Interstellar - Analysis and Review

To boldly go where no one has gone before.... I had to say that

This is Christopher Nolan's second foray into science fiction. The first one being Inception, which in many ways was more of a love letter to the anime film Paprika and heist movies than actually dealing the legitimate science. This film on the other hand is meant to be more about the science, and how it can possibly save humanity from extinction.

The Plot

The world is dying. Militaries have been disbanded. All technology and education are dedicated to turning people into farmers. And the only food left on Earth, is corn. But when ex-pilot and aeronautical engineer Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) discovers a message produced by an anomaly in gravity, he discovers the location of a clandestine branch of NASA called Lazarus. There, he is recruited by Dr. Brand (Michael Caine) to lead an expedition through a wormhole that appeared within their solar system to find a new home for humanity. Cooper leaves behind his family in hopes of finding them a chance for survival. Humanity was born on Earth, it was never meant to die here.

Analysis

Christopher Nolan is right. We no longer appear to look up to the stars. Instead we are more concerned about what is happening here on Earth. 

The Space Age during the Cold War may have been an age of dreams clashing in a time of potential disaster, but it was still an age of dreams. After we made it to the Moon, it seemed like the world was ready to conquer the galaxy, and then maybe the universe. But instead we're still here. Still having ideas and fantasies, but never anything that can be reality. Of course there have been probes and satellites sent to Mars, but for some reason it didn't seem to inspire many as it did when we first landed on the Moon. Even the European Space Program, Ambition, sets out to catch a comet and succeeded. While it is a small triumph on the road to space travel, it feels like it doesn't matter.

What happened to us? What happened to the ideal of reaching the heavens? I believe it is because there is this feeling of, we've been there and done that. Reaching the Moon seemed to be the greatest thing this planet has achieved. But honestly, it made everything we've done after that seem pointless. If there is anything that I hope this film will do, I hope it does inspire some to travel and seek out new worlds. But till then. We will watch as satellites do the work for us, and forget about a major achievement as if it was nothing. At least not yet. But for now, it is nothing. And that is sad.

Review

This is the movie that people who are not fans of Nolan will use as their ammunition to unmask him to the world as a fraud. Because there is definitely plenty of things wrong with this film. This is also the movie that people who are enthralled and worship Nolan as the god of cinema will use as their torch to continue to ignite the flames of genius that he supposedly is. Because there is a lot of this film that is utterly breathtaking, with a message that is extremely powerful. So which side of this war between Nolanites and Nolan haters do I stand on? Somewhere in the middle.

This is Nolan's most ambitious film with the most ambitious ideas that have not been explored since 2001: A Space Odyssey and the original Star Trek series. The dream of space travel. The scientific theory of wormholes. The theories of what would happen to someone inside a singularity? All of these things are tied together by a simple and unscientific concept. The love of a father and his daughter. Matthew McConaughey continues his spree of being a force in acting as he delivers a powerful performance as our reluctant heroic astronaut. Mackenzie Foy plays his daughter, Murphy, and shows that she is definitely a young one to look out for in the future. Their relationship is what binds this movie together and it is one of the strongest points of the movie.

The other strong points of the film have to do with the space travel sequences, the new planets, and the surprisingly breakout characters that were not really promoted in the previews. One of the things I love about Nolan's take on film is how he uses old school techniques in modern filmmaking. All the spaceships in the movie are real. Whether it be models or gigantic moving sets that the actors can actually step inside of, they are tangible objects and not made out of computer generated imagery. I could easily tell this from the way the moving parts of the docking stations and the shuttles worked. In CGI there is a slight delay and an unintentional grace to movement, even if it meant to be a small one. With models it feels more alive and the eye knows that it is a real thing. The same goes for the creativity of the planets from the water planet to the ice planet to the desert planet. All of them were filmed in actual locations with some CGI in order to enhance the otherworldly feel. And who are the breakout characters that I am talking about? The robots! TARS and CASE, two rectangular robots that I was not aware would be in the movie, and I'm so glad they were. These two robots are pretty much where most of the humor comes from, in an ultra serious and dramatic film. They are a relief as well as a breath of fresh air in terms of design on how a robot would look like. They are pretty much a direct reference to the Monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey, with the exception of being able to transform and are a lot more helpful.

Where this film falls apart though, mainly has to do with the need to beat science over our heads as well as the message of love being a transcending variable. Nolan took the ambitious idea of explaining all these scientific theories to an audience who would watch movies like Transformers and expect them to want to take in every second of information. The problem is, there is too much information. Now, some films have a lot of exposition in them. Look at David Fincher's films. But Nolan and his screenwriter brother, Jonah, put so much exposition that unless you are aware of the type of science being spoken (like I do) then it is very easy for the average movie goer to get lost in what all the science means. And it is a shame that the exposition is given to the supporting cast consisting of Anne Hatheway, Wes Bentley, and David Gyasi. While Hatheway's character, Amelia, gets to have more of an emotional character arc, she still winds up being just an exposition person along with the other astronauts. Their characters could've been handled better, as well as all the other characters in these films who are not the father and the daughter. 

There is even an appearance by a well known actor, who will be a welcoming surprise to audiences, but quickly devolves into a villain that ultimately seemed forced. But because of who it is, it was a nice character change for this actor. Still, it seemed unnecessary to give this movie a human villain.

While I was able to get by with the massive exposition and was fine with the appearance of a villain, what I didn't buy and nearly took me out of the film was the final 40 minutes of the movie. The build up of the film was built around real science and things that we do know. The final 40 minutes enters the realm of extremely weird science fiction that almost dissolves all the realism that this film is built around. While I understood it, it will definitely be a major turn off for the audience who will view it as too weird and too convenient. And I mean really convenient. In fact, anyone who is smart enough to see the massive foreshadowing in the beginning of the film will be disappointed by how convenient and weird the trigger for the foreshadowing is. It was just too much of a "WTF" moment that it really does not sit well for me.

Then there is the true resolution. It wasn't the way I wanted it to end, emotionally. That sounds like a pretentious thing to say, but if one were to think about the ending, everyone who watches knows there is a proper way to end the movie. And the way it does in this film is definitely the right one, but executed improperly.

Final Thoughts

This film could've removed a lot of characters and a journey to the water planet. It also could've gotten rid of half of the science talk and half of the "we need to be better" talk. If those were not in the film, this movie would've been a thousand times better. That's not to say that it isn't a thousand times better than other movies that have come out. Because it is, yet it isn't. This is an incredible film that reached too far and was incapable of doing all it set out to do. And that is fine for me. It is also fine for Nolan haters who see it as the living proof of him being a hack. It is also fine for the Nolan fans who admire the ambition. In the end it is still an incredible film that suffers with a horrible ending and too much exposition for its own good. This is the movie experience of the year, but not the greatest movie of the year. 

