IT Chapter Two (2019)

It Chapter Two (2019)

Director: Andy Muschietti 

Cast: Jessica Chastain, James McAvoy, Bill Hader, Bill Skarsgard, Finn Wolfhard, Sophia Lillis

The rule of thumb for sequels to a highly successful film is that the second one will be bigger, louder and more ‘in your face’ than the first film and trust me, It Chapter Two definitely does this. This sequel to Andy Muschietti’s adaptation of Stephen Kings IT is all that and then some. It certainly is longer! Strap yourself tight because this carnival of horrors is 11 minutes shy of being a three hour movie! A little too much for some viewers, I know. I saw a couple of people leaving the theater even before the film was totally over. But for those of you who want their movies to go on forever, because you just LOVE a good movie, well, you’re in for a treat. 

It Chapter Two picks up 27 years after the first one, with ‘The Losers’ all grown up, each living their own separate lives. One is a writer, one is an entrepreneur, one is a comedian and so forth and they’ve all forgotten the horrifying events they lived through together when they were kids. And that’s the way they want to keep the past, forgotten. But when the evil clown known as ‘Pennywise’ begins to kill again, it’s up to ‘The Losers’ to reunite and take on the monster, one final time. Will they have the guts to face their fears and slay the beast? 

 I thought I’d get a bit bored with this movie, because I’d seen the original one a million times, but as it turns out this remake has so many new elements to it, I was actually thoroughly entertained. The good part about this is that you can watch both versions of ‘It’ and you’ll have original moments occur in each. Basically, every major scare sequence has been altered, replaced or enhanced in one way or another by new monsters and nightmares, which is great. In my opinion, that’s what makes a good remake. A film that retains the essence of the original, while still giving us enough new material so that we won’t get bored. So don’t expect that creepy shower sequence you love so much from the original, it’s been replaced with some new creepiness. Yet not all is changed, the film successfully retained that feeling of true friendship and love that is such an essential part of IT and of many of Stephen King’s novels. King loves to tell stories that have that ‘gee whiz aint it fun to be a kid’ vibe to them. The clubhouse, the riding the bikes through the woods, the blood pact and the idea that our childhood friends will remain our friends forever and ever. It Chapter Two felt a lot like King’s Stand by Me…if you mashed it up with A Nightmare on Elm Street. Doesn’t that sound enticing? 

Andy Muschietti makes the film very much his own by adding those creepy cartoony creatures he infused into his horror film, Mama (2013). Remember that one? The one about the creepy entity who decides to raise a couple of orphaned girls? Creepy visuals indeed, but on IT he takes those creepy visuals up to a thousand. Loved the creatures on this one! Don’t expect anything “realistic”, after all, this film is filled with dark fantastic elements like aliens, evil clowns and giant soul sucking spiders. So, if you like your creepy, EC comics style creatures and monsters, you should have tons of fun with this one. A note about the effects, I personally really dug the visual effects aspect of the whole thing, while some people seem to be bothered by the cartoony nature of some of the effects, I personally thought they were effective when taking in consideration the tone of the film. 

Another thing I loved about It Chapter Two was the huge homage it is to the 80’s. I know going back to the 80’s has always been cool (tell me about it I LIVED through them) and some might feel that doing this on any film is old hat, but honestly, I loved the homages to the decadent era. A Thundercats t-shirt, a poster for The Lost Boys, a Street Fighter Arcade machine and A Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) on a cinema marquee were some of the homages I caught. But trust me, there are many more little homages spread through-out the entire film, one amazing one goes to John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982), but I won’t tell you how that one unfolds. So be on the lookout for those!

