Today's Column: anybody want a Dark Claw movie?

This month's column went up early. Superheroes again. They keep me talking it appears.

Disney, koop DC alsjeblieft!

Of course the tone of this piece is meant somewhat sarcastically. Sure, I'd love to see a Dark Claw movie or any other feature related to the wonderful Amalgam universe, but it's definitely not gonna happen. Ever. And I don't think all movie studios owning superhero copyrights joining together, either out of their own volition or because they're bought up by a larger corporation, would be a preferable solution. One studio owning all the superhero franchises isn't a monopoly we would want. Say what you will about various studios owning various pieces of the various superhero universe puzzles, it guarantees some diversity. If Marvel hadn't sold the rights to Spider-Man and similar large, popular and well known properties, we likely wouldn't have gotten Iron Man, Thor or Guardians of the Galaxy, and seeing as how well that turned out, that clearly would have been a great loss. Now that Spider-Man has returned to Marvel's fold, we have yet to see whether he's not gonna reap too much of other characters' glory, even though the fact Marvel is still working on titles like Captain Marvel, Inhumans and Black Panther is reassuring to some extent, as they seemingly mean to keep the diversity flowing.

But what about the fanboys' dreams of 'interpublisher' crossovers between characters belonging not only to rival studios, but also to rival publishers? They'll stay dreams. I doubt that would change even if a major player like Disney managed to buy the rights to the DC characters after all. Which certainly isn't inconceivable, considering the various properties they bought up in recent years. It often feels with all these companies buying companies, you'll one day end up with one humongously big fat supercompany on top, controlling every franchise. Maybe that'll be Disney in the not too distant future (they don't own the business genius of Scrooge McDuck for nothing, you know). But seeing as how they have yet to do crossovers between Indiana Jones and Marvel, or between more similar brands like the Muppets and Disney's own iconic characters, I doubt they'd go so far as to do a DC/Marvel crossover, let alone Amalgam. (Then again, there already is a comic book which serves as a crossover between Star Wars and Indiana Jones, courtesy of Harrison Ford's presence in both of them.) But if it ever happened, would it be good? An Amalgam adaptation, maybe. It's hard to mess up a fabulous hybrid notion like Dark Claw. A giant crossover between the Avengers and the Justice League? No way, far too many characters and their assorted baggage to make for a sensible plot line. Only the hungriest fanboys would understand it completely, but general audiences couldn't make heads or tails of it all. Let's see whether DC knows how to join its own characters together with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice first. Not to mention it has yet to be determined whether Marvel can pull a similar trick with having more than one group share the screen, as will be the case when the Avengers and the Guardians of the Galaxy join forces in Avengers: Infinity War Parts I & II.

And otherwise, let's just keep dreaming about these little fanboy fantasies of ours. I'm still dreaming of the release of more than only two Dark Claw comics...

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: A threesome of trailers

Trailer! Trailer! Anyone want a trailer?

Tweede teaser Star Wars: The Force Awakens

With every little bit of info released, the hype for this film is building. Though so far scepticism reigned supreme in my case, I cannot help but now feel a rising level of optimism as well, against my better judgment. There's only so much iconic imagery of the original Star Wars movies against the backdrop of an intriguing new setting you can give a guy before he breaks. That shot of the downed Star Destroyer just looked too cool to ignore. The first teaser lacked such sweeping images, but now that the release date is approaching, successively splendid shots will be revealed. Still, I'm not too high on some other old cards being played. An aged Han Solo doesn't get me nearly as excited, even though I love(d?) the character. It's just exemplary of the rehasing of old glory that's currently driving Hollywood, usually to lackluster results. Whether it will work for Star Wars is very much the question. At least Ford is still a capable actor we can take serious, but what of the likes of Carrie Fisher and Mark Hamill, who've made a career making fun - lovingly, but still - of their characters of old? That's the good thing about Chewbacca or R2-D2, they don't really rely on the people inside them to convince us. So for the moment, I revel more in the visual effects than in the acting, but that's a Star Wars staple anyway. The old stuff aside, what to make of the elements new to the Star Wars series? A mysterious chrome Stormtrooper, a beach ball Droid, novel characters and locations we need to learn to love (or not)... There's still plenty that can go wrong, but I can't help but feel there are definitely things going right.

Eerste trailer Scream: The TV Series

You gotta admit, this trailer is quick to make the statement most people will when they see it: 'you can't do a slasher as a TV series'. Doesn't stop this show from trying though. Being selfreflexive is of course one of the trademarks of the Scream series of movies, so it's good see this quality wasn't lost on the producers. But it's going to take spectators a little more than that to convince them to bother to watch this show. In all other respects, it doesn't seem to have much going for it, at least nothing the movies didn't show. Teens, murders, humour, that sort of thing. On the big screen, it worked well enough to spawn three sequels over the years, but on a TV show, even for a single season, you risk getting repetitive pretty darn soon. Unless the series still has cards to play this trailer doesn't reveal. Even if it does, as we are currently living in the Golden Age of Television, we have plenty of excellent programs to pick from, and I doubt many would opt for a slasher series based on a worn out series of movies. Unless it's raining very often and hard outside on those dreary afternoons.

Nieuwe teaser trailer Ant-Man

Posted above is the actual trailer for Marvel's latest flick, rather than the teaser mentioned in my article. At the moment of posting, I didn't take the different time zones State side into account, so the full trailer wasn't released the next day, but rather a few hours later, making my bit of news redundant even sooner than I had anticipated. But then, redundancy is the key term for teasers of trailers anyway. Other than the true Internet nerds who will end up seeing the movie in theaters anyway, nobody will really bother to watch such teasers, certainly not the paying "general audience" as it has come to be known as. In my mind, there really is little point to crafting trailers into events of their own in this manner, as trailers are a means to an end rather than the end itself, which is the final film. Where will this madness end? Teasers for teasers for teasers for trailers for movies? I'm making a stand to put a stop to this. Give me a teaser, then a trailer or three and then release the damn film. Release a bunch TV spots too, if needs be, but nothing more in the audiovisual department. As for this full lenth trailer for Ant-Man, as is the case for Star Wars I'm progressively liking what I see. It's always a hard blow when one of your favorite directors - Edgar Wright, in this scenario - departs a project, but in this case, the successor took a hint or two in terms of humour, resulting in at least one hilarious Wrightian gag (you'll know it when you see it). Hopefully the final film will echo more Wright, though I wouldn't expect the new director to ignore his own personality entirely, that would be unfair to him. And even if there's little more Wright to discern, it's a Marvel film, how bad can it be? *cough*IronMan3*cough*

Today's Column: will Spider-Man be our new Iron Man?

Told you I'd write that column? Well, here it is:

Wordt Spider-Man de nieuwe Iron Man?

What, another column in only two weeks, you may ask? Well, I had the time available to pen one and there was an opening because the guy who was supposed to deliver one this week didn't do so (for shame!). Plus, my editor recognized this as a current topic that needed to be posted before the news felt too far in the past. So, good for me.