SCORE: 7.5/10 - This movie will become a classic, but in 30 years from now

Gotham - 1x04 Arkham - Review

And the war continues to escalate

As members of Falcone's and Maroni's political branches are being taken down by an assassin, Cobblepot makes his return known to Jim Gordon. Elsewhere, Fish Mooney has a talent search for a new, "weapon."

This episode once again revolves around another staple of Gotham City: the Arkham District. There is a political struggle over what to do about the district and the asylum that will one day become an important part to the myth that is Gotham. And that struggle is between reigning kingpin Carmine Falcone and his rival to the throne, Salvatore Maroni. I'm not quite sure about the details for The Arkham Plan or the major politics behind it. Probably because I didn't really care. Which is really starting to become a major recurring theme coming with the case of the week stories. But there is someone who does care about what is happening to Arkham and how it effects the oncoming war between the two bosses: Oswald Cobblepot.

Robin Lord Taylor is definitely the standout of this series. As much as I enjoy watching Ben McKenzie and Donal Logue as Jim Gordon and Harvey Bullock, I can't help but feel a lot more excited when Taylor's Oswald Cobblepot is onscreen. It speaks volumes if the most interesting character in the series and probably the most interesting overarching plot of the series revolves around a minor character and a minor sub plot. That is how good this guy is and I can only hope that this series goes to continue to show off his talents and grow his character. It is strange that out of all the Batman villains this show has hinted or shown, he is the one who is the most fascinating. It is probably because we are intrigued by how this character eventually becomes The Penguin. In here we see his character grow in ways that we know will lead him to become the notorious Batman villain he will be. At the beginning of the episode he is just a lowly worker at Maroni's restaurant, but by the end of the episode he becomes the restaurant's manager through a brilliant display of manipulation he planned. If anything, he is the primary reason to keep watching the series. Which is saying something considering I'm talking about him first rather than the main plot of the episode.

And that main plot involves the two people who are suppose to be our heroes: Gordon and Bullock. I keep wondering why is it that as of lately I'm not really that invested in what's going on with them? I remember in the Pilot they were these two extremely fascinating characters who are forced to work together. That was great television! But then for some reason it just seem a little bit repetitive with them fighting over the same thing. And while it seems unfair to complain about repetitiveness in a procedural show when Sleepy Hollow has an almost repetitive nature between their two leads, at least Sleepy Hollow benefits by having a really off the wall character like Ichabod against a really sassy yet grounded character like Abbie. In here you have the makings of a great relationship between good cop and crooked cop. THERE IS A LOT THAT CAN BE DONE WITH THAT! Yet for some reason they both seem to be stuck in this repetitive nature that really started to show itself in the previous episode. At least in episode 2 there was some sign of character development, and it was very little. Yet that very little shows that having a some type of character development can hide the repetitive nature that is all the episodes.

That doesn't mean there is no character development in the show. It just comes off as almost annoying or not needed right now. And that character development for Jim falls into the hands of his soon to be wife, Barbara. In this episode she starts questioning Jim about Oswald, to which Jim quickly puts the pieces together that Montoya has been planting seeds of doubt into Barbara. At that moment, Barbara lets it out of the bag that the was a lesbian before she met Jim and that Montoya was her girlfriend. This was a revelation that the audience knew could not stay hidden for long, but at the same time it felt like something that should've been addressed in the last episode. It really is about the question of trust in their relationship. The fact that it is falling apart so soon when the audience have yet to see any good from it, really makes this fallout to be as powerful as it should be. You will feel sorry for both of them, but it is the way that friends would feel sorry for one another when something bad happens just because friendship obligates them to feel sorry. It could've made for a great development moment for these two, especially for Erin Richards' Barbara. But in the end it really seems to not matter in the grand scheme of things.

There is a minor subplot that has been speckled throughout the episode involving Fish Mooney. She's been having girls audition to be singers for her night club, but she seems to be looking for someone who can be more than just a singer. Mooney asks both singers to try and seduce her if they want the job. One who is obviously the more talented singer does not seem to possess the powers of seduction, while the other is not a fairly talented singer yet has the right stuff. While the answer as to who Mooney should hire is pretty obvious, she does the most Gotham thing to do when it comes to making big decisions. Have the two girls fight each other until one is left standing. And in the end the one that is left standing, is the one the audience knew was going to be her pick no matter what. Was this just a ploy to see if Mooney's pick is really willing to go the distance? Or is it because this is Gotham City, every decision made has to be done in the most cruel way possible. The subplot doesn't really reveal why is it so important for Mooney to have this girl in the war between Falcone and Maroni, but I can only assume it has something to do with her using the girl as a honey trap. If you don't know what that means, it involves sex and murder. 

This is another by the numbers episode with a fantastic story in the form of the Cobblepot plot. I really hope that this show regains the awesomeness of its two leads that was shown in the first episode, because if the writers can accomplish that, then this show will be incredible. But for now it seems to be Cobblepot is running Gotham, the show, while trying to run Gotham, the city.

SCORE: 7/10 - That 7 belongs to the Cobblepot plot and the brutal American Idol bit

STATUS: May continue to watch - I went over my 3 episode hump, but it seems this show may lose me eventually

Review of Previous Episode - Click here

Gotham - 1x03 The Balloonman - Review

The vigilante rises

Or rather the vigilante's victims rise. When the corrupt of Gotham City are tied to weather balloons and doomed to float in the air till they eventually fall back to Earth, Gordon and Bullock are put on the case. And while the city continues to change in the coming war, Oswald Cobblepot continues to work his way up the food chain.

Already? This series is going to be dealing with vigilante justice already? Um. Okay. It is a strange form of vigilante justice. The villain of this week is a vigilante dubbed, The Balloonman. From the synopsis, it should be pretty easy why he's given that name. What is interesting is how he's pretty much the big reference of this episode. By reference I mean he dresses up like two characters from superhero lore. One of them being the most obvious for Batman fans, a Prof. Pyg reference. The Balloonman's first appearance was as the insane pig masked villain, which was meant to throw fans off as to who he is. His second appearance however was a direct reference to The Shadow, aka one of the inspirations for Bob Kane and Bill Finger, the creators of Batman. This one signals that he is definitely a vigilante and may actually be fighting on the right side. This visual character development was both simple and was used to put references in a show that seems to be full of references from the first two episodes. It was definitely a more subtle reference rather than the in your face ones for the casual Batman fans.

