Benz Eye View: Jungle Cruise

Pros:

1.) There are some cool-looking jungle environments and settings that fit right into this Jungle Cruise. While they may not be ground-breaking areas, it does fit into the setting of a jungle that is filled with dangers from rapid rivers to dangerous animals. It reflects on the theme park attraction of the same name, though with bigger dangers than the ride. If you want to see the jungle with all its glory and its dangers, the movie does an adequate job.

2.) The VFX with the animals and a certain group of characters look just as good as the jungle environments. While you can tell they are CG animals, they still look like they are done well, especially with the jaguar, Proxima. I do especially like a certain group of antagonists that appear in the second act of the movie; it reminds me of the cursed pirates of Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl. The VFX team deserve some credit for their magnificent CG animals and environments.

3.) There is a twist with one of the main characters, Frank (played by Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson) that happens near the end of the second act that is actually interesting to see. No spoilers on what it is, but it actually gives depth to his character and a group of antagonists that are chasing after him. It may not help the movie with some of its issues, but at least it gives Frank more interesting aspects to his character…

Cons:

1.) …Speaking of the movie with some issues, let’s start with the main antagonist: Prince Joachim. This guy is one of the most stereotypical antagonists I have ever seen, and nothing about him is interesting in the slightest. He is literally a mustache-twirling villain that works for the German Army during World War I as well as a rich aristocrat who wants glory to his country; the writers could have added that he is Nazi and it would not change anything. Honestly, the second group of antagonists are more interesting that Joachim due to their connections with Frank, and I wish they had more screen time. The movie should have those guys as the main antagonists, not this stereotypical wannabe.

2.) I found how the action scenes were filmed to be quite sloppy. The fighting coordination can be decent at times, but there are some fights that are not done well. Add that some of quick-cut editing with close camera angles and shots can make these fight scenes look disorienting. I did not expect a movie called Jungle Cruise to have the best fight scenes ever, but I did not expect it to be this disorganized.

3.) Here is the biggest problem with this movie: it is too similar with both Pirates of the Caribbean and Indiana Jones. I do not mind that much if the movie does well doing its own thing, and aside from a few interesting differences here and there, it is not enough to make people divert their thoughts from Jungle Cruise to either of the two films I have mentioned. There is a treasure that the protagonist wants, but he/she is being chased by a group of people that wants it as well and another group of people that seemed to be cursed wants one of the protagonists for their own reason. If you have seen Pirates of the Caribbean and Indiana Jones, this movie has those elements but weaker. It is not a good sign that if someone watches a movie that reminds them of another film, and they want to watch that instead.

Overall:

Based on the theme park attraction of the same name (an attraction that I admit is not one of my favorites), Jungle Cruise is clearly Disney’s attempt to make another theme park attraction-based movie since the success of Pirates of the Caribbean (forget that The Haunted Mansion or Tomorrowland movies existed). I was not really excited to watch this movie, but I might as well give it a watch, and I think this movie is just fine. It is not going to be a movie that will launch the next Pirates of the Caribbean series, but it is a nice distraction to watch if you have nothing else to see. There are much better choices than what this movie offers, but if you liked the Jungle Cruise park attraction, I guess this movie will do just fine for you. Otherwise, I will just wait for Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings on the next boat ride there.

5/10

Benz Eye View: Snake Eyes: G.I. Joe Origins

Pros:

1.) The chemistry between Snake Eyes and Thomas Arashikage a.k.a. Storm Shadow is a great bond between the two characters. Though I wish the movie expanded on their relationship more such as how these two met, it is easy to buy that these two see each other as brothers and are willing to do anything to protect each other from harm, which makes it more heartbreaking to see that (SPOILERS IF YOU ARE NOT A G.I. JOE FAN) they will become future enemies in the end (END SPOILERS). While there are areas in this chemistry that could have been improved, what this movie has shown does a decent job nonetheless…

2.) …In fact, I argue from what the movie has shown between Snake Eyes and Storm Shadow, the more interesting character is Storm Shadow. This is not exactly a good thing considering this is supposed to be Snake Eyes’ movie, but Storm Shadow has a more interesting backstory and character development throughout the entire runtime. His actor, Andrew Koji, even does a better job than the rest of the actors on-screen. He may not be the most compelling character of all time, but he sure does make some impact in this movie.

