"The Amazing Spider-Man" - Review

"We all have secrets: the ones we keep... and the ones that are kept from us."

       I'll be the first to admit that I used to be one of those type of people who automatically disliked anything with the words "reboot" or "remake" attached to it, especially the latter as I didn't like the thought of something I already enjoyed a lot having its legacy ruined. However, remakes have actually been just as, if not, better than their originals lately ("Let Me In" and "Fright Night" as prime examples; oddly enough both vampire films). But reboots have actually proven to be very successful, at least in the superhero genre. "Batman Begins" revived a dying franchise that had been extremely panned by both critics and fans alike.

       I was actually a HUGE fan of Sam Raimi's work with the Spider-Man films, although I wasn't too fond of "Spider-Man 3" (but after multiple views, I realized it wasn't as bad as people said, just cluttered with too many main characters, but I digress.) I loved his directorial work, and really liked the cast as well, especially Toby Maguire because he portrayed both Peter Parker & Spider-Man so genuinely and naturally. I was actually very excited when talks of Spider-Man 4 began to surface a few years back; John Malkovich as Vulture sounded very promising, and I was looking forward to seeing Anne Hathaway as Felicia Hardy (although I was eventually disappointed to see that she would be some new character called Vulturess instead of one of my all-time Marvel favorites, Black Cat.) That project, however, began to slowly but surely disintegrate, and eventually Sam Raimi dropped from the project, and I believe the main cast followed suit as well. So I was actually relieved to see that the series would just be rebooted instead of continue with replacements, because that's always kind of awkward. A lot of people were automatically angry and hated the film before it was even released, but I was actually kind of excited, and became VERY stoked once I heard Marc Webb would be attached (I loved his work with "(500) Days of Summer.) and that Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone would be in the cast; two of my most favorite young up-and-coming actors. And if you think about it, a LOT has changed since the year 2002, 2004, and even 2007. In the former, the cell phone wasn't even remotely as common as it is now, and smart-phones were young in the latter.

       Enter "The Amazing Spider-Man"; did it live up to my expectations? It certainly did, and that's because I knew what to expect. I heard so many unbelievable negative reviews that bashed the film for focusing too much on the origins or having similar scenes to the original. Did we all forget that this is a REBOOT? On the contrary, I actually thought it didn't focus as much on the origins as I expected, I even felt that was all kind of rushed, which was one of the very few minor criticisms I have of the film. The other thing I felt was a bit rushed was the relationship between Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, however, their on-screen chemistry is so ridiculously great & intense that it didn't end up mattering at all (and oddly enough, Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield are currently dating after meeting on the set.) The only other minor criticism I have is that Andrew Garfield's acting felt just a very tad bit forced as Spider-Man, but it's probably because it's his first role of this kind, so it's something that I know he can and undoubtedly will master. As Peter Parker, though, he is absolutely flawless; he's funny, instantly likable, believable, charming,  haunting, and just overall brilliant in that area. Those reasons are exactly why Batman and Spider-Man are two of my favorite superheroes, because their true identities are vastly interesting, more-so than their respective alter-ego. And both the likes of Cristian Bale and Andrew Garfield have hit the mark on fulfilling the aforementioned.

       Other than the above-mentioned, there's really no other criticisms. The film delivers what's supposed to be expected. It's well-directed, greatly acted by the entire cast, has cool special-effects and action sequences, and has a pretty good storyline, although I think Sam Raimi's films had more memorable dialogue. I mean, who doesn't remember "With great power, comes great responsibility."?. Another thing I really liked was that the webbing was artificial, which is loyal to the original comics and the 90's TV series that I still love to this day. There's also a good amount of witty humor & comic relief. But to reiterate on earlier, the best scenes are undoubtedly the ones between Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, they are so sweet, tender, magical, moving, and they almost feel organic.

       Is "The Amazing Spider-Man" a masterpiece, groundbreaking, or the best superhero of the year? Not necessarily, but that isn't a bad thing at all considering it's a reboot. I honestly feel this is merely a prelude for greater things to come. With a very promising director & talented young cast, I expect many incredible things, and I personally can't wait for the upcoming sequels, as I know they'll be superior.

Rating: 4.5/5

"Prometheus" - Review

"Big things have small beginnings."

       Ridley Scott is one of those directors whom I'm very well aware of, and know of their work, however, whose work I haven't seen much of. There's no actual reason why really, it's just a matter of "not getting around to it", for lack of a better description. Although, the very little work of his I HAVE actually seen, I absolutely loved, specifically "Blade Runner" and "Gladiator".