The film does have a lot of levity to it, this has bothered some hardcore horror fans. But we have to remember that horror and comedy have always gone hand in hand. Remember An American Werewolf in London (1981)? How about Ghostbusters (1984)? Fright Night (1985)? Creepshow (1982)? All scary/fun movies. Remember, with the exception of hardcore horror fans who love true blue hardcore horror, the general population probably can’t take too much of the gory red stuff. Plus, this is a big budget horror film, producers want to make their money back and one way of doing this is by having the general population have a little fun with their scares. I mean, it’s not in every movie that three children get slaughtered in graphic ways. Producers know this, so they alleviate the tension with a little levity. Case in point, Bill Hader as Richie. Though if we get right down to it, the character of Richie was always the funny one in the novel as well as the original film. So, we can’t really complain that Richie is always saying jokes, that’s just the way the character was written. On top of all that, Hader is hilarious on It: Chapter Two, a very welcome addition to the film if you ask me. Hader, as far as I can tell, is a comedic star in the making. I got a feeling Hader is gonna be way bigger in the near future. 

Word of advice, go to the bathroom before the movie starts and don’t order the large soft drink or else you’ll be getting up half way through the movie and miss something. I say Muschietti will be making lots of movies in the near future, It Chapter Two has already made close to 100 million domestically, so it is a surefire hit. I’m just hoping that the Thundercats t-shirt in the film means that Muschietti is actually considering bringing the Thundercats to the big screen. Wouldn’t that be something? A Thundercats film is a surefire hit waiting to happen. I just can’t believe some producer hasn’t picked this one up yet! Everybody and their mother is waiting for that movie to get made. Well, at least those of us who grew up during the 80’s! So anyhow, bottom line with IT Chapter Two is that it’s a long film, sure, but a scary, creepy ride worth taking. 

Rating: 5 out of 5 

Dark Phoenix (2019)

Dark Phoenix (2019)

Director/Writer: Simon Kinberg 

Cast: Sophie Turner, James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jessica Chastain,  Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, Tye Sheridan, Evan Peters  

Again, another film that’s getting the shaft from audiences because they are being led to believe they shouldn’t see it. Hollywood is notorious when it comes to dealing with left over productions from a previous regime. Case in point, Disney bought Fox and so all films that were in the process of being completed during this period are quietly swept under the rug or treated like crap and left to die a quick death at the box office. For example, The New Mutants was one of the productions to get swept under the rug and forgotten. To be honest, that film looked all types of cool, it even had a horror vibe to it. Mutants in a horror film? Hell yeah I’d like to see that one! But since it was made during the Fox/Disney take over, it’s now in limbo, possibly being unceremoniously dumped on Netflix. And then there’s Dark Phoenix, the last X-Men film that will be produced by 20^thCentury Fox. Well, people already hate it because they just can’t wait for Disney to take over the X-Men and “give them the X-Men film they’ve always wanted”. 

It’s sad too, considering that the X-Men franchise was the one (along with the Spider Man movies) to kick off the currently still going strong super hero craze in cinemas. I remember a time when people just couldn’t believe they were finally getting an X-men film. Now here we are, at a point where people don’t want to back up an X-Men film. And it’s a damn shame too because this is a good one. Dark Phoenix tells the tale of the ‘Dark Phoenix Saga’, one of the most recognized and beloved of the X-men stories. This review comes from a guy who’s just read the Dark Phoenix Saga and has just recently seen Dark Phoenix. So, how did the comic book to film transition fare? Was the film faithful to the comic? For those not in the know the Dark Phoenix Saga is all about Jean Gray and how her powers get out of control and how she likes it. Problem is, absolute power corrupts absolutely and Jean ends up turning so powerful that all she cares about is pleasing her ever growing thirst for power, which includes the ability to devour worlds and everyone in them. She actually rivals Galactus in that sense, and Galactus is one of the most powerful beings in the Marvel universe! But how do the X-Men react to Jean going evil? Can Cyclops stop loving her? Can the X-Men and the rest of the world forgive her for all her evil doings? 

As expected, some changes do occur from comic to silver screen. The biggest one for me is that Jean’s reason for turning evil doesn’t come from within her, but rather from an entity that possesses her body while on a space mission. This point is the one that “bothered” me the most as I actually dug that element of the story, the fact that the evil comes from within,  that idea that we all have a dark side that we have to contend with, that side that we learn to keep in check, to control. The other big change is that they completely eliminated the plot line involving The Hellfire Club and their desire to control Jean and use her for their purposes. Finally, one last change was that the aftermath of Jean going evil and how she is judged by an alien race for having destroyed and entire planet and all the millions of people who lived in it. These changes were probably made for budgetary reasons, to keep the story “smaller”, and I get that. Which is why I’ve always thought this story should have been better suited for a trilogy of films rather than telling the whole story in one film. 

