charzhino

Don't let my 8/10 rating mistake you into thinking this is objectively a very good film. I am fairly new to the Star Wars saga, I know the basics as in the major characters and their simple relations to each other with further sparse knowledge on what the Force is/does. Other than that, I am a complete noob having only seen The Phantom Menace when I was 10.

Going into this film I wasn't excited as seemingly everyone was so my expectations were low, I was afraid I wouldn't have a clue on what was going on because the franchise/lore is so detailed and specific. However as the film progressed I began enjoying it more and more simply because I could follow the story. Everything/everyone was explained to the viewer in a way that wasn't complicated or abstractly complex. The story was basic and accessible. The dialogue was straightforward with no overlong, unrelated technical gibberish that only die hard fans would understand. Add that with decent moments of humour and cool CGI laser battles, this film exceeded my expectation and I left feeling entertained.

Now the objective part. Having said all that, I have seen numerous lifelong/die hard fans call this film an average, unoriginal clone of A New Hope (never seen it). And I can see why. If I was a hardcore fan from the original film in the 70's, I would be extremely disappointed at this re-ignition of the franchise. I am constantly sick of the mediocre, recycled garbage that Marvel puts out (I enjoy the MCU) in movies such as Ant-Man, Age of Ultron, IM3 and Thor 2. They rarely push the boundaries and reach for a teenage/child audience with a simplistic plot and cardboard soft villains. Star Wars TFA seems no different, with zero character development on a throwaway villain, a big CGI (badly done) super villain who is as interesting as a rotten tomato and the main actress who is half developed. Put that with a plot that is basically Fast and Furious 7 (another franchise I am a big follower but was very disappointed in FF7) in which a McGuffin device is being chased through different locations simply to drive the plot forward as conveniently and illogically as can be done. Put that with a few Dues Ex Machina moments that come out of nowhere to push the plot forward again at the expense of good reasoning, this film will disappoint super fans of Star wars who also admire good screenplay.

I understand now why big studios opt for simple plot lines and characters with lots of CGI and bone dry humour for most big franchise films. It's to attract new suckers like me, who enjoyed the film and will watch the new one when it comes out and to keep the real cash cows (children) happy to buy the merchandise.

Non-spoiler review. Having seen an early screening here in the UK, The MARTIAN was one of my most anticipated movies this year. Sci Fi is one of my favourite genres and its great we get a big budget space epic for the 3rd year in a row after Gravity and Interstellar before it. I wasn't a big fan of Ridley's last 2 movies Prometheus and Exodus Gods and Kings, both had great potential but failed to deliver. The MARTIAN unfortunately for me falls into the same zone. It is a better film no doubt than those 2 and the quality of characters /story is much more simpler and coherent but it doesn't reach the full potential I hoped it would. I have read a lot of comments from reviewers before watching it saying the film plays it safe and its clear to the viewer as the film progresses (I haven't read the book).

The premise of the plot is straightforward and easy to pick up and it provides the viewer with clear audible dialogue and exposition behind the motives of every action that Matt Damons character undertakes. The science behind the set pieces which form the pillars of the film are accessible to understand for the most part. The visuals are aesthetically pleasing to the eye, especially the terrain of Mars and some shots of the spaceship floating through space, I would say the 3d did enhance these scenes.

However without revealing spoilers, I just didn't become invested in the plot to care enough at the end. The film relies heavily on a formula which is pretty much, problem arises, problem solved, problem arises, problem solved, etc. There are 1 or 2 dues Ex machina moments which come out of the blue simply to drive the plot forward. In this sense the film starts becoming noticeably predictable as it runs its lengthy 2hr 15min course. I felt the dramatic moments on the script should have been focused more on how NASA and the crew debate the ethics of risking 6 astronauts and billions of dollars in space tech against the possibility of saving 1 stranded astronaut 50 million miles away. Overall it's an enjoyable movie, with dry humour and some neat moments throughout illustrated brilliantly by the acting of Matt Damon, but ultimately isn't the thrilling, edge of your seat, tension mounting space epic I was hoping it would be. For me Interstellar is the much better comparison and I would say Gravity is about par if not slightly better than The MARTIAN. Final rating 7/10.