3.) This is not saying much, but considering that the majority of the movie takes place in Japan, it is nice to see some of the Japanese landscapes, set pieces, and backgrounds. I know there is not much to comment, but I might as well give credit to the set artists on making Japanese areas and buildings. I think you guys know that if that is all I have to say about the third and last pro, then I have plenty to say about the cons of this movie, so let’s begin…

Cons:

1.) …To start, the action scenes are atrocious due to shaky camera and poor lighting. I can barely tell what is happening on-screen when the action starts, and it is rare when the camera stands still and it is bright enough to visualize these fights. These fight scenes could have been amazing, but due to production incompetence, all of these fight talents have gone to waste.

2.) I have pointed out that I found Storm Shadow to be more interesting than Snake Eyes, and that is not a good thing when the title character is less interesting than one of his major side characters. Not only was Snake Eyes’ character development and the writing cliched, but they are also predictable and weak. Here is his arc: Snake Eyes is seeking revenge against his father’s killer, and he is recruited by a peacekeeping clan to stop evil and has to prove himself worthy to join their cause and…you get the idea what is going to happen next. Also, when a certain event happens that made Snake Eyes’ friends hate him, how he ended up getting their trust back was pretty easy and convenient. If this is supposed to be the great Snake Eyes I had seen in the live-action G.I. Joe movies, then maybe it was best to keep his backstory a mystery.

3.) Honestly, if this movie did not have the subtitle G.I. Joe Origins, I would not have thought that this is a G.I. Joe movie. With the poor writing on display, this seems like a movie where the script was completely generic, so the studio decided to put in G.I. Joe characters (particularly Snake Eyes) in order to have a reboot to a failed franchise. Other than a few characters like Snake Eyes, the Baroness, and Storm Shadow, the only character I recognized as a G.I. Joe soldier was Scarlett, but she only appeared briefly in the second act and came in to fight in the third act. I can point more issues like plot holes, conveniences, and other writing mishaps, but is not really worth writing down here considering you get the point. So much for the American heroes.

Overall:

I do not really watch any of the G.I. Joe franchises (though I am familiar with some of their famous catchphrases like “Yo Joe!,” “Cobra!,” “And knowing is half the battle.”) other than the movies back in 2009 and 2013, and those movies were dumb. Now, we got ourselves a reboot to those movies, starting with arguably one of the most popular characters in the G.I. Joe group: Snake Eyes. Like the G.I. Joes themselves, I am not too familiar with this character, but if this movie was supposed to be his origin and a reboot to the series, I am not impressed. Snake Eyes is not interesting enough to hold the movie, the action scenes have several issues, the writing is cliched and poor, and it did not feel like a G.I. Joe movie. I would have been fine with it if the movie was just dumb fun, but even it could not pull that off. I doubt the G.I. Joe fans will eventually shout, “Yo Joe!” by the end of the movie, because this seems like another end to a potentially wasted franchise.

4/10

Benz Eye View: Space Jam: A New Legacy

Pros:

1.) There is no denying that the animation and VFX teams gave it their all in this movie. The 2-D animation is reminiscent to many of the old Looney Tunes cartoons, and when those characters enter into three dimensions, they look just as good. Even the backgrounds of the digital world appear natural to these actors standing in front of a green screen. If there is one big takeaway for this movie, the animation and VFX team should be proud of their work.