The good news is that the story manages to retain the gist of the Dark Phoenix Saga. Jean is still battling with her inner demons and the fact that she quite enjoys the influx of power. The story is still about her trying to control it. So we get all the important points that the original story hit. What’s good about the film? Is it as bad as the media and mindless movie reviewers would have you think? Hell no. In all honesty, I enjoyed this X-Men film more than I enjoyed parts 3 to 5! It is a very eventful chapter in the X-Men saga. To my surprise it is very well written. Now take in consideration that this film was directed by Simon Kinberg, the same guy who wrote X-Men’s 3 through 5! So he knows the X-men inside and out! Thankfully Kinberg takes the opportunity to fix a lot of the mistakes and quirks that fans haven’t enjoyed from previous entries and even makes fun of his own films. For example, Mystique has a line where she pokes fun at how it’s the women who are always saving the men and how the group should be called X-Women.  Also, just when Xavier is about to go on one of his famous ramblings where he starts to babble people to death Magneto says “save it, nobody is listening”. Poking fun at how sometimes Magneto and Xavier go on these endless rants! 

Why do I say that I enjoyed this one more than other X-Men films? Well for one, the dialog is straight and to the point which I loved. The film doesn’t feel like it was filmed entirely in a green room; this one feels like they actually shot the film in locations! In terms of action, this one delivers. There’s a moment where all the X-Men get together to gather Jean that’s just wow. There’s another scene on a train that will blow you away! Another plus is that the X-Men don’t hold back on their powers on this one. Remember how in X-Men you were upset because they put Storm to fight against Toad? Well, that doesn’t happen here! On this one all the X-Men go completely ballistic! In fact, they are more violent with their powers on this one than any previous X film, excluding Logan (2017) of course. Also, there are some amazing moments on this one like Magneto vs. Jean!  Anyhow, sadly this one is dying a quick death at the box office. But what can you expect? They were writing bad reviews even before the film was released. Good news is, we will see the X-Men rise from the ashes like the Phoenix by way of Disney/Marvel's take on the franchise, gotta say I’m mighty curious about that iteration of the X-Men. But this last Fox film was a great swan song; I recommend you see it in the theater. 

Rating: 4 out of 5   

Glass (2019)

Glass (2019)

Director: M. Night Shyamalan

Cast: Samuel L. Jackson, Bruce Willis, James McAvay and Anya Taylor Joy

M Night Shyamalan’s a walking time bomb when it comes to quality. While one film might deliver, the next might disappoint. For example, the double knockout of Lady in the Water (2006) and The Happening (2008) were completely rejected by fans of the director and nearly destroyed Shyamalan’s career entirely. He’d lost the respect of many audience members out there. Had he lost it? Well, for a while there it seemed like so, like he’d lost that magic that makes directors produce a good film. Then he kicked back and made a horror film called The Visit (2015), about these pair of grandkids who go to visit grandma and grandpa in their house in the middle of nowhere. Apparently, working on a smaller budget did Shyamalan good because with The Visit, Shyamalan proved to us and himself that he could still make a good film. Shyamalan cemented his comeback with Split (2016) which presented us for the first time with the fascinating character called ‘The Beast’. An awesome performance is what carried that film and we got McAvoy to thank for that. His psychical and psychological transformations when he switches from personality to personality is one of the films biggest strengths. 

Split was also the film that united Split, Unbreakable and now Glass as films that coexist in the same universe, with characters from Unbreakable and Split crossing over onto this new film Glass. There was a lot of speculation in regards to the film. Would Shyamalan deliver one of his good ones? Does he still as they say “have it”? Was Split a fluke? Would this be a great sequel, or a forgettable one? 

