Scooby Dooby Dud? | Scoob Review

#scoob #scoobydoo #warnerbrothers #hannabarbera
In this review, we will be taking a look at the polarizing 2020 animated reboot of Scooby-Doo, simply known as Scoob. Was this film a Scooby Dooby Doo or a Scooby Dooby Dud? (I guess the title gives it away but please be sure to see the full review and make your own judgment on the film.) I do not own any of the clips and images used in this review, as they are all owned by Warner Brothers and Hanna-Barbera (or rather what remains of the latter).
Also, please be sure to like, comment, and subscribe for future videos!

Follow us on Social Media:
Twitter: @austinmmyers19
Instagram: @austinmmyers19
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amm2media/
Blogger: www.amm2media.com


Please be sure to like, comment, and subscribe for more updates!

Judy (2019)

(Image Source: IMDb)

For as long as I could remember, one of my favorite films (if not my absolute favorite) has always been 1939's The Wizard of Oz. Consequently, it lead to Judy Garland becoming one of my favorite actresses of all time due to her beautiful rendition of Somewhere Over the Rainbow; a song that has also become one of my favorite musical numbers in a film (next to Proud of Your Boy and Who Am I). When I first saw the trailer for the biopic surrounding her life, I was excited and had such high hopes for the film. Thankfully, it not only lived up to my expectations, but far exceeded them as well! 

It beautifully retold the story of one of my favorite golden age actresses, flashing back and forth between her prime as an actress, along with showing roughly the final year of her life (while she performed in London). The flashbacks served to further develop Garland, and provided a solid context for the issues she faced later on in her life. These small insights into her earlier life were easily my favorite parts of the film, and I wish there were more of them to further develop her. Another insight I found interesting was the look into the darker side of the film industry, especially in regard to child actors. The plot was one that was definitely unforgettable, and that was attributed to Garland's actress, Renee Zellweger. 

Not only did Zellweger perfectly portray Miss Garland in both character and voice, the filmmakers also managed to give her a near identical appearance to the actress/singer. She absolutely nailed the role and put on a performance that makes the viewer forget it is somebody else playing her. If the MPAA is somehow reading this, do me a huge favor and please give this woman an Oscar! She certainly deserves it for her amazing performance! When she sang her rendition of Somewhere Over the Rainbow, it took a lot of effort to hold back some tears for her cover. Matter of fact, I am seriously considering buying the soundtrack for this film as I type this post as a result.

If you are wanting to see this, I would highly recommend it; it is one that will move you to tears and sympathize with the protagonist during her final years. However, if you were looking for a film that showcases Garland's life as a whole, then this might not be the film for you. This movie specifically covers her final year and her last performances in London, with only small flashbacks to her earlier career as an actress.

After seeing this amazing film, I am hoping to look more into Garland's life and see some other films she has appeared in to further understand her career. My knowledge of her is extremely limited due to only knowing her from The Wizard of Oz.
What is your favorite Judy Garland role? (I ask so I can see more of her career) If you have seen this movie, what do you think? Feel free to discuss in the comments below, like this review and subscribe for more Reviews and Retrospectives content! 

The Lion King (2019)

(Source: Amazon.com)

I will admit, this is one of Disney's remakes I waited for with much anticipation, and one of two I can definitely say I "loved" rather than simply "liked" (or in the case of Maleficent, did not care for at all). The original animated film this is based on is arguably tied with Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast for my title of "favorite Disney film", and this version can be said similarly for Disney's recent live action remakes. I grew up watching the animated Lion King across various forms of home media, going from the VHS, to the DVD, to my current Blu-Ray copy; matter of fact, I have seen the film so many times I know the story beats by heart along with its production history. Understandably, when I heard it was going to be another one of Disney's remakes, I was more excited for this than I was for Aladdin.

When I saw it fairly recently, I left the theater with a massive smile on my face seeing one of my favorite films with a new coat of paint; it remained faithful to the original (down to casting James Earl Jones as Mufasa once again), the songs were just as I remembered them and mixed elements of their stage versions, and managed to expand upon the story of the original in certain places. However, while I was more than satisfied with the finished product (and the burger I ate while watching it), I do have some flaws I would like to address.

