Benz Eye View: Rebel Moon – Part Two: The Scargiver

Pros:

1.) If I have to pick one or two good things about this movie, it does have great visuals and direction. From the costume/environmental designs to the cinematography, director Zack Snyder knows how to shoot a film for the most part. When he has a good shot that pairs with an action moment, he will show it off. Zack Snyder knows how to make killer visuals despite his huge writing flaws…

Cons:

1.) …Speaking of writing flaws, if you thought the first movie was bad, wait until you get to the second movie. I should have pointed this out in the first movie review, but the writing and the story are absolutely atrocious. From the world-building to the characters, not only are some of these plot points and parts of the world unoriginal, but the characters are easily the most forgettable people ever considering the failure to characterize them properly and gaping plot holes that will make you receive a migraine. I still do not understand why this galactic empire is interested in this one small farmland that produces grain when they could have tried other planets/worlds that could create the same thing. Not to mention the Seven Samurai/The Magnificent Seven plot line of a small group of village people fighting against a big group of criminals does not work when those small group of people are fighting a galactic army with tanks. There are bigger problems in the story and the writing like the characters, but I will focus on that in the last con.

2.) The action scenes are terrible, too. It is not because it is unclear to watch due to shaky cam or bad cinematography, it is because the audience can see the horrible action choreography (not helped by the slow-motion). There are so many moments where the main characters could have been shot and killed, but the villains are so bad at their shots that the Stormtroopers would be amazed. Anytime a major character is on a battlefield with enemy soldiers right in front of them, the movie cuts to another shot in front of these characters to avoid seeing these soldiers aiming at them when they should have. In fact, some fights have enemies that should be shooting when all they do is run toward them, something that a swordfighter would do, not a gunman. However, the only fight scene I liked was the last battle between Kora (played by Sofia Boutella) and Atticus Noble (played by Ed Skrein) since it does look cool what is happening during that fight.

I cannot stress this enough: if this movie makes the Galactic Stormtroopers look good, you know you messed up.

3.) Let’s talk about the characters if you remember them. None of them are fleshed out well; their characterization (if most of them had any) is so sloppy that I cannot believe anyone wrote this and thought it was a good idea. The biggest example of how poor their characterization is is a scene where the major characters are having some R&R and explaining their backstories to gain each other’s trust…two problems: it is far too late for anyone to care and it would have been better if this was done in the last movie where the writers could have dispersed their backstories throughout different points in that movie…like Watchmen. Let me highlight the poor characters with two more examples: Nemesis (played by Doona Bae) befriends a young boy on the farm, but these two barely interact (all they do is share looks), which does not work considering what happens to Nemesis in the climax and how that boy reacted to it. Kora has a romantic relationship with Gunnar (played by Michiel Huisman), which I do not understand since she has not shown any interest in him in the last movie (as far as I remember, that was not good either) despite Gunnar having romantic interests with Kora.

There are more I can point out like Jimmy (voiced by Anthony Hopkins) could single-handedly take on the evil imperial army by himself or something about a princess that is the movie’s obvious attempt to sequel-bait. I am sure you understand how these characters are wasted at best and completely forgettable at worst.

Overall:

Part 2 of Zack Snyder’s R-rated Star Wars movie idea is finally released with little fanfare, and there is a good reason why. It is bad when I say that Disney of all companies made the correct choice to refuse this idea into the Star Wars universe. The characters are forgettable, the world-building is stupid, the writing is non-sensical, the action scenes are poorly coordinated, and everything about this movie is doomed to fail. I want to support Zack Snyder on his Star Wars project considering how poorly Star Wars is going through these days, but I cannot do that when he makes terrible ideas like the Rebel Moon movies. I cannot recommend this and its predecessor to anyone; it is a movie series that proves the Force was never strong with Zack Snyder.

2/10

Benz Eye View: The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare

Pros:

1.) When the action enters the picture, they are done decently well. While it may not be the most impressive display of action ever seen, it can be a bit brutal to watch while being slightly hilarious at the same time. This is appreciated especially since there is little action in this movie.

2.) One character that stood out to me was Majorie Stewart (played by Eiza González). Her role is that she is a German Jew who has gone undercover to seduce Nazi commander Heinrich Luhr (played by Til Schweiger) to do her bidding while hiding her frustration against the Nazis for what happened to her people. Her subplot was slightly interesting considering that Heinrich suspects her for being a Jew, and that suspicion lingers throughout the movie. Intriguingly, I was more invested with her than Gus March-Phillipps (played by Henry Cavill) and his group.

