Spider-Man: Homecoming Movie Review

Let it be known that, after all my pondering and pontificating, I might be one of the only people in the world who walked out of Spider-Man: Homecoming feeling unsatisfied with the Spider-Man we may be seeing for the next decade or so. Not necessarily with the acting, action, or return to the MCU, but rather with the story presented, and the possible direction of the character.

Nobody's perfect, I guess.

The first thing I have to address is the acting, because it's good. New Spider-Man/Peter Parker actor Tom Holland definitely brings a fresh youth to the character. He's noticeably younger than his predecessors, and the story takes advantage of that by truly presenting us with a teenage superhero ready to make it out on his own, but one who might be too eager for his own good. Tom's funny, no doubt. He definitely matches up attitude-wise to Robert Downey Jr.'s returning Iron Man/Tony Stark, whose brief but notable appearances make sense within the world while not feeling too shoehorned in.


The real stand-out in the movie, in my opinion, has to be Michael Keaton's Vulture. Not often does a Marvel movie give serious time to developing their villain characters, and yet, Spider Man: Homecoming opens with his origins. And make no mistake, while sympathetic, Keaton also plays an incredibly intense and imposing villain. He's the perfect contrast to the youthful Spider-Man full of hope. Vulture is beaten down by the world, doing what he needs to do to stay up on top of it. Unfortunately, many other side-characters, like Jacob Batalon's Ned or Marisa Tomei's Aunt May are left to being conflicts of interest or light comedic elements in this particular Spider-Man film. You may think I'm being critical for a movie to have so many characters and leave them to serve specific purposes, but it leads to my central complaint of this Spider-Man movie: consequences mean nothing.

The main gist of this story revolves around Peter Parker trying to prove himself to Tony Stark after the events of Captain America: Civil War, in the hopes that Tony will officially let him into the Avengers. This makes sense, sequentially, in the life of Peter Parker, and I'll be honest, I thought this is the kind of Spider-Man story that I wanted. But with this change in the approach to the character, I found myself somewhat disconnected from Peter, far more than I ever had before in a Spider-Man story. It's not a journey about Peter just trying to do the right thing, by his family, or friends, or town. It becomes a story about the desire to be a god. Now, were I in Peter's shoes, I can't say I would choose differently, I'm simply saying that I now know this kind of Peter Parker isn't one I would elect to see over and over again. And that's not a critique of Holland's performance: it's more of a critique of the direction of the plot.

Another area I found myself oddly disappointed in was the action in the film. Save for the final act and, in turn, final fight with the Vulture, most of the action felt underwhelming, because Spider-Man didn't have to struggle too much. Not only that, but the special effects surrounding the action didn't look as sharp as other Marvel films, such as the Captain America series, have done. There's also the high probability that the action didn't resonate with me because I found the film's plot to be inferior to what I would have wanted.

I feel like, with Spider-Man: Homecoming, I start to see the cracks in Marvel's formula. And I even think of the past few films I've seen from them, particularly films like Ant-Man and Doctor Strange, where I first looked favorably, I now see to be somewhat mediocre. At the very least, the effort to get at least three movies a year out from Marvel is starting to have an impact on my enjoyment of them. This new Spider-Man is nowhere near a disaster, nor is it the best Spider-Man film ever made. It's a frustrating attempt to meld the core tenants of Spider-Man with the philosophy of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, by including one too many jokey sequences, a plethora of cameos, and a grab-bag of cliches, such as the romantic plot. That being said, if Spider-Man: Homecoming is any indication to what villains could be in the MCU moving forward, then I'm excited. I just wish the entire film had been as refreshing as the Vulture was.

Rating: 7/10

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales Movie Review

Look, this summer season isn't particularly enjoyable in terms of the offerings. Big blockbusters, sequels, reboots, and all other sorts of rabble are sprinkled as far as February to December nowadays. I'ts delightful in that it means a moviegoer is guaranteed at least one big movie a month, but the plethora of weekly blockbusters seems to have dissipated. What's more, most of them aren't as good as they should be. Enter Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales, the fifth entry in Disney's swashbuckling series. What should be an utter dud turns out to be a fun, two-hour distraction.

Johnny Depp returns to the role that made him stupid rich for another pseudo-historical adventure through the myth and mire of the high seas. Jack Sparrow, down on his luck and in need of some fortune, is recruited by a young boy named Henry Turner, in the hopes that Sparrow can free his father from the curse of the Flying Dutchman. Accompanying them is Carina Smith, an astronomer with the knowledge necessary to locating the Trident of Poseidon, an ancient tool said to have unimaginable power. Sparrow will need it to protect himself from Captain Salazar, a spirit on the hunt for Jack, with a thirst of revenge.