       "Prometheus" was a film I stumbled upon through trailers at the cinema, and it immediately made my list of "must-see" before I even knew it was a Ridley Scott film. The trailer showed elements I typically enjoy, which is thought-provoking Sci-Fi action. I usually prefer to view new films on the release day, so I'm not subconsciously persuaded by either critical or general public thoughts & reviews. The only reason I didn't rush out to see this one as soon as possible was because I kept hearing different things on how it was connected to the Alien series. I heard everything from it being a direct prequel, to it just sharing the same universe (à la Marvel), to a stand-alone film. That, of course, bothered me because I only saw the Alien films when I was VERY young, so I vaguely remember much, and thus, I consider them as films I haven't really seen yet.

       Regardless, I couldn't wait any longer, and went ahead to see it anyway. Overall, it definitely met my expectations. It's almost a flawless film, the only complaints I have are a collection of very minor things, most which don't really directly affect the quality of the film. The first, was that it left more questions than answers, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but definitely will be a bad thing if there's no direct sequel planned. I'll share the questions if left for me after the asterisks as they might be potential spoilers, so keep reading after the second set of asterisks: 

*************************

In the beginning of the film, what exactly happened when the alien drank the dark liquid? it looked to have created some kind of major reaction, potentially our origin? What did David say to the alien that caused him to go berserk on the group? Why did they want to destroy what they created? (humans), Why did David taint the drink he gave to Holloway with the dark liquid?

*************************

       I suppose a couple of my questions I might have missed the answers to, some could be debated until surface of the answer(s) was scratched, but the main ones are still unanswered. My second minor complaint was that I felt the film could have had a much better flow, but maybe that's just my personal preference. Although I seem to feel the same way about the other Ridley Scott films, so it could just be his style. Thirdly, I was expecting some high-caliber performances from the cast, given the very attractive-looking ensemble on paper. Sadly, most of the roles could have been probably performed by anyone else. Particularly the roles portrayed by Charlize Theron, Guy Pearce, and Idris Elba; it felt like they were just there to attract a wider-audience. Noomi Rapace was fantastic as always, although her character kind of annoyed me on a personal-level (i.e. she keeps desperately wanting to seek/know the truth, even though she keeps believing in a God), the stand-out role, was without a shadow of a doubt, Michael Fassbender as David. He's such an over-looked actor that deserves a bit more recognition. I have yet to see him in a film in which he wasn't at least one of the stand-out performers.

       So, the aforementioned was basically me just nitpicking at minor things, so don't feel that the film won't meet your expectations for one second, because believe me, it will meet them. The acting is great, the visuals are jaw-dropping, the score is great, the special effects are superb, and the story, very captivating and thought-provoking. It's quite possibly my overall favorite film of the year so far ("The Avengers" being the most entertaining film of the year so far), and I highly recommend that everyone check it out in theaters, especially if you're a Ridley Scott, a fan of the Sci-Fi genre, or just a person who loves a great film. I just hope we do get that direct sequel sooner or later, we definitely deserve it. Although there's some upcoming films that will more than likely dethrone it as my pick for best film of the year, I really don't see this losing its secure spot on my Top 10 films of the year list.

Rating: 4.5/5

"Brave" - Review

"Is the Pixar magic gone?"

       I've been a Pixar fan for as long as I can remember. I even recall the day of its inception with the release of 1995's "Toy Story". I was 9 years old, and I was so wowed and impressed since I hadn't seen anything like it before, I suppose the impression was so massive that the day I saw it is a flashbulb memory. Since then, I've seen every single Pixar film; most of them in their theatrical run as well.

       Every last and first days of a year, I like to compile lists of upcoming films for the new year that I'm excited over. I've been doing that since the MySpace age; I saw it as a win situation in so many ways, as it was a way to share my taste, remind me of upcoming releases, and to help promote them. I wasn't a huge fan of "Cars" (even more-so the sequel). But since 2007's "Ratatouille" (my 2nd favorite Pixar film, for the record), Pixar has had a safe and guaranteed spot on the aforementioned lists. And, "Ratatouille" was, in my personal opinion, what kicked-off the true golden-age from Pixar, as everything after that was a gem. The trend continued with 2008's "WALL-E" (my favorite Pixar film), and also with 2009's "Up" and 2010's "Toy Story 3" (both in my Top 5 Pixar films). However, that upwards roller-coaster took a dive downwards with 2011's "Cars 2"; but I wasn't too worried since it was merely a sequel for my least favorite Pixar film. But I digress.

