Reviews

I have watched, and loved, The Blacklist since the beginning. The supporting cast, especially Harold, Aram and Dembe were favorites but Spader was simply sublime: hilarious, thoughtful, kind, loyal and ruthless. This episode broke my heart for Red's sake. I was never a big fan of Elizabeth but she has been his raison d'etre across the years and now I wonder what will replace that. I was saddened by this episode, hearing him discussing his life in a world-weary way rather than his usual full-of-life conviction, forcefulness and self-interest. It was beautifully acted and made us see him, understand his feelings and sympathize.

It was not until TODAY that I heard about the "Red is Katarina" theory and was simply floored at the idiocy of it, never mind the writers sledgehammering the viewers with endless hint-drops. I thought he might be her uncle, perhaps Katarina's twin brother that we weren't aware of heretofore. I never thought that the thin, diminutive Katarina could be surgically altered to become a much taller, heavier man with different bone structure. Also, she was a spy, not a criminal, and in order for her to build a worldwide network of information and manipulation at the highest echelons, she would have needed contacts and access, not to mention astronomical assets, going in, since the twenty-five years or so between her abandoning Elizabeth and Red's appearance in Washington, wouldn't have been enough time to constantly travel the world, enlist myriad people--willingly or un- --to behave as he wished and so, so many other things which would stretch credulity. And there are the women Red obviously pleased amorously, which, if one had been reconstructed, would seem to require extraneous methods and/or appliances, to achieve the desired effect. I simply can't support this very startling conclusion. An emotional season ending. I can't imagine where it will proceed from here, but I intend to see it through.

First, if I ever hear the utterly asinine "woke" term again, I'll regurgitate.

This show, with its beautiful ship, haunting theme and vast potential, has yet to find its footing. Sometimes it takes a couple of seasons for shows to find their lanes but that doesn't seem to be happening, here. There are some very engaging characters: Oded Fehr has been a great addition: reasonable, balanced, professional but also having compassion, flexibility when required, while still maintaining the requisite Star Trek professionalism. Doug Jones is terrific as the captain, sharing the qualities above, as well. Anson Mount was the best interpretation of Pike I have ever seen. Perfect in every way. Tilly began as an irritant but took charge admirably. Although she was an ensign, she had real problem-solving and leadership abilities. Tig Notaro is hilarious in her dry, droll delivery. I'm glad she wasn't over-used and thus spoiled, but more would have been welcome. I adore Grudge. She's beautiful, chill, doesn't say much, but adds an aspect of home and warmth.

We knew Burnham was going to end up as captain but it was completely undeserved. She was, it seems, fawned over by everyone. At the end, they all stood around looking adoringly at her, as though she were some kind of savior from...something. This season was especially saccharine where she was concerned. EVERYTHING should not be about her, yet it ends up being, nevertheless. She's not a roll-your-sleeves-up working member of the crew but a figurehead surrounded by groupies waving paper asking for an autograph. Yeesh. The most improved aspect of the character this season was the gorgeous braids. I know: superficial, but they do seem to indicate freedom, expansion and individuality and , curiously, gravitas within those attributes.

Occasionally, I have seen things that hearken back to exploration, science, adventure...discovery...and eye-opening cosmic experiences. The "Guardian" episode was delightful insofar as it put a jovial human face on the same voice from the past we knew originally.

While every crew needs a leader, over-focusing on one character is never preferable to learning about them all through diverse stories which, ultimately, leads viewers to care. When all you have, essentially, is Burnham taking up most of the room, it's very difficult to become invested.

I suppose we'll see. Kurtzman isn't, or shouldn't be, the focus of all that is wrong (though Brannon Braga was in that position, back when, and others). I really, really liked the 2009 movie, of which he was a part. Some of the writers of the Trek novels are very good and create interesting stories which include both tech and human aspects of the Trek Universe (or Multiverse, more aptly). Why not tap into the hundreds of good books they've written for some divergent paths?

By the way, "Let's fly" doesn't.

Visuals are impressive (especially the ship), ditto sound/music. Characters have potential, once we find out something about them.