2.) The fact there are many cameos and references to plenty of Warner Bros. properties is amazing. From old time films like Casablanca to modern animated shows like the Justice League, it is cool to see so many of these properties on-screen together alongside the Looney Tunes. If you can think of a movie, a TV show, or an animated cartoon from Warner Bros., you are more than likely going to see them in this movie…

Cons:

1.) …However, the fact there are these many characters from Warner Bros. has two problems. First, it hinders the story, because LeBron James (played by himself) has to recruit characters from the Warner Bros. property in order to go against the main antagonist, Al-G Rhythm (played by Don Cheadle) on a basketball game, and instead of picking the numerous amounts of characters like the Justice League or Harry Potter, he was forced to pick the Looney Tunes characters, because Bugs Bunny misses them (which that in itself has problems, but I will get to that). Second, it is clear that this is meant to rub Warner Bros’ ego on how much franchises they own. If the film company wants to have these characters make cameo appearances, that is fine, but it also has to serve the story, which it unfortunately does not.

2.) LeBron James may be a fantastic basketball player, but he is no actor. With a couple of exceptions when he interacts with his son, none of his acting sounds convincing at all, not even his voice acting when he becomes an animated character. One of the better examples with his lack of acting talents is when he is falling into the digital world of Warner Bros., his scream sounds miniscule like someone who wants to scream but does not want to wake his neighbors. I go as far and say that Michael Jordan in the first Space Jam did a better job acting than LeBron, and even he was not that great. LeBron James is a talented basketball player, but his acting career is not going to be big unless he improves.

3.) There are plenty of brain-dead logic and terrible writing in this movie. Even if the movie follows toon logic once we meet the Looney Tunes, almost every event lacks any sense. Here are a few examples I can mention: why couldn’t LeBron James get Warner Bros. character to join his basketball team despite Bugs Bunny’s insistence to get the Looney Tunes together again? In fact, why did the Looney Tunes separate, especially when they easily got back together? What was Al-G Rhythm’s motivation again, because it does not really make any sense considering that he is an A.I. and could have picked someone else to represent him when LeBron refused his movie deal for some dumb reason? There are more I can list, but that reaches spoiler territory and I do not have that much time explain all of them, so to keep a long list short, this is one of the worst-written movies I have ever seen considering there are SIX SCREENWRITERS.

Overall:

As a child, I loved watching Space Jam; it was enjoyable to watch the Looney Tunes playing basketball against the Monstars…with Michael Jordan helping the Tunes with their dilemma (I apologize, but despite knowing he is a popular basketball player, I did not care for him that much). Watching it again these days, it is a dumb movie that has its charm and nostalgia. Despite its issues, I would not mind watching it again occasionally, especially compared to its sequel. Space Jam: A New Legacy is dumber than its predecessor, and not in a good way. This is most likely made just to cash in the nostalgia of the first movie, and they clearly did not know how to do just as good or better than its predecessor. I do not recommend this to anyone, even the fans of the original, though I can imagine that children may enjoy this more than adults (it is even entirely possible that it can be seen as a guilty pleasure). However, this new legacy is something that even Warner Bros. would not be proud of anytime soon.

2/10

Benz Eye View: Loki

Welcome back once again to another addition of MCU Marathon, but instead of one of the Marvel superheroes, we got ourselves a Marvel villain: Loki, the god of mischief. Not the one that died in Avengers: Infinity War, but a variant version of that escaped from the Avengers in Avengers: Endgame. Will he provide an interesting TV show like Wandavision, will it be a decent watch like The Falcon and the Winter Solider, or will it end up being disappointing? Let’s find out in the next installment of MCU Marathon: Loki.

Pros:

1.) Tom Hiddleston as Loki just kills it with his role as usual. He can act like a conniving backstabber waiting for you to lower your guard, or he can be a sympathetic individual who does care in his own way despite his troubling past. He is clearly the strongest thing about this show, especially when he interacts with other characters like Agent Mobius played by Owen Wilson. While this may not be the same Loki we have been following up until Avengers: Infinity War, Hiddleston still owns the character despite being a different version of Loki.

