Change Your Image
iconic-sr
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Divergent (2014)
Another Film Adaptation
Brief Overview: Divergent is a movie based off the book by Veronica Roth also titled, "Divergent." I am going to start off by saying that I did enjoy this film, but there were a lot of bland moments and plot points that were covered in similar movies.
The Positives: One thing that I really enjoyed was how well the movie stayed true to the book, starting with the cast. Shailene Woodley plays the leading role Tris, who is an awkward and remote teenage girl living in a futuristic society divided into factions. Woodley has also in the 2014 release, "A Fault in Our Stars" which has been met with positive reviews. She was also scheduled to play Mary Jane in the 2014, "The Amazing Spider Man 2," but her scenes were removed from the final cut (and for Spider Man fans, she may return for the third installment, maybe). What I liked about Shailene's portrayal is that she does do a good job playing a plain personality, and just being plain in general. She was definitely not going to win a beauty contest when this movie was shot (which may be a problem for some), but that is the way she is supposed to be. The book makes important notes that her appearance does not stand out and she is somewhat of an outcast. Moving on to other performances, Theo James plays the role of one of her faction leaders, also known as "Four." He also lives up to his novel counterpart by giving the vibe that he lives on a completely different planet with virtually no tolerance. Another positive aspect is the chemistry between Tris and Four which really makes the movie stand out.
The Negatives: In many ways, this film feels like a branch off of "The Hunger Games." Just watching the scenery, action, and the way the camera is handled gives me some Deja Vu. Also a lot of the character traits for the protagonist are strikingly similar. On a different note, "Divergent" lacks the "explosiveness" required to keep full attention of the general audience. I just feel that the script was slightly under par and maybe even disappointing for all the potential this franchise has.
The Conclusion: I gave this film an overall rating of 7/10. I think this film would be more satisfying if you have previously read the book, but it is by no means a bad movie if you haven't. I recommend this film for most viewers.
X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
Why "Days of Future Past" has Ruined the X-Men Franchise
Brief Overview: I was happy with the first two X-Men movies, and thrilled with the "new direction" the 2011 movie "X-Men: First Class" had taken. So needless to say, when I heard this movie was going to combine both casts into one movie, I was expecting the greatest X-Men movie to date, however, what really became of it was a lot of disappointment.
The Positives: I really don't have much to say in this category. It was nice to see both casts from the original "X-Men" and "First Class" united, but the overall performance was less than satisfactory. I must admit that I was pleased with the Charles Xavier of the past (played by James McAvoy), and Hugh Jackman's Wolverine wasn't too shabby himself.
The Negatives: I really wanted this film to do well, but it just fell short. This movie had so much potential, but it fell apart, starting with the script. This movie provided absolutely no transition from any of the previous films, and was filled with a lot of pointless chatter. So basically, Wolverine is sent back in time by Professor X and Magneto in attempts to rewrite history and save the mutant race from doom, from massive robots called sentinels. Well this goal was accomplished (mostly from Wolverine and Professor X of the past talking sense to Mystique and Magneto). What I really hated though, is once they did do this preventing the creation of the sentinels, somehow these change of events was able to bring back characters like Jean Grey (the Phoenix) and Cyclops. So in the end, everything that took place over the first three movies never happened (damn, did I waste a lot of time and money). The film was filled with bland acting, cheesy and brief fight scenes, and disappointing CGI considering other super-hero movies this year like "The Amazing Spider Man 2" and "Guardians of the Galaxy." The script really wasted the talent of wonderful actors, that could have easily made this the best film.
The Conclusion: Despite most of the reviews out there, I gave this film a 4/10 because it really was a pointless film. It did nothing to develop the characters in any way, and actually set the characters back. The movie really felt like a drama than anything else, and can easily be argued for the worst X-Men movie.
Blade (1998)
Blade: A True Vampire Slayer
Brief Overview: The movie I am reviewing is Blade which was released in 1998 and is really the first major Marvel film to hit the big screen. Blade is a human/vampire hybrid who takes it upon himself to eliminate the vampire "species." For the time this movie was made I believe it is a really good film, and still is a must watch for comic book fans.