But this episode also solidifies to Gordon that the police know what their priorities are: if bad things happen to scum, don't act; if bad things happen to police officers, unleash hell. That was a mentality that has been hinted at in the previous two episodes, but in here it is shown in full force. Gordon is starting to realize that if anything is going to get done at the speed it is suppose to, it means that a cop has to die. That is the sad truth. And while it may be the truth, we do get some more of that awesome Gordon and Bullock buddy scenes. We get some insight on how exactly Bullock goes about getting his information. Which mainly involves beating the crap out of guys and hitting on hookers. Which in Gotham, it does seem like the only effective way of doing things. However, it is starting to seem a little bit formulaic. Don't get me wrong, procedural cop dramas are always formulaic yet still compelling. But given that this show is trying to be an overarching narrative while being a procedural at the same time, it has to find a way to hide its procedural nature. Arrow, Sleepy Hollow, and Hannibal have mastered this, but this episode seems to be the first crack of that illusion of not being procedural. And it is a shame that it has to be when Gordon and Bullock are doing their thing. They really are great to watch, but looking back it almost seems predictable. They'll fight about philosophy, they'll do things one way, they'll get attacked, they'll find the one clue that matters. I hope that's not what happens.

But what seems to be hiding the cracks of being the procedural is the subplot that actually seems to have a continuous narrative in each episode. And that is the evolution of Robin Lord Taylor's Oswald Cobblepot. He is fast becoming the star of the show. I can almost imagine the only reason why some casual fans are still watching the show are because they're actually fascinated to see how this young man will become the Penguin. Taylor is definitely going to go down as the standout actor of this series once the season finale comes. Mostly because he is the only one who seems to be forwarding his own plot. The show is obviously trying to make the murder of the Waynes the overarching story arc of season one, but given how the only mention of the murder was a small bit involving Gordon and Selina Kyle, it seems the writers haven't quite mastered making it really matter. But that is mainly because Gordon and Bullock are locked into going through the procedural plot, while Cobblepot is free to do his plot without the restraint of the procedural. His actions in this episode actually puts him closer to power because he's working at the favored restaurant of Salvatore Maroni. Batman fans will know that Maroni is Gotham Kingpin Carmine Falcone's nemesis and only rival. Cobblepot makes it clear to Maroni that he is smart enough to know what is going on, and Maroni admires that. It'll be interesting how this all plays out.

And then of course we got two more subplots that are kind of interesting but seem out of place. The first one involving Renee Montoya and Cripus Allen of Major Crimes Unit. What makes their subplot interesting is that like Cobblepot, they are not restrained to the procedural nature of the show. But what they are restrained to is the disappearance of Cobblepot. And unfortunately, that is becoming predictable as well. Allen and Montoya will find clues that connects Gordon to Cobblepot disappearance which will then lead to Montoya trying to have a lesbian moment with Barbara Keane, Gordon's fiancé. While it is predictable, it can't be denied that the interaction between Montoya and Barbara is definitely interesting and well done. I just hope there is more to it than them being former lesbian lovers. 

The final subplot of this episode is probably one that is not really needed. The Bruce and Alfred subplot. Unlike the other subplots, they don't seem to be involved with the main plot or the main narrative of the show. The story in Wayne Manor appears to be existing in this realm of. "he's going to be Batman." Which was not obvious in the pilot, and was more forward in the second. But this one seems to be really pushing it by showing Bruce's fascination with the Balloonman and pictures of his parents' murder. It suffers from a different kind of restraint. We've seen Bruce Wayne become Batman. So really, the plot of young boy Bruce Wayne does not seem to be compelling. But what I do commend is that Gordon does not give Bruce a pep talk in this episode. Smart move.

All in all, this is still an interesting and entertaining episode. But at the same time it seems to be very procedural. However it is definitely a lot better than what is going on in The Strain but seems to fail doing what Sleepy Hollow excels at. Embracing the craziness. And while this show seems to walk a thine line between gritty and comic booky, they have to decide which one should it fully embrace.

SCORE: 7.9/10 - Cobblepot's story is the reason to keep watching

STATUS: Continue to Watch - It has me hooked enough to see the next one

Review of Previous Episode - Click Here 
Review of Next Episode - Click Here

Gotham - 1x02 Selina Kyle - Review

Her name is "Cat"

When homeless children are being abducted by a pair of eccentric kidnappers, Gordon and Bullock are put on the case.

That is pretty much the basis of this episode. Then what does this have to do with Selina Kyle aka the girl who will become Catwoman? Well, she is one of those homeless children who is being abducted. But unlike the other homeless street kids, she's smart enough to know that when two really cartoonish eccentric people walk up to you and offer you food, they're not to be trusted. Also given her cat like reflexes and extremely efficient parkour skills, she's able to get away. Other than being considered a witness to these crimes, she's not really as important as the story makes it out to be.

This is mainly because of the efficiency of Gordon and Bullock as detectives. The chemistry between Ben MacKenzie and Donal Logue is definitely the anchor of this show. It continues to show their growing partnership as well as their clash of ideologies. This is evident when Gordon is against Bullock beating up a child to get information, but would later allow Bullock to beat up a suspect (with a phone book) repeatedly after discovering the horrifying truth about what happens to the kids. It is really obvious that while they won't get one to fully "see the light" to their point of view, they can't work well without each other. Which again, shows how efficient they are by solving where the two eccentric cartoon villains were getting their drugs from.

But let's talk about those two eccentric cartoon villains for a moment. Doug and Patti played by guest stars Frank Whaley and Lili Taylor are the really cartoonish cohorts of the mysterious Dollmaker. Yup, another Batman reference. At least in this one he's only mentioned in name only and we never see him. But again, back to these two cartoon characters. The reason why I say cartoon is because for some reason they were directed to really ham it up. Their performances were definitely eccentric and delightful... the kind of performance you'd see in a Joel Schumacher Batman movie. Which is strange, because the pilot establishes the show's tone and look as a strange hybrid between the Tim Burton films and the Chris Nolan films. Now, a Schumacher reference is fine as after all it was the Burton films that led to the Schumacher ones, but for some reason their cartoonish villainy seemed a little too far. To give a comparison level of what seems fine about being a cartoon villain in this show is looking at two of the main players.

Fish Mooney played by Jada Pinkett Smith is both a very serious threat while at the same time an obvious cartoon villain. Yet there is something slightly more subdued about her that makes it slightly tolerable while at the same time still reminding you this is a comic book villain. Then of course there is Robin Lord Taylor as Oswald Cobblepot aka the man who will be Penguin. He is definitely a cartoon villain, but again it is subdued. This is a testament to what a scene stealer Robin Lord Taylor is as he is slowly going crazy while at the same time growing more calculating as a criminal mastermind. A glimpse of his mother in this episode also kind of explains where the crazy comes from, which is also a little cartoony, but again not played as cartoony as our guest star villains. When a level of how far cartoon villainy should be taken is already established, all guest villains should adhere to that feeling. We'll see how this goes with other villains that are sure to be on the show, right now it doesn't seem good.

