Movie Review -- Justice League

  Justice League marks DC Films' fifth time up to bat for their Extended Universe. Most of their films so far haven't been all that great, but this year's Wonder Woman showed signs of promise. Which direction will Justice League try taking this universe? Let's take a look.

  JL's plot is rather standard. Some intergalactic bad guy shows up to take over Earth using the power of the ancient MacGuffin(s) and a smart guy with access to lots of money and advanced technology tries to put together a team of superheroes to stop him. Are you starting to see the similarities to 2012's Avengers yet? While there are a few huge battle scenes the film doesn't have the same epic weight that that film did. There's also a few plot holes towards the end; namely what happened to the Mother Boxes after the final battle? Did they just disappear? And where did the aliens go afterwards? One good thing Justice League ripped off from the Avengers is the overall lighter tone, making it more fun and less serious than other films of the series like Batman v Superman (2016). It also includes subtle nods to the heroes' backstories and lore.

  Now let's talk about the characters. Some are great, some aren't. Ben Affleck is still a strong and charismatic Batman. Gal Gadot is quite comfortable playing Wonder Woman for a third outing, a real highlight. Ezra Miller brings enthusiasm and quipiness to his role as the Flash. Although his jokes don't always land well, he grows on you after a while. Aquaman/Arthur Curry, played by Jason Momoa, is rather amusing and cool. It sure was nice of them to name him after a Canadian First World War general, and he doesn't suck nearly as much as he does in the cartoons. The same can't be said of Cyborg, whose actor is pretty wooden. But the biggest failure in the character department is the main villain, Steppenwolf. He is about as bland as you can get and his physical appearance isn't all that impressive, not helped by the overabundance of CG effects used to render him.

  Yes, like the other DCEU films Justice League is drenched with computer-generated effects, some of which look like they haven't quite dried yet. I mean, why did they have to CG Cyborg's tracksuit? Is it truly that hard to find a real tracksuit these days? At least the effects team did a good job of wiping away Henry Cavill's moustache. When you take all special effects into consideration it isn't hard to understand why JL is one of the most expensive movies ever made.

  You may have heard about director Zack Snyder having to leave the project halfway through, entrusting the post-production's directing/writing/reshoots to Joss Whedon. And it shows. The difference doesn't wreck the overall film but there are times when you can tell who did which scene based on the scene's tone, cinematography, and/or use of slow-mo.

  On the whole, Justice League is an OK movie without any dull moments (and it's only 2 hours long, btw). It has its issues but I believe it does more things right than wrong. Seeing (most of) these heroes done justice on the big screen is gratifying and watching them interact and fight evil together is pretty fun. For now at least it seems as if the DCEU has taken a turn for the better. Superfans, rejoice!

Grade:  

Video Game Retrospective -- GoldenEye: Rogue Agent (2004), Part 1

  There are a ton of James Bond video games out there. There's 007 games for just about every console from the ZX Spectrum to the Wii U and I'm sure most fans of the Bond movies have tried at least one of the franchise's many interactive experiences. I've only played a handful – Agent Under Fire (2001), Everything or Nothing (2003), GoldenEye 007 (1997) – and to be honest I suck at most of them (the only one I've ever completed is AUF). But earlier this year I put myself through one 007 game that I just had to write about, 2004's GoldenEye: Rogue Agent.

  Although its title implies the game's based on the 1995 film GoldenEye, Rogue Agent is an entirely original creation. Taking place in an alternate universe, the plot follows a former MI6 agent who's turned evil and gotten a job with Auric Goldfinger of not-SPECTRE (remember, this was when the legal rights to the name SPECTRE were in dispute). Playing a Bond-style adventure as a villain instead of the familiar hero had a lot of potential. Just think of all the stuff an evil version of James Bond could get up to! This is going to be amazing, right?

  Let's go through the single player campaign together, shall we? The game begins with an introductory level at Fort Knox just like in Goldfinger, except you take on the roll of some agent dude partnered with Bond. You spend a minute getting acquainted with the controls, which this game maps out serviceably. Within moments your helicopter crashes and falls through a roof, crushing agent 007. Oops.