I enjoyed Split a lot but I remember thinking it wasn’t original. We’d seen movies about psychos kidnapping people for vile purposes a million times before. But that performance and that tension Shyamalan directs so well got me reeled in. With Split I went back to that old saying “it’s not what you say but how you say it”, sure we’d seen this type of story before, but Shyamalan told it so very well! Now here comes Glass, the sequel in which we’d see all these fantastic characters clash. The Beast, The Overseer and Mr. Glass. So is it the big conclusion we all expect? Yes it is my dear readers. You feel that tension building all the way through, kind of how all those Rocky movies that all led up to the big fight in the end. Glass is a very fresh take on the whole superhero thing. It tones everything down, makes it more believable. This is not a big special effects spectacle, no, this movie is more about performances, tension and suspense. In that sense the film was a breath of fresh air. It was interesting to see a super hero film that wasn’t  90% computer generated. So yes, glad to inform that Glass focuses on gripping performance and a well written, tense script. 

When Unbreakable (2000) premiered I remember I didn’t know what to expect. The premise pulled everyone to see it. How and why had David Dunn survived that tragic train crash where everybody died, except him? A lot was expected of the second film from the  director of The Sixth Sense (1999), which had been a hit the previous year. When I went to theater to see Unbreakable the night of its premiere, did my comic book loving heart know that it would end up being a movie that explained the nature of comic books so well? Nope. And that blew me away! Here I was watching a film about something I loved so much. Back in 2000, super hero films were not as big as they are now, so seeing a film that talked about comic books, was something for me. The film used all we know and love about comics and analyzed it with style. To me Unbreakable was one of the films that helped kick off what would become a new era of comic book movies, and era that has been reigning supreme in Hollywood for almost two decades now.

Glass does the same thing yet again, it dives into comic book lore by analyzing the nature of the villain. Why are these villains so deranged? What makes them tick? What set them off? We get a good dose of that in Glass. It takes us deep into the psyche of the psychos Mr. Glass and The Beast. This movie belongs to McAvoy and Mr. Jackson on the performance side of things. Willis plays David, who’s job is to be stoic, strong and quiet, but McAvoy’s Beast loves to chat it up. Every single one of The Beasts 20 something personalities likes to say their piece! The real spectacle here is watching McAvoy do this masterful job of giving each one of the personalities a completely different performance. I’d dare say I’d consider this performance for an Oscar, or some sort of award. Fantastic performance, a memorable villain if there ever was one. 

So did Glass deliver? Hell yeah, it’s a good film. I don’t get these “bad reviews” that it got from critics? The general consensus out there is that critics hate it, but that fans love it. I don’t get why critics would hate it but I agree that a fan of Split and Unbreakable should be very pleased (and even surprised) by this movie. It takes the premise from Unbreakable and Split further. I congratulate Shyamalan for playing with heavy themes within the context of the comic book world. On Glass he played with that wonderful idea that we all have this potential to be amazing, that we are capable of more than we know, we just have to believe. So yeah, Glass delivers, another good one on Shyamalan’s cinematic crown. 

Rating: 4 out of 5 

X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)

X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)

Director: Bryan Singer

Cast: James McAvoy, Michael Fasbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Nicholas Hoult, Oscar Isaac, Rose Byrne, Evan Peters, Sophie Turner, Tye Sheridan, Olivia Munn

Bryan Singer’s X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014), was a step up from the Bret Rattner directed atrocity known as X-Men: The Last Stand (2006), the worst film in the entire X-Men franchise. Sure it had its moments, but overall, there’s no denying it was a dud. X-Men: Days of Future past wasn’t perfect either, it needed that little extra oomph to make it perfectly awesome, which is something that director Bryan Singer has fixed with X-Men: Apocalypse (2016), which as it turns out is now one of the best in the franchise. To be honest, I went to see Apocalypse expecting another run of the mill X-Men film, something fun but not exactly memorable, yet Bryan Singer proved me wrong. The X-director took this opportunity to blow our minds away! Yup, I really dug this one!