As you might be able to discern from this overly long piece, I don't believe Spider-Man joining the ranks of Marvel Studios is a bad thing at all. I just know there's a lot of factors to take into account to make it work properly, without getting the feeling the webhead is hogging all the glory from his fellow superheroes (something Robert Downey Jr's Iron Man felt to be doing at times). And I have faith that Marvel will consider all possible angles, while my gut tells me they had it all worked out already, as they're champions in planning their universe thoroughly ahead. That said, I do believe re-introducing the audience to the beloved webslinger in the next Captain America movie is not the smartest move. It feels too much like 'oh, Spider-Man played a pivotal role in the Civil War comics, so let's use him in that screen adaptation to stick closer to the source material and earn points with the fan base' or a similar thought along that line. But this is not necessarily the Spider-Man we've come to know. It won't be Andrew Garfield. It's a new guy, which - unfortunately - does require a bit of an origin story to make it flow seamlessly. And such a story is better suited in his own film, rather than in somebody else's. Even though I recognize audiences have grown tired of Spidey's origin story, which has been retold a little too often in recent years. But you still gotta have it if you're talking about a new Spider-Man. A younger Spider-Man. Might they even consider going a vastly different route and eliminating Peter Parker for the new webhead on the block Miles Morales altogether? Now that's an interesting thought. Though definitely one that would polarize the fan community and make for quite some heavy flame wars all over the web. Whose side are you on? That's inspiration for another column right there.

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 Trailer: a very X-citing final X-trailer

As promised, here's the latest and apparently last trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155150/laatste_trailer_x-men_days_of_future_past_online

Any doubts I had about this film when watching the previous few trailers have disappeared: this film looks like a total blast! What it relays the most pressingly, compared to its predecessors, is the sense of a coherent story line; always welcome in a movie involving time travel. Even though it does kinda feel like a gratuitous set-up to have the original X-Men's X-Men and their recent First Class past counterparts hook up. It's definitely a step away from the original comic book story, wherein there was no past, only the present and the abysmal future that would have occurred if the X-Men hadn't halted certain events in said present. This time it's the past that needs to be altered for the good of both mankind and mutantkind, while the future serves as an alternate present, considering the characters from previous X-films do not appear all that much older (okay, so Iceman grew a beard: whoop-dee-doo!). Despite all the techie stuff involved, this grizzly future seems to takes place around the same time as our present (roughly stated, 2015-2020), making it a future only for the past.

More intriguing is what happened to the 'first class' of X-Men, who seem to have disbanded, making for a rather disheveled and depressed Xavier. There's definitely some explaining that needs to be done there. As happened in First Class, the need to form a new team is imminent, and this time it's Wolverine (Hugh Jackman playing that part for the seventh time, and still he's up for more: that's loyalty!) who must do the job. Question is: is this the actual future Wolverine transported in time, or has the older Xavier somehow mentally instructed the past Wolverine to do so through time? As seen in the marketing campaign, though not something easily picked up in this trailer, both the boney claw Wolverine and his adamantium wielding equivalent will be spotted in this movie, but will they share the screen, thus making for two different Wolverines in one film? This is still left a little vague, as can be expected from a film involving temporal mechanics. In the original story, Kitty Pride (Shadowcat) was the one doing the time travelling, but she didn't do so physically, as her present counterpart was mentally picking up future events sent to aid her in forcing a change that should prevent that bleak future from ever happening. Shadowcat makes an appearance in this movie, but since Wolverine is still the most popular X-Man, he now has taken over her role, and apparently reduced her character to mere cannon fodder. The notion of seeing two Wolverines onscreen simultaneously is a wonderful concept and I wouldn't mind exploring that avenue. But then, there's still plenty of fascinating character moments bound to pass, judging from the trailer, as Wolverine is confronted with past versions of fellow mutants he has come to know and love, or in other cases, hate.

And of course there's mindblowing action with Sentinels and all kinds of mutants and crashing football stadiums and stuff. Good to know, but in this case more than ever there's a great opportunity for getting to know these characters, some of them established is two different ways, from fresh and unexpected angles. Bryan Singer has previously proven to work well with large ensembles, giving everyone their appropriate due and I have full confidence he won't let us down in that regard once more. I was somewhat sceptical about this film thanks to the first two trailers - and the fact this movie deals with what is arguably the most classic and well loved X-tale of them all - but this trailer has gotten me X-cessively hyped for this latest X-travaganza. And those to follow, since Days of Future Past will have great consequences for various X-projects to follow, like X-Force and X-Men: Apocalypse. Seems the X-future will be at least as X-citing as the X-past!

Today's Review: Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Captain America: The Winter Soldier: ****/*****, or 8/10

For those of you who were wondering when Marvel would finally more aptly acknowledge its roots in our contemporary world politics, a hallmark that sets it apart from the likes of its rival DC (which instead has its adventures take place in an uncomfortable alternate Earth that is suspiciously similar to our own, but sticks to utilizing fictional cities and such), this second Captain America finally does just that, offering a fairly serious social commentary about the status of that wonderful thing called 'freedom' in modern (American) society. Without sacrificing the quality mix of catchy humour and solid action that characterizes all of the Marvel Studios movies thus far, Captain America: The Winter Soldier proves there is room for contextual exploration of the modern zeitgeist on the big screen as much as there is on the pages of its comic books. Forget Iron Man battling terrorists in Afghanistan, there's much deeper threats to be found on the homefront, as Cap is about to discover.

Of course the first thing this second Cap movie needs to do is re-establish the Star Spangled Avenger as a man out of time, providing much needed character exposition that was lacking in his second appearance in The Avengers, since that film's alien invasion plot and abundance of characters didn't allow much time for such additional subplots. His beloved homeland has changed much since he went missing in the Fourties and poor Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) ponders if he still fits in these more cynical times. Everyone he knew is dead or dying, as illustrated by a heartbreaking scene where he visits his former love Peggy, who has become a bedridden, frail old woman suffering from degenerative diseases. Equally deteriorating seem to be his cherished notions on freedom. Civil liberties have been sacrificed for the greater good to ensure national security and his employer, the supposedly worldwide peacekeeping organisation known as S.H.I.E.L.D., is keeping far too close an eye on everybody's private affairs to his taste. Comparisons to the N.S.A.'s shenanigans are easily drawn, but in the tradition of the great spy thrillers of the Seventies (from which this movie takes its fair share of notes thematically and stylistically), Captain America: The Winter Soldier suggests the people have slowly but surely traded in their freedom, conditioned by growing fear the government was sowing in their minds of losing it altogether. Naturally it's not wholly the fault of the executive power either – if you think Marvel joins the bandwagon of calling Obama a Great Satan, think again – as the movie identifies the good Captain's principal enemy to be at the heart of this shady matter. It turns out the former Nazi science department HYDRA has made the transition to the 21^st Century much more smoothly than the Sentinel of Liberty himself, embedding itself firmly in S.H.I.E.L.D.'s upper echelons. And so Steve must find a way to root out America's hidden adversaries and end their collective mindcontrol dominating his country, all whilst on the run, as they have successfully accused him of treason.