Klingon "slow-speak" is just maddening (I took a survey, admittedly limited, among family and friends). There must be a way to rectify this. By the time the characters had managed to articulate a partial sentence, I just wanted things to move forward: "Get ON with it, already!" I did not like the new-look Klingons. Those on "Enterprise" looked like the ones we have now become accustomed to. The albino Klingon in the first episode of "Discovery", set later, looked like the Engineers from "Prometheus"/"Alien: Covenant". It was jarring.

The first officer/mutineer is, thus far, very annoying. Constantly, unnecessarily, hostile and defensive. Her ostensibly morality-driven "rogue" persona is over-emphasized and she is perpetually talky/preachy. I'm looking for another character to actually enjoy watching.

First, I wanted to like this and there were parts that were well done, particularly the effectively abbreviated intro re: Bruce's origin story. For some reason, that really worked for me. As one living in the Motor City area, I enjoyed seeing the recognizable scenes. As a lifelong Superman and Batman fan, I would love my characters, regardless. My umbrage is taken in the way that those characters are treated.

Affleck's Batman did well, in many respects, however, the script was the downfall of the actors in general. Bruce was ready to jump to conclusions without any analytic rumination. Clark's alter-ego came across as insufferable and arrogant, which, at least in the comics I used to read, were traits never in his make-up. I had had reservations about Wonder Woman but Gadot was completely adept. I continue to hate the "300" style costume, however.

Hated the Bat-Suit. Batman is supposed to be agile and fluid. He looked like a lumbering 'bot in that atrocity. Still dislike the Hummer, as well. Nothing suggests speed or nimbleness in any way. Behind the scenes, he had to have assistance holding up, so cumbersome was it. This is not the man who moves effortlessly through the night sky.

Too many incoherencies, inconsistencies and utter illogicities unfortunately. Too many "What?" moments and abrupt shifts in information. The chases were appropriate but prolonged unnecessarily. It was difficult to follow the manifold threads and the entire Doomsday thing could have been better incorporated into another movie. The specious references to the JLA simply weren't satisfying and Aquaman looked like Vandal Savage from "Legends" (that's who we thought it was, initially, not even realizing we were seeing the inception of the JLA).

Although in my personal reading it was never posited that Metropolis and Gotham were even proximate, never mind across the river from one another, I liked it.

Eisenberg's Joker, I mean, Luthor, was jarring and simply awful. He was trying too hard to channel Ledger and it was glaringly obvious. Where was the suave, controlled genius who would become president? Where was the feline danger inherent in the BEST Luthor, Michael Rosenbaum, who was truly menacing, the more softly he spoke? What we saw was someone who didn't appear too bright, but rather a small, jealous man, frenetic and ranting, whose babbling was virtually unintelligible. We have no idea what his murky motivation was, particularly for unleashing Doomsday, nor what he thought the big D. would do, once Superman was dead. This "Luthor" made Hackman's look like "Hamlet." Who thought this was any kind of good idea? I simply saw him as another inmate for Arkham.

I'm not giving up on my much-loved DC characters, but I am truly disappointed that such enormous potential to craft a movie comparable to some of the Marvels I so enjoy, was utterly wasted. Zack needs to step down and pass the puzzle pieces to someone who has the ability to assemble them effectively.

Wonder what Abrams has lined up...?