If you remember the after credits sequence that appeared in X-Men: Days of Future Past, we saw a blue skinned individual, high above a sandy dune in Egypt, building a pyramid with the power of his mind. In the background, four horsemen oversaw the whole thing. Well, X-Men: Apocalypse picks up a few years after this, when this individual has turned into the ultra powerful first mutant known as Apocalypse. He has amassed a cult following that worships him as a god, but like any god, he has a few detractors who would rather see him dead, and so he ends up buried underground for a myriad years. That is until a group of modern day followers resurrects him and Apocalypse’s plans to destroy and rebuild our world are put into motion once again. Will he manage to destroy our society?  Or will the X-Men have what it takes to stop him?

There are many cool things about this film, but one of them is that it takes place during the 80’s, one of my favorite decades. This lends itself to many cultural references to that era, so keep your eyes peeled because there’s a lot of those! Keeping true to the whole 80’s vibe, even some of the characters look the way they did during the 80’s, for example Storm looks the way she did in the comics during the 80’s with her white Mohawk! Speaking of this whole thing about the film taking place during the 80's, we can see a pattern forming. X-Men: First Class (2011), took place during the 70's, X-Men: Apocalypse (2016) during the 80's and from what I hear, the next one will take place during the 90's. It's a cool gimmick they've been fooling around with. On this one we even get Angel done right! We even see how he gets his metallic wings, which happens exactly the way it did in the comics. Speaking of this film being like the comics, there are a lot of moments taken right out of some of the best X-Men stories! There are hints to the Dark Phoenix Saga, which will apparently be explored in future films and done right, not half assed like in X-Men: The Last Stand (2006). And there’s a whole segment dedicated to Barry Windsor Smith’s epic Wolverine storyline Weapon X.

And speaking of cool things that happen on this film, I’ve always been a huge fan of Barry Windsor Smith’s Weapon X storyline, it’s one of the goriest Wolverine stories ever drawn. On that story we see Wolverine in a beast-like form, as he is awakened for the first time after he is given his adamantium claws. He storms out of a secret lab, slashing and maiming every single foot soldier that gets in his way. Well, Bryan Singer has brought that comic to life and incorporated it into this film and it freaking blew me away to see Barry Windsor Smith’s classic artwork coming to life on this film! Some might not be happy with the fact that the Weapon X storyline was reduced to a mere segment on X-Men: Apocalypse. The Weapon X storyline is so seminal, so good that it should have gotten an entire film dedicated to it instead of a segment sandwiched into X-Men: Apocalypse. I agree with these sentiments wholeheartedly. Weapon X would have made the basis for the perfect Wolverine origin story, instead of the god awful X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) movie we got. Still, I was happy to see it as an extended showstopping sequence in X-Men: Apocalypse.  Wolverine fans, strap yourselves on tight!

Another great thing about X-Men: Apocalypse is that it’s well acted and written. I dug Magneto’s storyline, it’s so personal, so dramatic. It humanized the character a lot, it makes us sympathize with the villain once again. And once again, Fassbender steals the show as Magneto.  Performance wise, this is one of the best X-Men films in my book. Then there’s the show stopping scenes in the film, of which there are many. Its one showstopper after the next, every character gets a moment to shine; every one of them shows the full capability of their powers. Once again, Evan Peters as Quicksilver gets not one, but two amazing scenes in the movie! He moves at lightning fast speed to the tune of an amazing song! Not gonna spoil it for ya! Point is, not a moment is wasted on this film, there’s no boring filler on this one, this one is jam packed with action!

I’d forgotten that it was Oscar Isaac playing Apocalypse, and while watching the film, I didn’t realize it either because he is unrecognizable under all that make up, but in my opinion he delivered. Sure the only downside to this film is how Apocalypse looks; they should’ve done something closer to how he looks in the comics instead of redesigning him so much. It’s true, sadly he does look like a Power Rangers villain. On the upside of things, Isaac’s performance as Apocalypse is good enough that you’ll forget all that jazz and just enjoy the movie. On a final note, I do not understand how or why this movie has gotten such low numbers on Rotten Tomatoes even before the film’s release. If these numbers are based on critics reviews, I wonder if the critics saw the same film I did because this movie rocked! So screw that noise; in my opinion this film is extremely solid and highly entertaining! Bryan Singer has made one of the best in the series with X-Men Apocalypse, trust me, you will not be disappointed!

