pulikd

Weak movies can do more than just leave an audience disappointed, they can leave you with an understanding of what you'd like similar movies to miss and what you'd like them to have. It is like learning from mistakes.

The visual effects are weak, the werewolf and the violence scenes look bad, but this doesn't stop the movie from adding other supernatural elements to the mix, elements that require, obviously, visual effects. So, lesson one, if the resources are not great, do not bring more than necessary to the table. If you are "a werewolf movie", only work with werewolves and keep other fiction out. Concentrate your limited resources on the core element. Few can be as good as 2004's "Van Helsing" when it comes to working with multiple well-known fictional creatures. Don't aim too high. And if you think one monster isn't enough for one film, go watch 1979's "Alien". And if you think it is bad for a monster movie to barely have the monster on screen, then go watch 1979's "Alien". The might of that film might prove you wrong.

There is a settlement terrorized by a werewolf and there is a group of specially equipped "werewolf hunters" hired by the local authority to help. On the one hand, there is a prologue in the movie that gives one of these heroes a little backstory, and that is not a bad thing. But on the other hand, because the movie is in a rush, it does not focus much on them, and little is known about them both as a team and each separately. What could have helped is a scene where they are shown successfully killing a werewolf before the main hunt of the film begins. A scene like that would have given the audience an understanding of what this team is, how good they are and how they work. Their experiences could then contrast what they are challenged with now. And there is no need to be in a hurry. So, lesson two, take your time and pay attention to detail.

I wish I could say "the movie looks good" because the lights and the colors are good indeed, the cinematography is good, but the visuals in general are not, because the werewolf and the violence scenes are a part of them, and they look bad, and they are the key visual element here because this movie is a werewolf story. I wish I could say "this movie has a good story" because it isn't that simple and has a plot twist I didn't see coming, but there is a lack of focus and precision, there are simply more elements than the movie can handle and it isn't organized well.

Finally, this movie got me thinking about something. And for that particular thing, I am grateful. It made me realize what I wish I could see. The werewolf movies usually tell stories where werewolves are no discovery because they have been a part of the human culture for a while now. In most movies it's like "We're dealing with werewolves here but aren't they only supposed to be in fiction?" and there is no discovery to make. Or it's like "We're dealing with werewolves here and they are a well-known part of our world" and there is, again, no discovery to make. I wish I could see a Hollywood level werewolf movie that has werewolves be a discovery to everybody in the movie. Perhaps, that movie would have to be set in a time period way before now. As for this one, it doesn't look good but it could have. The story it tells isn't all that good but it could have been. Whoever likes werewolf movies and still hasn't seen this one, may as well give it a try.

When it comes to "science fiction", outer space is tempting to explore. It is mysterious and unforgiving. In reality, there are other environments just as challenging, if not more. One of them is the ocean depths right here, on Earth. There don't seem to be many movies about that. "The Abyss" is a good one. There can be criticisms, of course. Some of the secondary characters could have been paid more attention to, the pacing could have been faster and the fictional element of the plot goes beyond "science fiction" and borders on magic. But none of these ruin the movie. Thanks to what they go through and how the actors portray them, the main characters are no problem. And just because the movie is not very fast does not make it boring. There is nothing wrong with taking the time and exploring things, especially when a sense of humor is present in an environment where death is always near. And whether "hardcore science fiction" or "naïve fantasy" has more to do with the fictional element here, that element is given limited amounts of time and does not get in the way of matters of life and death. On the contrary, it amplifies things, especially, in the extended version of the film. As for the visuals and the sounds, there isn't much point in describing them. There is point in experiencing them. The cinematography, the visual effects, the sound design and the music equip the contents of the film with an outstanding package that time seems to be powerless to devalue.

"The Abyss" was a box office failure upon release in 1989. A few things may have had something to do with that. First, director James Cameron had already become known for strong action movies that rely heavier on things like fighting, shooting and explosions, and "The Abyss" wasn't exactly like that. Second, the promotion may have been weak. Third, the original theatrical release wasn't the movie we now know. The Special Edition was made public a while later and even went on to get a theatrical release much later, in 2023. Unfortunately, such theatrical "re-releases" don't do much to change the initial box office results. And the new trailer wasn't all that exciting, by the way. But the worst part is how the problems "The Abyss" brings up haven't gone anywhere since the eighties and the nineties. World War 3 is still a thing that can happen anytime soon.

It is possible to pretend this movie has nothing to do with any film series because, apart from a small prologue that doesn't look very good, everything only happens in one isolated facility. There clearly is trying to be a horror story, and it fails. And despite not having too many elements to work with, it still is confusing. That confusion comes from who really are the good guys and who really are the bad guys here, it also comes from the supernatural abilities of some of the characters, their powers and their limitations are not clear. The plot itself isn't meaningless, nor does it miss drama. It's just that it can't be clear enough on what really is going on here. And if you do take into account that "The New Mutants" is a part of the "X-MEN" film series, things only get even more confusing.

The characters are shown watching "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" twice. That show started airing in 1997 and ended in 2003. Is this movie set during that time, then? The first time they are shown watching "The Body" and that was an episode on Season 5 of the show, and the second time they are shown watching "Hush", and that was on Season 4 of the show. Since this isn't in order, those must be recordings. Plus, the technology here doesn't look old. The characters mention "X-MEN" so this has to be set in a time when "X-MEN" were alive and well and known. But there is a clear connection to "Logan" here that screams that these movies are set around the same time, but in "Logan" it's clear mutants are all but extinct and "X-MEN" are already history. Long story short, it's unclear where exactly "The New Mutants" fits in the franchise.

What's good is the movie doesn't focus on huge things and there is no apocalypse coming. It is a small story about a handful of individuals. There may not be enough to make all things clear, but there is enough to get the audience to care about them. And again, there is a prologue that does not look good, but the rest of the film does look good. Most of the screen time there may not be anything much to look at, but the cinematography is eye friendly here. No attempts to "look extremely dark", no shaky camera, no unnecessary tricks with bright lights. And when the third act arrives, it proves the two acts before it were worth sitting through. This goes for both the visuals and the plot.

This, on the one hand, is a sequel to the "X-MEN" film series that has huge events happen off screen in between the previous films and itself. On the other hand, it doesn't have too many things to deal with, and has a simple story that's easy to follow. But that simple story only works for two thirds of the runtime and the third act is a failure.

The harsh reality and the violence "Logan" is bold enough to have on screen go hand in hand both in the beginning and in the middle of the plot, but in the big finale, the plot twists and becomes complicated, and the elements it has to deal with get out of hand, stop making sense, raise questions, ruin what realism there was, and all that's left is the violence.

Director James Mangold had a strong third act in "The Wolverine" from 2013, and the rest of the runtime was boring because the movie couldn't handle the big material it had to deal with until things were clear and simple enough for the big final showdown. There was also a little prologue in that movie that did work, but again, that was just a handful of minutes and they were someone's memory. Here, the big picture is the opposite. It is the big final showdown that can't handle the material it deals with, here, the parts of the film that do work are the ones that didn't in "The Wolverine", the beginning and the middle. Fortunately, one failed piece out of three does not necessarily ruin the whole picture, but it does not make it good, either. Not when it's the finale.

First of all, because this movie has time travel, there are two time periods where the action takes place. Neither is around 2014, the year it was released. One time is 1973 and the other isn't specified but it is "about fifty years" later. That isn't a problem, though, just worth mentioning. Going back in time to ensure future survival isn't new. In "The Terminator", for example, the hero goes back in time to the year 1984, and that movie was released in 1984. Also, when it comes to many movies being part of one big film series to tell one big story, this whole franchise lost the way when the two thousands were over. "First Class" from 2011 and "Apocalypse" from 2016 weren't what "The Hobbit" was to "The Lord of the Rings", it was not about things that happened earlier in the same story. It was about starting from scratch. So, there are now two conflicting stories within one and the same film series, and "Days of Future Past" here wants to stitch them together. Unless you erase your memory and switch your brains off, it does not work. That is a problem. There is an extended cut of the film, of course, but it doesn't help much.