  It's in this beginning level you're introduced to the gunplay, so let's go over that for a moment. Unlike most 007 games of the era, Rogue Agent only allows you to carry two weapons instead of a full arsenal. Lame! There's a basic pistol you always have in reserve, but it thankfully disappears if you choose to dual wield two other weapons. That's right, you can dual wield in this game. This only goes for some weapons though; larger weapons like rocket launchers and assault rifles need both hands to operate them. Also, most of the guns don't allow you to zoom in. Ranged weapons are limited. You've got a limited assortment of weapons: 2 pistols, an assault rifle, an SMG, a grenade launcher/detonator, a rocket launcher, a lever-action shotgun, a slow-firing rail gun, and a poison/stun gun that slows people down. That's pretty much it. The only real escalation in firepower comes in the form of a minigun (in the 4^th or 5^th level) and the final level's OMEN rifle. More on that one later...

  As far as abilities go, you can't jump, but you can melee and you can also take enemies as human shields which is always good for a laugh. However, the dumb badguys can often be seen doing the same... to eachother.

  Anyways, you fight through Fort Knox to prevent a nuclear bomb from detonating and as soon as it looks like you're going to fight Oddjob, the bomb detonates and the level ends. But it's OK because it was just a simulation. M (voiced by Judi Dench herself) scolds the unnamed agent and dismisses him. The player is then treated to a rather cool opening “credits” scene setting up the plot. The agent gets a job with Goldfinger, Dr. No breaks away from not-SPECTRE and tries to take over the world on his own, a rivalry develops between Goldfinger and Dr. No, the doctor shoots the agent in the eye, and Francisco Scaramanga, not-SPECTRE's tech specialist (voiced by Christopher Lee himself), implants a cybernetic eye of gold in the vengeful agent's head thus giving him the moniker “GoldenEye”. Uh hum. This eye gives the player special abilities that are gained as the campaign progresses. These include MRI vision, hacking, brief invincibility, and later telekinesis. Weird.

  The next cutscene shows off Goldfinger's new weapon, the OMEN, which destroys organic matter and disintegrates dudes. Dr. No and his forces discover it's being held at Goldfinger's secret arctic hideout and attack it. And so the second level tasks you with defending the arctic base, and it's not all that great a level. It's a boring arrangement of dull rooms and hallways. The only real highlights are (1) the level's traps that you can activate and (2) the appearance of the laser from the movie Goldfinger (too bad you can't use that as a trap!). Anyways, the base is wrecked but the OMEN is shepherded away. GoldenEye is picked up by Pussy Galore who, by the way, looks and sounds almost nothing like she did in the film. Here she's basically your chauffeur... in a pink helicopter. Remember that from Goldfinger? I don't.

  The next mission takes place in Hong Kong where GoldenEye is tasked with assassinating Dr. No. Spoiler alert: it doesn't work. With an objective like this they could've mixed things up a bit with a sniping mission or stealth gameplay. But no, the majority of this level is shooty-shooty bang-bang inside and above dozens of high rise buildings. Hong Kong may be a bit more colourful than the previous level, bit it's just as mind-numbingly boring. Not only is this the most tedious level yet, but it's also far longer than it has any right to be! It just goes on and on and on and on. The idea is that you've got to go to a specific rooftop for Pussy to pick you up from, but why does the building she picked have to be on the other side of town? Any old freakin' rooftop will do!

  Once that nightmare is over, you head over to Las Vegas where you've got to defend the OMEN in its casino hideout from Xenia Onatopp who is rumoured to be working for Dr. No. This level is only slightly less dull than the previous ones. The gameplay is unchanged but I'll give it credit for being the most visually interesting level in Rogue Agent. The places here look vibrant and alive. If only the other elements of the game were like that!

  It's not until the following level where we actually get to go toe-to-toe (or is that thigh-to-thigh?) against Xenia Onatopp in a boss fight atop Hoover Dam. The only problem is that it comes after about an hour of the worst level in the game: an unending series of similar, lifeless, grey, concrete rooms with generic enemies. (By the way, all the bad guys bleed bright blue blood. I guess it was to avoid an M rating?) You start the level at the bottom of one side of the dam, you go inside, fight your way to the top, cross it halfway whilst taking on dozens of tanks and helicopters, go back down to the bottom of the dam, retrieve the seismic bomb (your mission objective), climb back to the top again, and cross the other half. It is a brainless chore. This game is in serious need of some variety. Other Bond games had vehicle sections, turret sections, stealth sections, even on-rails sections. But in this level I was so fed up I found myself simply running past enemies in order to get to the end quicker.