3.) Speaking of Gus March-Phillipps, this man and his other teammates are established to be the type who does not follow orders well from the higher-ups other than following the main mission. For one thing, Gus gets what he wants, even if that means asking a British officer for his uniform. If one of the leaders wants him to abort the mission, he pretends to not hear this and continues on with the mission. While these types of characters are not new (i.e., The Bad Batch), they are decent characters that the audience can support since they are pricks, but they will not abandon the mission if things get hard or if some weak leader tells them to abort. These characters are slightly compelling in certain areas like how much they love to kill Nazis…

Cons:

1.) …However, other than their fascination with killing Nazis, there is not much to these characters due to how the movie barely explores them. The only characterization you get from these people is in the beginning when Gus explains who he wants in his team. One character is insane, the other lost his brother to the Nazis, another character likes explosions, and the last guy is a planner. The only people with more characterization than them are Marjorie Stewart and Frederich Heron (played by Babs Olusanmokun) since the movie shows more of them preparing for Gus and his team’s attack than the team itself. If they are more compelling in real life, I wish the movie had shown it.

2.) The pacing can be a drag since this movie spends more time preparing for Gus’ attack and less showing these people fighting. It feels less like a war movie and more like a heist movie in a small sense. It is why I pointed out in the pros that there is little action: about three action scenes exist and the biggest one is in the climax. In between those scenes are the planning stages and little interesting moments. This movie did not need to be two hours long, so the pacing can be tolerable if a few scenes are cut out.

3.) Gus and his team bring comedy into this movie, and it is disappointing that there is little of that comedy. Since the movie is spent more on Marjorie and Frederich, it ends up being slightly more serious with light moments here and there. It ends up being a little jarring in terms of tone when Gus comes in gleefully killing Nazis while Marjorie and Frederich are concentrating on their arrival. It does not ruin the movie, but it is one of the movies where the trailers are inconsistent with this movie’s actual tone.

Overall:

Based on a true story that was eventually revealed to the public a few years ago, this movie has slightly intrigued me with its trailer and premise alone. Despite if this movie is accurate to the real events or not, is it still good? It is not too bad but be warned that the trailer is slightly deceptive. It can be fun to watch these misfits kill Nazis, but the tone is inconsistent, the movie spends more time with another group of people, and there is little comedy to this fun movie. If you keep your expectations slightly lower than intended, it is a movie worth watching despite a different type of ungentlemanly warfare.

7/10

Benz Eye View: Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire

Pros:

1.) I like how the movie expands on the lore of the Ghostbusters. You get to see various technologies, different ghosts, and distinct spirits. I appreciate that we see some variety in this world of Ghostbusters…

2.) …While having callbacks to the previous Ghostbusters movies is nice. For one thing, I recall that Ghostbusters II was not canon for some reason when Ghostbusters: Afterlife was released, but this movie officially confirms that it is. Other callbacks include the settings and ghosts that we have not seen in a while. If you are a Ghostbusters fan, you will appreciate these callbacks.

3.) While he may not be the most interesting villain you have ever seen, Garraka (voice actor unknown as of this post) is an intimidating antagonist. You feel his presence for a long time plotting with other ghosts since he spends so much of the movie in an orb. His backstory is as scary as the previous antagonists like Gozer or Vigo. Garraka may not be the greatest new antagonist in film history, but he is decent.

Cons:

1.) The pacing is way too slow. The movie shows what the Ghostbusters (both new and old members) have been doing since the previous movie instead of showing more interesting action. Do you want to see more of that action you saw in the trailers? They are sprinkled here and there throughout the movie and are not enough. There is more to why the pacing is an issue, but it makes the movie give you less of what you want/need.

2.) Nearly all of the jokes are not funny. It is rare to find a good joke in this supernatural comedy movie, and it is usually from the old Ghostbusters. I feel bad for some actors like Paul Rudd as Gary Grooberson who are trying, but the delivery and writing do not work. The filmmakers need better writers to help with the comedy because it is not working here.

3.) The movie suffers from lackluster writing and a predictable story. For starters, none of the characters (except maybe the old Ghostbusters) are interesting; even Phoebe Spengler (played by McKenna Grace) is not that compelling anymore. I go as far as to say that a few characters have no reason to be there like Lucky Domingo (played by Celeste O’Connor) and newcomers are not interesting enough for anyone to care about them. As for the story, when it shows that Phoebe is not getting along with her family (again, I believe), I knew exactly where the movie was going; that and many other subplots are that predictable. I know Ghostbusters: Afterlife was not a perfect movie, but I can tell that the filmmakers poured their hearts into it, whereas this movie barely has any.

Overall:

The Ghostbusters are back after the previous movie three years ago; a movie I like despite its glaring flaws. However, this movie has similar flaws as its predecessor, and I cannot defend it this time. It was nice to see the original Ghostbusters come back along with a new generation of members, but the movie is held back by lackluster writing, unfunny jokes, and slow pacing. Ghostbusters fans may find some appeal to this, but I am afraid to say that Busting Ghosts needs to be better than what this movie has.

5/10

Benz Eye View: Monkey Man

Pros:

1.) I give credit that Dev Patel as Kid / Bobby / Monkey Man can not only act well, but he can also fight well. Besides the movie showing his muscular body, he can fight in any difficult situation from being handcuffed to wearing a monkey mask. I do not know if he did all of his stunts or if some of those stunts were the stuntmen’s work, but Dev Patel clearly worked hard as a fighter and an actor.