The cinematography here could have been better. The bright lights and the dark darkness don't look great. In fact, now, years later, there is another movie that handles the light and the color like that when it comes to the dark future. That movie is "Terminator: Genisys" that most seem to hate. Still, the future scenes are the best part of "Days of Future Past" because they have some of the scariest movie villains ever. And the visual effects, unlike the cinematography, are good, if not great here. But this dark future does not have much screen time, and what does is the year 1973. There are moments here that show the events taking place through a camera from that year. These moments don't really do anything for the plot of the film, but they have more color to them than the rest of the 1973 footage. It looks very pale as though it was drained of as much color as possible, and when it comes to visual effects, some of it looks artificial. In "MIB 3" someone has to go even further back in time, to the sixties, only the footage from that time looks just fine in that film.

Although focusing on the titular character, this is a direct sequel to the original trilogy from the two thousands. The hero goes on a new adventure, one that is rooted deeply in his past and may help him change his life for the better. Unfortunately, the part of the movie that is between the prologue and the third act is problematic. Again, the movie focuses on one specific character and what he's going through, and there are no apocalyptic events coming yet, but there are some huge things at work, like the government or the crime world and so on, and the movie struggles to handle these things and the intricate intrigues that come from them, and even the action scenes do not really help here. It's like the movie wants to be more than just entertainment, it's like it wants to be something deeply serious, but doesn't really have what it takes. Fortunately, though, the hero's particular journey here works, and again, once things are clear enough and it's time for the big final showdowns, the movie works just fine.

None of these movies are perfect, they all have things that can be viewed as weak spots, but when it comes to the original trilogy spanning from 2000 to 2006 here, the third and last one seems to be regarded as not only the worst in the trilogy but also some of the worst in the entire franchise and, more than that, one of the worst "superhero/comic book to film adaptation" movies ever.

It relies heavier on visual effects than the two before, but the conflict here is bigger than in the two prior films, and having more visual effects here is only natural. That isn't a problem. What does deserve criticism isn't the quantity but the quality of the visual effects here. Some of them could have been better. But again, some of them, not all of them, and the visuals in general are not bad at all. There is nothing wrong with the cinematography here. So, visually, this isn't a bad movie. And as for the sounds, the music here beats "X2" from three years before with ease. Whether or not it beats the movie from 2000 is not that clear. But again, anyway, the package here isn't bad at all. So, if the movie is bad, then the contents have to be the problem, the plot. Is it bad, really?

It raises the stakes about as high as the previous movie, and explores more of the histories behind some of the key characters. Also, it obviously follows in the footsteps of what came before even though the director is new. Also, matters of life and death get even more serious here. The world on screen grows shaky and both the heroes and the villains are tested to the point where some of them almost lose faith in what they have stood for this whole time.

Magneto deserves a special comment. He is a villain, make no mistake, but there is tragedy to how he became what he is and how he does what he does. This much has been clear enough both in the first and the second of these movies. It is also clear in this one. But something is added now. He may have been a respected leader for the bad guys in these movies, he may have been followed, his authority may have been undisputed, but whoever has been allied with him this whole time has been there for their common cause. They were together because they were doing the same thing. And he would regard any of them as disposable units. Once rendered useless, he wouldn't hesitate to abandon them. He would also go as far as to sacrifice some of his own kind for what he believed to be the common good. But the only friend he's ever had is on the other side of the barricade. "The Last Stand" points this out in a way neither "X-MEN" nor "X2" did. And if it brings you to tears, it's only natural. It's designed to.

Of course, one can rightfully criticize the plot for bearing some clear resemblance to the first of these films, but it is not a copy, not even close. The runtime could have been longer with how much is going on here and acting could have been better here and there, perhaps. But the story is there, and there is drama to it. The bad reputation this movie has may have something to do with the comic book material behind it, and that I can get. But it's only a problem if you've read the comic books or the movie makes no sense at all. I haven't read any comic books, I'm only interested in the movies, and with some weak spots this one has, it may be the weakest in the trilogy because there could have been more care to how it's made, but a bad movie in general, some of the worst third movies in trilogies and one of the worst superhero films, no, that I can't get behind.

There clearly is more material here than in the previous film. It raises the stakes and explores some of the main characters' histories. The visuals are also stronger. What's clearly weaker than the last time is the music. Beyond the opening and the ending credits, there isn't much to speak of. In general, of course, "X2" from 2003 is "more" than "X-MEN" from 2000. But more does not necessarily mean better. Piecing all the elements together here isn't as careful as the last time, and even though the runtime is longer, the movie seems to be struggling to keep it all together. The editing may have something to do with that. But again, as for the good things, it is a sequel that follows in the original's footsteps. That alone can be viewed as a luxury a couple of decades after "X2" was released. It looks better than the first one. The sounds, however, don't beat the first one. The contents have more but could have been organized better. A good sequel, for sure, but whether it is better than the original can be rightfully questioned. And a good piece of entertainment that, again, is not all fun but also matters of life and death.

Like "First Class", there is a little prologue where one of the main characters is just a kid, only here, there aren't as many elements at work, and they form a clear picture rather than raise questions and confusion. And once that prologue is done, the film does not jump to a later date in our real history, it jumps to a time that hasn't yet come. No exact date this time but "the not too distant future" is something to think about. On the one hand, this hasn't happened yet. On the other, there isn't much time left. The movie looks and sounds good. As for the contents, things like evolution and mutation belong in science fiction, but here they border on magic. What's good is there are clear teams of heroes and villains with histories and motivations behind them. And though a sense of humor is present, the story told here is no laughing matter.

The Wolverine stands out among the original "X-MEN" trilogy mutants because of his erased memories, ones that could contain more than a handful of decades worth of lifetime because he doesn't age much and his body immediately heals once wounded or damaged in any way. At what age was it discovered that his body immediately heals? How did the surrounding individuals react to this and how did they handle this? At what age were his claws discovered? How were they handled? And when was it discovered that our hero cannot be killed, exactly? How did he react to this? How did the others react to this? The movie either ignores such questions or is very surface level with them. It is fast paced and doesn't focus much on anything. The characters' motivations raise questions and cannot withstand criticism. Some if this material may be shockingly stupid, primitive and, even for "science fiction" or "fantasy" or "superhero films", unrealistic. As a prequel film, the connection to the other films is damaged. The plot isn't good. The visuals could have been better, too. If not the cinematography in general, then the visual effects in particular. They definitely could and should have been much better.

The X-MEN film series began in 2000 and ended several years later as a complete trilogy of films, then, in 2009, the first so-called "prequel" film was released. Then more prequel films started coming. This may require a little explanation, so here it goes. A prequel, unlike a sequel, isn't the events that will happen after the story that has already been told, a prequel is a story that is already history. It has already happened, only it hasn't been told yet either because it wasn't necessary or because it wasn't technically possible to tell earlier. With these movies here, the prequels fail to hold on to the original story, they start as what seems to be a prequel but then, eventually, become a story of their own. This is confusing already.

Anyway, these prequels (that aren't exactly prequels) have reached what could be their dead end with "X-MEN: Dark Phoenix", an X-MEN movie that easily stands out among not only the prequels (that aren't exactly prequels), but the rest too, for one simple reason. Every other film in the series may have problems that prevent it from being all that good, but they all have what it takes to be, at the very least, entertaining, and this one from 2019 doesn't even have that. It is just bad.

With what Gene Grey did at the end of the previous film, one could, before even knowing this film was coming, safely have assumed her dark inner superpower wasn't a danger either to her or anyone around her anymore. She didn't release it back then because a tragedy had happened to her, not because she had been mentally or physically traumatized, she released it back then because it was necessary, and she was being encouraged and assisted by a good teacher. In between "Apocalypse" and "Dark Phoenix", one could assume there was some training to gain good control of that power and make it normal, yet another part of the team, but in "Dark Phoenix" here, it's like nothing was done in between the two movies about it at all. Instead, there is a prologue and a plot that triggers that dark inner power and ruins things for our heroes. The plot is set in motion by things and decisions that raise questions and paint some of the smartest individuals here bad, make them look like idiots. Even though said plot is boring, there seem to be enough things here for more than one film. How can a plot with so much going on be boring? It can be if key things don't make sense and there isn't enough emphasis given to things. It's like someone isn't telling you a story here, it's like someone is retelling you someone's story and they aren't all that interested themselves. The music, by the way, was annoying.