Enter his sidekicks and assorted allies. His gruff chief, Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson), reluctantly starts asking questions when he tells Steve of a black ops project that involves launching three new Helicarriers, designed to patrol the world neutralizing threats in their infancy, which Cap finds a revolting concept. It quickly makes Fury a target for an apparently successful assassination, after which Cap teams up with the lethal agent Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) to find out who killed his guardian. Evans and Johansson make quite an enjoyable pair with great rapport between them, both having served as agents of the same secret organization, but carrying different views of their job and its methods; a relic of a more innocent time, Cap dislikes Widow's end-justify-the-means approach to things that the Cold War, which he never experienced, has taught her, causing the necessary verbal fireworks between the two that both provide character development and witty dialogue galore thanks to their fine chemistry. Less compelling proves Cap's relationship with the new persona of Sam Wilson, an army veteran who, as a fellow former soldier, is more in line with his more black and white line of dutiful thinking. Since an ordinary human being, military background notwithstanding, would be too dull at his side in Cap's current endeavours, Wilson soon dons a pair of mechanical wings, convenient leftovers of a secret military project. Comic connoisseurs will remember Wilson's alter ego the Falcon well before the appearance of this apparatus, which only feels a forced addition to the movie's progression.

Equally contrived an inclusion to the plot could be called the movie's subtitular character, the Winter Soldier himself. Serving as the ultimate assassin, a cyborg killer whose mind is wiped after every assignment so as to keep his human tendencies from compromising his ruthless efficiency, this man with his metal arm harbours a dark past and personal connection with his new target. Considering his limited screen time, this relationship, which turns out to be crucial at the film's conclusion, is not given its due to ensure the desired emotional impact, and considering the number of loose ends left, feels largely as a set-up for a third movie. Considering how sparingly the character is seen on screen, you can't help but wonder why this movie actually carries the subtitle 'The Winter Soldier'. Nevertheless, the Winter Soldier proves quite a match for Cap in terms of kicking ass and makes for a formidable foe to behold. The same can be said for Robert Redford's Alexander Pierce, who fulfills a similar role except on a less physical level, serving as the movie's delightfully scheming evil mastermind: an apt choice, considering the various classic Seventies' political thrillers on his resumé.

In terms of visual spectacle and explosive action, The Winter Soldier effortlessly surpasses The First Avenger, trading in the predecessor's delightfully retro WW II style for a more intimidating modern look, with advanced technology to match. Drones and missiles are all part of the package to give this movie a contemporary, actual feel, but in typical Marvel fashion the movie tops this with even bigger guns and gadgets, the most exciting aspect the three giant gunships hovering above the American capitol as they threaten to hold the nation hostage, at its own behest via security over freedom. Spectacular aerial battles are the result, while the movie also contains its fair share of impressive hand-to-hand combat scenes, car chases and gun fights. Not to mention an ample dose of links to the larger Marvel Universe, evoking previously seen characters and surreptitiously introducing new ones. Rest assured, a Dr. Strange movie is a given now, while those who are eagerly looking forward to Avengers: Age of Ultron will get a vigorous nerdgasm out of the film's mid-credits scene. You have to give kudos to Marvel's continuous method of seemlessly creating a larger whole out of separate pieces, without harming the content proper in said standalone stories.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a sequel superior to its predecessor in every respect. It couples valid, well-timed social anxieties to a good political thriller plot, while never ignoring the fun that is to be expected from a Marvel flick. Granted, not all characters come across as intriguing or convincing as ought to have been the case, which is not exactly a new flaw to Marvel's movies either. This second Cap movie successfully introduces its protagonist to the new world he inhabits and the change in concept of the virtues he has always extolled, making this overly patriotic character much easier to digest and to identify with for non American audiences, while giving domestic spectators an added value in having their nation's superhero redefine their mores for them.

Today's News: Spidey loses his Webb

Yesterday's hottest news today on my blog!:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154451/webb_niet_terug_voor_amazing_spider-man_4

All good things come to an end, and for most directors, the number three is that magical line where they tend to call it quits. There's exceptions of course, like Michael Bay on Transformers, but then, that is not a good thing. It doesn't happen very often that a director working on a major franchise continues to work in that capacity beyond three movies. Sam Raimi stepped down as director on the previous Spider-Man trilogy at a point where that was still intended to feature more than just three movies (but as history willed it, Spider-Man 4 was dropped by the studio in favor of the current rebooted series). Marc Webb seems to follow closely in his footsteps in this regard. You'd think Webb might want to show off and do at least one more of these films just to stick it to Raimi, but such frivolous thoughts of competition apparently do no enter his mind. A job as advisor is enough for him when he has finished his trilogy, he says. And who can blame him? We gotta cut these directors some slack when doing three movies in a row and then deciding to call it a day. They spend years and years working on the same characters, the same type of films, propelled by the same high expectations by the studio and the general audience alike. That takes its toll. Webb will have spent the better part of a decade doing Spider-Man when he's done. Maybe he'd like to spend more time with the wife and kids for a change? Though no doubt he liked his experience on the first movie - and the paychecks that accompanied the job - well enough to have at it two more times, there comes a point where any director needs something new to keep thoroughly engaged. Directors are creative people that continuously crave new challenges and different types of projects. If they keep regurgitating their energy for doing the exact same thing for ten years, quality of the end results is bound to suffer, and nobody will be the wiser. Raimi's much maligned Spider-Man 3 already seemed to suffer from such deterioration, and we have yet to see how well Webb will cope on his third Spidey movie. Nevertheless, since these new Spider-Man movies too make the studio stupendous amounts of money, you can't blame them for wanting to keep the momentum going. Especially when they see how great Marvel Studios is doing with their Avengers approach, which they have now copied with the intention of exploring and expanding Spider-Man's universe, for the moment seemingly ad infinitum. Not only have they slated two more Amazing Spider-Man movies after next month's second installment, villain spin-offs Sinister Six and Venom are also in the works, whether the audience wants them or not. Hey Webb, how about doing Venom when you're done with Spider-Man? He's just like Spidey, except in black and evil, so totally different. There's your creative challenge right there!