2.) Speaking of a fighter, when you see these fights clearly, they are brutal and bloody. From fights in the ring to weapon uses like an axe, they are great due to the sheer brutality and claustrophobia it feels alongside the Monkey Man. Besides one big problem it has, these fights are worth giving this movie a watch.

3.) Since this movie takes place in India, there is a variety of scenery, from the clean and pleasant nature to the dirty and grimy city. That might not mean much to you, but since this is a different country and culture that I usually do not see much, I appreciate the change of scenery. This looks and feels like India, so the movie does a decent job in that area.

Cons:

1.) The cinematography has plenty of issues that I can list here: obnoxious close-ups and quick cuts, poorly lit and dim settings (though some of them have a good reason) that make it easy to get sleepy, and shaky camera in fight scenes that does not help when the Monkey Man wears similar dark clothing like the villains in a dark setting. I can see why the filmmakers did this: to show the claustrophobic feeling the Monkey Man is going through, but it is disorienting to watch. As mentioned, the fight scenes are great…if I can see clearly what is happening.

2.) The plot is nothing special: a boy swears revenge against the man who killed his mother, and he plans to stop the leader of an evil political/religious group. That is any revenge movie ever made; I am thinking of the Assassin’s Creed III video game on top of my head. If you have seen those movies before, this movie does not change much besides the setting…

3.) …It does not help that the writing has many issues. From forgettable characters with little to do to slow pacing, the weak and predictable writing makes it difficult to care. In the first half, the movie puts some mystery to the Monkey Man by sprinkling a few flashbacks to make you wonder what his backstory is when it is so easy to predict (especially when the shotty editing makes it more annoying). I am not saying these are the worst characters you will ever see, but I am saying these are characters and writing you will not remember other than some cool action scenes.

Overall:

If you have seen the trailers, you know that the critics are saying this is one of the best action movies in a decade and deserves to be watched repeatedly. I was looking forward to this movie, and after watching it, I have one question for these critics: what in the world are you talking about? This is not a terrible movie, but it is nowhere near close to being one of the best action movies in a decade. The action is nice to see (if you can), but the writing that is supposed to back it up can barely do that. I will give the main actor and director Dev Patel this since it is his first directorial movie: it is a decent attempt, but he has to do better than this. I can see some potential for this movie, but it deserves to be in a cage.

5/10

Benz Eye View: Bob Marley: One Love

Pros:

1.) I have heard of Bob Marley (played by Kingsley Ben-Adir), but I do not know much about him, and this movie made him interesting to me at least. He only wants peace and love in the world (especially in his home war-torn country of Jamaica), but he also needs peace within himself, especially with his dad. His way to help others is through his songs; the only thing he knows best. If you want to know who this man is, this movie may be a good start.

2.) The reggae music is introduced well here. While I admit that this is not my type of favorite music, I will say that it is entertaining to hear. The movie even shows how it is made through Bob Marley and his friends. If you like reggae music, you will enjoy its process and rise to fame.

3.) The movie makes you care about Bob Marley through his chemistry with his friends and his wife, Rita Marley (played by Lashana Lynch). Their performances make you believe they have known each other for a long time and love each other. They will go through thick and thin working with Bob’s songs and spreading the message of love and peace. The cast works great together and you can buy that these people are close.

Cons:

1.) Since this is a biopic movie about a singer, some cliches are unavoidable. From a struggling singer trying to start his career to suffering from fame, the standards of these types of biopics are typical despite having an interesting individual to watch. If you have seen many biopics regarding singers, you know what to expect here.

2.) One of the big subplots in the movie is that there is civil unrest in Jamaica due to the two political parties being at each other’s throats. There are gang violence and police presence to the point that Bob Marley had to leave his home for a couple of years. How does this get resolved? The movie tells you through an epilogue. That was underwhelming; it would have been better to see how that happened rather than being told in the ending.

3.) I apologize if this sounds bad, but I had difficulty understanding what the Jamaican people are saying. Their accents are so thick that I swear that they are speaking a different language (which I am sure they are at times). I got the gist of what they were saying, but the only people I truly understood were non-Jamaicans (i.e., British people). Once again, I apologize for this, and it may change if I see this movie again and put in subtitles or get better audio.

Overall:

As mentioned, I have heard of Bob Marley, but not by much. I was curious to check out this biopic about him, and after watching it, I say the movie was not too bad. I cannot say if this is accurate to who he is (though I am willing to say so considering his children and wife were involved in making this movie), but despite some setbacks like typical biopic cliches, this is a nice watch. Bob Marley’s message of peace and love holds strong in this movie despite its flaws.

7/10

Benz Eye View: X-Men: Days of Future Past -The Rogue Cut-

Welcome back once again to Marvel Movies Marathon where we look at the X-Men film that fully revitalized interest in this superhero team and fixed many of the mistakes in some of their past movies (until they screwed it up again later). Let’s look at this new X-Men film that is more or less a crossover of the past and present X-Men team: X-Men: Days of Future Past.