2.) There are some cool concepts and designs in this series from the TVA to the person behind the TVA. Firstly, the setting designs for the TVA gives out a Metropolis appearance that makes it look like it belongs to a time-related agency/group (though for a futuristic/time-traveling group, it is odd that they had to settle with that design, but I digress). Secondly, when it was revealed who is behind all of the TVA, it brings up some interesting ideas for the MCU, but I will get to that in the next pro. Lastly, having different variants of other people brings in some unique conflicts. I apologize if I am being vague, but I am avoiding spoilers. There are some great ideas, and they are good enough to hold this show.

3.) Once again, I cannot say any spoilers here, but the ending for this show (or at least, the first season) is a bit of a shocker, and makes it easy for viewers to not only await the next season, but also the MCU as a whole. It brings an idea of what is going to happen in this cinematic universe from here on out. It may be bigger than Thanos and the Infinity Stones; much bigger than we may possibly imagine that it may affect the Marvel Universe as a whole (note that I said the Marvel Universe, not the Marvel Cinematic Universe). I cannot wait to see what happens now, and this show may have started something to look forward to if this plays out well.

Cons:

1.) Here is something you should know about me: I am not that big fan of time traveling movies/TV shows, especially when they go into deeper and more complicated areas of time traveling (i.e., Back to the Future Part II). When it goes to simpler and established rules of time travel (i.e., Back to the Future Part I and III, Avengers: Endgame, and Doctor Who when it is consistent), I am completely fine with it even if there are a few issues here and there. In the case of Loki, those complications hindered the show for me for a while. There are plenty of times where it is easy to get lost on what these characters are mentioning when they introduce certain time travel concepts like the Nexus Event or resetting the timeline, though you will eventually understand them. What does not help is how all of this affects the MCU worldbuilding like how Hulk was wrong about his time traveling theory in Avengers: Endgame, or was the TVA fine with the Avengers traveling back in time to get the Infinity Stones (and those are a couple of big examples I can think of; I am sure there are people who can think of more). If a movie/TV show delves into time travel and introduces big concepts and rules in their media, it is easy to get lost on what is happening, especially to people like me who are not big into time travel in the first place.

2.) Loki is severely underpowered in this show. I accepted that in the first couple of episodes since his powers do not work in the TVA, but when he achieves opportunities to use these powers, I am a little shocked on how he gets beaten up pretty easily. There are people who do not like that by saying that he has fought the Avengers and can hold his own, but I argue that he may be a great character, he is not that great of a villain (look up Loki’s battles and interactions with MCU characters from Thor to Avengers: Infinity War). He is better at sneaking up and tricking people instead of battling them face-to-face, but even then, there are times where he easily gets tricked most of the time (a few of them I accept, but the rest I have a hard time buying). If you wanted to see Loki defeating people easily by tricking/outsmarting them, you will be disappointed.

3.) Loki’s character development is inconsistent and not that believable. Remember that this is the Loki that escaped from the Avengers in the first Avengers film (or more specifically, Avengers: Endgame in the first Avengers film timeline), so he has not learned to be good yet. Throughout the season, the show tries to make us believe that Loki has learned from his mistakes and joined the TVA to stop evil (especially with the first episode), but his actions slightly prove otherwise. He plans to trick the TVA and take it over, making a certain moment from the first episode seem pointless. In fact, Loki does not seem to be that trustworthy; he is still growing as a character when he slowly opens up to others like Mobius, but I have a hard time believing that a guy who was secretly planning to take over the TVA and trick others (and remember that he was just attacking New York against the Avengers and even threatened one of the members, Black Widow, to have her killed by her close friend, Hawkeye) is someone who can be trusted. It was not until the last episode that I found his change of character to be genuine (assuming that it is genuine), but it is slightly late for that. If Loki’s development was better, I would say that this is one of the best shows that the MCU has ever made, but as it stands, it could have been better.