I like Michael Fassbender's acting but I suspect these "prequels" have given Magneto another superpower, or even two. They are the ability to get away with anything in between films and to change his mind on things that mean a lot to him. I liked the young Storm, I liked outer space. The scene wasn't bad. But the visuals in general aren't good. They don't get crazy with light tricks and they don't have shaky cam, so that's good, but they, the visuals, are either pale or too bright with visual effects that are obviously visual effects. The film's story is set in 1992 but I doubt it would have impressed audiences even if it was released during that year.

Two things make this film stand out in the series. One is the visuals. Not the visual effects, the cinematography. The lights and the colors work wonders, plain and simple. So, that is good. The other is how evolution is handled. The mutations in these movies used to grow gradually. It's like they needed time to develop. That is only natural for evolution. Of course, not everything has always been going carefully, but if there is a movie that disrespects the whole point of evolution in a way no other comes close to, then it's this one. So, that is bad.

The first "X-MEN" movie tells the audience there has been some mutant activity for a while already, but it's "in the not too distant future" that the big things will happen. Years later "X-MEN: FIRST CLASS" tells the audience that, actually, no, the big things will not start in a new world that's yet to come, the big things have been happening already and some of them are in our history. And these things are growing. Huge events in the sixties and then more huge events in the seventies, and this movie, "X-MEN: APOCALYPSE" is set in the eighties, and it's about to get even more huge than ever before. Before it does, however, there is a surprising prologue set thousands of years ago, in Ancient Egypt. There is a humanoid creature worshipped as a god and there are a few guardians and there is some very important ceremony going on, but things don't go as planned and the "god" gets buried below a huge pyramid, but it is wrapped in some sort of energy blanket that won't let it sustain any damage, and the body it inhabits can, apparently, immediately heal once wounded. So, Logan the Wolverine isn't the only one who can heal. Anyway, back to the eighties.

The metal controlling mutant is now trying a peaceful life away from all action. It has now been two decades since he tried to spearhead the whole "mutants versus humans" thing. He now has a wife and a daughter but when his secret identity is revealed, some police show up to arrest him. They have wooden bows and arrows and the scene is happening in a forest. He wants no harm to his family and is willing to turn himself in. But his daughter can't stand it and she turns out to be a mutant with the ability to make birds go crazy and attack people. Wait a minute, his wife is human, but hasn't Magneto put himself and mutants in general above humans? Why would a guy like that even look at a human woman? Did he become a different person in between movies? Pay no mind to it. The birds have gone Alfred Hitchcock on the police and one of them accidentally lets loose a wooden arrow without even looking in the shooting direction. And that arrow turns out to have enough force to pierce not one, but two human bodies, both to a lethal outcome, the wife and the daughter. This is very implausible. Magneto turns angry and evil again and uses a little piece of metal to kill the policemen. He's bad again. Whatever, he's played by Michael Fassbender, and I like this actor. Let's see what happens next.

The mutant that can turn into anyone has been, apparently, helping other mutants, and because of what she did a decade ago, she has been idolized by younger mutants. This is interesting. There are some individuals with supernatural abilities in this world, and two of them stand out because of what they once did. One of them is Magneto who tried something big and bad but was, thankfully stopped by Mystique. He has been a wanted criminal this whole time now, a terrorist. And she has been known for stopping him, and other mutants look up to her. He's bad. She's good. Of course, there's also Charles Xavier and a whole bunch of other good mutants now, but they all basically live in hiding and aren't known to the world. Two are known. The bad one is a man. The good one is a woman. Maybe it's nothing.

That Egyptian mutant has awakened and turns out to be the oldest and the most powerful of all the mutants, going age after age devastating the world once there is too much going on in it. Where his powers end is unclear. He gathers a team of four to do his business and one of them happens to be Magneto. Basically, the end of the world is about to happen, but this is 1983, and the film itself was released in 2016, so, we do know the heroes are going to win. That's one problem with the doomsday here. This ancient mutant going by the name Apocalypse now has access to all the nukes in the world and he fires them all. But only to have them all go up into the outer space and then it is unclear whether they go off or not and what happens to them next. This is another problem. Will they just be floating around the planet for as long as possible now? Will this ever be brought up again? No? No. If Apocalypse wants to devastate the world, why not have the nukes go off and destroy everything everywhere? That would have been an interesting plot twist. By the way, during the scene with the nukes going up, there is some great music playing. It wasn't composed for this movie specifically and it wasn't composed for any movie, specifically, it is old and some movies can use it now. Go watch 2009's "KNOWING" and you'll see things, and you'll hear things, and you just might be scared by things. Be warned.

There is a scene where some of the good guys have just seen "Return of the Jedi" in a cinema. They talk about how the previous movies were better. They don't seem impressed. There is also a little scene in the movie where Apocalypse uses a TV screen to learn about the world, and that's when he decides it's time to go kill everyone everywhere. I wonder how "Return of the Jedi" would have worked on him. The main bad guy in that film ruled a Galaxy, not a planet, and had a colossal fleet able to blow up planets, and Apocalypse only has four individuals at his disposal, and their determination isn't clear, as well as their loyalty. Seriously, someone should have shown him that old movie.

Anyway, the human element has been taken out of the equation, there's no police and no armies trying to stop Apocalypse, there's just the little team of the good guys opposing him now. How does Apocalypse intend to destroy the world, you ask? Well, he tells Magneto to pull all the metal humans have ever put anywhere out of the ground. Magneto is busy now and the remaining three guardians of Apocalypse are now fighting the good guys. Not all of them, because two of them are lucky enough to have a moment and talk to Magneto. One of them is the well-known Mystique. She tells him he's good. And the other is Magneto's son, but Magneto doesn't know it, and won't know it in this movie. Then this movie uses Apocalypse as Emperor Palpatine, Magneto's son as Luke Skywalker, and Magneto/Erik Lehnsherr as Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker. The good guys win, but it's not Magneto that stops Apocalypse. It's a girl named Gene Grey. Obviously, a mutant, one that can read minds and control minds, just like Professor Xavier, but she can also have things move, not just metal, anything, but there's also some huge force in her, one that scares even her, but now, with some motivational talk from the professor, she unleashes that Dark Phoenix and that is why the oldest and the most powerful mutant loses. All the team working together couldn't stop him, even with Magneto helping.

Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix are the strongest mutants ever. The bad one is the man. The good one is the woman. Man bad woman good!? Movie, are you sexist?

By the way, when all those nukes were going up, there was a torpedo that didn't go up and hit a submarine instead. That submarine was Russian, or, taking the time into account, Soviet. And nobody in the film is shown to have a problem with that. And all the devastation done in the third act is so terrible it... doesn't occupy much screen time, looks like a CGI mess, and is, by the end of the film, treated as something easy to recover from. And Magneto, the one behind it, seems to be... just walking free. Whatever, movie, you are the movie. But here is my conclusion.

Some of the visual effects could and should have been better, but in general, the movie looks good. It also sounds good. The plot isn't good, especially, when it counts the most, during the final battle. And it disrespects the idea this whole film series rests on. Not a waste of time, but not enough to be a good movie.

The "X-MEN" film series began in the early 2000s and deals with a new stage of human evolution, obviously, a fictional one. There are individuals here and there with supernatural abilities some of which border on magic. Some have power over weather, others can read and control minds, and so on. All such individuals are called mutants. There are the good guys running a special school for mutant kids. They believe mutants can live a normal life among regular human beings. Others think mutants are superior and there is an inevitable war coming between mutants and humans. They are the bad guys here. There are also mutants that don't belong to any of the two groups yet. It is a matter of time and choice. And all of this mutant activity doesn't go unnoticed by the government. That was the first movie and it was a clear beginning. And the story continued with two more movies. But the simple times are over.