What else is there to talk about? Oh yeah, Bruce Wayne and Alfred. Sean Pertwee portrays an Alfred who seems to have not broken out of his military roots and into the more loving father figure we all know and love. This is shown from how incapable he is at handling Bruce's tendencies to self inflict pain. Alfred seems to be at a lost of how to deal with his new position as a father figure, which means once again Gordon has to step in to be the surrogate father until Alfred can grow to become the surrogate. This might get annoying as the show is better focused on Gordon, Bullock and Cobblepot rather than Bruce and Alfred. But still, as this show is still young there is room to grow.

But what about the title character? Selina Kyle? I did state that she's not that important. Well, she's not important to the plot of this episode, but she does make herself important to the overarching plot of this season which is the murder of the Waynes. Camren Bicondova shows herself as a competent actress as she excels with playing someone who will definitely turn into the seductive cat burglar fans love. Particularly a key scene in which she deals with one of the kidnappers that shows just how vicious she really is. It is a shame that she doesn't really become important till the end of the episode, but with what she has shown, she is definitely worthy of being called Selina Kyle. It's just unfortunate that for an episode bearing the character's name, didn't seem to serve her to her full potential. We shall see how this all plays out.

SCORE: 7.5/10 - It is not a bad episode, still entertaining, just poorly constructed
STATUS: Continue to Watch - There is still a lot of potential

Review of Previous Episode - CLICK HERE
Review of Next Episode - Click here

Gotham - 1x01 Pilot - Review

Everyone Begins

That can pretty much sum up this first episode of FOX's new series, GOTHAM. After Thomas and Martha Wayne are murdered in front of their son Bruce (David Mazouz), Detective Harvey Bullock (Donal Logue) and his new partner Jim Gordon (Ben MacKenzie) go on the hunt for the killer.

The average fan of Batman knows where this event will lead. The death of Bruce Wayne's parents is the pivotal moment that will change the course of Gotham's destiny. It is kind of fitting that we begin this series with that murder. Yet at the same time... I could've done without it. The murder of Bruce's parents has been filmed in far more effective ways in Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher's Batman movies as these strange vivid memories while Christopher Nolan showed us the real hard hitting drama in Batman Begins. However this show failed to do what the others did: make us care about their deaths. Thought arguably it is a more realistic approach of how a murder would go down, because of what has come before, it comes off as an unfitting intro into this world. Sure we've seen it lots of times, but each time has been different. This one didn't.

But then again, Bruce is not the main character of this story. New Detective Jim Gordon is. And he is not exactly a well liked new arrival in Gotham PD. Ben MacKenzie has huge shoes to fill taking on the iconic role, but this is a world he's familiar with. First of all, he was a police officer in the gritty and fantastic show Southland. So he knows how to be a police officer, especially one who has just been promoted to detective. And he was also the voice of Batman in the animated movie, Batman: Year One. So he knows Gotham and he knows that he's now entered the world a second time. And as of right now, he delivers on convincing us this is the man who will become the future Commissioner of Gotham. His performance was strong and it shows from the internal conflict boiling inside him. But he is nothing compared to his partner.

Donal Logue takes on the role of Harvey Bullock, a fan favorite from the comics and animated shows who has never been brought to the live action medium. Expectations for him were not as high as Ben's performance as Gordon, but that doesn't mean he won't deliver. There is a pressure of playing someone who has never been portrayed in a live action format before, and Logue has even stated how honored it is to be the first. And he made sure that if anyone was to follow him in the future, he's going to give them a hard time doing so. Logue is the standout of this show. The scenes with Bullock are intense and blurs the lines between right and wrong. He's the perfect foil for Gordon, as he is not afraid of doing what has to be done. He even berates Gordon for not killing a prisoner who threatened a cop. This man is dirty, but that doesn't mean he's completely corrupt. There is still a good man there, it's just hard to find.

These two are tasked with finding out who killed the Waynes, a case that Bullock did not want to take. Unfortunately for him, Gordon drags him into accepting the case. The fact that Bullock is afraid of dealing with the death of the Waynes shows that he knows things. Like what to avoid and who to talk to. Like Fish Mooney, a new character played by Jada Pinkett Smith. When we first meet her, she comes off as a cliched comic book villain, but as the show progresses that comic book nature begins to subdue for something more subtle and cunning. She apparently had information involving the murder of the Waynes, which helps Bullock and Gordon find the killer. But as this is Gotham, nothing can be solved that easily.

One of the main concerns that people had about this show was the cramming of so many Batman villains into one episode. I should say this right now that the only one who really gets the spotlight in this episode is Oswald Cobblepot, The Penguin, played brilliantly by Robin Lord Taylor. If it wasn't for Logue's performance as Bullock, Taylor would be the standout as Cobblepot. That shouldn't diminish the fact that he does an excellent job as the small fry who dreams of big things. Then of course there is a non speaking appearance of Selina Kyle played Carmen Bicondova. She's only in the intro and the end of the episode as she serves as an unknown witness to the murder of the Waynes. That's all she does, but Bicondova has the cat qualities down to a tee. There is also a small appearance by the girl who would become Poison Ivy, but it was a small one. But probably the smallest cameo of a comic book character, yet the most memorable, was of Edward Nigma played by Cory Michael Smith. If he can make an impression with just one scene, how much more if we get a lot more of him? Time will tell.

Other players are introduced in this episode, such as Barbara Keane played by Erin Richards and Renee Montoya played by Victoria Cartagena. If there is something I have to say about Barbara, aka future Mrs. Gordon, is that she momentarily took me out of the show. Her actress, Richards, is extremely stunningly beautiful. Almost too beautiful and looks almost too young for MacKenzie's Gordon. I know this is suppose to be the younger years of these comic book icons, but something about Barbara being way too beautiful and sexy irked me. Its weird that I'm complaining about someone being too sexy, but that's a compliment to Erin Richards who does great with her role. I just never imagined the role to belong to someone as beautiful as her. 

All in all, this was an introductory episode for not only the character but the way the city operates. All comic book characters were handled nicely and given the amount of time that is needed for them in this episode. So no it wasn't cramped, and its a good thing it can juggle so many to feel like a true ensemble. But this is the story of Gordon and Bullock. Gordon sees now that nothing is easy and that everything in the city is filled with lies. While we see he is a man who genuinely wants to change the city, we also know that he won't be able to do so. But his mission to change it will definitely influence one person: Bruce Wayne.

SCORE: 8.5/10 - A weak start with a masterful finish that makes the whole episode great

STATUS: Two Episode Countdown - If I can like the first three episodes, then this show is in good hands

Batman V Superman - The Suits of the World's Finest

Be honest...you want to see the above happen

As many know there is this little movie coming out in 2015 2016 called Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. A film that is a sequel or rather follow up to the financially successful and critically divisive Man of Steel that is also to be helmed by the same director: Zack Snyder. Now, my opinion of Man of Steel is one of overwhelming love yet still have to acknowledge that there are a lot of problems with the movie. Problems that can be easily fixed. 