For the purpose of this review, I am going to talk about The Rogue Cut version of this film. It adds 17 minutes to the runtime which includes a subplot involving Rogue (played by Anna Paquin) and alters a few scenes that fit that subplot.

Pros:

1.) I might as well get this out of the way first: how does The Rogue Cut compare to the original? It makes the film much better because it adds more dimension and layers to the plot and characters even if they are not necessary. Many examples include the remaining X-Men discussing the consequences of changing the past may end up erasing some of their existence, a rekindling romance between Hank McCoy a.k.a. Beast (played by Nicholas Hoult) and Raven a.k.a. Mystique (played by Jennifer Lawrence), an explanation of how the Sentinels found the remaining X-Men in the last act, and the biggest change of all: having Rogue be more involved in the story instead of being seen in a cameo in the original cut. While her role makes a slightly small impact on the main plot and I understand why the filmmakers had to cut it originally, it was nice to see her again.

2.) The writing is absolutely fantastic. Ignoring many some of the small nitpicks and obvious continuity issues, the mutants becoming extinct is already a big conflict, so what is left of the X-Men has to go back to the past by sending Logan a.k.a. Wolverine (played by Hugh Jackman) to his younger body and stop Mystique from killing Bolivar Trask (played by Peter Dinklage) by getting help from a younger Charles Xavier a.k.a. Professor X (played by James McAvoy) and a younger Erik Lehnsherr a.k.a. Magneto (played by Michael Fassbender). It is not as simple as it gets since Xavier is a complete drunk, Magento is in jail for apparently killing President John F. Kennedy, and Mystique is determined to kill Trask even if it means screwing over Xavier and Magneto since her Brotherhood of Mutants got killed. Their arcs are all fantastic from Xavier learning to let go of the loss and learn from Wolverine to Magneto further realizing that mutants must take control of their future by stopping humanity to Mystique learning to let go of her prejudices thanks to his stepbrother. Even the main villain, Bolivar Trask is not some evil human who hates mutants; he respects them to the point where he wants to use them as research and keep the human race from extinction. Most of the characters are fantastic (even the minor mutant characters from the future thanks to The Rogue Cut), and they make the audience care what is happening…

3.) …The biggest reason for that is the film does a fantastic job of giving tension and high stakes. The future Sentinels are no joke: no matter how hard the mutants fight and manage to slow them down, these robots cannot be stopped and that is established at the beginning of the film.

With the worst of humanity taking control of these monsters and wanting to see mutant-kind extinct, these Sentinels clearly symbolize all of humanity’s hatred. When the climax comes in, and the Sentinels find and kill the remaining X-Men while Wolverine is trying to stop the past from getting worse despite the limited time remaining, that is an example of heightened tensions reaching their limits.

This is so good that this film might as well be the X-Men film equivalent of Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame. I want to say that this film is perfect, it is not, but it is so close to being one.

Cons:

1.) As much as I love this film, I have to acknowledge the typical continuity issues in the X-Men films:

a.) The events of X-Men: The Last Stand where humans and mutants achieve peace is pointless considering where X-Men: Days of Future Past leads.

b.) Bolivar Trask changed from being a black man originally played by Bill Duke to a short white man played by Peter Dinklage. It is a great casting choice, but that is certainly questionable.

c.) Wolverine somehow got his adamantium claws back despite losing them in The Wolverine.

d.) How did Kitty Pryde (played by formerly Ellen Page) get time-traveling powers? Her powers are phasing, so I have no idea how it also upgraded into sending people through time.

e.) Charles Xavier mentioned that Mystique was captured during the Paris Peace Accords when she murdered Trask, but I guess she somehow escaped so the first three X-Men films can happen.

f.) Wolverine was not in the Vietnam War or with William Stryker (played by Josh Helman) (and he looked much younger in this film) in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but he is with some lady in New York City.

g.) Toad (played by Evan Jonigkeit) is in the film, but he looks much different from the first film.

I feel like at this point, the filmmakers just do not care about changing characters and events unless it is the more important plot points.

2.) I have some nitpicks on the film as a whole:

a.) Remember some of the mutants from X-Men: First Class like Azazel, Emma Frost, and Banshee? They are killed off-screen and you see some of their bodies when Mystique investigates Trask’s office. Their potential has certainly been wasted.

b.) Peter Maximoff a.k.a. Quicksilver (played by Evan Peters) is in this film, and he is cool. However, he is not in the film for long; when Magneto gets rescued by Wolverine, Xavier, and him, that is basically the last time we see Quicksilver. He could have been a great help in stopping Mystique from murdering Trask with his super speed.

c.) The one change I did not like in The Rogue Cut is after Xavier encountered Mystique in the airport via Cerebro, he had no idea where she was going. In the original cut, he figured it out by observing the plane ticket that Mystique had. He could have read her mind to learn her destination at least, but that would have made sense.