Things are now complicated. This one opens near the end of World War 2 in a concentration camp where a kid is forced away from his parents. Apparently, he can control metal, move it and twist it without even laying a finger on it. A man in a suit is interested in this kid and wants him to make a little coin move. This is happening in an office. The boy can't make the coin move. The man in the suit then orders his mother in and two armed soldiers bring her in. The man in the suit will now count to three and then shoot the boy's mother if the coin trick still doesn't work. It doesn't work and the boy's mother is shot dead. The boy is now angry. There is a bell on the desk and that bell gets squeezed and deformed without anyone touching it. The two soldiers are wearing metal helmets on their heads. They get squeezed and crush their heads to death. There are plenty of metal objects here and the boy really gives it his full power. Things get crushed, things get thrown, things fly. There is a gun on the desk. The man in the suit shot the boy's mom with that. The man who just shot his mom is right here and wearing glasses. This is 1944 and those glasses should have metal parts. The angry metal controlling kid does all sorts of things to everyone and everything around him but won't do a thing to the one bad guy who just killed his mother and thus angered him. The man in the suit, the murderer, looks extremely happy. He's making it clear he will research and develop the boy's ability. He pats the boy on the shoulder. The boy is already done doing his crazy thing and yelling that clichéd "no". And the man in the suit gives him the coin. The scene is now over.

The movie jumps 18 years ahead and that's where the plot will happen. The boy is now a grown man and looking for the man in the suit from 18 years before. They are no longer together. How long were they together? Why are they separated? Why hasn't our metal controller killed that man in the suit already? I can only assume they got separated because the war ended. But soon enough the man in the suit turns out to be alive and well, and a mutant, and more powerful than anything any of these movies has ever had to offer with the exception of the Dark Phoenix, of course. The mutant in the suit's superpower is absorbing energy and then using it against his opponents in a fight. You can't shoot him, you can't blow him up. You can't do anything. And he doesn't age. And now, because he doesn't have that moustache anymore, I recognize Kevin Bacon. I couldn't tell it was him in the opening scene. This actor is a power to be reckoned with. And the character he's playing is an even bigger power.

By the end of the film, the two men meet again. The one whose mom was shot dead is now friends with another mutant, a telepath who reads and controls minds. He not only knows what you think, he can get inside your head and freeze you for some time so you don't move a muscle. The bad guy has been found and the telepath is now in his head. The bad guy is frozen and can't move. The guy whose mother he killed 18 years ago is facing him and still has that same coin, and he will now move it. He makes it slowly float in the air and cut through the bad guy's head like a knife through warm butter. All this time the telepath was holding the bad guy but didn't want him dead and has been strongly against violence the whole time. This coin move is an abyss of insanity. And it ruins the movie for me.

The bad guy is frozen by a telepath and cannot move himself, but that coin is moving toward him and once it reaches the brow, it should simply push the immobile body to fall down on the floor, and the coin will simply float on through the air. That's one. Even if the body was slammed into a wall and the head was somehow fixed in one position so it couldn't move, the coin would never cut through the head like that. Moving that slowly, it would break through the skull and leave a bloody gaping hole half the brow big, and the exit wound would also be a bloody mess. That's two. Finally, the bad guy is paralyzed and can't move, but he can feel the pain, and he can do nothing about it. When the "heroes" kill him, he's helpless, defenseless. I find it hard to hate him now. And when they show his dead body put on display with his head down, his eyes shut, blood running down his face, I can't help but feel bad for the guy. I shouldn't, right? He's the bad guy, and he's sort of Nazi, and you know what, if the move has you feel for the bad guys too, it is a good movie, right? Things aren't just black and white, the good guys can do bad things and the bad guys can have something good to them, too, complex characters, motivations and more mumbo-jumbo like that, right?

Wrong.

The one whose mother was shot dead admits to the shooter it made him stronger. The loss of his mother made him stronger. He literally says "everything" the bad guy did, made him stronger. More importantly, he says he has "known it all along". Do you know what this means? Magneto, when he was a boy, wanted but couldn't learn to use his power himself, and he needed help, and he got that help when his mother was shot by the bad guy, so, am I to conclude that that is why he didn't kill the guy who killed his mother at once? Thank you for killing my mother back then and thus making me awesome and powerful but also die for killing my mother now. This is confusing. But the bad guy was a Nazi, right? Nazi equals bad, right? Right, only he wasn't exactly Nazi. In the opening of the film he literally says there's only one good thing about the Nazis, and it is that their methods work. He hadn't even agreed with their crazy ideas but had to admit they did sometimes achieve their goals.

All of this is, anyway, confusing. What could have helped is having the main villain survive the movie and remain a huge threat for more time. That would allow the franchise to clarify things. In the first movie, there was no doubt about the main villain being a monster, and the same goes for the second movie, and when he had to temporarily join forces with the good guys, that was a decent plot twist. Here, in these new movies nowadays, what could have been a series of films is slammed into one and individuals that could have had detailed and clear journeys jump from good to bad and audiences seem to think it's great. It's not.

The older movies had a better understanding of the material. That's why they had a better sense of humor and took their time to work with things. Cinematography was also better back then, and the stories were clearer, and history wasn't a problem. Here, these new movies are neither careful precursors to the older movies, nor are they independent attempts to start over from scratch. Thankfully, there is a little scene here with an actor from those older movies, and his reaction to the new, couldn't be more appropriate. Go fridge yourself.

This film is interesting for a number of reasons. First, it is part of a huge film series. If you saw "Avengers: ENDGAME" and skipped "Thor: Love and Thunder", you didn't lose much and won't have trouble catching up. Second, it has two stories to tell simultaneously. It focuses, obviously, on the titular "Guardians" team, and deals with a dark past catching up to one of them. The heroes dealing with that dark past right now is one story. The dark past itself, told through flashbacks, is another. Both do their job well and are successfully combined into one motion picture. Third, despite dealing with traumatic experiences, it does have decent jokes, and they are not exactly out of place. Not every movie can combine two things that tend to oppose one another. But here, it's done, and it does work. Fourth, the visuals and the sounds mean business here. This is good for the big screen, of course. Fifth, the drama, and this requires a special comment.

In stories, characters are supposed to go through things, deal with obstacles, and by the end of the story, they either become a different person, or stay true to themselves no matter how hard the story tries to break them. The first way is common and simple, say, an egoist becomes selfless and helps someone in a way that could get them killed, or a liar becomes honest, or a fool becomes intelligent and so on. In this movie, we have something. Dave Bautista's Drax has trouble dealing with humor and thinks dancing is for idiots. Take a look at what he's doing in the end. Why is he doing it? Is there a reason for him to have changed? Yes, there is, but no spoilers here. Bradley Cooper's Rocket doesn't like to be called "raccoon", but by the end not only does he accept it, he's proud of what he is. Also, he's not running from the things that once put him through so much misery. Chris Pratt's Star Lord is dealing with a recent personal loss. His way of dealing with it is drinking. Look at what he goes through and where he is in the end, but no spoilers here. And another example, possibly the most interesting one, is one of the bad guys. He has huge strength and he's young. Where he comes from ties him to one specific way of life and does not leave much room for personal freedom, apparently. And you know, choosing between a cage of gold with every basic need satisfied and a regular living tree in the real world, a bird will probably choose the latter. Will the things Will Poulter's Adam Warlock goes through change him? Watch and see.

Of course certain things could have been done better. The music was good, the visual effects were good, but the cinematography could have been more careful. The main villain is a threat to be reckoned with but what he is and does may lead you to rightfully question whether or not the movie goes a little too far. "Superhero movies", especially such as this "space fun", usually avoid violence, but this one may shock you. Finally, again, this is a superhero movie, and superheroes are good survivors, hard to kill, but some of the dangers our heroes go through could have been a bit less implausible.

If this movie left you questioning what it was and how it was made, I have three theories for you. Whoever made it is a genius infinitely superior to every filmmaker ever. You, like me, are just too low to get it. Everything about this movie was perfect. Not good, not great, perfect. Some parts of it are black and white and the story is told in a way that makes it hard to follow. It isn't in order. But it's not confusing, no, there's a higher artistic meaning to all of it. You, like me, are just too dumb to get it. This theory is, of course, a joke. That's one. Whoever made this movie cannot work with the simplest things. They can't tell a story at all. They surely know how to work with pictures and sounds but how these things tell a story, how they make a motion picture and how to put them all together in a way that makes sense and has a point, they have absolutely no idea. Zero, zeppo, nothing. This theory is, obviously, wrong. That's two. Whoever made this movie wanted a puzzle of a story, apparently, and it either got out of their control, or they got carried away and the result ended up the way it now is. The story is told out of sequence and the movie struggles to hold it all together. Also, it's three hours long and sitting through it could be a challenge. But if you do manage to sit through it, you may discover something interesting. Like me!

