Superman Vs Batman: Dawn of Justice Review

Remember when product placement in film was reserved for coke, pepsi, and lucky strike cigarettes? BatmanVsSuperman takes the concept of product placement to new heights. It is more of a walking billboard promoting the expansion of DC's universe than it is a complete film.  If Coke were granted the same overt advertising the film uses on its itself, there would be a scene where Ben Affleck grabs a Coke, drinks it, turns to the camera and says, "God, I f***ing love Coke." In truth, I wanted to like this film and, with top critics most likely panning it, there is an opportunity to set myself apart.  It's looking like that isn't going to happen.

To be fair, there were two factors that hindered my movie going experience:
1. Fanboys: I'm all good with the guys who gets excited by an obscure comic reference, but the three seated behind me were annoyingly disruptive -- thereby taking me out of the moment.
2. Standard Screen: If I had to do over again, I would watch this in IMAX and just deal with the 3D.  There are scenes that look spectacular but didn't leave me as awe struck as they would have in IMAX.  See it in IMAX.

From a traditional cinematic viewpoint, this film is a disaster.  Its pacing is awkward, narrative structure incomprehensible and dialogue so generic that I wished they would stop talking and just fight the entire time.  There is such a endless supply of scenes that I found myself unable to recall which preceded which.  It is as if the director went to the editor and said "you can cut down the individual clips length, but I'll be damned if you're going to cut out a single scene."  The result is an extended director's cut version of the film, usually reserved for DVD box sets.  We see what Bruce is up to, then Clark, then Lois, then Lex--back and forth and back and forth for what felt like an eternity. When the stories attempt to intersect, BVS turns into a disjointed mess.

Surprisingly, BVS's initial premise is clever and deals with Batman's increasing fear of Superman's capabilities.  Sure, Superman is good now but what happens if he changes his mind?  Even during Superman's acts of heroism, he leaves behind a trail of destruction. Batman's point is a compelling one and makes for the strongest story in BVS. Unfortunately, the film takes an excruciatingly long time for this plot point to build and its resolution made me scratch my head.

Henry Cavil is lucky he is so damn handsome because his acting is not very good.  He plays a reserved superman who is either always deep in thought or thinking about absolutely nothing; most likely the latter.  Ben Affleck on the other hand plays a rather effective Batman and is too good for this film.  Moving on to Jesse Eisenberg. Perhaps this is hyperbole, but I think we have reached a watershed moment for Jesse.  He was great in the Social Network, but his range doesn't span far enough to encompass the eccentric genius of Lex Luthor.  This film is on such a grand scale and Eisneberg doesn't have the screen presence to pull off this menacing villain.

Having said all this, there is no doubt that comic book purists will find this movie engrossing and walk away pleased.  It has stunning visuals and its format flows much like a comic book-- jumping back and forth between multiple characters while also giving insight into the DC universe.  But this isn't a comic book; it's a movie. At the end of the day, it needs to be a film first because that's the medium in which we are viewing the story.

In a nut shell:  BVS is just too long. The first half drags and has an ending that would make only the likes of Peter Jackson proud.  Having the name Batman in the title will get most people off the couch and into the theater.  Regrettably, they will be met with a film that is so worked up in its own universe, it forgets to deliver a compelling and coherent story. BVS takes itself far too seriously and, with the obscure DC universe references, feels like insider baseball.  Regardless, this movie will be a cash cow and is just good enough to open the flood gates for spin-offs galore.  In truth, it doesn't really matter what critics say for this one; you're going to see it. (1.5 out of 4)

The Dawn of Superhero Dilution

As we approach the Batman Vs Superman premiere, a term I use loosely with the prevalence of advance screening(is nothing sacred?), I want to reflect on my growing ambivalence for the genre.  As I stand in line on Thursday at 5PM- the premiere's 'early bird special', I will be struck with one realization - I'm not that excited.

Growing up there were few things that I looked forward to more than a new superhero flick.  The anticipation of its release was tantamount to those final days of class before summer break.  As I got older that feeling began to dwindle and I no longer counted down the days for the next superhero to hit the big screens. The anticipation was as strong then as it is ephemeral now. What changed? Getting older certainly plays a role but more notable may be the over-saturation of the superhero film market.

In the past 10 years we have witnessed a surge in the Superhero film genre.  The Marvel universe, being the largest, has created a monopoly in Hollywood, manufacturing movies quicker than Apple puts out new iPhones.  There are the occasional missteps such as the Fantastic Four series which just cant seem to get it right but overall audiences are happy.  The consumer demands a product often and the distributor is more than happy to put one out, devoid of quality inspection.  So shouldn't I just be happy with the abundance?  Maybe I miss having to wait.

