows like Smallville and Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman, but those are arguably past successes), and has been attempting to do likewise ever since Arrow debuted last year. Its slate of comic book adaptations for television isn't as ambitious and lacks the Marvel touch of coherency (shared universe and all, y'know), but it does reveal more diversity. Arrow is basically superhero light. The upcoming Gotham is more film noir/cop drama than anything else, despite its eventual penchant for masked villains and vigilantes. And as this trailer for Constantine shows, it's more of a fantasy/horror show. The original Hellblazer comics, published under DC's Vertigo imprint, never shared much ties with the regular DC-verse anyway and as all of these shows will debut on different networks, don't expect to see any Marvel type crossovers.

At the same time, 'crossover' remains the key word for Marvel. Agent Carter fits right in that strategy, building on events and characters from both Captain America movies and the running series Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., yet offering a different kind of adventure. Similar to that first Marvel TV series, the main component is spy stories, but set in a period setting, allowing for historical events and characters to be intertwined. Also, the emphasis is on a single (female) character instead of a team of personalities, so the make-up of the show is different from the get-go. It's gonna be a Cold War show, not a series where superhuman characters loom around every corner. But as the logo and the released plot synopsis indicate, connection to what regular audiences know and love about the Marvel Universe will be commonplace. The eagle logo clearly establishes the link between Carter and S.H.I.E.L.D., and it's likely we'll see the foundation of that organization sometime or other in the show: the term 'origin story' will likely be appropriate somewhere down the line. The character of Howard Stark (Iron Man's dad) will also play an important part, thus directly re-establising the connection with the superhuman element and the technological wonders that form another hallmark of the Marvel brand. Nevertheless, I have a tough time picturing this as an ungoing show, it feels more like miniseries material. Blame it on the period setting, blame it on the single protagonist, but the premise feels limited. It sounds like there's only so much you can do with it before it starts getting repetitive. There's a reason the supporting character of Agent Carter never got her own continuing line of comics. I hate to be the Negative Nancy here, but even though it does sound intriguing, I doubt this show will make it for more than two seasons.

As for Constantine, the trailer doesn't make me revel in jubilation either. Even though there's good names attached to the project, judging from the trailer the result has a definite B-movie vibe to it. Of course a trailer is not an accurate reflection of the final product, but it does cause people to get either enthusiastic or pessimistic about the show-to-be. I don't think many people will be convinced of the show's qualities - and with Neil 'Blackwater' Marshall directing the pilot, there just have to be some - after this trailer, or the accompanying clip. Maybe it's the cheap looking effects, maybe it's the choppy editing meant to evoke a sense of dread, but so far the pilot doesn't appear nearly as attractive as the movie, which also wasn't a brilliant piece of gothic audiovisual entertainment. I'm willing to reserve judgment until I see the finished thing (as people should anyway), but so far I'm more stoked for Gotham. That's probably the DC comfort zone speaking, sticking to what we like most about DC, which is undeniably Batman. And Hellblazer is a far cry from the tales of the Caped Crusader. At least Constantine has something to show for it by now. But for the present, Marvel's shows take my preference.

As for Neil Marshall, we still have an 'Episode 9' by his hand in store for us on Game of Thrones. His involvement worked out quite well the last time. Hopefully it will make a difference for Constantine after all.

Today's Review: The Amazing Spider-Man 2

The Amazing Spider-Man 2: ***/*****, or 6/10

Now that Marvel Studios' long term strategy has shown to pay off in the most lucrative manner imaginable, it's no surprise to see rival studios owning their own pieces of the Marvel pie try their luck with a similar concept. As such, Sony faces the most challenging job at universe building, as they own the rights to a franchise based around a single character: Spider-Man. Fortunately for the studio, Spidey has a wide array of friends and foes, allies and adversaries, to choose from in order to construct a larger shared realm which may at some point include movies that do not need the wallcrawler's presence to stand on their own feet. However, such characters, good guys and bad, will need to be introduced first to familiarize the audience with their personalities and groom them for their own solo debuts in later years. And so the crafting of a larger Spiderverse begins with The Amazing Spider-Man 2, which hosts a plethora of new characters and a threesome of rogues to enrich Peter Parker's life. Problem is, for a freshly rebooted franchise which, after a single movie that can be described as 'adequate' at best, still needs to prove to the audience the validity of the rebooting process, the time to start such universe building simply isn't ripe just yet. As a result, the second Amazing Spidermovie feels like a convoluted, incoherently structured piece that aims to be more than 'amazing', while the audience still waits for that moniker to make good on its promise.

In the sequel, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) has come to terms with his powers and responsibilities acting as New York's superhuman guardian, haunted by the vision of Captain Stacy, as he struggles to uphold his promise to the deceased father of the love of his life, Gwen (Emma Stone), to stay out of her existence in order to keep her safe from the harm that comes with being Spider-Man. A strong-spirited and intelligent young woman, Gwen is determined to embrace the dangers involved with dating Peter, or otherwise to move one with her career and leave him in the cold. This results in many a scene of fairly engaging and recognizable lovers' quarrels that reveal director Marc Webb's strengths in directing the identifiable romantic affairs of the younger generation. The chemistry between Garfield and Stone is still solid, though the same cannot be said for the writing of the former, as Peter has moved on from being a socially awkward nerd to a rather self-absorbed punk. Though his red-and-blue clad alter ego is modelled after his comic book counterpart more closely and convincingly than ever – webslinging moves, wisecracking puns and all – Peter feels like he has changed in character a little too much too fast, his occasional dickish behavior courtesy of a new team of writers. While Stone's performance remains a joy to behold, Garfield's oftentimes evokes more irritation than affection.