The titular character has gone through a lot, but at the very end he learns the end hasn't really come. It's only the beginning of a huge story that leaves you with absolutely no way to intervene and do anything about what's happening and, probably, there won't be a happy ending. He is known as the creator of the most powerful weapon in the world. He used to think the mere existence of such a device would stop not only the current war, but maybe stop any other war from ever happening. He used to think once one country in the world had a weapon like that no other country would ever dare oppose them in any way. But he was wrong. What it really meant is that whichever country could, they would do all they could to get their hands on such a weapon. And this race would only get worse. And it would probably only lead one way, a way of total annihilation. And you, as an audience, like me, having clawed your way through a very uncomfortable to follow story, now may as well find yourself thinking about something. This character, this person, this creator of the superweapon, is a real person from the real history of our real world. And these weapons have only since grown in number and might. Where are we all going? Can we do anything about it? The creator of this superweapon couldn't have done much about the danger spreading and growing, and if so, what can we, mere audiences, possibly do? Think about that.

Life on Earth has existed for hundreds of millions of years. It has come in many shapes and sizes. Different life forms have been around for different amounts of time. They have also occupied different corners of the world depending on temperature, terrain and other circumstances. We, humans, have been around for a very short time yet. Right now, though, we are dominant. The planet is ours. There is no telling for how much longer, considering how we, humanity, tend to handle the world around us and each other. But there was once, let's say, a group of creatures that are well-known for two reasons, at least. Their "once" lasted for around one and a half hundred million years. During that "once", they absolutely dominated pretty much every corner of the planet. No other group of life forms has ever dominated the planet as long. That's "one". They were also the largest creatures that have ever walked. Possibly, so big nothing will ever beat them. Gravity and air conditions limit the size of animals. Dinosaurs were both the biggest herbivore and carnivore creatures ever to inhabit the dry-land. That's "two". They had, let's say, relatives both in the water and in the air. Both were also huge. Sixty-five million years ago, all of them went extinct, dinosaurs, water and air reptiles, all of them. Since we discovered them, we've been fascinated by them. How numerous they were, how various they were, and how enormous some of them were. "Jurassic World: Dominion" is the sixth one in the biggest dinosaur related film series. Like most old and famous ones, this film series hasn't been feeling so good lately. How is "Dominion" doing?

Whoever watches these movies because of dinosaurs only, will probably see it as the weakest in the series. The dinosaur visual effects that these movies use were once groundbreaking. Since then, however, they haven't gone anywhere new. They no longer surprise audiences. And some of them may have even degraded. Also, cinematography in general could have been better. If that doesn't bother dinosaur fans, then a complication in the plot of the film can do that. "Dominion" isn't exactly a dinosaur movie. Rather, it is a movie about a possible end of the world. What's good about it, though, is the movie uses no miracle to solve the problem, it relies on science. This isn't "Interstellar". Whoever watches these movies because of picturesque locations will see something new, rather than yet another tropical island. Seriously, it's nice to see familiar dinosaurs in new environments. What's even nicer is how the film shows the dinosaurs disoriented and scared. They are not your typical "movie monsters" here. Unless they have been caged and treated in ways that would turn any living thing into a monster. Whoever watches these movies because of characters will see the old heroes and the new heroes going on dangerous missions and joining forces to take down the bad guys. By the way, the old heroes do not return for a handful of minutes and they do not return to be humiliated by the plot. They return because of their experience and the authority they have gained previously on this series. This is not "Disney Star Wars".

In conclusion, the movie could have focused more on dinosaurs. The visuals could have been better. The story could have been simpler. Or it could have been enough for two movies, two big parts of one story, like some big budget movies do sometimes. But even with all the weak spots, "Jurassic World: Dominion" isn't pointless. Nor is it heartless. It does deserve a chance.

For a movie about what seems like the end of the world, there isn't much "action" to "HOW IT ENDS". It is focused on two men saving a pregnant young woman very dear to both. She needs saving because where she now happens to be, she's alone, and everything seems to be falling apart because of a mysteriously catastrophic event. Her father spent a very big part of his life in the army. He is capable, experienced and has a gun. There are dangers on the way, of course, and the young man would be extremely vulnerable on his own. Of course, as far as "human beings turning on each other because of a life or death crisis" goes, this movie is nowhere near, say, Frank Darabont's "The Mist". But Theo James and, especially, Forest Whitaker, are a worthy driving force. It's the story of these two actors' characters that makes the plot interesting.

The film may not use a great deal of fighting, shooting or explosives, but saying there's little to look at would not be true. Whatever it is ruining the civilization here, it clearly has an effect on the world in general, too, on the nature. And the movie looks good. The cinematography does deserve a "thumbs up". The main character's journey is important. At the beginning, in a world where law and order are quickly gone, he's an easy target, but he isn't like that by the end. The dangers he has gone through have made him stronger, as a person. And that, hugely, is thanks to an older man being there and helping.

One cannot be absolutely sure whether or not the off-screen disaster trigger was supposed to be a mystery or ended up a mystery due to the mind behind the story told in the film unable to solve it. Argument or even disappointment can also be caused by the ending. Not the third act as a whole, mind you, just the very ending. What's clear is the movie looks good and is, for the most part, interesting.

Why "Hollow man"? That's what you may rightfully ask before seeing the film or, say, reading H. G. Wells' novel "The Invisible Man". Both deal with discovering a way to become invisible, transparent. Both deal with how this can eventually transform a person into a monster. The film does not claim to be an adaptation of that novel, though. It is set in a different time and does not deal with a genius secretly making dangerous breakthroughs in science. It deals with a group of scientists headed by a genius and controlled by the government. The visuals of the film are brilliant. And they do explain the title of the film.

The main character, Kevin Bacon's Sebastian Caine is, from a certain moment on, invisible. But that does not go for his clothes. And when he's wearing them, he looks hollow. When he isn't wearing anything and comes in contact with smoke or water, you can see a hollow human form. The shape is there but it's like there's nothing inside it. Again, the film looks amazing. And it's not just the VFX. It's the cinematography in general. The lights, the colors, the picture looks great. Director Paul Verhoeven, I hear, would say this movie wasn't really his because there wasn't much he specifically could do with it. It's like any other competent director could have handled the material. Verhoeven is known for the stories he tells in "RoboCop", "Total Recall" and "Starship Troopers'', of course. But compare Verhoeven's "Hollow Man" to the "The Invisible Man'' released around 2020. The older one has more color to it and does not try to "look dark". Jost Vacano was the director of photography working with Verhoeven then. They don't shoot pictures the way they used to, do they? And not every invisibility related movie has music by someone like Jerry Goldsmith. By the way, that new "Invisible Man" movie isn't an H. G. Wells adaptation either.

2000's "Hollow Man'' looks and sounds great. But the story could have been better. It is simple. The main scientist goes too far and things build up to a big and bloody third act. Not that you don't get to know any of these people, not that you don't care about them, but the story could have gone in a different direction. Here is what I see as a missed opportunity.

Doctor Caine may be a brilliant scientist but he isn't a great person. He's proud, stubborn and tends to look down on others. First, animals are tested, and it's clear he does not care about them at all. But there is someone who does care about them. Kim Dickens' Sarah Kennedy is responsible for the test subjects. And you can tell from her very first scene that, one, these test subjects aren't just a job to her, she's a caring soul, and two, she has been very unhappy about how Sebastian treats them. There's a conflict here. But then Sebastian volunteers to become the first human test subject. This is what they call "Phase Three". Once the whole team learns this has been "green lit" by the government it's clear there are no more animal tests coming. Sarah should be happy. Even Sebastian understands this and he tells her that, specifically. Also, she seems enthusiastic about "Phase Three" once she knows the time has come.

Elisabeth Shue's Linda McKay used to be with Sebastian but she's now with someone else and he is alone. It's clear he does not have anything much in his life other than the science. He is a hard working genius but he is also a lonely man. And he still is unhappy about Linda no longer being there.