The first piece of criticism that needs to be addressed was James Earl Jones' new interpretation of Mufasa. While initially, I was excited to see the original voice actor returning (considering he is one of my favorite actors, and Mufasa is one of my favorite characters), I was unfortunately disappointed seeing it in action. In the original film, Mufasa's voice had this booming power and regal tone to it, showing Jones was putting a massive amount of passion in the character. In this version, his delivery was flat, emotionless, and felt quite cheap. Unfortunately, that kills the mood in certain iconic scenes carried over from the source material, and sadly destroys their impact. Scenes such as him lecturing a young Simba under a starry sky, and the latter seeing his father's ghost later in the film lose the power and emotion they once had because of that flatline delivery. One could obviously see that Jones was not reprising his role for the fond memory of doing the original, but simply for a paycheck. A similar criticism can be given to Mufasa's brother, Scar; particularly regarding the new version of the villain song, Be Prepared.

I will preface this criticism saying that I liked the new Be Prepared; matter of fact, it sent chills down my spine moreso than the original and stage versions. The new version increases the intensity of the song, increasing its impact and the intimidating nature of the antagonist. However, like Doomsday's appearance in Batman v Superman, it also felt like it was tacked on to appease the fans since it was initially planned to be cut from the remake. This is definitely shown through the song's length and the lyrics, since over half of it is simply the phrase "be prepared" repeated multiple times. The song itself is also significantly truncated in comparison to previous versions, clocking in at slightly over two minutes as opposed to the three minute original. That and the hacked-together nature of the song disappointed me, because Be Prepared is my favorite song from the original film, and the one I was looking forward to seeing most. However, I love how it left me speechless as the number ending, simply mouthing "whoa" and attempting to process what I saw moments before. Moving past the negative aspects of the film, there are some massive positives that need to be recognized; for starters, those regarding the new Timon and Pumbaa.

Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen managed to gracefully uphold the legacy left by their predecessors, Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella. Matter of fact, there were times where the two managed to sound almost identically to the originals. Additionally, their versions of Hakuna Matata and the "live bait" scene kept me laughing. While the comedic aspect of the remake has been drastically reduced, I am  glad that Timon and Pumbaa still delivered on the laughs, and stole the show just as they did in the source material. I am going to give a slight spoiler, but my favorite scene with these two was when they were singing The Lion Sleeps Tonight, and their neighbors were looking at them like they were saying "oh god, not those guys again." Their expressions alone caused quite a few laughs from the audience.

In regard to the aforementioned reduction in comedy, while this take is substantially darker, it also means the emotional impact is increased. While I could emotionally connect with the characters in the original, there were moments where I was nearly to the point of shedding tears in certain moments in the remake. A prominent example of this was during the infamous stampede sequence; I tried to hold back tears as Mufasa put his own life on the line to Simba, but when Scar threw him off the cliff, I simply lost it. I do not remember the last time a scene in a film had that much of an emotional impact on me, but good job Lion King for pushing me to that point. I still cannot listen to the stampede's instrumental without having flashbacks of that scene, so thank you for that.

Overall, this is one of Disney's remakes I would highly recommend seeing; it is faithful to the original while also giving the viewer something new (along with references to the stage musical), it retains all songs and their charm from the original (something Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast did not), and is also beautifully animated. However, if you are going in expecting James Earl Jones to give another stellar performance as Mufasa or something as comedic as the original, then you will be somewhat disappointed. Myself, I am definitely looking forward to seeing it again when it is released on Amazon Prime Video; I absolutely loved it despite its flaws.

What did you think of the film? Feel free to discuss your thoughts in the comments below, and also please like and follow for future Reviews and Retrospectives posts.

Disney's Aladdin (2019): Diamond in the Rough?

 (Source: IMDb.com)

Initially, I had mixed feelings when this remake was announced but was nonetheless excited (since this is adapting my favorite animated movie). However, this film was an example of one I should have viewed with no expectations whatsoever; I was one who hoped for deleted songs such as Proud of Your Boy, and essentially an adaptation of the stage musical using Howard Ashman's deleted lyrics. I will say if you are one who had those expectations like me, you are going to be slightly disappointed; as a minor spoiler, the only instance of deleted lyrics in the film are at the end of Arabian Nights and the new reprise of One Jump Ahead (which was surprisingly written for the original film but cut later in production, similar to the aforementioned Proud of Your Boy). Despite all this, this remake is one of Disney's best in their current trend of live-action adaptations. Admittedly, while this film is by no means perfect (nor does it hold a candle to the original and its stage musical), it still does a solid job adapting the source material while giving us something new in the process. 