  There's also a cutscene in which Oddjob betrays GoldenEye, but the rogue agent throws the henchman down a bottomless shaft. And that's the last we see of Oddjob. Why did he betray GoldenEye? Was he really working for Dr. No? Did Goldfinger order him to do it? Seriously, the game never explains it and it's never mentioned again. What a waste of a cool character! By this point I had stopped caring. The only thing motivating me to continue was to see what would happen to the characters and what movie references would be made next. If I weren't a 007 fan this game would've been in the garbage by now.

That's all I can take for now. Check in next week for part 2!

Movie Review Repost -- Thor: The Dark World (2013)

I've been working on some new stuff these past few days and I promise I'll have it ready to go for next week. But for now let's have a look at the previous Thor movie, The Dark World and why I thought it was a disappointment. My thoughts on it haven't changed since 2013, though I wouldn't mind watching it again since I've kind of forgotten most of what happened in it. Enjoy.

  It's not easy to write these reviews when there's a cat sitting between you and the computer. Anyways, Thor: The Dark World! (Damn you, Willy for ruining my intro!)

  Thor 2 was OK. Really OK. It follows Thor and his girlfriend Jane Foster as they strive to defend the Nine Realms against the no-longer-dormant threat of the Dark Elves who have located the no-longer-missing ultimate weapon, the Aether. In addition to some fun new characters we're also treated to all the classic ones from the previous film, all brilliantly acted. This includes Loki, the most entertaining Marvel movie villain ever, the guy who steals every scene he's in and keeps you guessing as to what he's going to do next.

  At times the story seems rather rushed, especially in the beginning where it seems as if we're given a lot to swallow in 15-20 minutes. The same can be said of the fighting scenes; they often end abruptly with a very fast move that you can't really see. This movie also ends in a not-unpredictable cliffhanger. The mid-credits scene is a great big WTF moment and, let me tell you, the post-credits scene is pointless. Don't waste your time waiting for it.

  As with the first Thor movie, The Dark World has good special effects and is really funny when it wants to be (although some of the jokes were kind of predictable).

  Unfortunately, the film's main villain, Malekith (or Malarkey as I call him), isn't all that interesting. He commands an army of dark elves who carry cool weapons and can turn into Hulk-like monsters but wear these silly-looking masks that make me chuckle. And please tell me: why exactly do they want to destroy the universe anyways? Also, the Asgardians apparently just rebuilt the Bifrost that Thor destroyed in the previous film, thus completely validating one of my complaints from that film two years ago.

  In short, Thor: The Dark World is an OK film, but not nearly as good as the first. The story isn't as complete and the characters aren't as developed. In the first Thor movie, characters learn lessons and go through changes. The sequel, on the other hand, is just one of those good-guy-fights-bad-guy movies. But for what it is, it's entertaining enough and worth seeing once.

Rating: three stars out of five.

Movie Review -- Thor: Ragnarok

  It's been four years since the mild disappointment of Thor: The Dark World and you know, I really liked the first Thor movie and I think Thor is one of the funner characters in the Avengers family of films. What did Marvel Studios and director Taika Waititi (that guy with the saucer eyes) do to try to turn this subseries of films around?

  The difference between Thor: Ragnarok and the other two films is noticeable from the very first scene. The tone has taken a noticeable shift to the colourful, comedic, and campy – one might even say, deliberately cheesy. Imagine Guardians of the Galaxy, but with Thor instead of the Guardians. It may take a moment to adjust – especially if you remember what the other Thor films were like – but I think these changes mostly benefit the Thor series whose charm was beginning to wear thin after The Dark World. I said mostly because a lot of the jokes come from characters you wouldn't expect and sometimes they undermine what should be serious moments. Some of the humour feels forced, even immature. It all makes Ragnarok a movie that is very fun, but which borders on self-parody at times. As black Iron Man once said, “Never go full retard.”

  The story revolves around Odin dying (for the second or third time), which releases his evil firstborn daughter Hela from captivity. She takes over Asgard and expels Thor and Loki to a planet called Sakaar. The two must escape Sakaar and save Asgard with a little help from some friends along the way. As I said earlier, Ragnarok has a very different feel to it than the other Thor films. The third act, when things return to Asgard, is when it truly becomes a Thor movie. But the second act, which takes place on Sakaar (AKA 1980's Mos Eisley, USA) is kind of weird, considering the context of Thor 1&2.