       Enter 2012's "Brave". I had been keeping up with this film since I first heard about it with its original title, "The Bear and the Bow". The story seemed interesting and my interest heightened with the incredible looking teaser trailer. The actual recent full-trailer didn't impress me as much, but I just figured it wasn't a well-made trailer. "Brave" is a tricky film to discuss, and more-so to review because it really isn't a bad film by any means, it's just not remotely on par with the best of Pixar. Frankly, it didn't even feel much like a Pixar film. The storyline is extremely generic with very familiar characters of this genre (the goofy father, the strict mother, the rebellious/free-spirited daughter/protagonist, the curse, etc.), the generic storyline was executed very well, but that doesn't stop it from being generic, and thus, you aren't really captivated by it. I thought it would at least redeem itself with some witty humor that Pixar almost always delivers, but the humor were things that have been done before, and one too many times it went for the "easy" laughs. It also lacked the memorable characters that Pixar has never failed to accomplish before (even with "Cars"); it didn't even have an incredible soundtrack/score; it lacked one too many qualities that the standard Pixar film offers. The best thing about this film is definitely the visuals, it has some of the most gorgeous scenery I've ever seen in an animated film. Still, the film does have a pretty good message for mothers-daughters (And I suppose parents/children in general as well) about the importance of communication among family. But that message isn't remotely as deep or complex as previous Pixar releases, it doesn't leave that lingering effect on your mind.

       Again, to reiterate, "Brave" isn't a bad film at all, it's just not the Pixar masterpiece that we're so used to, let alone a great animated film. I was so used to Pixar setting itself apart from every other animated film studio, but the last two releases are simply on par with the rest. I can't help but be left with many questions and concerns. Did Pixar set the bar way too high? Is Pixar simply taking a brief break from anything serious? Is the Pixar magic gone? I suppose we won't have answers to those questions until the next couple of releases, which will be "Monsters University" in 2013 and "The Good Dinosaur" in 2014.

Rating: 3.5/5

"The Avengers" - Review

"A is for Avengers, Assemble, and for the A rating!"

I've been excited for the "The Avengers" as soon as I heard plans of it years ago, year after year we were teased over it with multiple post-credits scenes. But the wait is no more, and it pretty much delivered to my expectations completely. It was a lot of fun, well-directed, and well-made. If you have a comic-geek in you, you'll love this film dearly. It has awesome special effects, a LOT of hilarious comic relief (so many great one-liners), and some of the best comic-fight scenes ever. The screen-time among all the characters was divided pretty evenly, in my opinion, and I was also pleasantly surprised at how much screen-time Black Widow received (yay! ♥). This really isn't a film that's strong in plot, but I really doubt there's ANY major fan who expects that. I pretty much received what I wanted: to see some of the coolest superheroes in an entertaining and action-packed popcorn film. It's definitely the most fun film of the year so far, and it officially kicked off the amazing line-up we have this year for summer blockbusters. Oh, and make sure you stay put until after the credits for the most unique Marvel post-film credits scene ever, it was great!

My rating: 4.5/5

P.S. - Afterwards, I bought 4 of these cool new blind bad collectibles called Marvel Grab Zags (you get 1 mystery figure), I ended up getting Captain America (who's the chase, or in this series, "ultra-rare" figure), Hawkeye, Iron Man, and Thor. I wanted Black Widow the most, so I was bummed about that! :( but the Pad Thai that followed somewhat made up for it. So a grand day for yours truly overall!. :)

"Captain America: The First Avenger" - Review

"Quite possibly the biggest surprise of 2011."

Believe it or not, "Captain America: The First Avenger" is easily the surprise of the summer, if not, the entire year. Even though I hate to admit I was wrong, I was one of the many who unfairly wrote this film off as a disaster before it was released. He's never been one of my favorite Marvel characters, but the reason was mostly because I thought Captain America was a character who'd be very tough to make a decent film of. But I'm glad I'm standing corrected, since I enjoyed it a lot, and it's good to see that all the individual "platform" films leading to the actual "The Avengers" films have been great.

