Pages

Monday, December 17, 2012

My early Thoughts on Man of Steel

My early thoughts on Man of Steel





Before, I give my thoughts on this movie I want to talk about Superman because I can't talk about this movie without talking about the character. Superman may be well known to the public but he isn't loved by the general public. To the public he's overpowered, unrelatable and a flat character. I mean he does the right thing because he's a good person. Due to those things, he's considered hard to write. To the people who think he's too powerful where was this argument when it comes to Goku? Goku is one of if not the strongest characters in DBZ and people still love him. Heck, you can relate to the X-Men despite having powers so why can't Superman get that pass? 

Also, there are Justice League members that can put up a fight against him like The Flash, Wonder Woman and Green Lantern. Do you think Superman can beat all three of them? If the answer is no, then what do you mean he's too powerful? Another thing if you don't think he can beat Batman you have no business saying he's overpowered. This is what happens when you don't read comic books, if you did you would have noticed that the current Superman is powered down. I mean he can't push planets with his pinky. People still complain that superman is weak because of that, people make up your minds do you want Superman to be powerful or not? To be fair I can understand why it's hard to get into Superman comics. 

I mean most of the comics I've read are either about his origin,



or alternate versions of this character.


                                                  

There are two ways writers could work around the issue of Superman being too strong. One of them is to have Superman fight cosmic characters like Despero, Mongul and Darkseid. Another way is coming up with stories about him dealing with internal conflict instead of him fighting someone. That can be hard to do if people are not willing to watch a movie like that. That's one of the many things that hurt the 2003 Hulk movie, people were expecting an action film. Another thing he has an interesting rouges galley, I mean he can't deal with them by attacking them directly. When people say Superman is hard to write what they meant by that is it's hard to tell an ongoing story with this character. That's saying a lot considering Smallville lasted ten seasons. I can't comment on that because A I didn't watch the whole series and B I didn't think that show was about Superman because of how it was promoted. 

I mean look at this does this scream Superman to you? I thought this was a horror series.



As far as Superman not being relatable first of all don't you stop and think that we're not suppose to relate to him? This is a character who lost his family, home plant, most of his culture and his earthly father. (Depending on what you read or watch.) How can we relate to someone who lost all of that? He's someone we should strive to be and fantasize about being just like any other fictional character. Do you mean to tell me you don't want Superman's powers? Despite that, there are Superman stories where we can relate to him like Superman: last son of Krypton, all-star Superman and both versions of Superman 2. 

I don't agree with people thinking Superman is a flat character because he's not naive about how the world is he just doesn't internalize it. He believes everyone has the potential to be good. (Keyword potential.) That's why he's called the man of tomorrow Clark Kent believes in Truth, Justice and the American way. He uses Superman to inspire people to live up to those values. This makes him a tragic character; I say that because he's trying to live up to and set a stander that's impossible and unfair for people to live up to all the time. Just because this character is based on Jesus Christ that doesn't mean he should be just like him. I understand what the public meant by Superman not being interesting to a point, I mean do you think a reality show can last if the cast gets along all the time? Also doing the right thing is not clear-cut. It conflicts with people's boundaries, responsibilities and being smart.  

This character does have flaws like he has a savior complex, which makes it hard for Clark to have a life outside of being Superman. This is why his earth father Po Kent died to show him that he can't save everyone. He can also be short-sighted when it comes to helping people. For example, in Superman peace on earth, he tried to solve world hunger and it backfired. Then he remembers something his father told him. If you give a man a fish he lives for a day, if you teach him how to fish he lives for a lifetime. Do you see what I mean? This is why I rarely give homeless people anything because I'm just putting a band-aid on the issue but I digress. 

Despite being an alien, he has human emotions and he struggles with them, we see that in the comics and cartoons. Plus, he has trouble relating to humans because he doesn't have to deal with most of the baggage humans deal with. Superman's kindness is also a weakness because he can be manipulated. My point is that Superman should be respected as an underdog for being a hopeful and optimistic character. You don't think doing the right thing and not abusing your power is compelling? That's what I like about this character he shows that power doesn't corrupt absolute because it has no morality. What we do with power makes it good or evil. Not every superhero has to be dark and brooding. Just because a character sounds flat on paper doesn't mean that character should come off as such. 