d.) Alex Summers a.k.a. Havok (played by Lucas Till) is in the film, but his only role is that he got rescued by Mystique in Vietnam and was transported back to the United States. We will never see him again until X-Men: Apocalypse.

e.) I am not exactly sure how the effects of time traveling work. Kitty Pryde sends a person back through time via their younger bodies, and after warning of the events of the future, the timeline that Kitty is in suddenly disappears. That must be slightly complicated when Wolverine goes back in time because the people disappearing in the future timeline do not take effect until Mystique decides to not kill Trask instead of Wolverine, Xavier, Beast, and Magneto interfering in Mystique’s attempted murder. At least Avengers: Endgame‘s explanation of time traveling makes more sense.

f.) A wasted character in this film is Bishop (played by Omar Sy). He was a big deal in the comics during the Days of Future Past, and he is only regulated as a side character. He gets a little more screen time in The Rogue Cut, but he should have a bigger role at the very least.

I love this film, but I have to acknowledge the few flaws I noticed.

Overall:

The Days of Future Past is a bleak future where the hatred against mutants has increased immensely to the point of being an apocalyptic future (not to be confused with a certain mutant) of Sentinels hunting what is left of the mutant race. It has gotten so bad that Kitty Pryde has to go back to the past to prevent the event that started it: the murder of Senator Kelly. While there are plenty of changes in the film adaptation (i.e., Wolverine is the one who goes back in time), the main concept is the same. You might have thought I may not like this film because of the glaring writing flaws and continuity issues, but the truth of the matter is that I love this film. The tensions between mutants and humans have never been any higher thanks to the Sentinels, mutants dying with very little of them remaining, and it takes a long time for the main conflict to be resolved especially when the threat of an even worse future is possible. I can forgive the few writing and continuity issues; this film is that great.

The Rogue Cut also enhances the film in a similar vein as the extended version of The Lord of the Rings: it may not be necessary, but I prefer that over the original (for the most part). This is the best X-Men film ever made (besides Logan), and I highly recommend this version of the film to any X-Men fan. The future glows bright in this film and the filmmakers prevented the X-Men series from going into obscurity (until they screw it up again).

9/10

I do wonder about this: since the X-Men are coming to the MCU, how is the TVA going to explain all of what happened in this film and the Deadpool films? We will just have to wait and hope that Marvel Studios does not screw this up like they have been lately.

Benz Eye View: Dune: Part Two

Pros:

1.) As I said about the first Dune, the world is so fascinating. There are so many objects, people, religions, planets, terminologies, etc. that is hard to keep up what they are (to a fault), but they are so compelling to see. From the sandworms to the Lisan Al Gaib, Dune is such an interesting world with many amazing costumes and environmental designs that it is no wonder it is considered to be Star Wars before Star Wars.

2.) The writing is spectacular enough to make you invested in Dune and its characters. I mentioned in the last film that I found the characters to be standard or weak, but this film made me start to appreciate them. From Paul Atreides (played by Timothee Chalamet) to Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen (played by Austin Butler), all of these characters are compelling in their own rights which is reinforced by their stellar performances. This is how you make an investing world with fantastic writing (though there are issues).

3.) The directing, the cinematography, and the editing are top-notch. There are so many beautiful and great shots with careful placements of characters and objects that many of them might as well be paintings or pictures on a wall. If you somehow do not believe me, the trailer I posted on top and even the director Denis Villeneuve’s past works like Blade Runner 2049, Arrival, Sicario, and Prisoners should prove my point. The presentation is something you should watch to believe, and it is glorious to see.

Cons:

1.) As much as I like the world of Dune, I do not fully understand what is truly happening. While compelling to watch and I appreciate the film does so much show-don’t-tell, I feel like there has to be a little more exposition despite how long this film is. One example that I will be slightly vague on is that a ritual happened with Lady Jessica (played by Rebecca Ferguson), and when that ritual ended, the women around her were horrified when they learned something about her. I will explain slightly more why this can be an issue, but it is not enough to deter my enjoyment of this film since it at least delivers these scenes well.

2.) The film introduces plenty of new characters, and I like them all, but I wish they got more screen time. One character I was highly fascinated with is Feyd-Rautha Harkonnen; this psychopath that everyone fears other than his uncle, Baron Vladimir Harokonnen (played by Stellan Skarsgard), who is also honorable in one-on-one matches. He also has a cool yet simple appearance that is reinforced during that colosseum scene where everything is black and white. Despite having a fair amount of screen time in the middle of the film, he barely gets any more after that, especially what happens to him in the end. It is a shame despite there being a good reason why because I want to learn more about characters like him, and that is a good sign if that happens.

3.) As cool as the battle scenes are, there are not many of them and they are slightly over before they begin. The trailers made it look like a war epic when there were very few battles in this 2-hour and 45-minute film. They looked amazing, especially when the sandworms got involved, but this film is more focused on the characters than the battles. I still appreciate the little we get here, but it is a shame that there are not any more of these.