Also, I am currently eating my words in regard to Will Smith's Genie and the rest of the cast (aside from Marwan Kenzari's Jafar). 

I loved the portrayals by Mena Massoud (Aladdin), Naomi Scott (Jasmine), Frank Welker (Abu, Raja, Cave of Wonders), and of course Will Smith. They did a phenomenal job portraying their respective characters in addition to fleshing them out; their renditions of the iconic songs were also beautifully done.... except for Will Smith's Prince Ali. 

While I know he was making a solid effort in that scene, the sequence as a whole lacked the energy of its animated and stage counterparts; it is disappointing because Prince Ali is my favorite song that was in the original film. I did like the part of the song where Genie was waiting for Sultan's approval to enter the palace, even though it messed up the song's flow. Harkening back to my earlier statement on deleted Ashman lyrics, I felt this song could have benefited most from using them; Genie could have used the lost intro as a means of transitioning into the main number (since the scene started rather abruptly), and the lost lyrics littered throughout the song could have been used to embellish "Prince Ali's" exploits (similar to the stage musical). Utilizing these deleted lyrics was one of main missed opportunities in this film, the other being everyone's favorite Scarlet McCaw, Iago. 

I was disappointed that Iago's role was drastically reduced from the original and stage versions, where in this version he is simply a regular parrot; he is still capable of speech, but now it is small phrases. Alan Tudyk did a great job in the role, but I wish we would have seen more from him. Aside from Abu (who remained mostly the same from the original, if not having a more expanded role), the animal characters were essentially pushed aside. 

While I am not the biggest fan of Abu, I actually enjoyed him much more in this version. He was given a more dynamic personality and was a catalyst for some events in the plot, making this little monkey one of the most enjoyable characters in the film. Additionally, he is given more time as a monkey than as an elephant, which is another bonus for the character. 

Regarding the film's events and pacing; while the story was very solid, there seemed to be somewhat of a lack of cohesion in the second and third acts, as it simply jumped from one event to another. There were plenty of moments I enjoyed (such as the scenes of Aladdin and Jasmine in the marketplace), but there were also times where it seemed like Guy Ritchie was going off a checklist, trying to hit certain points. There were moments he nailed perfectly under his direction, and there were some that could have used some work (such as the infamous "jams" running gag). 

I respect the efforts of director Guy Ritchie and the beautiful score by Alan Menken, they did a very solid job in making this film. The cast made the roles their own and did a great job, especially the main trio. Aside from Prince Ali, the entirety of Menken's score was also beautiful, and Jasmine's new song blew me away. I also loved the callbacks to the source material and the stage musical, such as making Prince Ali "of Ababwa" and the little snippet of Proud of Your Boy used at one point in the film (a moment which made me shed a few tears of joy since that is my favorite Disney song). If you go into this film with ZERO expectations, then you will have an enjoyable experience and come out satisfied. It is not exactly a "Diamond in the Rough" like one would think, but it makes a great effort in trying to be one. Aladdin is certainly worth a watch (or two or three), and I loved how it took the material of its predecessors and ran with them. However, Jafar seriously needed some work... he certainly does not hold a candle to Jonathan Freeman, not by a long shot. 

Disney's Christopher Robin (2018)