Before I move on to the topic at hand I want to comment on his trucks. I notice people are making fun of this character for wearing them outside of his suit. I found this odd at first but after learning the history of trucks I don't mind them and you shouldn't have an issue with them either. This is another example of ignorance is bliss. Plus, without them Superman's suit looks like a wet suit, the trucks help give it more color. You can pull this look off for both him and Batman as long as the suits don't look easy to be subjected to wear and tear.   

Now as for this movie I don't know what to think of it I mean the trailers didn't give us any info about this movie and I like that less is more, plus trailers aren't suppose to tell us about the movie the purpose of trailers is to get us interested in watching the movie. The actor that's playing Clark/Superman has some big shoes to fill and I'm not going to compare him to the late Mr. Reeve. Judging from what I've seen it looks like this movie might borrow elements from Superman Earth one, I say that because Clark doesn't know what to do with himself. There is a scene in the trailer where his earth father tells him to keep his powers a secret even if it means not helping other people, do I have to explain why this bothers me?   

I'm interested in seeing how he will become Superman despite what his earth father took him. It looks like the creators are telling Superman's origin story again the problem I have with origin stories is that they feel like time fillers, I mean they don't add anything to the story or the overall plot. I wouldn't mind seeing his origin again if it's a part of the overall story like in Batman Begins. That could be the case General Zod is the main antagonist in this film. Speaking of General Zod I was a little disappointed that he's the villain because we already had him as the villain.           
                                                 
                         I was hoping to see someone new like.                           


I wouldn't mind having General Zod as the big bad again if the writers can do more with this character he wasn't just a dictator. The people who worked on the latest Batman films are working on this film and they're giving superman a realistic universe. If you're going to put realism in a movie that has characters with superpowers, then you need a scientific explanation for those powers. You can tell dark and depth Superman stories without making the character that way. For example, you can have Superman compromise his values without losing his credibility. Despite some red flags I'm willing to give this movie a chance and I hope this movie change people's perspective on this character. 

P.S if this movie becomes a franchise, then I don't want Lex Luthor as the main villain and I don't want kryptonite in this franchise. Lex was overused in the earlier films and Superman has other weaknesses besides kryptonite. Really there are other types of kryptonite that can affect Superman both physically and mentally. I wouldn't mind seeing that because you can make a story out of that. Also, I want to see this franchise focus on other relationships Superman has with other characters besides Lois Lane. I wish that the creators would come up with a better disguise for Clerk/Superman than have him wear glasses and changing his hairstyle.
 

Friday, December 7, 2012

My spoiler review of The Dark Knight Rises

My spoiler review of The Dark Knight Rises



PrologueJust like The Avengersa lot was riding on this movie because I thought this movie was going to be the first Comic Book movie trilogy where all three movies are good, but that wasn't the case. I refuse to believe that Mr. Nolan had anything to do with this movie because of how bad it turned out. I also blame myself for being disappointed because I chose to watch this movie despite the issues I've noticed in the trailers, advertisements, and people in Hollywood don’t know when to keep their mouths shut. (Thank you, Mr. Letterman and TMZ.) I normally don’t do spoiler reviews, and I was going to wait after the Oscars to see if this film gets any nominations or Oscars. I decided to talk about this now because it would be a waste of time explaining why this film doesn’t deserve any nominations, especially for best editing.
Before I rip this movie into pieces, I want to address the elephant in the room, and that is the Joker. Mr. Nolan said in one of his interviews that the Joker will not be talked about in this film, that bothers me because the Joker is the reason why this movie is at the point that it's in. I understand Mr. Ledger's death messed up his plans for this movie; however, that's no excuse for how this movie turned out. What stopped him from recasting the Joker? I know some people wouldn't like that; however, they should be understanding about it. Mr. Nolan should have written the Joker out of the movie instead of ignoring him like he never existed if this was going to be a problem. This movie ruined the characters, and I am going to go through them one by one. Before I get started, I'm going to call Bane Ubu because that's who he is. 