Overall:

When I reviewed the first Dune, I did say it was a great film in terms of visuals and its world, but I thought the story was standard or weak. Rewatching it before its sequel, I appreciate the film more, but I still acknowledge some of its weaknesses. Now that I have watched this sequel yesterday and pondered on it, I believe it is much better than the first, but some of its issues hold it back from agreeing with the critics saying it is the best film they have seen this year. The filmmaking and the world of Dune are fantastic, but I feel that the one thing that holds it back is that the world is too complex and too big to fully understand what is happening. I am not saying it is terrible, but I can certainly understand why the Dune book is known to be notoriously hard to adapt (from the little I have heard from that series). While I cannot speak for the series’ fans if they will love it or not, I can say that it is a big cinematic experience in its own way (especially on IMAX and repeated viewings) that deserves to be seen.

8/10

Benz Eye View: The Wolverine

Welcome back once again to Marvel Movies Marathon where Wolverine gets his own movie…again. Will it work better than the last time this character got his own spin-off movie, or will it suffer the same fate as that terrible movie? Let’s find out with the second movie of our favorite X-Man himself: The Wolverine.

Pros:

1.) One of the big plot points of this movie is that Logan a.k.a. Wolverine (played by Hugh Jackman) loses his healing factor, making it hard to fight anyone. This puts tension and danger in this character like never before (and will be used again in Logan), so he cannot always go berserk against those who stand in his way or he will surely die. I wish this movie took full advantage of it (and the franchise eventually will in Logan) since this is rarely explored and eventually resolved in a slightly predictable manner. I still like this idea, and I will explore this a little further when I do an Overall Previous Marvel Movies review on Logan later.

2.) I like the change of scenery and setting. Japan feels like a different sense of fresh air with its culture, environment, and people. From the yakuza to the samurai, it is nice to see something new in terms of an area to explore. One great example is when Wolverine fights Shingen (played by Hiroyuki Sanada) which is similar to a samurai battle, but Wolverine uses his adamantium claws instead of a sword. Japan is a great change of scenery, but this may be a bias since I enjoy Japanese culture anyway.

3.) The first act of the movie is not too bad. From Wolverine being imprisoned in Japan during World War II to his time being isolated due to his guilt for killing Jean Grey (played by Famke Janssen), it is easy to care what is happening to him since we have seen and understand what he has went through in the previous films. His arc is decent as well since he avoids becoming the Wolverine for the already-mentioned reasons. Not a bad start to his arc as well as the writing…

Cons:

1.) …However, I will not go as far as to say that the writing is decent nor will I say it is terrible. There are problems with it and I will list them here:

a.) The last time we saw Wolverine in X-Men: The Last Stand, he seemed content and happy since the mutants were living in peace, but this movie suddenly shows that he is now sheltered and alone. It makes sense why he is like that, but it is not consistent with the last time we saw him in the previous chronological movie (it would make more sense if they included that deleted ending scene from X-Men: The Last Stand where he left the X-Men).

b.) It is a little convenient when two Japanese characters usually speak to each other in English instead of Japanese. It strikes me as odd and lazy for writers to make an excuse for audience members to not read the subtitles.

c.) Wolverine getting Yukio’s (played by Rila Fukushima) prediction of his death wrong is so predictable that the writing poorly gives any tension to it.

d.) I do not understand how Ichiro Yashida a.k.a. the Silver Samurai (played by Haruhiko Yamanouchi) is absorbing Logan’s agelessness into his own.

e.) Yukio joins Wolverine by the end of the movie, but it goes absolutely nowhere, especially since the mid-credits scene shows Wolverine on his own two years later with no mention of what happened to Yukio (especially since she gets retconned and recast in Deadpool 2).

f.) Charles Xavier (played by Patrick Stewart) is alive as seen in the end credits scene in X-Men: The Last Stand, but how did he get his own body back when he transferred his mind to some random guy’s body the last time we saw him?

These issues do not ruin the movie…

2.) …But what does not help at all is that I found many of these characters uninteresting. At best, they are cliched characters that could have potential, but they are not explored enough to be given a chance. The only reason I somewhat care at all is that their actors did a great job in the performances, or in the case of Mariko (played by Tao Okamoto), she is very attractive. Ichiro Yashida wants to leave a legacy by living forever, Mariko does not want to be the head of her grandfather’s company, Shingen hates his father and daughter since he wants the company, Viper (played by Svetlana Khodchenkova) is an evil mutant scientist who wants money and power (I think), Noburo (played by Brian Tee) is a corrupt minister of justice, and Yukio is loyal to the Yashida family that adopted her (especially Mariko). Once again, there is not much depth to them when I can see an attempt for it.