Today's News: Cap gets clipped

Just a minor tidbit of news today, but on schedule for a change:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154265/nieuwe_clip_captain_america_the_winter_soldier

When a movie's promotional campaign starts handing out free clips, you know the actual release is only weeks, if not days, away. I knew that already of course, but the general audience isn't supposed to be in the know as much as I (or simply just not as much of a know-it-all as myself). Of course, such a clip still serves purely as advertisement and therefore refrains from giving away vital plot information. We get to witness an all-in-a-day's-work type of skirmish in the adventurous life and times of the Star Spangled Avenger, as he infiltrates a secret ocean base that has been commandeered by a second rate villain (Batroc the Leaper) few non Marvelites will have heard about, with only minor tie-ins to the overarching plot of the film proper. The scene shown in this fragment of the final film also serves as its opening, re-introducing Cap and Black Widow for an audience that needs its memory jogged to remember who these characters were again and how well they played together, both in terms of action and snappy dialogue. If you hadn't seen the first movie yet you largely get the handle on Cap, though you might fail to understand those few comments relating to him being a character out of time. He seems to be blending in fine though, running black ops missions for S.H.I.E.L.D. As the new footage that concludes the clip reveals, he won't keep doing fine though, as he's in for a serious reality check as to how much America has changed from the simpler times he was born and raised in. Luckily Widow will continue to have his back. And since both of them are slated to re-appear in Avengers: Age of Ultron, I wouldn't expect any dramatic casualties on their part. I hear Samuel L. Jackson's Marvel contract is rapidly expiring though. Who knows, maybe S.H.I.E.L.D.'s one eyed top dog will finally go down with his helicarrier?

Today's News: rise of the sustainable superhero

Another MS newsflash from mine own hand:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153835/nieuwe_behind-the-scenes_featurettes_the_amazing_spider-man_2

Not much novel actual content from the movie itself here, except for some new snappy gags showing off Spidey's trademark sense of humour (sorely missed in Raimi's trilogy of Spider-films). Otherwise these are typical puff pieces, in which the cast and crew reminisce about how great it was to make this movie, how much they adored each other on set and how lucky they are to have these jobs. Which is the usual sort of thing for featurettes like these to show. They serve as little more than promotional pieces reminding you of how much you want to see this movie by displaying little new material but showing mostly 'the good times' from the set so you get the idea that these people have the greatest jobs imaginable, and therefore the resulting final film is a work of love, instead of mere business. The 'Sustainability' video is interesting in this regard too, as it reveals how much studios aim to appear as if they care about more than just the huge sums of money that are involved, in this particular case by 'going green'. Producing big blockbuster movies is after all a hugely wasteful exercise, and there's definite room for improvement there. Now that public sentiment towards ecological thinking turns ever more in the direction of widespread embrace by vast audience numbers, studios hop on this bandwagon to show the folks that are likely to buy tickets they care about the environment too. Especially in the case of giant multi-million dollar projects like this one, public relations are of the utmost importance, so the studio must appear as likeable and openminded as possible. You didn't think they were going green because it actually is the most responsible and sound thing to do, right? They're doing this because the audience needs to like their new movie in every way imaginable, and ecological thinking is "all the rage" right now. Sounds harsh? Maybe it is, but time must tell whether the current Hollywood fad of sustainable filmmaking leads to actual permanent changes in the industry and its general short-term way of thinking. That said, it's still a change in the right direction and as such a laudable objective. But I doubt most audiences will care really much about all this hard work on the sustainability front when they sit down in theaters to watch The Amazing Spider-Man 2. They just want to see their webslinging hero wisecracking around as he's kicking bad guy butt. Bad guys like the Green Goblin. See, there's some subverted ideological overtones right there...

Today's News: I'm being capped by the star spangled Avenger

Added another trailer to the MS archives:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153522/tweede_trailer_captain_america_the_winter_soldier

Another bitchin' trailer for this movie that keeps me excited despite its overly patriottic protagonist. I gotta admit, I'm posting a suspicious amount of Cap 2 stuff recently. I don't mean to give this movie preference over others just because I look forward to it (as I happen to look forward to said other movies too), it just depends on the availability of scoops and the eagerness of my colleagues to post the other news before I beat them to it. Also, with Cap 2's release date approaching fast, advertisement output for its rival superhero movies X-Men: Days of Future Past and The Amazing Spider-Man 2, due out soon after, seems to have diminished a little. Maybe it's Marvel Studios' way of telling its competitors 'there's only one true Marvel so back off', maybe it's just convenience, or maybe there's some secret deal to keep out of each other's way a little bit (wouldn't be surprised, as these three movies will be guaranteed hit films at the box office anyway so why deny each other success when we can all get happily loaded together?). That said, with America's top sports event the Super Bowl up this weekend (I really don't get what they like about that sport), be sure to see a lot of promotional campaigns for summer blockbusters suddenly picking up speed, as this is the perfect time to get the word out on such fare for audiences as yet unaware of these big budget Hollywood projects. First spots for various epic summer movies are already up a few days in advance accordingly, with the best stuff yet to come. I doubt this will be the last trailer I'll be posting this week...

Today's News: Winter Soldier is still coming

We're not rid of the star spangled Avenger just yet, like it or not:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153459/nieuwe_posters_captain_america_the_winter_soldier

Seems like the second Captain America's promotional campaign is releasing new pics and posters every other day now. Considering its rival at the boxoffice, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (a Sony release despite being a Marvel superhero too) is doing the same, there's a precedent for this. It's basically ensuring people are aware of your movie whether they care to be or not by going all-out releasing new materila in a high frequency: to put it brief, a sort of overkill. Still not particularly popular outside the US of A, Cap could sure use the help of some glorious new posters like these. Too bad his own is rather dull and overly sombre, not a particularly neat piece of visual imagery that sticks to mind. However, Black Widow's fabulously sexy poster, formidably appropriating all of Scarlett Johansson's wonderful physical attributes, certainly makes up for it (not to mention she can act too). That poster is bound to attract some audiences all by itself. Call me a sexist if you much, but please remember I didn't make the poster, I only spread the word about it by posting it online. It reminds us Cap has something Spidey does not have (yet): a superpowered (well, sort of) female sidekick riding along into battle with him, instead of cheering him on from the sidelines like Emma Stone's all too human Gwen Stacy sticks to (so Sony better introduce the Black Cat or Silver Sable into the rebooted Spider-Man franchise soon to keep up!). People who want to see a heroine kick butt as well as any hero, if not more so, will surely get what they want in this film. Nor will the movie feel the need to have its protagonists from both sexes engage in typical romance with each other, as these characters have a strictly professional relationship. So whatever personal demons continue to haunt Steve Rogers in the 21st century, Agent Romanoff will be there to make sure the threat to world peace (but mostly America) is subdued with extreme prejudice. And otherwise there's still their mutual boss to contend with. As if anybody could beat Samuel L. Jackson in whatever regard. Except for impressive feminine looks of course.

And guess what? On the heels of these new posters and set photos, Marvel released yet another new Cap 2 poster. Why do I even bother to keep up... Because that's what I signed up for is why! And in all honesty, that stunning Black Widow is not a poster I would want to have missed. I'll be sure to keep an eye out at work for that one! Hopefully not while covering me other eye with an eye patch and doing Nick Fury imitations. That would be a little too nerdy even for me.