Rating: 5 out of 5

Victor Frankenstein (2015)

Victor Frankenstein (2015)

Director: Paul McGigan

Cast: James McAvoy, Daniel Radcliffe

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is one of those characters that gets adapted on to film a lot. Like Dracula or James Bond, Frankenstein’s monster keeps getting brought back to life again and again; Victor Frankenstein is the latest attempt. The problem with popular characters such as Frankenstein is that if the new take on the character doesn’t offer anything new, it’s going to get ignored as another “unnecessary film”. That’s the first thing that popped into my mind when you hear that their making a new Frankenstein film. Is it necessary? What new angle does it attempt to impress us with? For example, Kenneth Branagh’s Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) showed us an eloquent version of the Frankenstein monster, an intelligent version of the monster was something we’d only read about in Mary Shelley’s book. On Roger Corman’s Frankenstein Unbound (1990) we were presented with a time traveling storyline. Mel Brook’s Young Frankenstein (1974) was a parody of all the old Universal movies, and so on. Each take on the character has to have an angle. Even the filmmakers know they are walking on tired ground, the first words spoken on this new film are “You’ve heard this story before” Yet onwards they went and made this film, and so now we have a new take on good old Frankenstein. Was it worth it?  

On this one we start to dive into Frankenstein’s world by seeing everything from Igor’s point of view, which I found totally innovating because Igor is always relegated to slave status on these films, we’ve never really seen his story. He’s always been the ugly, monstrous hunchback who follows Dr. Frankenstein’s every order by saying “Yes Master”, not so on this movie. On this movie Igor is a circus performer, a clown act who gets treated with no respect despite the fact that he’s actually a pretty knowledgeable person who educates himself by reading a lot. While visiting the circus Victor Frankenstein realizes Igor is actually brilliant and decides to take him in as his partner. The thing with the Igor character on this movie is that they did a complete overhaul of the character. On this one Frankenstein straightens Igor’s back, eliminates his hump and gives him a name all within the span of five seconds. Bim, Boom, Bam! Suddenly we have a handsome, clean cut, well dressed Igor. This constitutes the biggest change in the whole story, the desire to treat Igor with some respect, to give him some depth. He’s no longer an assistant, he’s a partner. He’s not an order receiving idiot, he’s actually part of the reason why the experiments flourish, because of Igor’s genius. Igor even falls in love and actually gets some, that’s right, Igor gets laid, this is not your grandfathers Igor that’s for sure. What’s most interesting is that Igor is a character who doesn’t even appear in Mary Shelley’s book, I think this makes it even more obvious where the inspiration for this movie came from; we’re talking about movies feeding on movies and then becoming something else entirely.

I enjoyed everything about this movie, they way it looks, how well it was written, how characters grow and have a depth to them. These are intelligent characters we can root for. I love the dialog on this thing, it didn’t waste any time, it goes quick and to the point while not forgetting to be eloquent and well versed. I’m not saying it’s Shakespeare, because this is still very much a commercial film every step of the way, even going as far as setting up future movies, but it is well written. It’s dialog sounds appropriate to the era it takes place in. I read somewhere that the director behind this film, one Paul McGigan, said that he considered Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein to be a boring book, which I have to admit, is true. It’s not a story told in an exciting manner, the book is introspective and philosophical, and it’s not exactly concerned with action or adventure. So I can see why the director would express himself that way about a beloved classic. In fact, I don’t think the filmmaker’s where even concerned with the book at all, they seemed more inspired by the different cinematic adaptations of the character. Their influences are more cinematic than literary. They even reference Young Frankenstein (1974) at one point, keen listeners will hear it. One thing is obvious, director Paul McGigan didn’t want to make a boring movie and if you ask me, he succeeded.