I went into this movie with hope and optimism and not put off by the negative light shone towards it. An hour and 40 minutes later, I left feeling empty and unsatisfied. Comic book films are supposed to make you feel inspired, but not this one.

So what is wrong with it? One word – chemistry. In any superhero team/ensemble there should be great character interactions and a feeling that these guys can effectively make a team, never mind a ''fantastic'' team. The best team movies all have characters playing off each other as in the Avengers and X-Men.  However, there is zero chemistry between any of the F4. We see an attempt at some early romance between Reed and Sue which doesn't go anywhere. Johnny Storm is billed as a genius but troubled kid however we never see why he has a high IQ, he is just shifted in to make up the numbers. We never see him form any sustainable bond with any of the others. Ben Grimm also appears as an outsider, brought in with little sense to the project to fill the final slot. The chemistry between the original F4 (2005) was MUCH better whereas here they feel like 4 individuals.

 

The climatic battle takes place in the most boring environment that you can imagine. It is over within 10 minutes, with not much ingenuity to overcome a half decent attempt at Dr Doom, who at first seems very intimidating. This film will be quickly forgotten and the question isn't whether a sequel will be made or whether it will cross over with X-Men, but is the original Fantastic 4 film a better watch than this depressing, dull comic book movie. Final score 5.5/10

Spoiler free review. Let me first start of by saying that I am not a Marvel ''fanboy'' or a DC nerd. The comic book genre of films have made it to my personal top 3 favourite genres in the last decade and the MCU has been a strong contributor to that rise. I hold the first Ironman, first Avengers and Captain America 1+2 in high regard. I did not like the direction they took with Iron Man 3 (more on this below) or Guardians of the Galaxy but Winter Soldier was a gem in terms of balancing solid action, drama and levity.

That being said, my initial thoughts on Age of Ultron (AoU) are quite negative. To me, its essentially a carbon copy of IM3. There are problems which strike you repeatedly as you progress throughout the film. The 2 biggest complaints I have with AoU is 1) the tone (comedy) 2) the script/writing.

So starting with the tone. I like to laugh as I'm sure most people do, but there is a time and place to exhibit your comedy writing skills in an action film. In AoU, its a constant, recurring and predictable theme. It's not limited to one character either, everyone is popping one liner jokes as if its the Expendables and yes, most are not funny. The timing of these moments of levity are horrible too, desensitising the viewer to any impending fear of death in battle. If the characters seem so relaxed in not worrying about possibly dying, then what suspense is needed to be held by the audience? This plagued IM3 in a bad way and its arguably worse here. The comic book films which achieved great success in this regard were XMen DOFP, The Avengers 1, Cap 2 even Dark Knight Rises! Can you imagine at the climax of Xmen DOFP if old Magneto and Storm and Bishop start pulling one liner jokes as the army of sentinels came charging at them? It would kill any tension! 2) The script. I won't say too much since this is a spoiler free review, but it really feels rushed and unorganised. I watched Fast 7 around 2 weeks before AoU and I got similar vibes. Again, its not the fact that the film is 2.5 hours long or has too many characters, that isn't am excuse since The Dark Knight and Xmen DOFP shows how to navigate these theatrical obstacles. There are a few completely unnecessary subplots in AoU and useless characters which do not impact the story overall. The villain himself, Ultron is another massive let-down in Marvels already growing catalogue of mishandled villains.

So as a summary, if you want mindless action and cool CGI, which this film does offer in the form of some spectacular visual fight scenes then you will like AoU. If you are after a darker, grounded and more moving story like the trailers promised, you will be severely disappointed. Final score 6/10 and I am being kind since Cap is my fav Avenger and they finally gave him some good screen time.