As I mentioned in my previous review of 2017's Goodbye Christopher Robin, A.A. Milne's series of children's novels were a substantial part of my childhood. However, I grew up more with Disney's version of the stories and came across the source material later on. While I admired Goodbye Christopher Robin for being relatable on a personal level, I liked Disney's Christopher Robin on a conceptual level in addition to being somewhat relatable. I found the concept of an adult Christopher being a bit jarring at first, since the first image that usually pops into mind is the character as a child. The film's overall premise is unprecedented, as this is something that has never been attempted in the history of Winnie the Pooh. (Yes, in Goodbye, we saw an adult Christopher, but that was only for a brief moment) It was a take on the concept that was fresh and new, and it was beautifully accomplished. Despite the tone being darker than one is used to with this franchise, it manages to take many of the right steps in achieving a solid result. For starters, it has the prolific Jim Cummings reprising his role of Pooh and Tigger. Additionally, it is littered with references to Christopher Robin's source material. Pooh, Tigger, Eeyore, Kanga, Roo, and Piglet are designed as stuffed animals, with an appearance hybridizing Disney's version and that of Christopher Robin's original stuffed animals. However, Rabbit and Owl were designed with a more realistic aesthetic, probably as a nod to the fact that A. A. Milne himself created them rather than his son.
 As a minor spoiler, the title sequence also contains some events in Christopher Robin's life that mirrored his actual counterpart, such as being sent to boarding school and serving in World War II afterwards, in addition to distancing himself from his plush animal friends. However, instead of resenting his father like what actually happened, the film takes an approach similar to the Robin Williams movie, Hook. Christopher Robin simply grows up, leaving the remnants of his childhood behind. Surprisingly, the beginning of the film portrays him similar to that of A. A. Milne himself, albeit to a lesser extent (this is a Disney film, after all). However, when Pooh and the gang re-enter his life, he slowly begins to rediscover his inner child and slowly begins to share his former life with his wife and daughter. Ewan McGregor once again nails his role as the title character, just as he did as he did with Obi-Wan Kenobi and Lumiere (has there ever been a bad role of his?). As mentioned previously, I found myself relating to this version of the character like I did in Goodbye; I am a total workaholic, and at times I have made decisions that involved choosing work over family and friends. After seeing this film, I have decided that when I am back in my hometown after graduating from college, I am going to spend more time with them and make up for any time that was lost. While it is alright to have a stable career and a dream to work for, one must never forget their loved ones, because the person could almost push them away in the process. I believe that if Christopher Robin never reunited with Pooh, he would have slowly lost everything that he held dear to him.
Overall, I would highly implore each and every one of you reading this post to see this movie! It is heartfelt, it brings on so many feelings, and its message is absolutely fantastic! You do not need to be a fan of Winnie the Pooh to enjoy it, it is a movie that is definitely for everyone; it will definitely resonate with you.

Fullmetal February: Fullmetal Alchemist (2017 Film)

At last, we conclude Fullmetal February with a look at the most recent adaptation of Arakawa's beloved manga; the live action Fullmetal Alchemist movie! While I praise the two animated versions and the original manga, I have some mixed opinions about its transition into live action.

Like many other adaptations of Japanese anime and manga, the story is a highly condensed version of the source material's events. However, it corrects many of the mistakes Brotherhood made with its story; such as starting at the most logical point, Edward and Alphonse's first attempt at human transmutation. Comparatively, this film is the most faithful version of the Elric brothers' tale; albeit with some events receiving slight changes, switched around, or omitted entirely. As a result of the latter, major characters were also surprisingly omitted. I am not worried, since I believe some will make an appearance in the inevitable sequel. While I did not like their choice for the main antagonist, they managed to expand upon a minor character from the source material, and somehow connect them to the Homunculi.

My largest gripe with this film was the story and pacing; similar to Shyamalan's The Last Airbender, the film's director decided to severely truncate the plot in order to cram as much as possible into a two and a half hour timeframe. Consequently, this makes it difficult to connect with the characters and become engrossed with the story. I was hoping for a strong amount of character development and seeing my favorite plot points unfolding in live action. While I was treated to both to some degree, it ultimately left me wanting more and feeling disappointed as a result. The pacing was the film's biggest flaw, simply because so much is coming at you in such a short amount of time. Maybe to alleviate this, they could have split the movie into two and dedicated each film to a specific story arc from the manga.

In terms of characters, the actors portrayed each one as faithfully as possible; Edward was short-tempered and high strung, Winry was loving and always worried about the Elrics, and Alphonse was the group's voice of reason. I love how Maes Hughes was also given a larger amount of development and was upgraded to a major character in the film. He stole the show, and I was always excited to see him onscreen. While I despised Shou Tucker in the previous versions, I found him more tolerable in this one and I am thankful they left Nina's fate as ambiguous. It does beg the question, will she survive in the sequel, be killed offscreen, or be killed by a potential live action Scar?

Overall, I would say this film is a solid attempt at adapting Fullmetal Alchemist. It was not as bad as others have said, it is in desperate need of improvement. The framework for a good story is there, but the directors need to iron out the bugs in the pacing for the sequel. I am looking forward to the next installment of this series, and I am hopeful for a stronger film and the inclusion of omitted characters.