So, he is now the lab rat. He'll now know what it's like to be a test subject and there is a young woman whose job is taking care of them and, clearly, is more than a job to her. Sebastian and Sarah haven't been famous for getting along, only now he is going through a very hard time. And she, as a doctor, is still there. In a way, he's in her care. What if these two went from disliking one another to the opposite? She hasn't liked him because of how he looks down on test subjects but he basically is one now. And he is quite miserable. What if the hardships, instead of turning him mad, made him see things in a different way? What if her caring about him gradually made him like her? What if he was no longer unhappy with his previous love interest not being there for him? He isn't a teenager, after all, have him get over it and move on. Sarah, by the way, has no social life either, just the work, so that's what her and Sebastian have in common. This could have been very interesting.

What also could have been interesting is how Sebastian sees this whole invisibility as excitement and fun at the beginning, but then the tests and all that take their toll. What if he, eventually, grew tired of invisibility and, instead of going "crazy god mode", hated the idea instead and wanted it wiped out along with the whole data? Because it's dangerous to everyone, not just the invisible individual, but the human world in general, and nobody, no matter how well-meaning they may seem, should ever get their hands on such powers.

Doctor Caine is a brilliant scientist working for the government who has made a breakthrough. Unfortunately, he is a lonely man who has nothing much in his life except for the work he has been doing night and day. A proud man seeking greatness and tempted by the unique abilities he has discovered. Also, a woman in his team used to be his lover. She is with someone else now and Sebastian is lonely. Once "no visibility equals no evidence" starts doing bad things to his mind, he alienates from the team and becomes dangerous. He learns his previous lover is with another man from his team now and that, specifically, is why he decides to kill his entire team and live using his invisibility. His previous love interest and her new lover live but everybody else die, including Sebastian. The killings, the destruction, everything is the might of Hollywood. As for the characters, you do get to know them and you do get to feel bad when they die. But the story is primitive. I wouldn't label it good. It's the visuals and the sounds that are good or even great, the package. This is what is. Now let me share what I think could have been.

Doctor Caine is a brilliant scientist working for the government who has made a breakthrough. Unfortunately, he is a lonely man who has nothing much in his life except for the work he has been doing night and day. A proud man seeking greatness and tempted by the unique abilities he has discovered. Also, a woman in his team used to be his lover. She is with someone else now and Sebastian is lonely. Now that he is undergoing some seriously unique and dangerous experiments, he becomes a different man. He realizes that it isn't fame or powers that matter so much, it's life in general and the people around you in particular. That's where happiness could be found. Because when you dedicate all you are to some project, that project might just consume you whole, become your life and leave no place for anything. It will make you hollow. There's nothing to you anymore, just the project you're working on. When you're sick or in trouble, it's not your project you can turn to for help, it's the people around you. And Sebastian no longer looks down on the others in any way. He values them and respects them. The woman he loved is with someone else now and it is her business, not his. It's time to let go of that past and move on. Not just because it is reasonable but because there's someone else right here who could be very good for Sebastian. Apart from all else, neither him nor her have any personal life, that's what they have in common, and that's what could be a new beginning after what they've gone through with all these experiments.

And these experiments should not be. They are wrong. Nobody should ever get their hands on such power, no matter how well they seem to mean. This is where the third act could have gone Hollywood level explosive and violent, only for a different reason. Sebastian and the team could have united against the committee that controls them and who knows how that conflict could have worked. Maybe the team would use invisibility in some way because troops were sent to deal with them. Or maybe they decided to destroy the whole project. And the laboratory was pretty deep underground. Things could have been done here. Maybe they got blocked down there and ordered to come out in order to be arrested. And maybe they chose to sacrifice themselves to make sure the invisibility formula is buried for good.

The young and muscular Arnold Schwarzenegger is easily the biggest highlight of this motion picture. That's as obvious as obvious can get. And it's not like the remaining cast isn't as good. Make no mistake, they are. But this alone wouldn't have made 1982's "Conan the Barbarian" timeless. There are more highlights to speak of that make the movie as strong as it is. The music is one of them. What Basil Poledouris does here is so impressive you can easily play the whole soundtrack as if it were an album composed, recorded and released by some great musician. There may be no lyrics there, but there is some choir used here and there. And the absence of lyrics isn't an issue because it underlines just how interesting the music itself is.

Yet another highlight is what the visuals have to offer in general. The landscapes, the sets and the costumes all have something in common. You see, they are not computer generated images, they are the real thing either found or made for real to be filmed. And then, of course, there is the competent cinematography to make sure those real things do look both real and impressive. Finding the right location or creating something to be filmed is one thing, and succeeding at capturing it to make sure that screen displays the material in all the glory is another. This movie accomplishes them both.

Then there is the story. Obviously, revenge is both impactful and familiar as a thing to talk about. But there is something else here. An interesting line is drawn between what is and isn't magic. A little example is required. Someone ends up in a cave because they need shelter for the time being. The cave turns out to be the remains of some old throne room or something like that. There is a throne and even a skeleton on that throne. The skeleton is in a fixed sitting position and wearing something on the skull. Probably, some proud ruler who wouldn't abandon their position of power and nobility even facing death of old age. That's just how strong their will was. A tiny story on its own right here, by the way!

But why we're here, readers, is what the skeleton's hand is holding, and that is a sword. The living intruder takes the sword in their hand with clear fear of the dead. The sword is covered in thick dust and rust. The new owner uses a simple way to make it cleaner, hit a nearby rock several times. The loud metallic sound created by these actions proves enough to disturb that old sitting skeleton. You see, removing the sword was disturbance number one, and the following actions were more, and a dead body can only remain in a sitting position provided there are no disturbances whatsoever. The now empty hand slides off a bit and the neck movement causes the head to no longer face what's in front of it, but what's down on the ground. And the thing worn on the skull falls off as well.

To a civilized, rational viewer, all of this is easy to understand. But the new owner of that sword is a person from a whole different time and isn't immune to superstition. That the viewer can also understand. But there is, indeed, magic here, both good and bad. The bad one has a huge cult following and is very scary. It is like a disease plaguing the world of humanity and the movie is more than a revenge tale because of that. It is a story about a mighty and hugely motivated man going through hardship, teaming up with a few others and taking on an insane bloodthirsty evil.

This long anticipated motion picture is interesting to think about. It is the most technologically sophisticated dinosaur in the world of movies yet. If Oscars still mean anything, and if there still is any justice left on our planet, then "Avatar: The Way of Water" should win best VFX, best cinematography, best sound design. Win or be nominated, at the very least.

If you watch movies carefully and pay as much attention to detail as you can, and if you've read my review for the first one, then you know there was a slight VFX error in that one. It only occupied a handful of seconds, but it was there, and you cannot change that fact. I'm not saying I saw that error on viewing one because that was more than a decade ago now, but I'm certain I did spot it very early on. I didn't pay attention to it because I was heavily interested in the plot, but then I decided to review the movie, and I couldn't turn a blind eye on that little moment that had been bugging me for all those years of me and "Avatar", so I took a closer look and saw what I saw. There it was. I've now seen the sequel. Finally, and I was watching it on that huge screen, and I was paying attention, and I didn't spot anything visually wrong with anything. Thumbs up, for sure, not to mention how the first one was a forest movie, and this one is a different story, it is an ocean movie, but it still has some nice reminders of the forest. Safe to say it is visually even stronger than the first one, absolutely. The sound was also amazing. The only element of the package that is weaker than in the first movie is the music here. It is good, make no mistake, but it does not beat the original score by the now late James Horner. R. I. P.

So, the package of this one is as high as possible, probably the highest thus far with the whole underwater motion capture work and everything. But the content is also interesting. In a way, it is the polar opposite to the package. Not in the quality regard, no, the plot is good. You see, the visuals are as new in terms of their production as they get, they are the technologically freshest. But the story here is an old one. Is this basically yet another older film on another planet like many would say "Avatar" was basically "Dances with Wolves"? No, it isn't like that. But the core of the plot is family and how it functions, and this is a very old and familiar topic. A father protecting his wife and their children from peril is what this movie has to offer. This is classics, a dinosaur of a tale. Regardless of how "sci fi" this all is, the plot is very understandable and human. By the way, if you haven't seen the first one, I suspect you won't be confused much and you'll probably catch up. Is the second one a copy of the first one? No, it is not, but there are elements that tie the two plots together well, and it should not be hard to figure out who is who and why they are where they are.