No. 1: Ubu I was pumped when I found out that Bane was going to be the villain, and Mr. Nolan said the reason why he picked him is that he wants an adversary that will challenge Batman both physically and mentally. Mr. Nolan described him as a monster movie bad guy with a terrific brain. Sadly, he didn’t fit that description in this movie. This bugs me because I'm tired of seeing this character get wasted. At the beginning of this movie, I thought Ubu’s mask meant something because he said no one cared who I was until I put on the mask. Later on in the film, we find out that his mask has no meaning; all it does is keep him alive. 

The movie starts off with Ubu abducting a scientist from a CIA plane. He accomplishes this by having his henchmen fly a bigger plane over them and performing a blood transfusion to fake the scientist's death. Do I really have to explain why this heist shouldn't have worked? Also, him and the main villain claim to be members of the League of Shadows, what? The League of Shadows is a group of ninjas; they don’t make public apprentices, announce their plans, and Ubu’s men don’t dress or operate like the League of Shadows. If they are the League of Shadows, they wouldn’t try to destroy Gotham City, because Ra's al Ghul wants to destroy Gotham because he believes that the city is beyond saving. Gotham was fixed between the first two films. Also, Bane was excommunicated from the League of Shadows because Ra's views him as a monster, why I don't know. So, Ubu shouldn't be trying to destroy Gotham for that reason alone. 

I'm having a hard time buying that Ubu can beat Batman for two reasons. First of all, despite Bruce’s condition, he was trained by the League of Shadows, and Ubu isn’t. In the Knightfall story, Bane did break Batman’s back, but before he did that, he put Batman through a gauntlet. During that gauntlet, Bane figures out that Bruce Wayne is Batman. After being physically and mentally drained, Bane breaks his back. In this movie, Ubu was able to beat Batman because he's bigger, and I don’t know how he figured out that Bruce Wayne is Batman. Second, Ubu's mask gives him painkillers in gas form, so he can’t control his breathing. That's like eating until you're full, going jogging, or smoking a pack of cigarettes, and then getting into a fight. This isn’t the comic book Bane, where he has venom and he becomes Juggernaut strong, plus the creators cheated with breaking Batman’s back. We don’t know if Ubu broke his back or injured it. This feels like fan service. 

After that, Ubu took him somewhere and put him in a wishing well and left him with no one watching him. He's doing this to show Bruce what despair looks like. First of all, how can this pit represent despair if there is a way to escape it? Second, the League of Shadows is not about despair; they are about restoring balance through bloodshed. Finally, we don't know how this prison works. Question how is Bruce Wayne/Batman not dead after the spinal injury, falling from the well, and getting hit in the head? Ubu tells Bruce his plan, and it makes no sense. Ubu's plan is to prove that Bruce's efforts to save Gotham have been in vain by giving the people of Gotham hope and stealing it from them. The flaw with his scheme is that Bane is making the people of Gotham think that they can survive something that he is threatening them with. 

Ubu: I'm going to stab you in the kidneys, don't worry, you will survive. 

Me: You're the one threatening me, which means you can decide if I will survive or not. 

Ubu: No! No! It's fine, you can survive this.  

Me: I'm just saying I would have a better chance at surviving if you didn't point to knife at my kidneys.

Ubu: You will survive! 

Me: OK. 

When Bane goes back to Gotham, he turns a device into a nuclear bomb with the help of a scientist he abducted at the beginning of the movie. Then Ubu makes his appearance, destroying bridges, tunnels, and other parts of Gotham. Then he becomes Hitler. I’m not joking, he gives speeches like a dictator. He shows the bomb to the people of Gotham, kills the scientist because he can disarm it, gives a speech about him claiming to be a libertarian, and releases the inmates of Gotham. OK, what's Ubu trying to do does he want to destroy Gotham or give Gotham back to the people? 