The Positives: The first thing I really liked about the film is the actor who plays Blade. Wesley Snipes is perfect for this role; he goes through the film showing almost no emotion which perfectly portrays the vibe given off by the character in the comic books. The rapid fire, intense action sequences is the real pinnacle for the film. It's really fun watching Blade take on 20 vampires at a time in a highly complex style of fighting. This flick will definitely keep the attention of the general audience.
The Negatives: I had several issues with the 1998 Blade, but none were so severe that I would not recommend this movie. At times, the acting was a little overdone and the CGI was cheesy, but you must keep in mind when this film came out. Also, there was way too many needles in this movie; at times I was wondering, "Is this a super-hero movie or a film about some advances in virus vaccinations?" (No, in all seriousness, it really isn't an issue, unless you have a phobia of needles. If so, proceed with caution!) And the last problem I had is the story line. It wasn't really that bad per se, but it just wasn't a very intriguing angle.
The Conclusion: If you like vampires (or hate vampires), enjoy high intensity action sequences, sword fighting, blood and gore or just a comic book movie fan, this is a must-watch movie. I highly recommend this movie.
Punisher: War Zone (2008)
Punisher: War Zone; An Example of R-Rated Movies in the Marvel Universe
Brief Overview: In a small, remote way, "Punisher: War Zone" is the sequel to the 2004 version starring Thomas Jane as the protagonist. I personally find this flick to be more of a stand alone film due to the facts that the Punisher was recast (now Ray Stevenson) and makes virtually no reference to the previous film. "War Zone" has a much different feel than its predecessor which works for some, but not for others. One of the most controversial topics among fans and comic book movie producers/screenwriters is the idea of R-rated movies. This has become more of a pressing issue with the confirmation of films like "Venom Carnage" and "The Sinister Six." Also this topic is also brought up when discussing possible reboots for anti-heroes like Punisher, Daredevil and Ghost Rider. I will further address the positive and negative aspects of "War Zone," Marvel's most recent R-rated film.
The Positives: First of all, I really felt that Ray Stevenson was a perfect fit for this role. Not only does he have a real intimidating appearance (which is crucial for a character with the values he has), but he also portrayed a sense of a disturbed past and massive nostalgia which is really what motivates Frank Castle (the Punisher's alter ego) to do what he does. "War Zone" provides a film packed full of cool shoot out scenes and action, with a graphic nature that really shows the Punisher's values and morals when coming to crime fighting. There is a substantial amount of action that will keep most viewers attention throughout the movie.
The Negatives: There are some pretty devastating issues with this film, that really held back its full potential. Like many other R-rated movies containing graphic violence, it is easy to lose track of the story line to waves of murder and blood baths. I felt that the story line was one of the weakest I've seen in a comic book adaptation. It was really hard to find a distinct train of thought within the film, and there was almost no back story providing details as to why he was punishing the people he was. The violent content also can provide a barrier for younger audiences which can be a problem for some, but it really depends on your age and tolerance to graphic material. I think the violence was necessary for the character, but others may disagree; once again it is really circumstantial. Some of the acting was a little cheesy or overdone, but for the most part it was tolerable.
The Conclusion: I gave this movie a 6/10 which may be a little high, but there was really nothing to compare it to considering no other Marvel movie displays the same intensity of graphic content that this film does. I would recommend this movie to most adult audiences and comic book fans as well.
Spider-Man (2002)
Spiderman: First Installment of the Original Trilogy
Brief Overview: Sony has released two different Spider-Man franchises to date, and the movie I am reviewing is the first Spider-Man in the original trilogy (I have also reviewed both movies from the current franchises, so if you find this helpful check out those two reviews under my name iconic-sr). 2002 Spider-Man for the time it was nothing short of spectacular. In many ways, the original Spider-Man is a pioneer for many of the comic book movies we have today. This film is directed by Sam Raimi, and stars Tobey McGuire as Spider-Man, Willem Dafoe as the Green Goblin (the antagonist) and Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane.
The Positives: For the most part, 2002 Spider-Man stays true to the comic books, while making some minor changes that actually work pretty well. I felt that the casting was good, and each actor fit their role (with the possible exception of Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane). The CGI for the movie is impressive for the time this movie was made, and the action sequences are shot very well. Willem Dafoe plays a very good Green Goblin, displaying insanity and a sinister vibe that really makes him a notable villain for comic book movies and proves a challenge for our protagonist.