The characters deserve a special comment. "The Way of Water" has a way to bring back some of those that did not survive the first movie. It does not make the most sense, of course, but seeing Quaritch in action again is brilliant. Unless the upcoming movies in this growing franchise take a bad step, Quaritch and Spider will be what Vader and Luke were to the old "Star Wars" trilogy. Mark my words. Sigourney Weaver is also back. Her character is gone, for sure, but there are flashbacks, and more, and even though it also raises a question or two, it was done for a reason, and the surface of that reason has been decently scratched here. The plot thread will go on. Unfortunately, there is no way to bring back Trudy, and it would be nice to see her again. Well, not everyone gets to come back. But then, who knows? It isn't easy to do such things without getting carried away and ending up with something ridiculous. So far, everything is alright, and it should stay that way.

By the way, what is a character, exactly? Does it have to be a living creature? Does it have to be human? No, because a robot can also be a character in a story. In this movie a whale is a character. A huge underwater life form is a character in a motion picture. It has a history, it has intelligence and kindness, and it shows care for the ones around. And it can fight. The "Avatar" franchise isn't what you need if you want interesting characters, you say?! Well, nobody here may be Anton Chigurh or The Joker from Nolan's Batman movie, but the characters here are clear, relatable and interesting nonetheless, and most importantly, the movie is daring and good enough to question what a character even is and proves they don't even need to speak. This is impressive.

You know what, the three hour runtime I did not even notice, I didn't get tired of sitting whatsoever. A decent sized chunk of that runtime had me crying for a number of reasons. What got me first was the awe. Then the movie got me thinking about how the beauty I was seeing was fictional, and the real beauty on our real planet is dying now, and that is sad. Finally, when it came to action and violence, the movie really got serious. James Cameron should be nominated as best director once again because he is so good at working with drama in a motion picture. Thank you, Jim.

Buffy is a sixteen year old school girl. When she was fifteen, she learned something very unpleasant. The world turns out to be full of different evil creatures, like vampires, werewolves, witches and many others. The general human population does not know about them, but there are selected individuals that do, and there is one chosen to fight the monsters. That one person is a human girl gifted with unthinkable physical strength you would never know she has by looking at her, and there is also her watcher acting as the teacher. He has the experience and knowledge, and he is the one that does the research, whereas the slayer does the fighting. Buffy here is, obviously, the slayer. The slayer is, by the way, an expendable unit. They don't tend to live long, and should one die, some other girl somewhere gets, so to say, activated as the new slayer. And this line just keeps going on and on. This fictional set of circumstances raises a question or two.

Why just one person, and why a girl? Wouldn't a muscle built guy be better for the fight? Better yet, how about a large collective of such individuals? There is a way to answer this. The creator of the show, Joss Whedon, had apparently grown sick of one particular horror movie cliché. You see, horror movies don't tend to hold young blond girls in high esteem, portraying them as useless and quickly killed. So Whedon decided to work with that. And the strong female character that is Buffy was thus created. But does it make sense? In an interesting way, it does. The show is big, detailed and rich, and if you, no matter how many episodes and seasons past, still can't figure something out, a particular episode that is "Chosen" has Buffy herself say something very important. Her life, the slayer's life, is insanity. Insanity isn't the right way to live, it isn't how things should be, slayer or regular person. Something is wrong with this world is what the show has to say that way. There is something wrong with our world. It shouldn't be the way it is.

The slayer isn't supposed to have friends or any personal life, for that matter. It's the rule. But Buffy is a nice, likable person, and people tend to try to communicate with her. And she does try to have friends, and more than friends. She wants to have a normal human life but cannot. What she is creates a huge obstacle for that. Being the slayer isn't a job you can quit, you're in it for life, you're only done with it and free from it once you've been killed. And your identity has to be a secret, but that secret isn't easy to keep, not to mention how little personal time and space the slayer ends up having in life. This isn't living. It's insanity, and also slavery, because the slayer does not get paid for doing their job. One that puts her life on the line every night, one that keeps a lot of peaceful people safe, one that prevents the whole world from ending every now and then, by the way.

It is clear what kind of person Buffy is, it is clear what she wants, and the obstacles on her way are also clear. And she deals with them. And they keep coming. All of this means that Buffy is interesting to watch. She is a strong female character, but a very likable one. Not to mention her friends, her family and the villains. There are many of them, some are male and others are female, and they are hard to deal with. And some characters go from being the good guy to being the bad guy or the other way around, and all of that, obviously, makes things interesting. Then there is also the package of this whole story. The vampire make-up is up there with movies like Coppola's Dracula, the visual effects, the sound, the cinematography, the acting, all well. The ending of the show, of course, could have been stronger, and that isn't a plus, but not a big problem either. The show can have you on the edge of your seat, it can have you laugh, it can make you fear, and it can make you cry. It is an impressive piece of work.

"Chosen" held in a high esteem should not be surprising. The last episode on a beloved show has a big final battle, sacrifices and, basically, is "out with a bang", but is it really great? Unfortunately, no, it isn't great, fortunately, it is still good.

The episode is well-paced and has enough time for all it wants. And it isn't just big dumb action fun. Our heroes prepare themselves for the final battle and go where they want it to be fought so they can have a strategic advantage to compensate for their lack in numbers. Plus, they do involve some much needed magic. And some of them will not be coming back, and someone may as well tear up in front of that screen. Spike has come a long way. When he first appeared on the show, he wanted to kill Buffy, and he was a monster, and now, so much later, with so many events to have influenced him, he's in love with her, and now dies to save her and pretty much everybody everywhere. He may have been a monster some time ago, but he is a hero now. When Buffy sacrificed herself in "The Gift", they all cried, but none looked as devastated as Spike when seeing her dead body. Now that Spike sacrifices himself, there isn't a body to even see. And there isn't anyone to cry for him but Buffy herself. That is an interesting comparison to "The Gift", by the way.

There is a lot of devastation involved in the end, and those visuals don't all look good. The idea of there now being a great many vampire slayers all over the world isn't brilliant. Come to think of it. There are now plenty of girls with basically the strength of ten human individuals out there, and what if some of them are even worse than Faith when she was the villain here? The life of a vampire slayer is insanity proven by what Buffy has had to go through, and it would be interesting to see some new system presented to fight the vampires, but that would be innovative and complicated, and it wasn't done. The screenwriters don't want you to see a revolution, they just want a big fight and to be done with it. Speaking of the big fight again, "The Initiative" exists on season seven, and they could have been useful here, but again, no.

The Hellmouth has been closed now, and that is good. The Hellmouth has been very significant throughout the whole show, and now, it has been finally dealt with for good. But there is a detail that undermines the accomplishment. You see, Giles says there's another one in another place. So, the Hellmouth wasn't unique, it wasn't special, and closing it wasn't really a special thing to do then, right? A slight detail you may as well miss, but it is a disadvantage and it does weaken the episode. Also, the shot of our heroes looking at where Sunnydale was minutes ago, before falling through the ground, that was a good shot, make no mistake, but it also has a detail that weakens it. That sign that says "Welcome to Sunnydale" falling in a comic way during such a moment. That was misplaced. Again, just a detail, but it is there and there's nothing you can do about it. Finally, Buffy gets stabbed through the side with a sword and it does not influence her fighting, running or jumping. Unlike what a similar, but a smaller wound did to her once on season five. I'm glad Buffy's alive and well, I'm glad most of the heroes are, I'm just saying the finale could have been even stronger. It needed to be more careful, precise and daring. But it's just good, not more.