This plot is standard fare for the series, but the inclusion of a younger, eager generation to compliment Depp's somewhat tired Jack Sparrow is entertaining enough to keep a viewer engaged. The highlight is absolutely Javier Bardem's Captain Salazar, who's criminally underutilized in the film. His gravitas, demeanor, and command of whatever scene he's in is mesmerizing. It reminds me of Davy Jones in Dead Man's Chest. Bardem steals the show here. Additionally, Geoffrey Rush returns to play Captain Barbossa, but he doesn't do anything terrible inventive or new with the character. Yep, it seems like veterans came to do a more minimalist job with their roles, while the newcomers actually seemed to have fun.

Special-effects wise, I'm somewhat disappointed. Bardem and his ghost crew look astoundingly good, and the explosions of ships and sunken vessels are haunting, but from my understanding, this is a Pirates film that decided not to film on the open seas as past iterations had done. No, this is a shoot that had ships suspended in giant green screens. That's a big letdown for me, especially considering how one of the strengths of the series was that the audience felt like they were on the ships with the pirates. Now, it looks like a stage.

On a further note of disappointments, the writing isn't entirely as clever or original as it thinks it is. There's quite an abundance of chuckles, I must say. But again: they don't come from Jack Sparrow for the most part. Furthermore, concerning the script, there's an interesting amount of world-building and history-exploring done with the Jack Sparrow character. Alas, like this season's Transformers: The Last Knight, all world-building is done at a base level. Nothing is dug too deep. Of course, that would take away from the somewhat-mundane plot already established.

This is truly the best Pirates of the Caribbean movie in a good while. The action is fun, the new characters are enjoyable, and the return to the high seas is always a joy, especially in this franchise. Unfortunately, it's just too 'okay' to return the franchise to greatness.

 Rating: 7/10

Wonder Woman Movie Review

After 76 years, we have arrived. The third member of DC Comics' trinity of superheroes has arrived with her first feature-length summer blockbuster, while her companions Batman and Superman have been dominating the big screen for the last four decades. Trust me on this: it was worth the wait.

What director Patty Jenkins has delivered is not your average origin story. As Diana Prince/Wonder Woman sits in her office within the Louvre, she receives a photo of herself and her friends from World War I courtesy of her modern-day ally, Bruce Wayne. This propels her to reminisce of her entry into the world of man, and her abandonment of the Amazon life that she knew. As she enters the fray of World War I with her guide, Steve Trevor, ushering her into the world of man, Diana is faced with the difficult decision of saving mankind or abandoning it to ruin. It's a story that's engaging, well-paced, and enjoyably dense with character, chemistry, and action from start-to-finish.

Gal Gadot really does bring her a-game in this film. In her past films, such as her appearances in the Fast and the Furious franchise, as well as her Wonder Woman debut in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, it was clear that she was new to the art of Hollywood acting. She was sometimes wooden in her line delivery, or had difficulty conveying the intended emotion at times. Thankfully, she has improved immensely since her last outing as the titular superhero. While she's still not as strong as some other actresses in the role might have been, the kindness, love, and toughness that radiates with the character of Wonder Woman certainly radiates with Gadot. Her fighting and wit is impressive, and it's an absolute joy to see on-screen. It's clear now why director Zack Snyder hired her back in 2013, and it makes me all the more excited to see her grow even further as these films go on.

The supporting cast made up of notably Chris Pine as Steve Trevor, Connie Nielsen as Queen Hippolyta, and Robin Wright as Antiope are all the mainline attractions. Unfortunately, because the latter two do not stray from their home island of Themyscira, they don't have much opportunity to work beyond the first 30 minutes of the film. That being said, it allows Chris Pine to shine as Steve Trevor, who I would want showing me the way man's world worked if I was an outsider. He's charming, he's smart, and he's just humble enough to work excellently as the second-in-command to Wonder Woman's ragtag group. Several smaller characters dot the film with quirky personalities, and help to explain for Diana what man's world really is like: the female secretary Etta Candy represents the role of the woman in 1918, Charlie represents the war veteran and the horrors it can cause people to deal with, and Chief and Sameer represent the inequality struggles of minorities, just to name a few. Wonder Woman is dotted with characters that comment on the problems of the world, but unlike Diana's own aversion to the evils of war, they never beat you over the head with their messaging. It makes for an intellectual way to simply understand the plight, think about it after the film, but not feel lectured to. Besides the casting, the subtle messaging is one of the smartest things this movie does.