Obviously, and I have to include similar assessments of Age of Ultron, there is no way to recapture the utter magic of seeing a new and astounding thing for the first time, but audience expectations often seem not to take that into consideration for subsequent installments, especially for blockbusters. The CG was effective in allowing us to suspend our disbelief and embrace the notion that the creatures were there. The occasional sequel is better than the original (Mission Impossible 4, for example), but I don't attend a movie anticipating how far short it will fall. Impressions and opinions will, of course, be formulated after the fact, but don't forget that this is fun fare, thus largely illogical. Did it have annoyances? Oh, yeah: most of the characters, but Chris Pratt was terrific. The animals were suitably scary and the action did not lag. I'm not sure, however, how any sequels are going to play out in a movie-believable way, unless the action is shifted to another locale. Also, a major question, for me and many others: what happened to the can of Barbasol Nedry dropped in the original? I completely expected that the next chapter would constitute someone finding it and picking up the reins to recreate the nightmare. Still waiting on that one. I did have some eyebrow-raising moments when the raptors and the T worked together and seemed, anthropomorphically, to acknowledge each other as they went their separate ways. Ditto the raptor moment with Owen, at the end. Also, a time-honored notion among these kinds of movies never fails to befuddle me: the use of uncontrollable, enormous carnivores--or genetically enhanced "super soldiers"--as "weapons". Regardless of their size, an encounter with high-powered explosive devices would negate all else. And, let's face it, an enemy isn't going to see these building-size things coming at them and simply wait around to be hot lunches. While the I-Rex was a "stealth" dinosaur, camouflaged in a jungle, it would not be invisible in the open. The raptors had no such advantage so, again, the idea of such creatures as military assets has always been ridiculous. The principals in these movies proceed on the premise that these no longer extinct creatures were an attraction for theme parks and they were largely ignorant or dismissive of what they were actually unleashing. Aside from the entertainment value, the clear warning: never underestimate nature. "Inventing" a dinosaur for commercial purposes, well, some who were eaten--and some who should have been--got what they deserved. I also wonder, since Hammond said, at the end of TLW, that the animals should be left alone, for the safety of both sides, how his entire caveat was overlooked and others forged ahead, especially on an island which belonged to and was controlled by another government. Oops. Logic. Well, there has to SOME. Still, glad I went and enjoyed.

First, I love superhero movies and thus wanted to like this more than I did.

I've seen all the predecessors and certainly like Garfield and Stone infinitely more than Tobey and Kirsten, the latter of whom was supremely annoying. The casting in this actually surpassed what I expected with regard to some characters, notably Harry. The James Franco version was certainly different. I was not familiar with Dane DeHaan but he was absolutely creepy enough to be the offspring of Norman...Willem Dafoe's Norman. Some actors simply exude creepiness naturally.

Unfortunately, the movie didn't know what it wanted to be. It could be said that the angst-ridden love story and the heroic tale were part of the same canvas but the transitions were jarring if they existed at all. Wise-cracks were surreptitiously spouted next to life-speeches. Something simple became overstated to the point of confusion.

There was no focal point. The story rambled from point A to point B by an unnecessarily circuitous route and was unsatisfying because of it. Nothing was clear or fleshed out.

Ideally, the ending should have come when Peter decided to hang it up, thus providing something the third installment could build on. We could see the inactive Peter recalling the tragic events of part 2. A situation arises, he recalls Gwen's speech and decides to kick back in to neutralize Rhino. Instead, this anticlimax was stuck at the end and totally collapsed the ending, leaving nowhere to go next time without some creative dancing by writers...and they had better be good ones, more organized than the ones who wrote this.

Finally, I love the music of the Marvel Universe. Spider Man, of course, is still under the Sony aegis and seems not to have received the attention to quality that the Disney efforts are notable for.

Of all the Marvel movies I have seen, I cannot recall one which had such terrible music. It was often inappropriate for the scenes, sometimes absurdly loud, nothing soaring or memorable, not even catchy. It was just clanging, boring and irritating. I was shocked to see Zimmer's name in the credits. I normally love his stuff and it generally lends gravitas to a vehicle.

It might be better to wait until the licensing reverts to Disney before Spider Man 3 is made. While the story could pick up on what's been done, retain characters and so on, it would still receive a fresh treatment and, perhaps, right the ship.

I was so impressed with the way everything was handled. Normally, reboots are iffy, often unsatisfactory. This one, however, maintained the flavor of the original yet managed to open up an entire new world of potential for the franchise.

I wasn't expecting to be as wowed as I was by the casting, in particular, yet (with the exception of Chekov's hair (!)) I thought the new people were terrific.

The action, the effects: marvelous.

Spock's emotionality was appropriate to a young Spock, finding his way. In the OS, he actually smiled, displayed emotion and so on. While that passed in the concentration on the mature Spock, fount of wisdom and advice, it should be expected that, when he first came to Starfleet, he had not yet perfected his mien of emotionlessness. It fit the stage at which the character was presented to us.

Insofar as the death of Amanda and the (shocking, to be sure) implosion of Vulcan go, we are dealing with a redirection of the unfolding events, therefore, changes--some disturbing and surprising--have to be included. You can't have history changed while everything you know and are comfortable with remains the same. That would negate the purpose of what this movie was trying to do.

I was eminently satisfied and would not hesitate to give a very high rating to the quality and presentation of this movie.