Today's News: a deluge of more Spidey pics and posters

Here's another bunch of Spider-Man images I posted on MS:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/153149/meer_nieuwe_posters_en_shots_amazing_spider-man_2

Are you getting tired of Spider-Man yet? I gotta say, this is really an agressive, in-your-face marketing campaign that Amazing Spider-Man 2 is witnessing. It seems there's new material made available every other day. And we still have more than three months to go before the movie hits, so I don't expect it to get any less any time soon, which means the movie's release will be hard to miss. New images is one thing, but what's the point of so many different posters? One possible answer in this case is building up (unconscious) franchise awareness. The 'Enemies will unite' tagline on the Electro one-sheet is a rather overt reference to the recently anounced upcoming Sinister Six spin-off movie, the groundwork for which is being laid right in this film. TAS-M2 introduces three(!) baddies from that notorious team of super villains from Spidey's rogue gallery, and if you count Lizard from the previous installment as another (though that has not yet been confirmed), you only need to spawn two more in TAS-M3 before the Six can have at the webslinger in the fourth film (also alreayd announced) and their own adventure afterwards (an all-bad guy movie would be a new one even for Marvel). As the trailers revealed - subtlety is not one of this franchise's strong suits - the identities of the missing pair have also been established already. But of course, the danger with so many characters is risking a convoluted, overcrowded movie. Remember how well (or not actually) Raimi's Spider-Man 3 fared in that regard, when it also let loose three antagonists on our hero? At least director Marc Webb will have a decent blueprint on how not to do things storywise.

And if a Sinister Six movie wasn't enough, it seems Spidey's archenemy Venom is getting his own solofilm too, though no word yet on how this character is gonna get introduced prior to that happening. The proposed project certainly won't build on Raimi's third Spider-movie (thankfully!). Since Venom needs to be (re)introduced through a Spider-Man film first (otherwise you completely ignore the origin of the character and his motivations), everybody's guess is he will pop up in TAS-M3 too, which means he could possibly replace Lizard as a Sinister Six member. But why then the privilege of a solo film? After all, it seems unfair and overkill if we would see Venom both in his own film and the proposed Sinister Six flick, unless he would be replaced by another villain in the latter, rendering the Sinster Six Venomless but justifying a Venom movie more strongly. As you can see, Sony Pictures' intended development of the Spider-Universe is already rife with questions about the future of characters not yet introduced, and that universe at present still consists of only one film. But a constant stream of images, posters and the occasional new vague comment from the director and execs keeps the fans' discussions and controversies going and ensures it will survive for a few more years. Are you getting tired of Spider-Man yet? If not, you probably will eventually, if those Spider-fans can't shut up about it until solid information is finally released.

Today's News: Paquin gone rogue

A little flash of news from mine own hand today:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/152605/anna_paquin_uit_x-men_days_of_future_past_geknipt

I'm not surprised at this occurrence: considering the vast number of returning characters, not to mention a bunch of new ones, there were bound to be a few left in the cold. Apparently Rogue was only in this one single action scene, so it appears there was little substance to her character anyway. If it helps the pace and flow of the movie, sacrifices have to be made. 'Kill your darlings' is a well established editorial practice, and many a film has fallen prey to scenes featuring fan favorites being chopped out. Compare The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King for example, where everyone's preferred evil wizard Saruman was excised, despite being played by the formidable Christopher Lee (blasphemy says I!). At least that movie had an extended cut upcoming, which I doubt will be the case for Days of Future Past. At least Bryan Singer assures us we'll see the scene on the home cinema release regardless, albeit not reintegrated in the movie proper. It is always a hard thing for actors to swallow when they hear they haven't made it into the final film - the Saruman incident for instance resulted in a brief falling-out between Lee and Peter Jackson - but apparently Paquin is enough of a professional to be cool with it, even though it means she did the whole Comic-Con press thing last summer for nothing. That is, Singer tells us she agrees with the decision: we have not had confirmation of her own opinion yet, so maybe it's just a marketing tactic to assure us that despite the change everything has been resolved amicably. Something which I am inclined to believe, considering the director and actress have worked before twice, so they're probably dear friends as these things go. And as for the fanboys, get over it: there's still plenty of mutants around in Days of Future Past to make for an X-travaganza like nothing seen before. Unless Singer goes all Sentinel and terminates a few more to make the movie run more smoothly. It's Marvel, anything can happen.

Today's News: more Spidey pics, and a trailer soon slinging our way

Look what I found online to post on MS:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/152139/nieuwe_fotos_amazing_spider-man_2_online

These pictures are getting increasingly oriented, as was to be expected. The shooting process is now over and done with (excluding eventual pick-ups), so the first finished (or nearly so) effects pop up in the promotional material as evidenced here. We now know who the new villains are and which actors will be playing them - in case you simply can't care less and/or missed this bit of news, it's Electro (Jamie Foxx), Rhino (Paul Giamatti) and the Green Goblin (either Chris Cooper or Dane DeHaan) - so now we are dying to see what they can do to the poor webhead. These few pictures are just the tip of the iceberg as the marketing machine slowly but surely starts to crank out more and more intriguing stuff with the intent to drag us along in the typical Hollywood hype surrounding this type of excessively expensive (but often equally lucrative) blockbuster flick. Pictures are one thing, but what the audience wants is trailers. And they're getting one pretty soon, as we've been teased with little snippets of it for a week now. These days, simply releasing teasers and trailers for a big budget film like this is apparently not enough, you have to release teasers for the trailers themselves too. It feels like commercial overkill, as it's likely the trailer will be seen by most people who would visit the film itself in theaters sometime along the next five months anyway, but the marketing execs take no chances, spending even more top dollar bombastically announcing the upcoming trailer event which like the film itself should not be missed by anyone since it's gonna be oh so special; a thing the studio system tries to convince us of in the case of pretty much all summer blockbusters, with most of them failing to live up to such hype. Of course, with such a thorough marketing campaign, the more money is lost if the movie flops (e.g., John Carter). Not that the movie will flop, considering the Marvel logo alone is enough to draw record breaking attendance levels in these days.

Oh well, the trailer is up tomorrow, folks! Be sure to plan your life accordingly so as not to miss this must-see online spectacle! Or simply wait till you see it in theaters somewhere before the end of April next year. Or ignore it altogether and go into the movie without knowing what's gonna happen, as people used to do in the old days. Now the ability to be surprised about a blockbuster's content, that was truly amazing!