My one true gripe would have to be the CGI. For one reason or another, it never seemed to look it's best at every single point. I went to this showing in an IMAX 3D theater, so it wasn't like I was deprived of a quality screen. In a film, I understand that a director has to balance a budget and put the money where it can best go. For example, the scene of Wonder Woman storming through the lines of the trenches to rescue the town (as shown in several trailers) is a stunning sight. It's my favorite part of the movie: Wonder Woman leading the way to victory. But certain other scenes, such as the final confrontation between Wonder Woman and Ares (who is talked about throughout the film, so don't worry about spoilers) were somewhat not as sharp. I'm willing to bet it was the CGI spectacle that was the fight between the two gods, whereas the storming of the gates and the trenches looked to be put in more practical sets. It's not a huge issue, and it doesn't suck away from the fun of the film, but when leaving the theater, it's something I was thinking about. It certainly shouldn't stop you from seeing this wonderfully told, acted, and directed motion picture.

Wonder Woman should've had at least 5 movies made before this one. She should've been as much of a public icon as Batman or Spider-Man. But the patience of the world has paid off in spades, and director Patty Jenkins has delivered to us something great. If you're looking for the next big superhero movie, this is the one. It's fun, heartfelt, and full of wit. It's full of hope, and full of life. Gal Gadot is a great Wonder Woman, and I can't wait to see more of her in the future. For now, I'll just wait with baited breath that this movie is a sign of change for all DC films moving forward.

Rating: 10/10*

*Note that a 10/10 rating from me does not mean that a film is flawless; rather, it means that it's a masterpiece and should not be missed.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Review

Returning to the Harry Potter world is almost always a treat for me. I love watching the movies with my family, I love reading the books, and I even enjoy the occasional trip into Pottermore, the mythology website set up by creator J.K. Rowling. Naturally, I was ecstatic to revisit the Harry Potter world, and to America no less! As a prequel, as a CGI-filled monster adventure, as a brand new foray into the Wizarding World, I was stoked.

It's too bad this film falls short from those that came before it.

Let's start by discussing the characters. Starting off with Newt Scamander, who unfortunately doesn't work as well as a lead character should be. He's definitely confident, but only in certain scenarios, particularly with the creatures of the film. Not that a character should have to be incredibly confident in each and every scene, but in scenes when he's interacting with others and proving to be incredibly awkward, and even sometimes cold, it just rubs me the wrong way. Don't get me wrong, I like Newt and the job that actor Eddie Redmayne did, I just don't like him all the time.

Katherine Waterson's Tina Goldstein is a little bit more closer to the adventurous type of wizard that we love to see in these movies. She's tough, she's smart, but she's reckless, and it gets her in trouble, particularly when she meets Newt. The film definitely picks up when folks like Tina, her sister Queenie, and their new muggle (or no-maj, 'cause what we definitely need is another dumb name) friend Jacob, join Newt in the rush to re-capture all of the beasts. Jacob, in particular, acts as the 'Harry Potter' of this series, where there is a new character rushed into this fantastical world, and acts as a lens for the audience, someone we can relate to the most. I certainly did, and I thought the job that Dan Fogleman did with the character was awesome. He was certainly the most engaging character.

Now, while these characters weren't as enjoyable or engaging overall as the original trio from the past Harry Potter films, I still liked it. The same can be said for the action, story, and music. There's less action that's truly coherent in this movie, less wand-play, so to speak. Spells don't fly as freely or as excitingly as they have in the past. And the special effects, generally relating to the fantastic beasts (y'know, the title characters), don't look all that great. They don't have the power, the impact, or the gravitas of other CGI character's that I've seen in the past, like the Incredible Hulk, the Transformers, or even the dragons from the original Harry Potter series. It probably has something to do with the cinematography of the film which, granted, reflects the 1920's in a believable way to me, the coloring and camera angles never really express the power or swiftness the creatures should be having.

The narrative itself was weak overall as well, which was so disappointing out of J.K. Rowling. Understanding that a novel is an incredibly different work of writing than a screenplay is, I would have assumed her transition, while rocky, would have overall been done well. And while the story isn't a disaster, it's bland and has too much going on to be able to focus the really interesting stuff. The conflicts that Newt runs into get resolved quite quickly. Characters are introduced and killed rather quickly. The one interesting story line that developed rather interestingly was the one of Credence, who bears with him several analogies about modern social issues.

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is a fun adventure back into the world of Harry Potter, but it's an overall frivolous one. Characters aren't very well-developed, the special effects of the creatures are sub-par, the exploration of Magical America is little, and offers a weak narrative of a journey. Make no mistake, the magical world of Harry Potter holds that same nostalgic place in my heart, this venture was just a little less magical.

Rating: 7/10