3.) The only remaining problem I have with this movie is many of the nitpick changes they made from their comic book counterparts:

a.) Viper is a mutant in this movie, but in the comics, she is not only a human but a Hydra agent. In fact, one of her nicknames is Madame Hydra; you can see a version of that character in Season 4 of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

b.) The Silver Samurai is a mutant, not a mech in this movie…

c.) …In fact, Ichiro Yashida is not supposed to be the Silver Samurai. It is supposed to be either Shingen Yashida or Kenuichio Harada (played by Will Yun Lee) since both of them became the Silver Samurai in the comics.

It is not that big of a deal since some changes from the comics to movies/TV shows are fine, but these small changes did bother me slightly.

Overall:

With Wolverine getting another run of his own movie (and it is definitely not going to be the last), I can definitely say that The Wolverine is a big improvement over X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but not enough to say that it is great. If I have to describe this movie, think of it as a Yakuza (or Like A Dragon) movie, but nowhere as intriguing as in those games. There was some potential, but it certainly did not hit a home run. At the very least, there are no visible continuity issues that this movie has over its predecessors, but if you want a fantastic Wolverine movie, then Logan is a great choice for you. The Wolverine did overcome the errors of its predecessor, but not enough to make a fantastic ronin in the land of the rising sun.

6/10

Benz Eye View: Argylle

Pros:

1.) Elly Conway’s (played by Bryce Dallas Howard) deduction on predicting the future is a little interesting. She has so much experience in writing her Argylle books that she figures out what may happen next in her real-life conflict thanks to the clues and steps that the criminals were doing is similar to what her next book was going to be. How exactly she is doing this not everyone is going to like, but it was interesting until it was revealed down the line.

2.) One plot point I found also interesting is that Elly imagines and communicates with Argylle (played by Henry Cavill) from time to time. Elly is not taking things well considering she is forcibly part of a conspiracy that both sides want her, so she looks up to her inspiration, Argylle, and imagines him fighting in place of Aidan (played by Sam Rockwell). Occasionally, she even talks to him to be motivated when things are going downhill for her. This may not be an original concept, but it is decent in execution.

3.) The last act has the over-the-top action that we like to see from director Matthew Vaughn. If you have seen any of his Kingsman films, you know exactly what you are going to get: colorful, bright, and dumb action sequences that do not care if they make sense or not. If you want that same action as in Kingsman, you will get it, especially in the last act.

Cons:

1.) The CG and green-screen effects are not the worst I have seen, but they are definitely noticeable. They probably would have worked if this was an animated CG movie, but since they are blending in alongside live actors, even a child can tell these effects do not match next to the actors. From obvious green screen effects to video game-like car chases, this is probably an example of the VFX artists needing more time.

2.) The writing is not the best I have ever seen. The first and third acts have some decent writing, but I cannot say the same thing about the second act which has some ludicrous and absurd writing. From overusing exposition to some of the lamest lines ever, my patience with this movie was getting thin. In fact, the twist on who the real Argylle turns out to be is dumb; there are a couple of reasons why, but that leads to spoilers. I expected better from Matthew Vaughn, especially what he was apparently trying to do in the end.

3.) I say the last act has some great action, and I would say the same thing about the first two acts as well, but there is one big hindrance that prevents me from saying so. When Elly watches Aidan fight off their attackers, she sees him as Argylle. The problem is that we occasionally watch the action from her POV and her blinking changes Aidan to Argylle and vice-versa. It gets annoying when she does that constantly; the filmmakers should have toned it down at the very least.

Overall:

I was excited to see another movie by director Matthew Vaughn since many of his films are fun action flicks. From Kick-Ass to Kingsman to X-Men: First Class, he has become a great action film director to me. I am sad to say that his latest movie is just OK. While the action can be great at times, I cannot say the same thing about the writing. I expected better from him, and if the ending of the movie was foreshadowing what I was thinking, then something better may come out of it in time. Until then, this agent Argylle is certainly not going to replace James Bond or the Kingsmen anytime soon.

5/10

Benz Eye View: X-Men: First Class

Welcome back to Marvel Movies Marathon where we will review another X-Men film that explores the origin of this mutant team. Will it repeat the same mistakes that X-Men Origins: Wolverine did, or will it revive the interest in these mutants once again? Let’s find out in the next X-Men film: X-Men: First Class.

Pros:

1.) In the previous X-Men films, Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen as Charles Xavier a.k.a. Professor X and Erik Lehnsherr a.k.a. Magneto respectively were fantastic casting choices. In this film, James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender as their younger counterparts were amazing in their roles. Their performances and chemistry carry the entire film and you can buy that these two were close friends until their unfortunate divided beliefs. I will credit whoever chose these two actors because they are amazing choices as the younger versions of these popular mutant characters.

2.) While Charles Xavier was excellent in this film, it is clear that the main character is Magneto himself. He wants to kill Sebastian Shaw (played by Kevin Bacon) for killing his mother and torturing him with experiments, but he meets Xavier who wants him to be the better man. Despite that, his eventual downfall is that he kills Shaw and agrees with him that humans are inferior and mutants are the superior race. His character arc is tragic; he was alone with vengeance in his mind until he met Xavier, a positive influence on Erik, but he let his flaws get to him and grew to be a worse mutant as a result. This is a great arc for one of Marvel’s most memorable villains.