That concludes Fullmetal February, if you have suggestions for next February's anime month, feel free to email me at austinmmyers18@gmail.com and also please follow if you like my content!

25 Years of Aladdin! (Collaboration Between Reviews and Retrospectives and Random Antix)

In celebration of Aladdin's 25th Anniversary, my good friend Joshua Edwards and I decided to make two videos paying tribute to the film and its stage adaptation! Feel free to like, comment, subscribe, and discuss your favorite Aladdin moments!

(Random Antix: A Random Arabian Night!)

(Reviews and Retrospectives The Series: Aladdin's Broadway Journey!)

Justice League (2017)

(Image Source: Collider.com)

To recap the critical history of DC’s Extended Universe; Man of Steel was polarizing, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice bombed like a nuclear missile, as did Suicide Squad, and Wonder Woman managed to… somewhat redeem this dying cinematic universe. Did Justice League manage to replicate the success of its predecessor, or was it a massive, poorly-paced mess like Dawn of Justice? In my opinion, I can honestly say both “yes” and “no” to these questions.

To begin, I can confidently say Justice League was a MASSIVE improvement over Zack Snyder’s previous film in the DCEU, which was Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. The pacing is definitely an improvement, and does not drag out like the latter film (which was even worse in the extended cut, despite the story improvements). There is also a smaller amount of plot holes, which was another major problem I had with Dawn of Justice. However, with that being said; there were still some minor story flaws that I need to address. First, while the pacing was an improvement, I feel like certain events moved rather quickly. Some moments in the story moved by so fast, I did not have a good amount of time to take them in. The overall tone was also improved to be more digestible to moviegoers, thanks to the involvement of Joss Whedon. While the tone was lighter than its predecessor, it was also very inconsistent (maybe because of the polarizing styles of the two directors). Some moments would be dark and brooding, while some would be goofy and lighthearted. It can be inferred the darker scenes were filmed under Snyder’s direction, while the lighter scenes were filmed under Whedon. The latter type of scenes felt more in line with the previous DCEU film, Wonder Woman (you may want to take notes from this movie, Snyder). Adding to that statement, Zack Snyder still does not understand how to write certain characters aside from Batman. Whedon thankfully understands and successfully manages to make each character as accurate to the source material as possible, while also fitting the world the film is set in.

I praise Joss Whedon more than Zack Snyder for finally getting the characters right! Unlike in Dawn of Justice and Man of Steel, Superman finally acts like more positively (instead of acting like an emo teenager). Batman was also adjusted to be more like his comic counterpart, instead of the brooding extremist from the previous film. However, what irked me this time was him being a tad insensitive towards his comrades, especially Diana Prince/Wonder Woman. Speaking of which, I loved the interactions between the two, and felt it was similar to their animated counterparts from the Justice League cartoon. I believe this could hint at a budding relationship between the two characters, as I can tell they have feelings for each other. If I had to choose one character to be the movie’s “breakout”, it would definitely have to be Ezra Miller’s Barry Allen/Flash. This version of Barry was hilarious, keeping me laughing almost every moment he was onscreen, and I love how Justice League acts as the starting point for his development. However, while I do enjoy his personality and character, I still think Grant Gustin is the better Barry. Gustin’s version of the character has a personality closer to the comics, while Miller’s felt more like a copy of Peter Parker in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. As for Aquaman, I felt like he could have had some more character development, as we do not learn much about him throughout the film. I honestly hope the upcoming Aquaman solo film manages to expand upon their title character. The character that does receive an ample amount (maybe the most amount) of development is Victor Stone/Cyborg, plus he is the character that is most accurate to his comic counterpart. He acts and feels like the Cyborg I grew up reading about in the Teen Titans comics and watching the tv series of the same name, even saying “boo-yah” at one point in the story.

Overall, while this film is a major improvement and a bright light for the future of the DCEU, there are still some problems that need to be fixed in future films. Zack Snyder needs to learn more about these characters, so he can give viewers accurate portrayals. Second, he needs to learn that not every DC film he makes needs a dark and brooding tone; it is alright to have some positivity. Not every film has to be like Watchmen. For example, Superman films need to be fun; as the title character is optimistic and always thinking of a positive outcome. Finally, he needs to learn about pacing in a film, and find some balance between the dragged-out Dawn of Justice and fast-paced Justice League. If he and DC can manage to iron out these three problems, then the future of the DC Extended Universe is a bright one. I look forward to the future of this cinematic universe, and I would hate to see it fail because of the movies always repeating their previous mistakes. I would highly recommend seeing Justice League, do not listen to what the other critics say; form your own opinions and feel free to discuss them in the comments below. 