Overall:

This is an MCU show that is especially interesting compared to the last two shows that the MCU has made, because it delves into a story about an alternate Loki in a time traveling realm. After watching six episodes, I have to admit that I am conflicted with this show. On the one hand, I enjoyed this show for its main character, the world of the TVA, and the ending shows plenty of promise on what is going to happen on the MCU. On the other hand, many of the time-traveling concepts that are introduced takes a while to get used to, Loki is severely underpowered, and his character development is not well-established until the last episode. I have seen plenty of people who love this show, and there are others who absolutely hate it. For me, I enjoy it, but it does come with some caveats as I have pointed out.

If there is one thing I can take away from this show, it is this: it brings up some interesting possibilities on what is going to happen from here on out. I wish that it was delivered better, but from what this show did, it did its job. Overall, I enjoyed Loki, but it could have been better with an additional episode or two. Whether it will show glorious purpose to the fans or not, we will have to wait and see (especially considering that there is another season coming soon). Regardless, I am looking forward to what the MCU has in store after what Loki has shown.

Watch It

Benz Eye View: Black Widow

We return once again to MCU Marathon, and the start of the Phase Four films of the MCU (ignoring the MCU TV series like Wandavision and Loki). After so many years, Black Widow finally gets her own movie, but is it a movie worth watching and a good start to the MCU Phase Four films? Let’s find out on the next installment to the Marvel Cinematic Universe Marathon: Black Widow.

Pros:

1.) As the soon as the movie begins, it has a fantastic start. The childhood story of Natasha Romanoff and her adoptive family goes from peaceful to tense in a matter of a few minutes. You can understand where she comes from and how she fears for her family and herself when they are all separated, and how horrified she was when she was trained to become Black Widow just as it was hinted at in Avengers: Age of Ultron. It was a fantastic start for the movie…

2.) …What helps the movie more is that the relationship between Black Widow and her adoptive family. Yelena Belova, Alexei Shostakov a.k.a. Red Guardian, and Melina Vostokoff are great additions to the MCU, especially when they interact with each other and Black Widow. All of them have their own strengths and weaknesses, but they care each other in their own ways: Red Guardian is the prideful one while Melina is the calculative one for example. Personally, my favorite of the group is Red Guardian, but these characters are great overall.

3.) Honestly, it is about time that Marvel Studios made a movie about Black Widow, and her backstory that has been hinted throughout the MCU should have warranted that. Now that her own movie is out, that warrant is justified. Many parts of the movie show off her character well while some have good ideas that could have been delivered better and others that have issues, but it is good to see one of the major members of the Avengers finally having a movie (while the last major member is going to have his own Disney+ show). In fact, the movie reminds me so much about the Bourne films due to similar tone and story beats. Not bad to make a movie about a character that *CENSORED* a couple of MCU films ago.

Cons:

1.) While the MCU does constantly have many comedic moments throughout their films, it does not work here due to the serious and dramatic tone. There are many moments where characters are having serious talks or dramatic events, only to have them ruined with a joke afterwards. In fact, there is a moment where a character talks about hysterectomy and the movie shows that moment off as comedic; it was more awkward that funny. This reminds me of The Incredible Hulk where that movie also had a serious and dramatic tone, and the comedic moments did not work there either. If the movie wanted to be more serious, then maybe it should not contain jokes.

2.) The main villains: Taskmaster and General Dreykov are disappointing antagonists. Nothing about these two are interesting at all; Taskmaster is just a silent guard following orders while replicating other superheroes abilities, and General Dreykov is the boss that wants to take over the world. Although, there is something about Taskmaster that is revealed that seems more insulting than helpful for the character, especially if you are a fan of that guy in the comics. In fact, I looked up the reactions of the fans of Taskmaster, and to put it simply, the fans are not only unhappy about the change of character, but they also compared the change to the Mandarin in Iron Man 3 (a film I liked, but I can understand why fans were not happy with that) and Deadpool in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. I compare Taskmaster to one other character in the MCU, but I think that will lead to spoilers if I reveal who it is. If this was going to be Natasha Romanoff’s last appearance, they could have at least given her a better villain, or better yet, do Taskmaster better like what the Spider-Man PS4 game did with his side missions.