If he wants to destroy Gotham then why not just set off the bomb instead of waiting for 5 months for it to go off? How is he giving Gotham back to the people by releasing inmates and trapping the police in the sewers? If this is psychological warfare it doesn't work if you don't give people a reason to trust you. I'm not going to bother asking why isn’t Ubu an elderly man, I mean we see him in a flashback later on in the film and he's the same age in that scene as he is now. I wish the writers would leave the part out that he was part of the League of shadows because it doesn’t make him an individual villain and he has no reason to do this as we will learn later on. 

P.S. I didn't like the way he was killed off.   


No 2: Bruce Wayne/Batman 8 years have passed since The Dark Knight, and no one has seen Bruce or Batman, huh? What gives no one in Gotham thinks it's a coincidence that both Bruce and Batman have not been seen, not even Commissioner Gordon? (To be fair, he doesn't care who he is.) Come on, it's obvious that Bruce Wayne is Batman; this undermines the realism this movie claims to have. This is no different if Bruce put a sign in front of his mansion that says Hey morons, I’m Batman! The only person who figured it out is John Blake. He didn’t figure it out because both Bruce and Batman haven’t been seen; he figured it out by hiding your emotion is like wearing a mask metaphor. 

OK, first of all, if he's that good at spotting people hiding their true emotions, then why isn’t he a therapist? Second, what made him think out of everyone in Gotham that Bruce is Batman because of that metaphor? The reason why Bruce Wayne hasn’t been seen is that he's still grieving over Rachel’s death, OK, I'm not trying to be insensitive. I know it's not easy to deal with the death of a loved one; however, this is a disgrace to this character. The last film was about him learning how to deal with the hardship of being Batman. He saved Rachel more than once, and he was chased by the police, but those things didn't stop him from being Batman. Now that he has lost Rachel and Batman is a fugitive, he doesn’t care about Gotham anymore. If that's the case, then why did he become Batman in the first place? Here are a few scenarios.

Bruce: It was my plan to fix Gotham City.

Me: Then why did you stop being Batman for the past eight years? 

Bruce: Shut up!

Bruce: I don't want to be Batman because I don't want to put my loved ones in danger.

Me: Then why did you spend 7 years training to become Batman in the first place?

Bruce: Shut up!

This makes him look selfish because isolating himself like this causes him to lose his company and put Gotham in danger. This also shows that Rachel was wrong about Bruce as far as there won't be a time when he will no longer need Batman. Later on in the film, we find out that Bruce’s body is badly injured he has no cartilage in one of his knees. Mr. Nolan thinks we have only two brain cells rubbing together. How did this happen to him, I mean, he spent 8 years doing nothing, plus he was Batman for only a year or two, so how did he get badly injured? After John Blake talks to Bruce, Bruce runs into Selina Kyle and finds out about Bane; he becomes Batman again. So that's what it takes to get Bruce to become Batman again is stealing from him, our hero, ladies and gentlemen.  
After Bruce was left in the wishing well, one of the inmates was able to fix his back by hanging him on a rope and hitting his back really. This isn’t a Kung Fu movie; this also undermines the realism in this movie. I'm surprised that Bruce is taking advice from these inmates because what they have to say is not that helpful. When Bruce is having a hard time trying to escape the well, the inmates tell him that you were born in a life of privilege and you're not afraid of dying. Huh!?! What does that have to do with it? Plus, he said he is afraid of dying in the pit while his city burns, so what are they talking about? The real reason why he's having a hard time escaping is that whenever someone tries to escape the well, the inmates start chanting like they're at a soccer game. No wonder no one was able to escape this well; it would be hard for anyone to climb with all that noise. 
Speaking of chants, what they were chanting meant rises (WOW! That's really subtle of you, Mr. Nolan.) I thought this was going to be used by Ubu’s men, but no, it's used by inmates who tried to take advantage of a kid, wow. Well, we learn that this kid is the only one who was able to escape the well. I’m no expert on children, but I haven’t met a lot of kids who don’t have Acrophobia or are strong enough to climb. We also learn about what we thought was Ubu’s backstory, while Bruce is in the well, we get flashbacks of these inmates going after this kid, who we thought was Ubu, to do GOD knows what. I'm surprised that Bruce didn't make a grappling hook and get out of the well that way. Really, I can't believe the inmates didn't try to work together to get out of this prison, considering no one is watching them.  
After escaping the wishing well, Bruce returns to Gotham and stops Ubu and the bomb as Batman with the help of Selina Kyla. Wait, how did Bruce manage to get back into Gotham City before the bomb exploded when most of the entrance to Gotham is blocked and he's broke? OK, guys, I want to ask you something; would you trust a woman who steals your mom’s necklace, your car, plays a role in you losing your wealth, and sold you out to a group of mercenaries? If the answer is no, then why is Bruce so stupid in this movie!?! He has no reason to trust her; she even points this out. She sounds like my ex. Also, Bruce Wayne/Batman fakes his death by flying the bomb away from the city on the Bat and passes the Batman mantle to John Blake. 