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

      

    

Spider-Man has had a rough cinematic history, as everything after Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 2 was met with mixed reviews. Spider-Man 3 was considered a cluttered mess of a film; overloaded with various subplots and villains, notably the “emo Peter” scenes during the film’s second act. The Amazing Spider-Man was far from “amazing”, as it was merely a modified rehash of Spider-Man’s origin story and mischaracterized his alter ego of Peter Parker. The second Amazing Spider-Man is considered the worst entry in the character’s history in film. Including many of the issues carried over from the previous film (such as the aforementioned mischaracterization of Peter Parker), this movie suffered from massive issues in pacing and character development. In both films, Emma Stone’s Gwen Stacy had as much emotion as Bella Swan in the Twilight film franchise; and Andrew Garfield’s Peter Parker lacked the intelligence his character is known for (even a child would have known rubber does not conduct electricity, you do not need a YouTube video to figure that out). Thankfully, since Spider-Man became integrated into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the character is being adapted as faithfully to the source as possible. Matter of fact; one of the praises of ­Captain America: Civil War was the perfected version of Spidey portrayed by Tom Holland. (When people say, “third time’s the charm”, they are not bluffing). Despite having a mere fifteen minutes of screen-time throughout the entirety of the film, fans (such as myself) were excited for this version of Peter Parker and could not wait to see his future adventures unfold. Spider-Man has made a fantastic comeback and an amazing homecoming as he made his entry into the MCU. Welcome home, web-head; I am overjoyed because my favorite super-hero is being treated with the utmost amount of care and respect he deserves.

              To start this critique, the movie is thankfully not an “origin story”; at least not in the traditional definition of the term. Nobody wants to see Peter Parker getting bit by a radioactive spider and Uncle Ben’s murder for a third time. Thankfully, this movie picks up with Peter already aware of his spider powers and it focuses on him learning what it truly means to be a hero; emphasizing Uncle Ben’s famous quote “with great power, comes great responsibility” and using said quote as the film’s theme.

           Speaking of Peter Parker, I am overjoyed that Sony has accurately portrayed the character in this version. His high intellect is emphasized more than his predecessors (especially Andrew Garfield’s version), as he is known to heavily rely on it over the course of this film. On another note, Tom Holland’s version of the character feels like he leaped right out of the comics; notably the Ultimate Spider-Man series, as Holland draws inspiration from that universe’s Peter. As for the other side of the coin, Holland’s Spider-Man is essentially “on point” with what is seen in the main and Ultimate comics (as the Marvel Cinematic Universe usually combines elements from both). In this film and Captain America: Civil War, this Spider-Man is a wisecracking, naïve, lighthearted hero; as opposed to the brooding and overly emotional versions portrayed by Garfield and McGuire. While I rank McGuire’s version higher on the list (mostly for nostalgic purposes); I believe Tom Holland is truly “the Ultimate Spider-Man” and blows his predecessors out of the water. Thankfully, the antagonist of this film is also a significant improvement over his predecessors; he is also a villain that has never been seen in cinematic form.

              Using a Spider-Man villain that has never been used in cinema is a massive advantage this film has over the previous ones. Since there is only one interpretation, the filmmakers are given a massive amount of creative freedom as they are essentially creating a character from scratch. While I do not know about Adrian Toomes aka The Vulture as much as I do about Green Goblin and Doc Ock, but I was impressed with his cinematic debut in Homecoming. From what I do know about The Vulture, it seems this version takes heavy inspiration from his Ultimate version (despite bearing the name of his mainstream universe counterpart), similar to our protagonist. His character arc seems similar to the nameless man who would later become Joker, Deadshot, and Scott Lang’s version of Ant-Man; a man so desperate to support his family, he turns to criminal activity for survival. Toomes is not inherently evil; he simply wants the happiness and well-being of his loved ones, especially his young daughter. Michael Keaton was an excellent choice to portray the character, not because of his previous superhero experience, but for the wide range of emotions he can portray and how realistically he can portray a character. I enjoyed his role as Batman and Ray Kroc in The Founder (the latter I am hoping to review someday). Back to Keaton’s character; he has no desire to take down Spider-Man (nor does he want to), he merely sees him as a nuisance.