One could argue that the film could've started during Lois's introduction with just a simple two hour running time. I can see the film working without the first 30 minutes, but then that means I won't have my awesome John Carter/StarWars/Heavy Metal opening prologue with Russell Crowe reminding the world he's a badass. I'll even be the first to say that the dialogue is atrocious. Not even magnificent performances from magnificent actors could save it. That's why most of the blame gets directed at writer David Goyer. He's an amazing storyteller, but when it comes to dialogue he is very weak. That's why his best scripts become phenomenal when he is partnered with another writer. That's where Argo's Oscar Winning screenwriter, Chris Terrio, comes in to save the script from suffering another atrocity of language. But the story, well, I can guarantee you it will be amazing...I hope.

When this film was announced as the sequel to Man of Steel, I thought this was the smartest decision DC/Warner Bros. has ever made to compete with Marvel/Disney. I have no problems with Batman being in the movie. I do have a problem with Wonder Woman being in the movie because she could've been saved for another film. But seeing as how they want to subtly build the Justice League in this movie so that the next movie is Justice League, it does show a sign of concern.

It is perfectly fine for people to think this movie will be a cluster f#@% because what seems to have started as a simple battle between The Dark Knight and the Man of Steel now seems to be including The Amazing Amazon and a couple of others. If Spider-Man 3 and Amazing Spider-Man 2 have taught us anything, too many characters is a bad thing. Especially Amazing Spider-Man 2 because it sacrificed the story for the sake of world building to catch up with their parent competitors. Which seems to be what is happening with this movie. But then again there was this other movie called: X-Men: Days of Future Past. A movie that has roughly 25 well known comic book character in it yet still turned into a phenomenal film. Why? Because it knew what to focus on and not try to give everyone valid screen time but instead necessary screen time to serve a purpose for the greater story. That is what I feel like this Batman v Superman movie is doing. That's not to say that it could go either way. Time will tell. But till then. We have our contenders.

The Dark Knight

The casting of Ben Affleck has been controversial but his costume wasn't. I love costumer designer Michael Wilkinson. He was Snyder's costume designer on 300 and Watchmen, and he really gets comic book design. His showcase in Watchmen was an obvious homage to DC Comics movie history with the different costumes which were designed better than his predecessors. Then of course there is his work on Man of Steel with designing the iconic Superman Suit and Krypton. Pure genius. And that genius shows in the above image.

This is the first Batman costume since the 1960s Adam West show that actually looks like the costume from the comics. If one were to look at the details, it is obvious that this costume is suppose to be made out of cloth instead of the armor from Nolan's Dark Knight films. The cowl and the gloves do seem like the same material of the Burton Batman films, but it is a nice merging of what made him iconic in the movies with what is known in the comic. I'm so happy that they went with this direction as opposed to the armor. This version may have padding inside to accentuate Affleck's ever growing muscular physique but it helps with the comic book image of showcasing perfect bodies in tight spandex. This may also be the first film adaptation to actually be black AND GRAY instead of all black! It sure as hell looks like it. It is perfection on so many levels that people who can't see it are obviously not comic book enthusiasts. But it can't be denied that Affleck looks like Batman. Whether or not he can pull it off, that is the real question.

Man of Steel

A powerful contrast with the black and white image of Batman, this is Superman. And I really mean IS Superman. Michael Wilkinson did a fantastic job with his first rendition of the costume for Man of Steel. A lot of people thought it was another rubber suit with texture on it, but in reality it is actually a spandex suit with chain mail textured onto it in order to subdue the bright colors. This upset some fans, especially the removal of the red trunks, but his new rendition of Supes' costume should make fans happy. It keeps the design of the first while tweaking a few bits.

His gauntlets are now blue instead of gray and extend to more of the arm. The alien lines on his sides actually seem to go up this ribs. The belt buckle now seems to be gold and square now instead of an oval. Plus the color looks brighter than the last suit which was toned down for the serious tone. This suit is still toned down but it is still obvious that the colors are bright. Especially coming from the S-Sheild which seems to be brighter than the rest of the costume. Henry Cavill is already monstrous in size and the added padding  is just to remind you that he is. And it works beautifully. Just look at that image. It does remind me of Kingdom Come's Superman who is suppose to be older. Cavill does look a little bit older in this pic. Maybe it's just the lighting on the hair... But that doesn't matter. CAVILL IS SUPERMAN! But if you like Christopher Reeves then I understand. But for me Henry Cavill is Superman.

What about a certain...Amazing Amazon?

Well according to Zack Snyder, he hasn't filmed scenes of actress Gal Gadot in the costume yet because she still has a long time to get buff and ripped. But given from what Wilkinson has done with Superman and Batman, I'm confident that his design of The Amazing Amazon will be breathtaking on the beautiful woman they have playing her. Whether or not she can act though is not my main concern, it is how they're going to portray the character is what got me more worried. But that is a topic for another day.

Final Thoughts

Come on! They both look like their comic book counterparts! Just look! LOOK!

I'm a big DC Comics fan, yet my favorite movie is a Marvel film: X-Men Days of Future Past. Well, the movie rights are technically not owned by Marvel so.... blah! What I'm saying is that the costumes of DC Comics are the most difficult to translate to screen because they were created in a time when spandex was the way to go for Superheroes. Marvel had the chance of establishing themselves in a time period when costumes can gradually cross the line between standard to grounded. So for costume designer Michael Wilkinson to maintain the idea that superhero costumes are pretty much just colored sculpted bodies and make it work is amazing. In fact these two costumes for this big movie are so far my favorite adaptation of a superhero costume. They're faithful yet updated. The way it should be. I anxiously await the reveal of Gadot in the red, white, and blue costume but also the looks he has for the entire Justice League.

Marvel may be more fun, but DC has their production design trumping them all the way. Now... all they need is to make this movie good. Yup. JUST this movie good. They can screw up the Justice League movie because it will always be compared to The Avengers, but THIS movie about the battle between the most iconic superheroes of all time has to be good. It has to. IT HAS TO!

300: Rise of an Empire - Analysis and Review

The return of the Historically Inaccurate Manly Movie!

300 was a movie that spawned a rebirth of stylized slow-mo action films back in 2007. It along with Sin City (both the comic book creations of author Frank Miller) also helped upsurge the comic book film genre and the hyper stylized green screen filmmaking. Both were considered revolutionary at the time that they were made as well as being lauded for being literally accurate to the text and images of their respective graphic novels. But the key words there should be "at the time."