Waiting, remember that? We still do it at supermarkets and the DMV.  For superhero films however, waiting is a thing of the past. They come out so quickly that my reaction has gone from "Only two more months till the new .........!" to ".......is coming out next week? I guess I'll go see it."

Many of these films have become less about their own story and more a way of setting up sequels and spin offs. The end result is a product that doesn't have to fully deliver.  I remember reading write-ups on the original Captain America and Thor, the consensus being it's an adequate film on its own, but really serves more as a set up to the Avengers. They are blinding the consumer with future promises so they won't notice or care about the current film's mediocrity.  It's essentially giving the film a handicap.

That was not the case in the early 2000's. The films stood on their own and if they were bad, even in a good series, (think Spiderman 3) they got panned. Not only did we line up to see these superheroes in the theater, we eagerly awaited their DVD release. There was something special about buying the DVD. We re-watched them, showed them to our friends, and took pride in the collection we had amassed.

The superhero genre has hit the point of diminishing returns. We are so caught up in the spectacle and polish of the film's visuals that we no longer mind an average story(think Avengers:age of Ultron). That is not to say some don't excel to deliver a thought provoking story-- I am pleasantly surprised when they do. BVS may mark the beginning of the DC film expansion and I can't say I want this train to stop; I just fear the great superhero films will get lost in the crowd.  Christopher Nolan's  Batman series were more than just good superhero flicks, they were great films. The need to put out a product of such high caliber in order to be successful simply is not there. I hope we get more superhero films on par with The Dark Knight, but with the current trend, I'm not going to hold my breath. In the end I shouldn't be complaining, I'm still going to see them.

The Brothers Grimsby

Sasha Baron Cohen was once king.  He created shockingly offensive personalities that pushed comedic boundaries few have been able to emulate.  Most notably, Borat, whose film turned both Sasha and his alter ego into cultural icons. You would be hard pressed to find someone(above the age of 12) who hasn't heard the name Borat, let alone seen the film. As we watched Borat go from one crass stunt to the next we wondered "can he really get away with this?" With Borat a distant memory, Cohen once again attempts to make the climb towards relevancy with The Brothers Grimsby.  Like they say with professional athletics, the hardest part isn't getting to the top, it's staying there.  In the case of The Brothers Grimsby, Sasha isn't going to be a repeat champion.

The film centers around Nobby, (Sasha B. Cohen) a well intentioned yet bumbling moron, who has been searching for his brother, Sebastian (Mark Strong) for the past 28 years. Nobby finally reconnects with his brother only to find out Sebastian is a MI6 agent who is on the run.  The two team up to help take down a terrorist plot and clear Sebastian's name. As you may have guessed, action and stupidity ensues.

My largest frustration with The Brothers Grimsby may lie in its own mediocrity. It is by no stretch a quality film, but not quite bad enough to discount entirely.  Somewhere deep in the movie's core is a funny and surprisingly touching premise.  The brothers' relationship, when explored is rather compelling, if only it wasn't followed by jokes involving genitalia. Humorous moments are quickly overshadowed by cheap one liners, disrupting a few promising bits.  I found myself laughing, but those laughs were fleeting and by the halfway point they had almost entirely subsided.

Sasha has become his own worst enemy.  He set the comedic bar so high years back, that now anything less feels disappointing.  As usual, there is a built up expectation to shock the audience with something they've never seen before. He succeeds on that front, but with situations far more gross than funny. It is as if he fears not including 'those' infamous scenes is somehow cheating the audience.  Frankly, he isn't wrong, we expect them, making it all the more tragic when they don't work.

In a nut shell:  I don't see myself revisiting The Brothers Grimsby. Sasha has become a slave to his old formula. He has the aptitude for comedic greatness, but is so fixated on the most vulgar aspects of humor that he cannot actualize his potential. I laughed, although I can hardly recall why.  Still, the film is watchable; never did I feel bored or in a rush to leave. Many of the jokes don't land, but if you are looking for gross humor, this isn't the worst thing out there. (1.5 out of 4)

10 Cloverfield Lane

3 and 1/2 Nuts!

There is something refreshing when a film releases its first trailer less than two months before it debuts. It is a confident yet risky move, limiting both hype and expectations.  Perhaps the producer, J.J Abrams is making a statement, that a film's success can occur on its own merit without months of traditional Hollywood promotions.  Time will tell if this was a smart choice depending on box office sales. Regardless, it is a bold move on the studio's part, but one that allows the audience to go in with an open mind.  Whatever your expectations may be they will not only be met, but surpassed.