What gives!?! This movie addresses how bad it is to lie, even if your intentions are good, and to have this movie end on a lie undermines that message. Why would Bruce choose John Blake to be the new Batman, or whoever, I mean, Bruce didn’t think this through. John Blake doesn’t have the same training Bruce had to take up the mantle, plus we don't know much about him. This movie would have ended differently if Bruce had done a background check on the main villain, who was pretending to be someone else. Plus, how did he survive the explosion? I mean, that was a nuclear bomb; he needs more than 5 seconds to get away from that kind of explosion. I know this movie is trying to give Bruce an arc of being a broken hero trying to rise above his pain to become the hero again. It's just that Bruce needs a better motivation for not being Batman; Ubu and Bruce don't have history. Also, you can tell this story without Bruce isolating himself from the world for eight years. Plus, Bruce hasn't been Batman long enough to tell that story. 

P.S. Do I really have to comment on how ridiculous it is that Batman would fight with the police in the daytime? Also, I was surprised that Bruce didn't deny that he was Batman to John Blake.  


No. 3: Alfred Despite having one tender scene, I didn't like what this movie did with this character. I don't buy that he would leave Bruce’s side the way he did; he left in the first act before anything happened. If Bruce being Batman bothers him, then why did he support him in the last two films, and why didn’t he leave when Bruce from day one? He told Bruce that he would never give up on him. What happened to that? I know this was also done in Knightfall; however, it made more sense in that story despite having an issue with it.
Alfred also plays a role in Bruce's broken state of mind. I mean, what has he done in the past eight years to get him out of this funk? Telling Bruce about the letter that Rachel chose Dent over him didn't help either because A he waited too long to tell him that, and B he burned that letter. Another thing, where did he go when Ubu was terrorizing the city? When he was at Bruce's grave, grieving, I was trying not to laugh. I'm sorry, but you can't have it both ways; you can't turn your back on him when he's vulnerable and expect me to feel your pain. OK, if I were Alfred, I would be mad at Bruce for letting me believe that he was dead because they didn’t resolve the issues that made Alfred leave. 

P.S. How did he get information on Bane? I mean, no one else knows who he is before he reveals himself. 


No. 4: Deputy Commissioner Foley Question why is he in this movie? I mean, he's just in the movie to extend the movie's run time and slow down the GPD from stopping Ubu. When Ubu tried to escape the stock exchange, and Batman showed up, Foley told every cop to go after Batman. What the fudge? This is what I'm talking about. It seems like the GPD forgot about the Joker because they're making the same mistake they did with the Joker, as far as not taking Ubu seriously. Why not spend half of the police after Batman and the other half after Ubu and his men? 
The reason why he wants the GPD to go after Batman is so that he can take credit for the capture of Harvey Dent’s murderer. I don’t understand why he keeps calling John Blake a hot head when he's giving suggestions that will move the plot faster. Is he trying to be funny? Early in the film, the GPD knew that Ubu and his men were in the sewer, besides John Blake Foley and the GPD didn’t try to get them. This guy wants to be a better Commissioner than Commissioner Gordon, but he does things that Gordon wouldn't do.