3.) It goes without saying that the writing is excellent. While there are a few flaws that I will get to in the cons, they are not enough to deter this film. From the main plot to the character arcs, this is a fantastic prequel to the X-Men series that heightens the originals (for the most part) and gives a better understanding and more depth to characters like Professor X and Magneto.

Cons:

1.) As I said, the writing is not perfect. For starters, let’s get to the continuity issues.

a.) Xavier and Raven a.k.a. Mystique (played by Jennifer Lawrence) are step-siblings and have known each other since they were children. That is pretty odd considering that the first X-Men film shows Mystique poisoning Xavier when using Cerebro, and he never brought up this important detail about Mystique being his step-sister to any of the X-Men.

b.) Emma Frost (played by January Jones) is in this film, but not the same one in X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

c.) Moira MacTaggert (played by Rose Byrne) is also in this film, but she is now a CIA agent instead of a nurse in X-Men: The Last Stand.

d.) Mystique and Hank McCoy a.k.a. Beast (played by Nicholas Hoult) were romantically involved, and this detail was never brought up in X-Men: The Last Stand, though I can forgive this one since this is probably a little too personal.

e.) Beast created Cerebro instead of Xavier and Magneto as mentioned in the first X-Men film.

f.) In the first X-Men film, Xavier said that his first students were Cyclops, Jean Grey, and Storm, but this film shows that his actual first students were Beast, Alex Summers a.k.a. Havoc (played by Lucas Till), and Cassidy a.k.a. Banshee (played by Caleb Landry Jones).

g.) When recruiting other mutants, Xavier and Magneto attempted to recruit Logan a.k.a. Wolverine (played by Hugh Jackman) which he “politely” turned down. I can understand Wolverine not recognizing them later down the line since they got older and he would eventually lose his memories, but Xavier and Magento should recognize him. It is even pointed out in X-Men: Day of Future Past that young Xavier recognized Wolverine.

While not as numerous as X-Men Origins: Wolverine‘s continuity issues, they are more forgivable considering that the writing is great.

2.) If I had to pick one actor who I thought was the weakest of them all, it is January Jones as Emma Frost. To put it simply, she looked bored. I think what she was trying to do is look intimidating while confident knowing she can read and control an individual’s mind, but she looks so uninterested except when Shaw compliments her appearance. This is a complicated character in the comics who looks like she can be on your side or her own side (think Catwoman with her complicated relationship with Batman), and this version is clearly on Shaw’s side, but Jones’s performance makes it look like she is just tagging along because why not. Hopefully, if she ever appears again at some point, they get a different actress, or January Jones should improve her acting at least.

3.) As I said before, the writing is not perfect, so here are a few issues I have with it:

a.) We learn more about Mystique and what led her to join Magneto in his cause. This is a double-edged sword issue. On the one hand, this gives the character a little more depth to the cold exterior that we have seen in previous films. On the other hand, this also may ruin what we knew about her in those films and question how she is that cold when she was not always like that. When she leaves Xavier to be with Magneto at the end of the film, it just makes her look like a douchebag for leaving her kind and loving step-brother for little reason. This is not exactly the best origin with her character.

b.) There are a few moments where the humans show their hatred against the mutants and it feels a little forced. Unlike the previous X-Men films, this prejudice is barely acknowledged, and very rarely it seemed genuine and earned like when both the United States and the Soviet Union launched missiles against the mutants when they saw them as a threat. Examples like when the human CIA agents protecting the mutants make fun of them for some stupid reason just feels like they are adding prejudiced elements for the sake of it.

c.) Armando Muñoz a.k.a. Darwin (played by Edi Gathegi) gets killed by Sebastian Shaw by using one of Havoc’s energy attacks and shoves it down his throat. Considering his power is adaptability, that should not kill him. In the comics, something similar happened to him, but he survived by becoming a form of energy. This is just a complete waste of a character here.

d.) This one is not a writing issue, but I do not know where else to put it: I am not a fan of Beast’s appearance here. Compared to his appearance in X-Men: The Last Stand, he looks like a weird human and animal amalgamation that resembles Beast from The Beauty and the Beast, but his face came out wrong. It will eventually improve in later films, but why couldn’t the filmmakers learn from Beast’s appearance the last time he was seen?

Overall:

The risk with prequels is that it tells backstories that are not always needed. X-Men Origins: Wolverine is an example of how it made Wolverine less interesting to the point where none of the other X-Men films acknowledged it ever again. This film is an example of how to make prequels right by making the main characters just as compelling as their older counterparts with a story that gives them a fantastic arc. While there are a few issues that still hold it back from perfection like the ever-present continuity issues, X-Men: First Class is a great film that any fan of the Children of the Atom will appreciate and enjoy these characters and their backstories.

8/10