The film focuses around Michelle, who after a terrible car accident wakes up chained to a pipe in a small underground room.  It is apparent she is being held captive; however,  her captor may not be the worst of her troubles.  Within the opening minutes of the film we are thrust into this nightmarish universe via a masterful title sequence.  It is brilliantly edited, highlighting her car crash and instantly engages the audience faster than any film in recent memory.

With little backstory the audience doesn't feel forced to care for Michelle, instead it happens organically through her actions and conversations.  The dire setting of the film strips the characters down to their core leaving them vulnerable. We gain a certain feeling of closeness to Michelle and she becomes someone you care about and want to see survive.

Although 10 Cloverfield Lane takes elements from other genres, it manages to keep us guessing. There is such uncertainty in every decision Michelle makes--who she should trust and if the wrong move will lead to her untimely demise. Our protagonist's danger feels real as does her own mortality. It creates a high level of suspense, making us feel more uneasy as the story progresses.

With only three characters in the entire film,  a good deal of scrutiny can be placed on the individual performances.  All three excel, bringing to life individuals who each have emotional depth and separate motivations.  The stand out performance comes from John Goodman who turns what could have been a very one dimensional character into a complicated multilayered psycho.  It brought back feelings of the film Misery, with Kathy Bates who plays a similar role-- motherly at times but capable of snapping at a moment's notice.  This type of character's unpredictability create tension in any scene they are in.

If there is one gripe with the movie, it is that the ending goes a tad over the top, taking what is a small scale film and really amping it up in terms of scope.  Some may find this jarring but I found it gave a real sense of closure to Michelle's character arc.  

In a nut shell: This is a tremendous piece of film making. Despite the film's unfamiliar setting and circumstance, the characters still feel relatable.  Not only does it play with audience expectation prior to viewing (due to its untraditional release), it also adds a fresh twist on some ideas we have seen before.  From start to finish the score remains haunting and adds its own layer of suspense to an already tense film.  Don't be surprised to find yourself  with fists clenched and mouth ajar.   It is a great addition to what the director calls the  "Clovervesrse" and I look forward to future stories from this world. (3.5 out of 4)

Cloverfield (2008)

With the release of 10 Cloverfield Lane only days away, I felt it was fitting to take a look back at the film which shares (in part) the same name.  One can only speculate as to how much of a sequel this new film will be.  From the looks of the trailer, 10 Cloverfield Lane will have a new cast and story-line while continuing to exist in the same universe as the first.  I would be hard pressed to call this a sequel in a traditional sense of the word.  Regardless, Cloverfield is very capable of standing on its own two feet as a welcome addition to the monster/disaster movie genre.

Although I would not consider myself a fan of the 'found footage' style of filming, it can still be an effective means to engage the audience.  Maybe the novelty has worn off for most, but here the handheld camera effect created a more intense viewing experience; we feel very much a part of the disaster. This type of filming eliminates the traditional three act narrative and allows us to jump right into the action with little backstory. Instead of investing time on the character's development we are able to focus almost entirely on the terror being recorded, which is the real strength of the film anyway.

The film centers around Rob, who after a one night stand with close friend Beth, is now very much in love with her.  In the midst of Rob's own going away party, Manhattan is attacked by a vicious monster.  Rob, accompanied by his friends, set out to save Beth and get off the ravaged island. TJ Miller plays Rob's best friend and is the "cameraman" for the film. Miller does a serviceable job tracking his way through the city yet his acting leaves something to be desired.  Generally Miller is quite funny in films, although here his jokes fall flat.

The film shines through its sudden bursts of intense action.  Despite its low budget, Cloverfield is a visual triumph.  It puts the audience right at the ground level, forced to look up and witness the monsters destruction. To watch Manhattan, a city so well known, fall to chaos is both jarring and familiar.  One can feel a strange sense of déjà vu, drawing parallels to the attacks on 9/11-- only now we see what a full scale attack on our soil could look like. Replace the monster for a more realistic adversary and the films true terror message can really hit close to home.

Cloverfield's characters can be frustrating and at times downright unlikable. Their decision to go back and save Beth is almost nonsense in the face of imminent doom.  To make things worse, Rob is arrogant and selfish which makes it hard to root for his survival.

In a nut shell: While Cloverfield may not have the most likable cast of characters, it certainly has enough action and suspense to captivate the audience.  It doesn't get bogged down with an overly complicated plot and serves as a crushing reminder as to how devastating a terrorist attack can be.  It takes everyday Americans and shows that in a moment's notice their entire world can change. The trivial issues in everyday life can suddenly feel insignificant when faced with your own mortality. It's a sobering thought--one that we should reflect on more often.  (2.5 out of 4)