              The supporting cast of the film is as brilliant as the main members of the cast! To start, while Marissa Tomei nailed the role of Peter’s Aunt May, I felt she was too young for the character. Aunt May is supposed to be an elderly woman, and I do not understand Marvel and Sony’s decision to make her younger. I believe Tomei shared this sentiment as well; as she opted to make her character look the age she is supposed to be. (Unfortunately, Marvel did not follow through with this idea) As a result, Tomei’s version of the character is unfortunately the butt of a “hot aunt” running gag. I did enjoy the aspect of her character’s personality being similar to her Ultimate Universe counterpart, as she is (for the most part) against Spider-Man and Tony Stark. She believes Spidey to be a menace to society, and claims Stark is nothing more than a womanizer (I completely agree with you, May. I am not a fan of Tony Stark, either). Stark is essentially unchanged in terms of appearance and personality. However, he feels obligated to keep Peter out of trouble and be responsible for him. He encourages the young man to continue being a hero, but he wants Peter to remain street level for his own safety; this is the reason he does not want the boy to become an Avenger. He feels Peter is not ready and lacks the experience to face higher threats such as Loki, Ultron, and Thanos.  As much as it makes me want to vomit when I say this, Stark’s actions towards Peter are completely justified as he is simply keeping watch on him. When Stark confiscates Peter’s suit, he is doing so to teach him a lesson. Peter did not need the suit to be a hero; he simply needed to do what is right to protect all that he cares about. Although it was not explicitly said, it seems Stark is the one to teach him the iconic lesson “with great power comes great responsibility” in this film.

In the plot department, it seems the romantic aspect of this version of Spider-Man is not as emphasized as it was in the previous incarnations. While Peter does have a romantic interest for a classmate named Liz, the relationship between the two is relegated to a minor subplot. Unlike Mary Jane Watson or Gwen Stacy, Liz is a minor character, and the female lead could arguably go to Peter’s classmate Michelle (portrayed by Shake it Up’s Zendaya Coleman) or Aunt May. The movie strictly keeps the focus on the titular protagonist and his journey, as a Spider-Man movie is supposed to do. While Peter has a massive amount of character development in the film, I felt like more time could have been devoted to developing the supporting cast (aside from Tony Stark and Adrian Toomes). I desperately wanted to know more about Liz, Michelle, Peter’s friend Ned, Aunt May, and maybe his late Uncle Ben as well (I just do not want to see his murder for the third time in a row).

Overall, Spider­­-Man: Homecoming is a nearly-perfect film. Currently; it is tied with Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 2 as the best film in the character’s cinematic history, and it could possibly be the best film to be made under the Marvel label (I consider it the best in the MCU so far). It has the potential to beat The Avengers, Deadpool, and Logan for the spot of “Best Marvel Movie”. The film perfectly portrays the life and daily struggles of Spider-Man, making it feel like a perfect adaptation and it definitely feels like the movie leaps right out of the comics. I am not biased when I say this, I am definitely looking forward to seeing more of Spider-Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Welcome home, Spidey; we are glad to have you back where you belong!

Wonder Woman (2017)

The DC Cinematic Universe, (or DC Extended Universe; as it’s now called, which I think is a dumb name) has been driving along a bumpy road since its conception. Originally, this universe was going to start with the 2011 Green Lantern film starring Ryan Reynolds. Unfortunately, due to the film being a massive failure; it was later considered a standalone film (and the butt of various jokes from Ryan Reynolds in Deadpool).

In 2013, the cinematic universe officially started with Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel. The film served not only to reboot and retell the origin of Superman, but it also served as a launching point for a shared universe (similar to what Marvel had been doing since 2008’s Iron Man). Man of Steel received mixed reviews such as a 55% on both Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic (I certainly liked it, but I can understand the flaws it had), but it was a box-office success for Warner Brothers. As a result, plans for a sequel were underway only months after the film’s release.

The sequel was finally released in 2015 under the title Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. The purpose of this film was to introduce Batman and Wonder Woman to the DCEU, along with paving the path for the oncoming Justice League movie (the latter of which I am looking forward to when it releases in November of 2017).