Today's Mini-Review: Thor: The Dark World

The Odinson returns in his second solo venture, more grandiose than the last, but still very close in narrative make-up to its predecessor, despite a change of director. Kenneth Branagh declined the offer to helm this second installment while female director Patty Jenkins was fired early on, at which point Game of Thrones director Alan Taylor took over the reins, and quite successfully so. The Shakespearean overtones are nevertheless kept in, only enlarged by his Martinian experience with grand halls, epic battles and conniving siblings, all too similar in nature to the subject matter so far. After leaving the Avengers and returning home with his captive brother Loki, Thor (Chris Hemsworth more beefed up than ever) has been kept busy for two years fighting rampaging marauders and other dangers to cosmic stability across the Nine Realms. Meanwhile, his human love Jane (Natalie Portman) also hasn't taken time off in search for her divine boytoy by using every scientific means at her disposal. On investigation in Britain, she stumbles upon a portal to another place where she is infected by the Aether, a dangerous, ancient material that is the key energy source of the largely extinct Dark Elves that once battled the Asgardians for dominance in times immemorial, and lost. Sensing the Aether has awoken, the few remaining members of this shadowy race prepare for another shot at universal power grabbing under the leadership of the wrathful Malekith (Christopher Eccleston wearing creepy make-up). When they unexpectedly assault Asgard and kill Thor's mother, the distraught wielder of the powerful hammer Mjölnir disobeys his heavenly father's commands and recruits his untrustworthy brother Loki (an impeccable Tom Hiddleston, again playing the trickster god with the usual vigour that makes him the most fascinating Marvel villain of them all) to defeat the Dark Elves before their nefarious plans for Jane and the universe are brought to their catastrophic conclusion. The only bond that shares them at this point in their overly tumultuous relationship is the mutual love for their mother's memory: otherwise there is no trust or love lost between them. Will Thor manage to save his girlfriend and everything else, without ending with a knife in his back at the hands of his seemingly imbalanced brother, or crushed by the ever stronger Malekith? It will remain to be seen during a bombastic battle in the British capital (instead of set in the States, as has been usual in Marvel movies thus far).

The problem audiences might have with Thor: The Dark World is the fact it doesn't dare to leave its established comfort zone and therefore sticks suspiciously close to what we have already seen in the previous film. Though Thor's cosmic portion of the Marvel Universe is certainly expanded in terms of scope and story, thematically speaking there's little to be found that feels new. The nature of heroism, the love for a mortal woman, the rivalry between brothers: it has all been done before, but at least The Dark World doesn't do it badly. In terms of style Asgard has never looked so glorious to behold: a sharp contrast to the dreadful dead soil of the barren world of Svartalfheim that had to be conquered and annihilated for the Norse gods to rise to power – which makes you rethink how much of 'the good guys' they really claim to be – as we are told in a fabulous prologue that feels a lot like the opening of a certain Peter Jackson fantasy blockbuster. Apart from the many predictable but entertaining scenes of supernatural action The Dark World provides, also ever present is the level of humour that reminds us we ought not to take any of this too seriously, as well as keeping us from forgetting we're watching a comic book adaptation. Key in this is a reversal of the dynamics between Jane and Thor seen previously, where he was cast out of his world in order to come to terms with a “lesser state” of existence for his own good. This time it's Jane's turn to be a stranger in a strange land as she's swept to Asgard where her Earthly unsophisticatedness causes many a merry moment: not because she's overwhelmed by it all, but due to her impulse to make scientific sense of her new environment, which startles the Asgardian natives somewhat. Those who hoped for more Asgardian style dialogue, as present in the comics, will find themselves disappointed though, as the gods unfortunately speak as much of a contemporary language as our own. Thor and Jane make a decent on-screen couple, but it's the supporting cast that succeeds the most in keeping us engaged, with Hiddleston worthy of most praise. It is often said a movie is only as good as its bad guy, which should have made The Dark World a very good movie, but Loki is forced by the plot to be submissive in terms of villainy to Malekith, despite the fact Loki far exceeds this new villain in being interesting (no criticism on Eccleston's performance it must be stated), mostly thanks to his almost heartfelt loss of his mother, which for a moment makes you think he genuinely wants to help Thor in exacting revenge. And by pulling that off convincingly, Hiddleston again reveals why he was such a good choice for this loveable rogue. Dark or not, it's Loki's world, and we would do well never to underestimate him as everyone else does.

And be sure to stick with the credits a while longer to witness a largely unrelated but neverthless hugely intriguing typical Marvel 'bridge' to next year's Guardians of the Galaxy, which will expand the cosmic corner of the Marvel Cinematic Universe even further. It stars Benicio Del Toro with a funny accent and a silly hairdo, so you have no valid reason to miss out on it, really.

Today's Double News: Cap 2 coming soon

Posted two bits of news relating to the same movie on MovieScene yesterday and today:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151112/eerste_poster_captain_america_the_winter_soldier

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151154/eerste_trailer_captain_america_the_winter_soldier_online

Looks pretty good, both poster and trailer. It clearly shows the writers understand the contemporary concept of 'defending freedom' isn't so simplistically black and white as most people (both now and in the Fourties) often consider it to be, especially in America where protecting liberty comes at the expense of liberty. Poor Cap is finally coming to terms with this revelation, something he didn't exactly have time for in The Avengers as he was too busy saving the planet from an alien invasion with his super buddies. But now he gets that much needed and anticipated reality check, which also forces him to find a new place for himself in American politics as the paragon of American virtue he has been shaped in. It's this aspect of Captain America, the analysis by American writers of what America stands for today relayed through this comic book character, that has always made him more interesting that most people would at first expect from a superhero who's dressed in a single nation's colours but is often shown to save the entire world, as if other nations couldn't do likewise. And hey, if you still don't like the Star-Spangled Avenger, there's still Black Widow (Scar-Jo!) to enjoy, as well as newcomer the Falcon (Anthony Mackie), who can still fly as in the comics, but apparently no longer communicates with birds (indeed, his real falcon sidekick seems to have been ixnayed, thus also saving some money on visual FX so more can be spend on crashing helicarriers). It seems he has upgraded to telepathic connections with humans instead (though this has not been overtly confirmed by the trailer). And last but not least, there's Samuel L. Jackson playing Nick Fury again, but apparently he's not as cheerful as before, and is turning a darker page of the character's history, keeping in line with his Ultimate Universe counterpart on whose likeness Mr. L. Jackson was based. Or was it the other way around? The villainous Crossbones also seems like a worthwhile addition to Marvel's current cinematic rogue gallery, but just what the deal is with that 'Winter Soldier' remains to be seen. Unless you're aware of his history from the comics, as I happen to be.

Cap 2 seems an intriguing step away from the more lightheartedly toned predecessor in favour of adding some much needed depth, both emotional and political, to the character. At the same time there appears to be a plethora of action scenes and ample room for a good joke here and there. If the film is as good as the trailer, 'winter soldier is coming' doesn't seem like that sinister a mantra. But hey, if Iron Man 3 is any indication, it may still turn out that the Winter Soldier isn't actually a scary bad guy at all, but just a silly actor hired by a much less appealing and narratively convoluted evil character we couldn't care less about who messes up our respect of the heroic protagonist, after which his girl friend needs to save the day in her underwear. Let's hope IM3 was just a one-shot screw-up for now.