Spidey's knack for getting those he cares about in trouble is quickly proven as he's confronted by no less than three new villains in this movie, each with his own personal baggage and history that needs some exploration (especially if they are to be found worthy of reprising their roles for later projects). The main antagonist, the volatile and hotheaded Electro (Jamie Foxx), is given the most balanced bit of background, in which he is revealed kind of as Peter Parker-gone-bad. A lonely and socially isolated geek, his involuntary plunge in a vat of genetically engineered electric eels (if you feel this sounds silly, ask yourself whether it would if it involved spiders instead) grants him powers beyond his wildest dreams, but as he hopes to finally stand out from the crowd, those masses that worship his idol Spider-Man reject him, forcing him to go on a electrostatic rampage aimed at New York's favorite webspinner to get back at the world. Though Foxx's performance, some times over-the-top while at others more contained, leaves something to be desired, as does his rather two-dimensional anger directed at Spider-man, Electro's colourful but lethal sparkle shows make for a fancy visual style not seen in a Spider-Man movie before.

What has been seen before however is Harry Osborn, Peter's long time friend and occasionally Spidey's nemesis. In Raimi's trilogy of movies, Harry was given an arc all his own over the course of three movies, building up to the conflict to be and Spider-Man's emotional disarray that came with it. Not so in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, where the same story is roughly being told in a single film, in a much abbreviated form that does not do justice to the many decades of comic book lore in which this close friendship annex hateful rivalry slowly but surely evolved. When his father Norman (Chris Cooper), the head of OsCorp Industries, dies as a result of a degenerative illness that runs in the family, Harry (Dane DeHaan) gets reacquainted with his childhood friend Peter as he offers his condolences. A more elaborate backstory is inferred, but as it is only the subject of the briefest conversation it is hard to truly care about the relationship between Peter and Harry. The latter swiftly becomes CEO of OsCorp where he finds himself thrown in an arena of board intrigue and backstabbing conspiracies to remove him from office, as he tries to find a cure for what killed his dad and all too soon will end his life prematurely too. The only thing standing between him and an untimely demise appears to be the blood of genetically engineered spiders, company property that was deemed lost, so Spider-Man's blood appears to be the only cure still available. As the disease starts to corrupt both his body and mind, Harry's friendship with Peter turns sour when his buddy will not help him get in touch with the wallcrawler to acquire that pivotal transfusion. Eventually more drastic measures must be taken for survival and Harry transforms into the maniacal Green Goblin, hellbent on wrecking Peter's life, especially when he discovers his secret identity. DeHaan proves quite up to the task of portraying the sympathetic Harry, who grows ever more frustrated as his quest to save his own life is thwarted by both those on his payroll and his oldest friend. He also visibly shows to have had a blast playing the crazed Goblin, making DeHaan's contributions to the acting front more sizable than Garfield's haphazard performances, though both characters are admittedly driven by less than stellar writing.

Last and least of the trio of baddies is Rhino, a Russian criminal played by Paul Giamatti (who also makes it abundantly clear he's enjoying himself tremendously), whose presence feels more of an afterthought added by the studio to get that universe building going, as he adds little of relevance to the plot otherwise. Appearing only in the beginning of the film as a violent smuggler who's ridiculed by Spidey, and at the end donning stupendously large battle armour, the character proves the finest example of how not to introduce characters meant to form part of a larger whole later on, if you want the audience to invest in them. It is made clear in the climax of the film Rhino is the first member of Harry's team of villains meant to destroy Spider-Man, a plot line which is already stated to carry over in the next entry into the series, as well as in the announced Sinister Six spin-off. However, this attempt to foreshadow such future fare backfires on The Amazing Spider-Man 2 as a film on its own. 

 

If you compare the first few trailers with the final product, you'll notice the film feels to be lacking not only many scenes but also entire story threads that would have driven the plot into a very different direction. Scenes between Harry, his father and Peter promised much more intricate relations between the characters than what was ultimately seen on screen. Likewise, characters' scenes were filmed but dropped, including the introduction of Mary Jane, while others were shortened dramatically, like Harry's secretary Felicia Hardy (who fans will know as Spidey's love affair/part time enemy Black Cat) suffered. The undeniable fact is, with multiple foes, a tumultuous love life and relationship with assorted family, plus a continuing search for his roots and the fate of his parents carried over from the predecessor, there was more than enough going on in the plot of the film already without the studio's obvious insistence of setting up future films as well. As a result, few of the many plot lines get their chance to stand out amidst the convoluted whole that now is The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Of course, there's some fine action scenes and shows of superhero spectacle, while the webslinging never looked better. But in most other respects, the film too often feels like coming up short considerably. Arguably, Sony will make more time to craft the upcoming films into a more coherent and consistent whole, as the element of universe building was rushed into this movie's plot while production was already underway. For now however, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 has ended up a Spider-Man film that quickly branches off into an advertisement for upcoming Spider-Man films, hurting its own ending, despite the otherwise tragic climax, which under less padded conditions might have made this the emotionally most powerful Spiderfilm as yet. Robbed of its right to exist as a separate entity, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 failed in that regard, nor does it bode well for Spidey's future.

And to make matters worse, some viewers will be treated to a version of the film with end credits containing a scene for the next X-Men film, which causes this movie to feel even more like a commercial for future superhero flicks, even wholly unrelated ones...