The Negatives: I think most people who have seen this movie would agree that the overall tone is bordering on the cheesy side. I felt like a lot of moments that should have been intense were underplayed and others were overacted. Kirsten Dunst's interpretation of Mary Jane was bland. She portrayed virtually no emotion, and is really the only problem I had with the casting for this film.
The Conclusion: I gave this movie an 8/10 because given the time that it was created this movie was the elite super-hero movie. The storyline, action and dialogue keeps the interest of the audience and provides a fun movie for comic book fans. I recommend this for general audiences.
Godzilla (2014)
Hollywood: Hopes to Resurrect Godzilla
Initial Review: Godzilla has seen the big screen numerous times (mostly in countries outside of America), but has only had two major Hollywood depictions. The 1998 Godzilla was considered by many not only a poor film, but also a poor depiction of the legendary monster. Godzilla would lay dormant until 16 years later when another Godzilla film (no relation to the first in 1998) would be released in 2014. In many ways, 2014 Godzilla brings back the monster from the old Japanese films that made him/her (whatever it is) so popular, but there are some flaws to its monstrous interpretation.
The Positives: One issue I had with the original film is the opposition Godzilla had to face (which was really none at all, it was more Godzilla tearing up the city). In the 2014 version, Godzilla faces off against two monsters of god-like size and power. I must say it was fun watching the ending battle scene. The movie has a decent story line that works for this movie, even better than the '98 version. I am also going to list Godzilla's appearance as a positive, but it's mostly a matter of opinion. Godzilla's look has returned to the original appearance Japanese Godzilla films.
The Negatives: 2014 Godzilla is flawed for mainly one factor (and a major one at that). In my opinion, the film fails to keep active attention from the audience viewing it until the end of the movie. The first 3/4 of the movie is a total bore and really is not worth watching except for the necessary background for the end. Godzilla gets a total of maybe 25 minutes of screen time, and the rest of the movie teases you with glimpse sightings. The movie is also filled with boring chatter that interests just about no one except the people in the movie.
The Conclusion: In many ways, 2014 Godzilla is the superior Hollywood movie. However, this doesn't make for a good film in general. The only part worth watching is the last 40 minutes of the movie, in which you will have to wait a while to see. I cannot recommend this movie to general audiences, but for fans of the larger than life monster, this may be a good movie to watch.
The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)
A Successful Reboot and Start of a Franchise
Initial Review: The Sam Raimi "Spiderman" trilogy was hugely successful and really set the bar high for other superhero flicks, but a disappointing third installment (made in 2007) ended the franchise. Five years later, Sony released "The Amazing Spiderman" the first installment for the rebooted franchise. The reboot, which is the film I'm reviewing, is directed by Marc Webb and features actor, Andrew Garfield, as Peter Parker/Spiderman. I was skeptical after seeing the trailers for the film, but the actual movie changed my opinion.
The Positives: The first improvement Sony made from the original trilogy is the cast. When I first saw photos of Andrew, I thought he would be a terrible choice for the role, but I now believe he is the superior Peter Parker/Spiderman. Andrew's acting ability is incredible; he is very flexible and displays emotion well without coming off as cheesy or giving the feeling that he is overacting. He plays the role of the nerdy Peter Parker well and has the cocky and joking nature of Spiderman down to a science (which was missing from the first trilogy). Every time I watch him play the role in the Amazing Spiderman 1&2, I feel like I am actually in a comic book, which adds to the authenticity of the film. Emma Stone plays the role of high school sweetheart Gwen Stacy, and displays a moving chemistry with Andrew Garfield (and I guess it helps that these two are dating in real life). "The Amazing" brought in new angles, like Peter's parents, which added to the storyline and brought something fresh for those who followed the last franchise. One thing that I really enjoyed about this film is the new look and web shooters for Spiderman. I really was not a fan of the organic web shooters of Raimi's trilogy, and watching peter design the web shooters was fun and added credibility to his genius qualities. The new suit was also a fresh look. The slick, spandex suit has visual appeal and the eye pieces, to me, gives Spiderman a darker tone. The comedy was awesome and kept me laughing throughout.