Today's Mini-Review: Kick-Ass 2

Kick-Ass 2: ****/*****, or 7/10

The wacky creations of Mark Millar and John Romita Jr. return to the big screen in this sequel to the 2010 hit film Kick-Ass. Again centered around the premise of everyday people (that is, if nerds are eligible for that title) donning silly outfits and going out on the streets at night to fight bad guys, only to have things go wholly awry, we find Dave 'Kick-Ass' Lizewski (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Mindy 'Hit-Girl' MacReady (Chloë Grace Moretz) a while after the events of the predecessor, as they struggle to decide whether they should continue where they left off or just settle for a normal boring life after all. While Dave is adamant of returning to the criminal infested back alleys to keep his fellow civilians safe from harm, Mindy is confronted by her custodian Marcus (Morris Chestnut) who keeps telling her she should stop such behavior in favour of resuming the normal childhood taken from her by her father, and go in search for her true self, and disregarding the foul mouthed little crimebuster her father transformed her in. She does just that and quickly gets drawn into the equally vicious unforgiving world of teenage high school girls (walking talking clichés, but none the less hilarious for it). Meanwhile, Kick-Ass meets a band of fellow vigilantes, named Justice Forever, led by the seemingly mentally derailed born-again Christian Colonel Stars and Stripes (Jim Carrey; his presence was heavily marketed for this film, but he's only in it for a screen time of less than ten minutes), with which he readily signs up. Trouble is brewing though, as his archnemesis-to-be, the treacherous vigilante formerly known as Red Mist (Christoper Mintz-Plasse), is hellbent on revenge for the death of his father – whom Kick-Ass shot out of a skyscraper window with a bazooka – and is determined to become the world's first true supervillain, for which he gathers an army of evil henchmen (dubiously called the Toxic Mega-Cunts) and assumes the outrageous code name The Motherf*cker. With tensions mounting as the new ultimate bad guy hunts down the members of Justice Forever in search of his benevolent counterpart to exact his revenge on, things can only come down to a climactic showdown of epically violent proportions. The main question is: will Hit-Girl find her true nature in time to come to the good guys' aid?

Though the novelty of the concept of “ordinary” folks wearing ridiculous costumes and getting into more trouble than they anticipated has worn off since the first Kick-Ass was released, it's gratifying seeing our favorite take on the subject receiving a follow-up. Nevertheless, Kick-Ass 2 doesn't kick Kick-Ass' ass. Though still delivering a plethora of good gags and witty in-jokes, the emphasis on overly gratuitous violence and heavy swearing tends to rule the plot just a bit too much at times, being rude just for rudeness' sake, while most of the action scenes feel repetitive as they feature mostly costumed weirdos beating each other up with clubs, knives and the occasional guns instead of opting for more original scenarios like the previous installment did. As is the case with most sequels, this one just gives us more of the same without feeling the need to properly expand the world in question too much for fear of leaving its comfort zone. That said, it cannot be denied there's a heart and soul to Kick-Ass 2, and as was the case with the previous film, it's mostly centered around Hit-Girl. Whereas Kick-Ass' most endearing (and funniest) moments revolved around Hit-Girl and her father Big Daddy (you'd never think you would miss Nicolas Cage!), the same is true for Kick-Ass 2 where Hit-Girl's plot line tends to steal the show as she's off on her own adventure surviving the torments of being an unpopular teen girl in a world ruled by major bitches. And though Hit-Girl was always the most awesome ingredient of the franchise, it's amazing to see Mindy by herself works just as well without her alter ego, which makes us go without the purple suit for most of the film without missing it that much. As for girl power, we have the bad-ass new character of the hulking Mother Russia (bodybuilder and first time actress Olga Kurkulina) to do some serious damage to other people in the same style whilst in the employ of The Motherf*cker. In this regard, she's rather an exception, as almost all other evil henchmen, as well as the majority of Kick-Ass' new fellow protectors, get very little development. There's so many zany new characters with similarly goofy outfits that we can only hope for a neat DVD bonus feature to explore them all. Overall, Kick-Ass 2 gives us exactly what we were kinda expecting, an explosive and hilarious sequel to its predecessor that does an adequate job further delving into the crazy nature of vigilantism and fleshing out the characters of our beloved Kick-Ass and Hit-Girl a bit more, but lacks the smarts and charms that characterized the first film and feels otherwise rather a repetition of moves. It must be stated though, you haven't lived until you've seen Mindy melt over a Union J video clip. And as a bonus you get Jorah Mormont Iain Glen doing a very creepy New Jersey mob accent.

Today's Mini-Review: The Wolverine

The Wolverine: ***/*****, or 7/10

Hugh Jackman returns to the role of Logan, the X-Man with the healing factor and adamantium skeleton and claws, for the sixth time (after only a brief but hilarious cameo appearance in X-Men: First Class (2011)). Several years after the cataclysmic events of X-Men: The Last Stand (2006), that witnessed the death of his beloved Jean Grey (Famke Janssen) at his own hands for the greater good, Logan is still in agony, travelling through Canada aimlessly in search for something to believe in again. When young female ninja Yukio (Rila Fukushima) finds him at a bar picking a fight with irresponsible hunters, she offers him a chance for redemption, of sorts. Her employer, the powerful Japanese clan leader and major industrialist Yashida (Hal Yamanouchi), is dying and wants to thank Logan for having saved his life back in 1945, when an atom bomb was dropped on both their heads at Nagasaki. Logan haphazardly accepts the invitation but is dismayed to learn the old man's offer of taking his “curse” of “immortality” – not wholly accurate, as Wolverine isn't truly immortal, he just ages much slower than everybody else – for himself so he won't have to die,and Logan can live a normal life if he so chooses. All too soon, Logan finds himself immersed in a complicated web of intrigue in the clan's affairs, revolving around Yashida's legacy and his decision to leave everything to his granddaughter Mariko (Tao Okamoto) upon his demise. Before long, the girl has to run for her life, dodging Yakuza bullets and ninja swords, but fortunately Logan has taken a liking to her and aims to protect her from harm. Matters turn worse when Yashida's shady physician, a sexy mutant poisoner named Viper (Svetlana Khodchenkova), manages to disable Logan's healing abilities, thus rendering him vulnerable. 