The Plot

In this follow up to the original smash hit, Rise of an Empire shows a different side of the war. While Leonidas and the Spartans held the Persians back at the Hot Gates, the Athenian Navy held the Persians back from making complete landfall on Greece. Leading the charge of the Athenians is the military commander Themistocles (Sullivan Stapleton) who goes against Persia's most vicious naval command and military genius, Artemisia (Eva Green). While the Spartans may rule the land, the Athenians rule the seas in an epic battle that will stain the ocean with blood!

Analysis

It is a wonderful thing to be considered a "revolutionary" film. Whether small or big, if something comes along and then others try to emulate, then that film really should be called revolutionary. Unfortunately, that usually means imitators are to come. Now, the TV Show Spartacus may be a stylistic rip off of the testosterone, blood shedding, female nudity bonanza of 300. Coming off of the 300 craze there was a definite need to fill that void and Spartacus does that. But like The Matrix caused an abuse of bullet time, 300 would result to an abuse of "ramping." As in the action slows down then speeds up then slows down to put emphasis on a certain attack. It works wonders the first time it is seen, but when used over and over again it is clear that there is not much originality with action. At least it is not as bad as the shaky cam action introduced in the Bourne Films.

Then of course there is the other subject that has to be addressed: Historical Inaccuracy. I can argue that the narrative of the 300 graphic novel was meant to be a visual propaganda storytelling by a soldier trying to rally his troops for war. So of course the story is exaggerated and the enemy is made out to be monstrous. Though in the movie they took the "monstrous" portion of the propaganda to the extreme. But then again the best propaganda does make the enemy literal monsters. And that's how the story was intended. A soldier rallying his troops by telling them an exaggerated story of true events that make them feel superior and the opposing party as monsters. Unfortunately because of the times we live in, people will not see it that way and they have every right to see it that way.

The Persian Empire were not monsters and they were in fact more civilized than the Greeks who were known for keeping slaves, something the films and the comic completely leave out. But because the movies is visual propaganda to serve the movie's storyteller, it does come off as a literal propaganda against modern Persians. It is their right to take offense in this. I have a Persian friend who is offended by this. But at the same time I could say that I should be offended by Act of Valor for portraying Filipinos as monsters. But I'm not. And is it the same thing? No, because at least the Filipinos still looked Filipino whereas the Persians in 300 look like monsters. But this brings me to another point. Everyone is capable of being a monster, but it takes an intelligent person to see that. It also takes an intelligent person to know that this movie is not by any means trying to be historically accurate nor claim that this is historical truth. It is a film that is meant to just give a simple message of freedom is worth fighting for but the characters just happen to be based on real historical people.

But does this sequel have the same message? Well...

Review

I enjoyed the film. That doesn't mean I think it is good. But I enjoyed it enough to where I think it meets up to the standards of the previous film. But it doesn't surpass it. The fact that the most memorable scene in the movie is the ultra violent and extremely hot sex scene between Eva Green's Artemisia and Sullivan Stapleton's Themistocles, and I mean this is one of the hottest sex scenes I've ever seen in recent films so far, then that kind of tells you something about the rest of the film.

Zack Snyder was working on Man of Steel when this film was in production so directing duties got passed on to Israeli director, Naom Murro, who does an adequate job of mimicking Snyder's style from the first film. But that's where the problem lies, the director was mimicking the exact same style from the first film. That shouldn't be a problem when dealing with a sequel, but when the notion of bringing in a new director to take on an established property usually means something has to be changed. The stylistic difference between Kenneth Branagh's Thor and Alan Taylor's Thor: The Dark World are obvious but they still feel like they're related and connected. Murro doesn't show a distinct style difference or flair here the way Snyder does when he was at the helm. This may not be his fault as this is his first foray into large action epics having only directed a romantic comedy previously. And while the Naval Battles are indeed fantastic there wasn't really a memorable moment that stood out. All the action was just fine and acceptable entertainment for the time. I could even say that it wasn't as gory as the last movie. Hmmmm.

Usually I'd go on to say how the actors are incredible, but for this film that praise only belongs to one person: Eva Green. She comes in to this saga as Artemisia, a Greek Woman who was forced into slavery then rescued by Persians who would then breed her into the ultimate military genius. It is interesting that the film would acknowledge that the Greeks had slaves yet completely ignore it when they keep establishing that the Persians are the ones who enslaved people. So that was a little odd, but it is her backstory. And Eva Green fully loses her self in the role. She is a powerful presence who remains in one's memories well after the movie is over. She is the ultimate villain, far more interesting and scarier than King Xerxes from the previous film, who in here even he has reason to fear her. And like I said, her sex scene with Stapleton's Themistocles is incredible and extremely hot. And I saw that in IMAX 3D with a lady friend who dragged me to movie... Thank you IMAX 3D.

Which brings me to Sullivan Stapleton. The only memorable thing about him in the film was he was the guy who got the savage warrior woman to bend over. But I really have to place a lot of blame to the script more than his acting. His character is not Leonidas and his army is not the Spartan army of killers but an army of ordinary people who really want to fight for their people. So he's not as testosterone fueled on overdrive as Leonidas but rather a smart and caring leader who does worry when his troops die. This would work great if Gerard Butler's Leonidas was not a precedence. It leaves Themistocles and his forgettable supporting Athenian cast looking like terrified soldiers rather than the manly blood thirsty soldiers introduced in the previous film. While it does offer a clear distinction that Sparta really is different from Athens, that distinction lacks the punch this film needs.

Final Thoughts

This is an enjoyable passable entertainment. It is not a history lesson so don't view it that way. This is more like a historical fantasy imagined by a teenage boy who just discovered that girls look better naked. That is not necessarily an insult, but that's how it feels like. It is still entertaining and weirdly enough it can be edited with the previous 300 film into a single 3 hour epic. It is possible to do that with these two films. And that would be incredible. But as a standalone, it is just okay.

SCORE: 6.7/10 - Eva Green is ridiculously hot... oh yeah and cool action

The LEGO Movie - Analysis and Review

EVERYTHING IS AWESOME! 

Once this movie is over, that song will be playing over and over in your head.

The Plot

A seemingly ordinary construction worker mini-figure (LEGO person voiced by Chris Pratt) discovers that he just might be, "The Special," the one destined to save the Lego World from the evil Lord Business (voiced by Will Ferell). He will need the help of a powerful rebel (Elizabeth Banks), a wise hippie wizard (Morgan Freeman), an iconic superhero (Will Arnett), a magical cat (Alison Brie), a gigantic pirate (Nick Offerman), and a 1980s something space guy (Charlie Day) to take on the terrible power that Lord Business plans to unleash!

Analysis

If there is one thing that directors Chris Miller and Phil Lord excel at, it is the theme of "the absurd and the heart." What I mean by that is they have pretty much done films that borderline the absurd comedies during the era of Airplane and Top Secret! There have been many films that try to do the absurd reality comedy route these days but always seem to lose sight of what it is that made those comedies work: the heart.