3.) This is the biggest disadvantage towards the movie and everyone has pointed this out: this a movie that is several years too late. This could have been a Phase 3 MCU movie instead of a Phase 4 MCU movie because of one reason: we know that Black Widow is not going to die in her own movie. SPOILERS for the very few people who have not seen Avengers: Endgame, but she dies after the events of Black Widow. (END SPOILERS) The fact that it took Marvel Studios this long to finally give her a movie was a huge disservice for the character, the fans, and the MCU. The timing was late and Marvel Studios should have planned better.

Overall:

Ignoring the MCU TV shows like Wandavision and Loki, Black Widow is the start of Phase 4 of the MCU…and it was a decent start. While it is good to see that the character finally gets her own movie, it is unfortunately very late into the MCU when her character has…just in case to be vague if anyone has not seen Avengers: Endgame, moved on from the Avengers. What we got here is a movie that has a great backstory to the titular character and likable side characters that fit for her, but it suffers from comedic moments ruining the serious tone and disappointing antagonists. What brings this movie down a bit further that it is ultimately a generic MCU movie with similar story beats like the other MCU films. It is still a good movie overall and fans will have some enjoyment, but if this is supposed to kick off Phase 4 of the MCU, it needs to do better than that. Let’s hope Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings makes up for it.

6/10

Benz Eye View: Hitman’s Wife’s Bodyguard

Pros:

1.) If there is one that I enjoy about this movie other than one certain pro, I just like the last act for action reasons. While the rest of the action scenes have issues, the final act’s action is actually not bad and can be quite fun. While it may not be the best action you will ever see, compared to the rest of the movie, this will do just fine and it is a decent way to end the movie.

2.) The three main leads can be pretty funny and have a good chemistry. Ryan Reynolds, Samuel L. Jackson, and Salma Hayek are the ones carrying this movie with their interactions and their wit. They made this movie entertaining…

Cons:

1.) …However, despite their chemistry, even they cannot save this movie from being a slog. One example is that despite how funny they can be, their comedy can sometimes be more annoying than hilarious. The jokes are barely comical most of the time, and it is usually the three characters just talking over each other. The trio have their moments, but their comedy (as well as the movie’s ) usually does not work.

2.) The movie goes by way too quickly by the first half. The pacing is too rushed, and I can tell that these filmmakers thought the first half was boring, so they must have thought rushing through the movie would make it better, but it just made it look sloppy. Even some of the action scenes seemed rush with some quick-cut editing. If the movie just calmed down a bit with its pacing in the first half, then the movie would actually be a bit better for it.

3.) This movie has one of the most generic stories and writing I have ever seen. One guy wants to give up his action thrills (or in this case, bodyguard duty), until someone comes in to ask for his assistance on a mission. Nothing about this movie stands out other than a few moments, but those are ruined by certain twists. It does not add anything new, and even with what it has contains sloppy writing.

Overall:

I am surprised that they made a sequel to The Hitman’s Bodyguard, a movie that I thought it was fine. I guess it did well enough that the filmmakers made another one, but I wonder why since it was not that big of a success. I admit that I barely even remember the first one, and I can say the same thing about its sequel as well. The difference between the two is that the new one is nowhere as good. This movie is less focused than the previous one, and it tried to use the main leads to help make up for it, but the three can only do so much. Just watch the last movie unless if you want to see some ridiculous moments with Ryan Reynolds, Samuel L. Jackson, and Salma Hayek.

3/10