Credit has to be given to Jackman for sticking to the Wolverine character for so long, which prohibits the use for a reboot at some point as most other superheroes with movie careers have already experienced. It also allows for Logan's emotional and sensual side to be explored, something director James Mangold (3:10 to Yuma) doesn't amply succeed in. It seems odd for this typically 'loner' character, who finally found a family with his fellow mutants, to just go and get himself caught up in what's basically a very private affair in a family he doesn't know, in a culture he hardly understands, even though he had nothing to lose. The various family ploys and their ramifications for Japanese and Yakuza politics hardly feel coherent, as everybody has his or her own motivations for gaining power, some of them underexposed, others needlessly complicated and layered so their bigger picture proves difficult to grasp. Logans romantic entanglement with Mariko is a typical Hollywood love plot, except for Logan being plagued by inexplicable, pointless visions of dear deceased Jean: of course her death still haunts her, but apparently her mental powers have left some sort of astral imprint upon Logan, or so I surmise since the writers never bother to fully explain this aspect of the plot. It just seems like an overly simple, lazy excuse to get Famke Janssen back for a few short sequences. Whatever the movie lacks in character logic it mostly makes up for in action, with a knife fight on the roof of a high speeds train as the most intense moment in that category. Otherwise however, the action scenes seem somewhat repetitive with their focus on samurai and ninja clichés, culminating in a big action piece between Logan and a mecha-warrior with a burning sword, which is this movie's take on Marvel's original Silver Samurai character. The make-up of some featured characters sure deviates from their original comics counterparts, as was to be expected but necessarily appreciated. Similarly to Silver Samurai now being a robot-armour instead of a kinetically charged mutant in shiny, traditional Nippon warrior garb, Viper has transformed from a typical assassin dabbling in assorted toxins to a full fledged snake like mutant, complete with silly forked tongue, the ability to spit poison and skin shedding issues. The only character who stands out next to the ass-kicking Wolverine himself is the tough, lite and wise-cracking Yukio, both dangerous and playful, who brings some much needed lightheartedness in an otherwise all too dramatic and emotionally heavy superhero film. The Wolverine is only a minor improvement over Logan's previous solo adventure X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009). Though more room is given for Logan's personal turmoil, the side characters for the most part aren't as colourful and compelling this time around, nor is the action delivered in a diverse manner to keep capturing the audience's imagination. Nevertheless, the short teaser for the next X-flick, next year's X-Men: Days of Future Past, wedged in halfway into the end credits, sure makes the levels of anticipation rise tremendously, considering what other popular characters make a comeback.

Today's Mini-Reviews: downfall of the rich and powerful

Iron Man 3: **/*****, or 5/10

Most disappointing of the Marvel Studios movies so far. Shane Black (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang) took over the director's chair from Jon Favreau who did the first two installments. Maybe it's Black's tendency to go over the top a bit too far, maybe the writers and producers just got terribly lazy in the creative process after the sucess of the predecessors, but Iron Man 3 proves a dud. Tony Stark finally has found a decent equilibrium between his eccentric playboy life and his public role as the armored superhero Iron Man, but soon his world is turned upside down after he deliberately picks a fight with the vicious terrorist leader Mandarin (“played by Sir Ben Kingsley”) who wounded his former bodyguard Happy (still performed by Favreau himself at least). The Mandarin comes down hard on Tony, destroying his mansion and seemingly obliterating his various armors. With only his wit, his engineering skills, his insufferable character flaws – he was never more irritating than he is here – and the aid of some kid in a shack, he soon turns the tables and confronts his new nemesis and his silly army of exploding people, only to find out the situation is not what it appeared to be, as the Mandarin is just a fraud (way to ruin a classic bad guy, Marvel!). Another adversary, A.I.M. leader Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce) is behind it all, out to revenge himself on Stark, literally for making him cry ten years earlier (now that's what I call a solid motivation for aiming to conquer the world!). During the film's climactic showdown, Tony can fortunately count on his girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) to save his ass, plus he had another 40 armors inexplicably hidden up his sleeve. Iron Man 3 pretentiously delves into semi-philosophical territory when it keeps asking whether the suit makes the man or vice versa, but the fact is we simply don't care. All we knew was that Robert Downey Jr. made Iron Man and now sloppy writing has allowed him to be unmade, for which Downey reportedly received the sum of 50 million (!) dollars, probably for looking the other way as it happened. At least Stark is basically still the same after four films, as it was clear what audiences wanted and expected from the get-go. The same can't be said for the Mandarin, whose presence was alluded to in the prevous two Iron Man films, but all of a sudden proves to be someone else entirely halfway through the film. Don't trust the trailers for this film that insinuated that we were in for a major epic villain played by Kingsley, since that's all a lie and you'll end up disappointed. Blame it on the Chinese involvement, as Iron Man 3 was co-produced with Chinese studios to cut costs (Downey's salary had to come from somewhere after all). And in such a case, you simply can't afford to have a Chinese villain claiming to be after the destruction of western civilization. Interestingly enough, the Chinese market received a slightly different cut of the film including scenes not seen in the regular version, to make it even more attractive for Chinese audiences. Iron Man 3 bodes ill for the rest of Marvel's Phase 2, but there's gotta be better upcoming movies to make up for this huge letdown. Ant-Man maybe? 

 

The Great Gatsby: ***/*****, or 7/10

Another visual feast by Baz Lurhmann (Moulin Rouge, Australia). The fifth version of the classic book by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and definitely the most extravagant, as we would have expected from Luhrmann, who always tends to lavishly overstylize his films. This is his first foray into the realm of 3D, and fortunately it's a successful one at that. From a narrative viewpoint, the movie predictably feels less intriguing. In the early Roaring Twenties, war veteran Nick Carraway (a rather dull Tobey Maguire, as is the norm) moves to Long Island, next door to a giant mansion belonging to the seemingly incredibly wealthy but enigmatic Jay Gatsby (Leonardo DiCaprio, another one of his hugely rich and influential but emotionally tormented big screen souls). Drawn to the unreal world of fabulous upperclass decadence, Carraway soon gets his taste of high society as he attends one of Gatsby's unbelievably amazing parties. Gatsby soon purposefully reveals himself to Nick and recruits him to arrange a meeting between himself and Nick's attractive cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan), a long lost love of Gatsby from before the Great War whom he lost contact with and who has since gone on to marry a rich but quite dislikeable land owner (Joel Edgerton). Hoping to respark their love thanks to Nick's involvement bridging their past, Gatsby and Daisy soon reunite and haphazardly start an affair that can only end in tragedy. But despite his attempts to basically bang a married girl, you hope Gatsby succeeds as he is a sympathetic character, once a boy who came from nothing but worked himself up to incredulous heights, while still favoring the lower class folks who live decent lives worth living, instead of engaging in the monotony of endless partying. Gatsby appears to make a stand for the poor, hard working labourers with his understanding attitude and actions, which can only lead to his downfall from the rich ruling classes and their corrupting power over everything and everyone. But what a downfall it is, shot with such dynamic vibrancy and wild colour schemes, presented in three jaw-droppingly beautiful dimensions! Nevertheless the blatant melodrama at the core is hard to be effectively sugarcoated, even in Luhrmann's elaborate ways. The Great Gatsby emulates its titular character, in the sense that it's packed with bombastic bravoura and laced with visual flair throughout, detracting you from the lack of a refined, satisfactory plot, which is notably absent if you care to see beneath the mask of its sensational appearance. Beneath the surface it's all fairly hollow, but not without a certain charm. This movie is a feast to behold as much as the parties it depicts would no doubt be a thrill to attend, but ultimately, it proves a fairly forgetful experience in the long run. And so Hollywood can keep remaking Fitzgerald's novel once every few decades to ever more spectacular results.