This is what makes their comedy style so distinctive because they are able to have these absurd characters in these absurd realities yet not lose sight of what message they are trying to convey. And that message can be a simple one like brotherhood in 21 and 22 Jump Street to believing in one's self in Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. While very simplistic in message, they are powerful if handled correctly. Especially with an absurd concept of food raining from the sky or an extreme satire of the reboot/remake craze that has been going on, it is important to always find simplicity to keeps the audience locked into the absurdity.

And The Lego Movie is even more absurd than anything that Lord and Miller have done, and I am counting their animated show Clone High. But like I said, they know where the heart of this story is and again it is simple. Which works well in what the film really is about.

Review

There are so many things that can go wrong with this movie and so many misinterpretation of what is this movie's purpose is. First, this movie can be seen as one big gigantic toy commercial (which in all out honesty let's face it, it is) that could easily be grouped with the likes of Michael Bay's Transformers or the G.I. Joe films. Also it sounds and looks like a silly kids film. The same thing can be said about Lord and Miller's other movies. Yet by some miracle, this "big gigantic toy commercial" is also a genuine movie!

Lord and Miller have crafted a story that definitely speaks to many generations, especially those who grew up playing with legos. They acknowledge the two kinds of people who buy legos: the creative builders and the instruction based builders. It is this acknowledgement of those who follow the instructions and those who revel in imagination is what proves to be a powerful essential theme of the film. The idea of revolving the movie around that dynamic alone is what makes this movie so brilliant. Not only do they have a product to convey large concepts, but the product is so heavily based in those large concepts without people realizing it. Though while it may be a large concept of creativity versus conformity it is a fairly simple concept that does not hurt the film for being to simple but empowers it.

The voice casting in this film is top notch. 2014 just might be the year of the Pratt because Chris Pratt is gaining huge momentum in Hollywood as of late. If this is the first film to define his career this year then it is a fine edition. He does so well as the lovable yet gullible hero, Emmett, who is so concerned about pleasing everyone that you really feel for the guy when he realizes that maybe he tries to please too much without thinking about what's best for him. Then there's Elizabeth Banks as Wyldstyle the rebellious "Master Builder" who displays a powerful front that hides an insecurity that Banks is able to convey so well just through vocal performance. Then of course you have Morgan Freeman playing the wise wizard Vitruvius who makes fun of the fact that he is always playing these wise characters as well as pokes fun of his iconic voice. Will Ferell does well as the evil President Lord Business but there is more to his performance that really makes him a standout in the film. Too bad I can't say what it is, but when you see it, you will know what I mean.

Will Arnett as Batman is hilarious, Alison Brie as Uni-Kitty is adorable, and Charlie Day as Benny the Space guy was just laugh out loud hilarious but the standout here has to be Liam Neeson as Bad Cop/Good Cop. That's right, Liam Neeson is in this movie with Morgan Freeman. And Liam Neeson finally shows a side that we don't often associate with him: a very high pitched almost squeaky voice as Good Cop. Of course his iconic gravelly voice is used for Bad Cop, but his ability to switch back and forth between the two characters is incredible and unbelievable that this is coming from Liam Neeson.

The animation in this film is gorgeous. The painstaking detail it took to ensure that everything in this film is created by existing lego pieces (except the ones used for original characters) is tremendous! Yes the film is CGI but it is the same CGI program used design the models for the actual toy company that was then transferred to Australian animation company, Animal Logic, to use as a tool for cinematic greatness. It is animated to be like a stop motion film and there is indeed some portions where it is animated in the classic "Brick Film" way, but the fact that it is dominantly CGI does not take away from it feeling real.

Final Thoughts

This is truly one of the smartest animated films to have come out in a long time. It is relentlessly funny. So relentless that you'll have to see it a couple of time to see all the jokes you might've missed the first time. It is truly a family film and a smart one that doesn't need to dumb things down for the kids to understand. This is definitely one of the best animated movies of the year so far.

SCORE: 9.7/10 - Relentless and heartwarming all at the same time

Why Dwayne Johnson would make a great Superman

Yes, I'm well aware that Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson has been attached to DC Comics for a very long time. At one point he was ready to play Lobo in Guy Ritchie's take on the character. That would've been a perfect fit for him as well as put him in an awesome Sci-Fi movie. Then there was the news about him playing Black Adam some years back for a Shazam movie. Whether it was proven true or not doesn't matter now since apparently Warner Bros. announced they are definitely making a Shazam movie sometime after Zack Snyder's Justice League gets released. Whether or not he will be playing Black Adam or perhaps the titular Shazam (aka Captain Marvel) remains to be seen as well. All that is known is that he is playing a huge part in the DC Cinematic line. A part that he claims has never been seen before and is definitely on par and/or stronger than Superman. That's a big claim. However, in a weird way, that quote got me thinking. What if Dwayne Johnson played Superman? What would that be like? Would it work? Is that a bad idea? Well... in my strange little world where any movie is possible... yes.

I know what the immediate problem would be if someone were to have cast him in Man of Steel or hell any Superman movie. "HE'S NOT WHITE!" That is what the general consensus would be. And to be fair, that is true. He isn't. He's half black and half Samoan. Though at first glance his ethnicity is pretty hard to pin down, one can assume he's one or the other. Skin tone wise, he would automatically not be considered a contender for Superman. Me personally, I don't see that as quite fair. Granted, the character's known ethnicity is that of a white man, but let's be clear about something. Superman aka Kal-El is an ALIEN from Krypton. An ALIEN. In other words, Superman could've looked like anything but he just happens to look like a white man and get picked up by an elderly white couple. So in a sense, anyone can play a man from another planet who gets adopted by earthly parents at a young age. And what are the chances that all the Aliens on the planet of Krypton are white? Oh yeah, and by the way, look at Marvel's Nick Fury in the films. He's not suppose to be black. That's an alternate version of Fury that they used in the films. So, that sort of takes care of that one obstacle that would get in the way.

Johnson has shown that he can play ruthless and calculating. Just look at his earliest and current roles. The Scorpion King and Agent Hobbs come to mind of what this guy can do if you ask him to be a warrior. Then there's also the middle part of his career when he was doing more family friendly films. During that run he's shown a softer side and very capable of being charming. I mean come on that is a million watt smile he's got. The type of charm and charisma Superman would need. Plus, he's one of the few wrestlers turned actors who actually developed a good screen presence. Is he the greatest actor in the world? Not really. Can he act? Yes he can. The guy is capable of showing different sides and does have a diverse range. Don't believe me? He played a gay man trying to become an actor in some John Travolta film. I don't remember the name of the film but I remember him because he was awesome in it. So clearly this guy can switch back and forth between being the big blue boy scout and the angry god that Superman is known to be.