  This weirdness is personified by Jeff Goldbloom as the Grandmaster (i.e. himself), the ruler of Sakaar. This dork is a joy to watch and I'd bet any money that Jeff was allowed to ad-lib some of his lines here. All the classic characters are back – Thor, Loki, Odin, Heimdall – as well as a new villain, Hela. She's played by Cate Blanchett who does ham it up a bit but is still very good in the role. Another excellent addition to the cast is the Hulk, badass as ever. And he's even learned a bit of speech since Avengers 2 (2015) adding depth to his personality. Thor is a bit different this time too. Aside from cracking more jokes he now has short hair, a new costume, and doesn't use his signature hammer. One last character I have to mention is a rock-skinned, soft-spoken gladiator named Korg. Voiced by Waititi himself, Korg might be the funniest character in the film but I think he's given too much screen time. In a film that already has Loki, Jeff Goldbloom, and an overall funnier tone does it really need yet another comedic relief character?

  Ragnarok suffers from numerous narrative troubles. These include cheap deaths of established characters early on in the film, a multitude of clunky exposition trying to set up backstory in as few words as possible, and a wholly pointless scene featuring Dr. Strange (which is also nothing but comedic relief). Considering all this pointless stuff, this is a movie that doesn't need to be 130 minutes long.

  In spite of this Thor: Ragnarok is a rather fun and entertaining movie that's worth watching once. I'd say it's better than Thor 2 (certainly more memorable) but not quite as good as Thor 1. It's an alright superhero adventure flick that doesn't try to be taken too seriously. (Warning: the 3D on this one sucks. Avoid it!)

Grade:  

Movie Review Repost -- World War Z (2013)

So guess what: I'm in the middle of packing/moving again, which means that I haven't had much time to spare for writing lately. Sorry about that. I've got ideas for new material, but it may be a week or two before I can get any of them written and posted. In the meantime let's take a look back at the review I wrote in 2013 for the action-horror flick World War Z. I liked it. I know a lot of people didn't think much of it and I don't fully understand why. It was alright; perhaps an In Defence Of article is in order?

  Is it just me or are there, like, a ton of zombie shows nowadays? I wonder why people like them. Is it because these stories demonstrate how fragile civilization is? Or do people like seeing mindless walkers being shot by the hundreds? Rejoice, zombie fans; World War Z has both of these elements!

  World War Z's story follows Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt), a UN inspector, in his worldwide search to find and halt the rapid spread of a rabies-like virus that turns people into zombies. This highly suspenseful plot wastes no time getting straight to the action; zombies appear within the movie's first five minutes. Conversely, one thing you might notice about World War Z is that there's actually a lot of pointless stuff. There's pointless locations (South Korea), pointless characters (Thomas and Dr. Fassbach), and pointless plotlines (Gerry's family having to leave the navy ship). However, even though the movie is nearly two hours, the story never feels like it's dragging on and manages to be entertaining throughout. One thing that you might find disappointing is that the climax isn't as impressive as the rest of the film might condition you to expect. It's hard to explain; let's just say that you may be surprised at where the film decides to end.

  There's only a handful of characters that get any significant fleshing-out, but the acting is good from one end to the other, especially from Brad Pitt. Just remember to stay away from him if a zombie apocalypse ever does break out. Pretty much everyone around him ends up dying; he's like a bad luck charm. But to be fair that's partially because he's surrounded by clumsy characters who take forever to learn basic things like not making noise or how to not shoot yourself.

  As you've probably seen from the trailers, there are some impressive long shots from this film's action scenes. Unfortunately some of the fight scenes (not all, but some) suffer from the menace that is shaky cam. (Also the 3D in this movie is pointless. Don't bother with it.) And like so many other zombie apocalypse shows we don't learn where or how the zombie virus originated. Also, why don't the humans just let the zombies starve to death? Or would that be double death, I guess? Whatever.

  Anyways, World War Z is a fine addition to the zombie horror genre. For a movie about a zombie apocalypse it's relatively bloodless, which is fine if you're like me and prefer suspense to gore. Both horror and action fans will be able to enjoy this film.

Rating: three stars out of five.