Thematically speaking the movie goes everywhere a Frankenstein movie should, it doesn’t lose the essence of the books themes. Frankenstein has always been about the difficulty of accepting death as a part of life. About accepting that at one point we’re all going to bite it and that there’s nothing we can do about it. The film goes into the whole religion vs. science issue. In the film, Victor Frankenstein is a realist, he doesn’t believe in any sort of superstitions or the supernatural; he is very grounded on logic and reality. This mentality is pitted against the mentality of the police officer conducting the investigation on Igor’s disappearance, who’s all about Christianity, wearing crucifixes and calling everything ‘sin’. Who will win this battle of wits? Religion or science? I liked that edge; I loved the audacity with which Victor Frankenstein screams “There is no Satan! There is no God! There’s only me!” So yeah, I liked the fact that the film tackles philosophical issues, as it should, being an adaptation of Mary Shelley’s equally philosophical book, so yeah, this film has some strong writing. This film was written by Max Landis, son of film director John Landis, the guy behind such films as An American Werewolf in London (1981) and The Blues Brothers (1980). So Max Landis grew up in the world of filmmaking, which always helps make a good screenwriter, or director or both. Children whose parents are famous filmmakers usually follow in their parents footsteps and sometimes end up being good filmmakers. Sofia Coppolla, Angelina Jolie, Roman Coppola come to mind. Max Landis is also a part of one of these show biz families, he’s known movie making his whole life, which probably explains why he’s such a good writer. Chronicle (2012) was fantastic, and so is Victor Frankenstein (2015).

The interesting thing about this movie is that it’s not really about the monster, in fact, you won’t see the monster until the films third act which speaks a lot about how well the film is made, it keeps you interested all the way through even when the monster isn’t around.  Bottom line is, this isn’t a worn out cliché filled take on Frankenstein. It takes everything known about the character and pushes it a bit further, faster, quicker, to the point. The film is a visual feast, loaded with atmosphere, beautiful colors and a great set design! I loved that whole sequence with the castle on top of the hill, next to the ocean, as thunder and lightning crashed, cool stuff. Honestly, I’m saddened that this one is bombing at the box office in my book; it doesn’t deserve to be a turkey. Sadly, this sometimes happens to good films. And it’s happening to this one; it still hasn’t even made its 40 million dollar budget back, and that’s a “small budget” Hollywood wise. It could that audiences are still suffering nightmarish flashbacks of the god awful I, Frankenstein (2014). Or it could be that all anybody cares about is Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015), and fanboys are saving up their dough to see that one a few times. Maybe it has something to do with the absolutely bland poster. Whatever the case, Victor Frankenstein is a good film that doesn’t deserve to die a quick death at the box office. Go see this refreshing take on the character in theaters now! Save a good movie!

Rating: 4 out of 5  

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

Title:  X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

Director: Bryan Singer

Cast: Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Halle Berry, Nicholas Hoult, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Peter Dingklage, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Famke Janssen, James Mardsen, Kelsey Grammer

So this is to be the end all be all of all X-Men movies, reuniting characters seen in all previous X-Men films, from the first trilogy, to X-Men: First Class. The story this time is based on the famous Chris Claremont/John Byrne storyline that ran through The Uncanny X-Men #141 and 142. Many comic book fans consider this storyline one of the greatest Marvel Comics ever made. I mean, it’s easy to understand why. A lot of important characters die, the whole idea that mutants are being wiped out like flies is a scary one, drawing parallels with fascism. It’s a story that touches upon many important themes. Racism, bigotry, xenophobia, you get the drill. So anyhow, here comes the film based on the famous tale; did it do it justice?

One of the greatest Marvel Comics ever made; The Uncanny X-Men #141!

                             
For those who haven’t read the story, Days of Future Past starts out in a dark distant future where giant dna-copying robots known as Sentinels go around hunting mutants and eradicating them from the earth, like cockroaches. The idea being that mutants aren’t so special anymore because these Sentinels can copy their dna, and as a result their powers. But wait! The X-Men have figured out a way to send Wolverine back in time to stop the anti-mutant hysteria that started way back in 1973, when the Sentinels where first created. Can Wolverine convince a younger Prof. Xavier to help him stop the events which lead up to the creation of the Sentinels?