The film achieved the intended purpose, but I feel it was released a bit too soon since the only previous movie was a Superman solo film. I feel this movie should have come later in the series, and if you have seen it you will know why (but I digress). The film was praised for Ben Affleck’s role as Bruce Wayne/Batman and Gal Gadot as Diana Prince/Wonder Woman, but it was slammed by critics for the sluggish pacing, lack of action sequences, various plot holes, depressing tone, and the overall mischaracterization of Superman. However, as the film was once again a “box office success” for Warner Brothers and DC, another entry would soon follow.

In 2016, it was time to let the villains take the lead in Suicide Squad. This movie (despite winning an Oscar for Best Makeup), is considered the worst entry in the DC Extended Universe, thus leaving a bad taste in the mouths of fans and critics. As a result, the future of this franchise was uncertain until July 2, 2017… the release date of Wonder Woman.

At the time of this review, this film is being heavily praised by fans and critics; earning a “Certified Fresh” stamp on Rotten Tomatoes, and single-handedly redeeming this dying Cinematic Universe.

Similar to Marvel’s Captain America: The First Avenger, Wonder Woman is told through a storytelling device known as a “frame story”. For those who are unaware, a frame story is a plot essentially told in flashbacks and bookended with segments set in the story’s future or present day. While the beginning and end of the movie are set after the events of Batman v. Superman, the flashbacks are set in the distant past to explain the origin of Wonder Woman. As for the origin story, it seems to borrow many elements from the New 52 incarnation of the character; something I shall not explain further to avoid spoilers.

The origin was also done much better than Superman’s in Man of Steel; it is better structured and more linear than the aforementioned film, thus making it easier to follow. However, my only complaint towards the plot (albeit an extremely minor one) is that some elements of the story (such as how the plot is handled) felt like they were ripped directly from Captain America: The First Avenger. I will not say which ones (once again to avoid going into spoiler territory), but if you have seen both films then you will know what I am talking about. I understand both films pertained to the two world wars, but I wish DC was a bit more original in that regard. Matter of fact, it seems one of the main characters was modeled after Steve Rogers aka Captain America.

Speaking of characters, I commend DC for sticking to the source material in terms of characterization. Gal Gadot’s interpretation of Diana/Wonder Woman felt like she leaped right out of an issue of the New 52 run of the character, while containing some elements from before that infamous run.

She nailed the character’s personality and mannerisms, and was totally dedicated to the role (even going so far as to participate in reshoots while pregnant). By far, she is the best actress that has portrayed this character; beating out her predecessors Lynda Carter and Susan Eisenberg. She had an excellent chemistry with her co-star, Chris Pine, who played Steve Trevor. Overall, Gadot did fantastically! However, I have some things to say about Pine’s character in particular… and some of it is actually not so positive…

To start, I felt in some aspects he was somewhat of a “Copy-Paste” of Steve Rogers; aka Captain America. While their personalities are not 1:1, I found some traits to be quite similar (except Pine’s character was a bit more snarky than Evans’); even their respective actors and characters share the same first name! There was also a scene pertaining to Steve Trevor towards the end that felt eerily similar to a scene from The First Avenger.  (Try to guess which scenes if you have seen both films)

As for the film’s main villain, it follows the previous formula established back in Man of Steel; a larger than life villain that initially seems impossible to defeat, and has some relation to the protagonists. (Can Diana manage to defeat Ares and turn the tide of The Great War? Watch the movie to find out!)

Ares has an amazing design; fitting for his character. I really liked his armored design that is faithful to his comic counterpart, and I liked his overall connection to Diana and her origin (again, you know the drill since I always say it, no spoilers).

Overall, this film is an excellent sight to behold! Unlike the two previous films, I was glued to the movie screen for every second of Diana’s journey to fulfill her destiny. This movie is indeed a significant improvement over the previous installments, as DC has finally learned from their previous mistakes and actually applied what they learned.

It is actually so much better than the movies that were released before Man of Steel, such as Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight trilogy and Zack Snyder’s Watchmen. I would highly recommend this movie to all fans of cinema, Wonder Woman, and comics in general. Diana of Themyscira, I welcome you with open arms in your theatrical debut, and I am definitely looking forward to seeing her, Batman, and Superman return in Justice League.