The Negatives: The main problem I had with the movie (which to me is a big problem) is the lack of action. I'm not saying there was no action throughout the movie, but the scenes were short and didn't provide the vibe of Spidey having much power. His attacks didn't seem to cause much damage to the lizard (the villain of the movie). The second issue I had with the movie is the villain himself. Even though he had good back story, I was disappointed with the cgi used for his appearance. He just didn't feel very scary despite his massive size.
The Conclusion: Despite some negative aspects, I gave the movie 7/10 which I deem as a pretty positive review. "The Amazing Spiderman" brings new concepts to the table which makes the film entertaining for the general audience. I am confident that this movie will be a good experience for comic book fans and general viewers. I strongly recommend this film.
Also see my review for "The Amazing Spiderman 2"
Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011)
A Franchise Up in Flames
Initial Review: To me, the Ghost Rider character has so much potential. He offers something that very few other Marvel characters can provide: a more sinister tone. Ghost Rider is more of an anti-hero than anything else, which makes him stand out from others. From what I understand, the first "Rider" had mostly negative reviews, but still spawned a sequel. I personally thought the first film was mediocre, and was really anticipating the sequel to step up its game. I have very strong mixed feelings about this movie which I will address further in this review.
The Positives: The first thing that stood out to me was the change of appearance for the protagonist, Ghost Rider. His skull looks much less animated than the first, and at times gives of a smoke that clouds his body and really gives him a darker tone. The film provides some decent action scenes which I believe was an improvement from the last film. I also felt that there was a better story line than the last Ghost Rider.
The Negatives: I had many issues with this film starting with the acting. Not only did the film have a less prestigious cast than the last film, but I believe every actor in the movie overacted throughout the film, including Nicholas Cage. Changing direction with the cast, the flick lost consistency when they changed actors for the main antagonist. The Devil, played by Ciaran Hinds, paled to his predecessor (Peter Fonda) with massive amounts of over-acting and terrible facial expressions that really annoyed me. The movie also lacked back story for the new characters they introduced. The flow of the movie really felt off to me, and felt like a low budget movie.
The Conclusion: I gave this movie 5/10 due to disappointing acting and consistency. By no means is this the worst Marvel movie I've seen, but it lacked the quality to keep the audience interested throughout. I don't know if I would recommend this movie to anyone, but if you are a comic book fan, I think this a movie to see. This movie, released in 2011, has not seen a sequel since burning the franchise.
The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (2014)
The Amazing Spider Man 2
Initial Review: The Amazing Spider Man 2 is definitely one of the best movies of the year! I also believe that it is the best Spider Man film to date. Marc Webb masterfully fuses action, romance and comedy into a film that is fun and moving for everyone.
The Positives: I liked the first "Amazing" that was released, but there were some problems I had with it. I think this film took these challenges head on. I felt like there wasn't much fighting in the first movie, but this was vastly improved. The romance was top-notch much like the first film, and the special effects went above my expectations. *(Spoiler)* I may be hated for this, but I thought it was a good move to kill off Gwen Stacy this go around for two reasons: it needed to follow the comics and it set a much darker tone for the rest of the franchise (which will be needed for future films like "Venom Carnage" and "The Sinister Six." Towards the middle of the movie I was really getting the vibe that this was mostly a kid-directed movie, but the death of Gwen brought it back to the tragic feeling of Spider Man that was so popular in the comics (God I'm going to miss her). I really enjoyed the villains which added to the fun of the movie.
The Negatives: Now this film wasn't all roses but it was exceptional. One problem I had was the little screen time provided for the Green Goblin (after transformation) and the Rhino. Critics often referred to the film as having three villains, but it really felt like one with two side battles to tease the next film. The character who dons the rhino suit has all but 12 minutes and the Green Goblin (once again, after transformation has like six minutes of screen time (approximately). However, I do agree with the critics that the back story for Harry Osborn felt awkward, and there was one two many story lines running through this movie.
Conclusion: I gave this movie 9 out of 10, due to the facts that it has so many positive aspects and with minimal negative issues (that are really more of a nuisance than anything else. I highly recommend this film for everyone.