Bryan Singer returns to the franchise he helped build with X-Men (2000) and X2 (2003). In a way, Singer has returned to fix the huge mess left by Brett Ratner with X-Men: The Last Stand (2006); a film that changed X-Men cannon by killing off important characters as if they didn’t matter. I can almost hear Ratner saying “Kill Prof. Xavier? Sure! Let the next guy deal with it, meanwhile I’ll have a movie that everyone will talk about because important characters die!” That next guy ended up being Bryan Singer, picking up the pieces, trying to make things make sense again, trying to make order out of chaos. So it’s no surprise that Days of Future Past has a couple of surprises in store for X fans! In many ways, it’s great to have Singer back in the helm. I mean, so far, he’s the director that has handled these films the best, so it’s kind of comforting to know the material will be treated with some dignity and respect.

In Days of Future Past there are so many characters appearing on screen at the same time, that unless you’re a diehard X-men fan, you probably won’t know who the hell is who at times. Who’s that guy with fire coming out of his chest? Or that mutant opening portals? I don’t know, but it sure is cool! That’s one of the things I’ve always enjoyed about the X-Men comics, the multitude of characters, each with their own amusing ability. Having this whole mess of mutants running around using their powers and kicking the hell out of each other is fun times in my book. On this particular X-Men flick we get to meet many mutants we hadn’t seen before, like Quicksilver, whom you might have gotten a glimpse of during the final moments of Thor: The Dark World (2013). And by the way, speaking of Quicksilver, he was the one character everyone was all worried about. “He looks funny, he doesn’t look right” Whatever! He’s the guy who steals the movie! Quicksilver only appears for a short period of time, but damn, Quicksilver’s moment to shine is so cool that I don’t think the film every reached that level of awesomeness again. The film reached its peak somewhere around the middle of the film and it was all thanks to Quicksilver.

For all you comic book purists out there, well, you know they tweaked things around a bit. I guess the most notable change to the story is that Kitty Pride is not the one who goes back in time, it’s Wolverine. Every book to film translation suffers from changes for the sake of being more cinematic or exciting, so its understandable why they chose to make Wolverine the main character instead of Kitty Pride (like in the comics) or Bishop (like in the cartoons); considering Wolverine is the most popular X-Man ever, it kind of makes sense. In a sea of characters, some are bound to get lost in the shuffle and the one that got the least amount of attention in my book was Storm who is in the film for about 5 minutes total…or maybe less. Other characters only cameo and others you’ll see in some outstanding action sequence, and never see them again. But this is the nature of the beast. X-Men has always been a comic propelled by the idea that this is a group of super heroes and with so many characters in its roster, it stands to reason that the spotlight will shine on a different one with each story. In a future movie, who knows, maybe it won’t revolve around Wolverine so much. I mean, there are so many other characters to focus on. Still, with such a huge cast, I have to give Bryan Singer some props for not letting this turn into a total cluster fuck of a film.

At the end of the day, this film is a spectacle, a huge comic book movie with top notch special effects work, tons of action and many mutants to keep you entertained. Is it the best X-Men film ever made? I don't know, I guess time will tell on that one, but I will say that it's a very satasfying film. My only complaint would be that I wish they’d showed us more of the dark future world where the film starts out in. That part of the story is supposed to be very post apocalyptic, but alas we only get a glimpse of it. Aside, from that, I’m a happy geek boy with this movie. Of course the story brought to mind many time travel films, but the first I drew comparisons to was The Terminator (1984), because of the whole idea of going back in time to stop something from happening. By now everybody expects an extra ending at the end of all of these superhero movies. Disney has been doing this “extra ending” thing for a while now with great success. It’s a great thing in my book because it keeps the spirit of comic books alive. Comics have always been about the “to be continued” at the end of the comic, the cliffhanger to make you come back for next issue, or in this case, the next film. So yeah, now 20^th Century Fox is copying this technique in their Marvel movies, and it makes all the sense in the world to me. Trust me, stay after the credits! Then go on the internet and find out who the hell Apocalypse is. Looking forward to X-Men: Apocalypse come 2016!

Rating: 4 out of 5