Season seven made it clear in the very first episode that our heroes were up against some huge evil power, and then they got to know what that entity is, exactly. That entity is a mighty enemy because it has both the muscle and the brain. It can seriously influence the minds of our heroes in order to demoralize them and separate them from each other. And then it can summon a monster to go plow through the ones it wants dead. Only Buffy proved strong enough to deal with it. And the "big bad" itself may be very powerful, but not almighty, after all. After "Showtime", things became relatively calm, and our heroes got a chance to breathe. But it wouldn't last, because the ultimate evil has another card up the sleeve. One that you won't even notice until it is too late. An agent kept secret until the moment to be called for, and one nobody would ever even suspect because he is a human being and a priest. Only this opponent proved even worse than that ancient vampire warrior that almost killed Buffy in "Bring on the Night", this one is even stronger physically. Someone has been either killed or seriously injured. And Buffy became unwelcome in her own house because she is the leader here, and whoever gets hurt or killed, their blood is on her hands. She has just been forced to leave the house. A unanimous decision, except Spike wasn't around at the time, but he's about to come back from an important mission. One where he was looking for information on that human priest masked beast. So, this is now the episode called "Touched".

On the surface, there isn't much going on here, but what seems to be and what is may not be the same. Buffy and Spike are out of the equation for a certain amount of time here, and Buffy's house is crowded with people. They have a new leader now, and one that has a history with Buffy, a history going way back and not all friendly. But the point here is value. You don't really value what you have until you've lost it and have to keep going without it. Buffy may have made a mistake, for sure, but how many times has she saved them? And since when does "we no longer follow your leadership" equal "we get to force you out of your own house, the one you've been so generous to present to us all as shelter for this crazy time"? They may all have to learn the hard way what they have lost by kicking Buffy out. And now think about this. She has died twice. She's been brought back twice. She's been near death as a result of battle injury, and none of that has been able to break her spirit. But here, now, something almost has. The fact that after all she's done, she was thrown out by exactly the ones she's been doing all of it for. Sometimes you don't need to be injured or defeated in a fight to give up, sometimes what pushes you too far is how you are treated by the ones closest to you regardless of what you've gone through for them. And Buffy is now nearly lost. Thankfully, she does still have someone who won't turn their back on her, and won't just go with emotion. And it is Spike.

Spike has never been welcome with anyone here but Buffy herself, and even between the two of them, there were problems, and every time she had to defend him from the others, she would bring up his physical strength. She'd always say they needed him because he was muscle and good in a fight. And she was right about that. He is good in a fight. But what's so interesting about this scenario is as follows. Buffy did need Spike, but for a different reason, and she may not have known it herself. She is now at the point of giving up and abandoning all, and if she does, nothing good comes anyone's way, she has to come back. But she can't come back by herself, she needs someone to bring her back, and that happens to be Spike. He is more experienced than any other of the heroes, and he has now known Buffy for a good time, and he can tell when a bad decision has been made. The good guys getting rid of Buffy was a bad decision, and her decision to finally give up is no good either, and Spike is there to convince her to return. Words can cut deep and hurt bad, but they can also help when they are the right ones and well-meant. And that's what Spike has to say now. Watching him and Buffy finally talk to each other calmly, reaching understanding and warmth after all they've been through, that was something special. Remember, a man is not just "muscle", a man is also common sense, and a heart. And Buffy going up against Caleb once again was as brilliant as it was simple. The confrontation between them in the end of this episode reminded me of Buffy facing Adam in "Primeval", and few things can do that.

Obviously, every next episode is a continuation of what was before, and a little part of the big picture, but some are more than that. Occasionally, two episodes in a row would easily stand out as one story way too big for forty minutes, and that is why it takes two times that runtime to tell. Sometimes they would even have that "Part 1" and "Part 2" subtitle, and sometimes they wouldn't, like "Surprise" and "Innocence" on season two. The same goes for "Bring on the Night" and "Showtime" here. Things have been building up on season seven, and they have reached the point where something has to be dealt with as soon as possible but cannot be dealt with during just one episode, so it takes two. That's just how serious it gets here.

"Showtime" is a story about a hero going up against an extremely powerful opponent under unfortunate circumstances. The opponent is physically stronger, and there is too much to think of for the hero, a lot more than just their own life to keep in this fight. And it isn't just about life or death in the fight, there is also the spirits to take care of. A message has to be sent now. Both to the rest of the good guys and to all of the bad guys, and that message could be about how the good shouldn't panic because the devil may not be as black as some would have you believe after all. Everybody is vulnerable.

Also, like the previous one, "Showtime" isn't just strong on its own, it is important for the whole show, not just this one season here, the show in general, and things could be coming full circle soon enough. Not to mention the story of Buffy and Spike here. In a way, "Showtime" is a mirror to "Fool for Love" from season five. But that would be a matter of going a little more into detail than required.

Something is special about this episode, but what is it exactly? Is it the visual effects? They may look good, but there aren't many of them here, and they have never been the biggest highlight of the show. Is it the practical effects? They are good, for sure, but things like vampire make up have never been a challenge for the show. It is always well-done on the show. So, there has to be something else. It can't be the music. Where the episode has it, it is brilliant at doing its job, not to mention the beloved music theme by Nerf Herder. But again, nothing new in that regard. What, then, the acting, maybe? Not exactly because, again, it has always been up there, it has always been strong.

All of the above matter, but they are not the core of the episode, not the heart of it, not what drives it. What drives it is the story it tells. And this is it. This is where things require an explanation. But this is not about how season seven is growing stronger in this particular episode, not about how this episode uses some past material and how it is significant for the show in general, no, not even that is what makes "Bring on the Night" as strong as it is. What does is Buffy, the main character, and this is about her character arc here. This is where things get really interesting.

Picture this. There is a character in a story. The character has a goal and works hard to get what they want. The character deals with obstacles on their way, and by the end, the character becomes a different person. For example, Han Solo in 1977's "Star Wars" is selfish and only works for the money. But the events of the story change him, and by the end, he is selfless and fights for someone else, not for himself or a reward. This is a character arc. The character starts out as one person and ends up as someone else. A coward can become brave. A fool can become intelligent. A liar can become honest. And so on. This is one type of character arc, the common one, the one that is widespread and better known. But there is another. One that is more complicated and isn't often used. It isn't about becoming someone else. It is the opposite. It is about staying who or what you are no matter what.

An example is 2016's "Hacksaw Ridge", a war movie about a combat medic who was desperate to save as many lives as he could and, in general, just wanted to do his part for the common good. But his religion and his personal life experiences would not let him take a human life. By the end of the movie, regardless of the horrors seen or endured, he'd still go to battle unarmed. Like every other time during the movie. There is even a moment where someone talks to him after a massacre and says any man would be screaming for a weapon after something like this. There would be more death and bloodshed after that conversation, but the hero would stay true to himself anyway. That's what this is about. A scenario that would change anyone, break anyone, but not the hero. And this is what Buffy has on "Bring on the Night".

The supernatural opponents she has to deal with, the everyday life and, in general, all the pressure, it is too much here, both physically and mentally. Buffy keeps being warned in friendly ways by those around her who care about her and don't want her to get hurt, but she has no time to take care of herself, or just won't because the problem to solve is so big she cannot rest no matter how tired she has now become. She has been trusted with more unexpected responsibility, not that she did not have more than enough already, whatever personal space she has left is nearly gone. There seems to be nothing but hostile forces working against her now, because the people around her, though they care about her, cannot help her for good reasons. It's all on her and she won't give up. She keeps going. And what she has to go through in this episode is something that would make anyone lose all hope and give up. She has had to fight a very powerful opponent nobody even knew existed till this night. She has had no rest for nights and days now. She has no way to reach the one soul who is both physically capable to help her in this fight and holds her most dear. He's being held prisoner by the enemy and has his own tests to endure.

She has been hurt in the fight against a monster never dealt with before. She has never been hurt this bad. She's lucky to have survived. Beaten up and bloodied, knocked out unconscious and left for dead under a pile of rubble. Found and now brought home by her friends and companions. Now awake with all of them talking about her in another room. Talking about how everybody in here was only counting on her and she's now out of the equation. Sarah Michelle Gellar's performance here is something special after all. You don't need any words spoken. You just need to look into those eyes and you'll see what she's going through. And this is when she goes to that other room and gives them all one hell of a speech. About how there's no turning back, about how her will is as strong as ever regardless of the pain and fear. About how she isn't going to stop, about how they are going to win. And that mouth of hell may as well choke on someone. After all she's been through, she still got that spirit. She won't let anyone see her defeated, she won't let them panic and lose their faith in her. Nothing has been able to break either her body or her soul. That is Buffy the vampire Slayer.