The storyline was simple but effective, the cast performances were good, the lead characters were memorable & had dimension, and it had a smart balance of both heartfelt dialogue & awesome action sequences with acceptable comic relief here & there. But perhaps my personal favorite aspect of the film was the 1940's setting & costumes. It was a rare pleasure to experience in a Marvel film, and it was executed both very elegantly and genuinely. My ONLY complaint was that I would've loved to see more scenes between Captain America & Red Skull, their shared scenes felt a bit too rushed and short.

I know I'm against 3-D in cinema, so please don't think I'm being bias, but I honestly didn't see anything that would be remotely special in 3-D, so I'd suggest saving your money and seeing it in glorious 2-D.

"Captain America: The First Avenger" isn't up to par with Marvel modern classics such as "Spider-Man", "Spider-Man 2", and "Iron Man", but then again those films are VERY difficult to match. It still, however, might shockingly make my current Top 10 of 2011 (I'll share that soon). Overall, it's a really good film, and I highly recommend it. I am now completely stoked over "The Avengers" film next year.

Score: 4/5

"Thor" - Review

"Whoever wields this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor."

"Thor" was always a Marvel character whom I never imagined making it to the big screen; and as soon as it was bound to happen due to a film about "The Avengers" being green-lit, I felt it wasn't going to be as grand as other Marvel films such as "Iron Man", "Spider-Man", and "X-Men". It also didn't help that I wasn't very familiar with the actor choice to play "Thor" (Chris Hemsworth), however, I started to gain some confidence for the project when I started to see names such as Natalie Portman ("Black Swan", "V For Vendetta"), Kat Dennings ("Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist"), and of course, the great Anthony Hopkins, being added to the cast.

As soon as the first-look images surfaced, followed by the initial trailer, it started to look quite appealing to me, and it gradually became the 2nd comic-book film of 2011 that I was most looking forward to ("X-Men: First Class" is 1st). It ended up pretty much meeting my expectations. I was entertained, I felt the emotional aspects, I laughed & appreciated the comic relief, and I enjoyed it overall. The running time is stated as 114 minutes (1 hour, 54 minutes), but I honestly didn't feel the length whatsoever, which is definitely a good thing. It wasn't as great as the first two "Spider-Man" films or "Iron Man" (but then again, those are tough films to top!), but it's definitely the best Marvel film since the first "Iron Man". The acting was very solid, with Chris Hemsworth surprisingly taking the honors as the best performance in the film (breakout performance, for sure). I also felt the chemistry & romance between "Thor" and "Jane Foster" was amazing, beautiful, sweet and quite possibly the best thing about the film. (the clicking between the two felt rushed, but the chemistry was so strong that it didn't end up mattering). The action was plentiful, the special effects were incredible, the dialogue was good, and the flow was perfect. I also enjoyed the references to Iron Man and Hawkeye (who are both appearing in "The Avengers").

"Thor" is the third of four characters who are being introduced in their own films before the release of "The Avengers", and so far, the first three have been really good to great. "Thor" is definitely one of the best Hollywood films of the year so far, and will easily remain so. It's very good entertainment, I definitely recommend it; and I'm already looking forward to its sequel and, of course, "The Avengers". :)

Score: 4/5

"Battle: Los Angeles" - Review

The biggest disappointment of 2011 (thus far)

I hate admitting it, but I was actually very stoked about this film when I first saw the teaser trailer last year. But considering it was brief & without much detail, I now learned that the saying "don't judge a book by its cover" applies to not only things you assume will be bad, but also things you assume will be good; live and learn, I suppose.

My expectations were very high for this film, but all I received was a bunch of military/war film cliches that merely replaced the enemy country with aliens (if you can't name at LEAST 10 major cliches, then you can't call yourself a reliable source of film knowledge). There are also a lot of plot holes, the dialogue was overly cheesy & sometimes laughable, the CGI/visuals weren't impressive in comparison to recent visual achievements, and there are certain happenings that aren't just far-fetched, but unexplained as well (the ocean level lowering in a matter of hours, seriously? at least explain how!). If you want a simple action-packed blockbuster movie, without any depth, character development, deep dialogue, or lingering afterthoughts then you'll love this, if you're the complete opposite, then I'd highly advise to keep away, or at the very least, wait until you can rent it.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the occasional "popcorn flick" when I turn off my serious switch, but this film just felt like a first-person shooter video game that I'm not able to play; not fun at all! It was inevitable, but here's my first negative film review.

Score: 1/5