And if we got to talk about muscle mass...you're kidding right? Henry Cavill is the first actor to play Superman who actually has the body to match the name. But if we're talking about a muscle mass that matches what he is usually drawn as in the comics then it would take a lot longer for Cavill to reach that point. That's where you enter The Rock! The guy is huge. If you don't believe me something is wrong with your eyes. He was huge during his wrestling years but in his film Hercules he has gotten ridiculously huge. The body definitely matches the mythical figure and that's what Superman is: a modern myth. He has always been drawn to be larger than life to the point where when you look at him you automatically know he's stronger than you. I think many people get that feeling if they were looking back at Johnson. He's got the superhero body type down for a long time and even more so now.  It would match up with Superman's muscle mass perfectly. Especially if it resembles Jim Lee's work on Superman. And don't talk about he doesn't have the hair! The guy can grow that! He doesn't have electric blue eyes? Contact lenses!

However, I know no matter what I say here it will never happen. I know I should say "never say never." But with Cavill as Superman now (and I have no problem with that) and Johnson being lined up to play some currently unidentified DC hero/villain, the chances of this happening in the future are nonexistent. It would be nice for a change to see someone of a different Ethnicity take on the big blue boy scout. Hell, I'd love to cast my half white and half vietnamese friend as Superman. But I know that's not the kind of world we live in. Perhaps someday it would be fine. And perhaps somewhere in an alternate universe, Dwayne Johnson is playing Superman. It's just not in this universe.

But really this would be cool to watch if Dwayne Johnson was playing him. Or even Zod.

Godzilla (2014) - Analysis and Review

The Return of the King

I feel like I'm in the minority of my circle of friends when it comes a film called Pacific Rim. Apparently it was suppose to make me feel like a kid again because its Kaiju (Giant Monsters) fighting Mechs (Giant Robots). Who wouldn't be excited by that? I'm not saying I wasn't. I enjoyed the film. But I didn't have that sense of nostalgia that apparently triggered in them. However, for the new American remake of Godzilla directed by Gareth Edwards, that is when my childhood came flooding back with a big smile on my face.

The Plot

Caught in the middle of a conspiracy, Lt. Ford Brody (Aaron Taylor Johnson) and his father Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) witness the awakening of an ancient threat. The only thing that can possibly save the world from this old terror is a creature just as ancient. That creature being Godzilla.

Analysis

My plot summary is not the official summary of the film, but that is the straight forward plot of the movie. And while I did say that Godzilla has to "save the world," that doesn't meant that he's trying to save mankind. He's literally just a creature of instinct. It is his nature to seek out gigantic beasts and kill them then go back to the sea. At least that is the explanation of this iteration of Godzilla. Which has always brought up a question of debate as to whether or not Godzilla is a hero or villain. The answer that this film was able to hammer home was simple: he's neither. 

This Godzilla is depicted as a FORCE of nature. One that comes and goes the same way a hurricane or a tsunami does. The connection is made obvious in a scene when Godzilla causes a tsunami that kills many people, even when all he was really doing was just getting out of the water. He is indifferent about the lives of humanity because we are honestly nothing to him. We are his equivalent to ants. Small things that just happen to be in our way whether we're aware of it or not. It really makes it clear that he's really just doing what he does, which is rise up out of the ocean if a gigantic radiation hungry beast starts wandering the Earth, and really that's it.

This is definitely a slight departure from his destroy humanity nature which was in the original Godzilla (Gojira) film as well as some of the Heisei films (the 80s and 90s reboot). However, the idea of him being a Guardian was something that the Showa films (the original 50s-70s run) made loud and clear. So in fact, this Godzilla is a mixture of all that came before. He does borrow some of his nuclear metaphor origins but really it is more about the unstoppable power of nature that takes hold of what he represents for our generation now.

Review

Having read and seen reviews prior to watching the film, I was well aware that the most common complaint of the film is that Godzilla is not in it too much. Having went in with that mindset I was surprised by how much he was in it. Though the definition of "wasn't in it" probably means him on land and doing stuff. He is in the film a lot, just mostly swimming.

The story is serviceable enough to bring back the King of Monsters to the big screen. It does a smart move in giving Godzilla fans the things they love about the franchise (Godzilla vs giant monster(s)) as well as injecting a reality that can only be compared to what Chris Nolan did with Batman (real and gritty). However, I'm not saying that this is anywhere near close to a Chris Nolan movie, but it definitely has enough realism to amplify the absurd nature of the movie. The monsters were treated as animals acting out on instinct rather than some sense of wanting to destroy the world. It is a great take on the giant monster genre that usually drums up needless world destruction. Not that I'm criticizing it, because let's face it Godzilla fan love massive destruction. But in this film it is rather subdued to make it feel more like a catastrophe than destruction porn.

The acting in the film is great with Bryan Cranston being the standout performance in the film. We feel an immediate connection to his character that really helps us the audience and his onscreen son played by Aaron Taylor Johnson get sucked into what's happening. Aaron Taylor Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkins and David Strathairn give great performances with what they are given. While it can be argued that Johnson's character was one of the weakest elements of the film, I don't believe that his performance detracted from the film as a whole. Even Juliette Binoche has a small but pivotal role that enhances the standout performance that Cranston has.

While I can criticize by saying that yes the story was serviceable but not anything amazing and that Godzilla doesn't show up too much I think the real criticism on everyone's mind is this: Cutting away from the Action. The film does a great job building up the tension between two monsters facing off throughout the film but always cuts away when they actually begin to fight. While I didn't mind it because they give a full blown monster battle at the end of the movie, I can understand why people would be upset about being teased through the whole film. I would argue that had they shown half of the Airport battle between Godzilla vs the male MUTO (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organism) then it would've sated people's need to see a battle throughout the film. However all they did was show the start then immediately cut away to the aftermath on the news. Again, there is a full blow battle between Godzilla and the MUTO couple, which completely justifies holding off on all the action till the end.

The two movies I would compare this iteration of Godzilla to are Jaws and Michael Bay's Transformers. Both movies hold off from showing the titular character as well as having human characters drive the story. However Jaws is an excellent example of this type of storytelling while Transformers is a fun film but there are times when the characters act like idiots. If anything this Godzilla is the middle ground between the two while leaning more towards the greatness of Jaws while borrowing some destruction from Transformers.

Final Thoughts

This film did what Pacific Rim could not: bring a smile to my face. This was me reliving my childhood in a more realistic sensibility. As a huge Godzilla fan, this was definitely a treat for me. Though I can understand why some Godzilla fans may not like this film, I respect them for that. However, this is a really good film. Not great. But I have a feeling when a sequel comes along, all the problems with this film will be fixed in the next one. Also as a final note: I still enjoy the Roland Emmerich Godzilla even though I can see how horrible it is.

SCORE: 7.9/10 - A great modern retelling of the legendary King of Monsters