No. 5: Commissioner Gordon We see how keeping Harvey Dent looking good to the public affects Gordon. He lost his family over this lie, the lie is eating him up inside, and he's about to lose his job. I find it odd that he doesn't talk about his family. Does he miss them? What's the point of doing that if it has no payoff? After Gordon has been shot by one of Ubu’s men, he's sent to the hospital. 
In the second act of the film, he tells every cop to go into the sewers and smoke Ubu and his men out. Huh!?! Why send every cop available into the sewer? Why not send a SWAT team? What makes Ubu think that the GPD is that stupid that they would go in the sewer, like I say, it just takes a SWAT team to get them out. I’m guessing it's the drugs making him talk like that. I wish Commissioner Gordon would tell Batman to come back after Ubu holds the city Hostage. Also, how did he know the masked man's name is Ubu when no one addressed him as Ubu?    


No. 6: John Daggett This is another character that needs to be written out of the film. John Daggett is a member of Wayne Enterprise, and he's mad because the company is losing money and no one has seen Bruce Wayne in 8 years. Since he has his own Construction Company and Wayne Enterprise is losing money, he decides to work somewhere else. Wait! I'm sorry that what someone with logic would have done. Instead of doing that, he has a plan to take over Wayne's enterprise with the help of Ubu and Selina Kyle. 
OK, three things about his plan that bother me. First of all, John Daggett needs Bruce’s figure prints for this to happen, and Ubu uses his figure prints at the stock exchange to download something to make Bruce poor. One big problem with that is Bruce wasn’t at the stock exchange, and no one noticed that Bruce wasn’t at the stock exchange. Second, why wasn’t John Daggett investigated? I mean, Alfred said that he has a history of hiring Ubu. Finale Daggett is mad at the wrong person; he should be mad at Miranda Tate, she's a Wayne board member, and her clean energy project is costing the company a lot of money to the point where it's almost bankrupt. 



No. 7: The people of Gotham City How in the world did the Dent Act eliminate organized crime? You mean to tell me no one tried to fill the vacuum? I wish this movie would force on the people of Gotham, I mean, it doesn't show us how Ubu being a liberator or terrorist affects them. Yes! We get a small montage of people being thrown out there homes, partying, and being tortured, but it wasn't explored. Gotham City is like a character itself. I was hoping that Gotham's citizens would be more involved in what Ubu was doing. Also, the Gotham citizens didn't react to Ubu's speech about Harvey Dent, I mean, they didn't ask Commissioner Gordon or anyone if it's true? However, it would be a matter of he-said-she-said because it's hard to prove that, because he's dead, Gordon's family was written out of the film, and the witnesses disappeared. I wish Commissioner Gordon would disclose what Hervey did to someone. 

I was surprised that the GPD didn't get out of the sewers themselves. I mean, don't they have equipment that can help them do that? Also, Dr. Crane/Scarecrow is in this movie, but he was wasted; he's used as a judge to execute the rich citizens of Gotham. The arc in the last two films was can Gotham be saved? I thought this movie was going to continue that arc by having the people of Gotham stand up to Ubu, fighting back, and wanting Batman to be their hero. I wish the writers would come up with a better way for the people of Gotham to find out that Batman didn’t kill Harvey Dent on purpose, so that the people of Gotham can appreciate Batman for taking the fall. 

  
No. 8: Miranda Tate/Talia That’s right, Miranda is Talia al Ghul, the daughter of Ra’s al Ghul. You can't argue that this is a good twist because we didn't know Ra's had a child until now. This really gives me a headache because I don’t know who planned what. Miranda tried to see Bruce numerous times about the clean energy project, and she finally does after Daggett made Bruce broke, so Bruce made her in charge of the Wayne board and the fusion device because he's afraid that someone will turn it into a bomb. What!?! Why did Bruce build and keep a device that can be turned into a bomb and cost your company money? I know he has a fail-safe for it; however, that won't stop someone from finding it since you haven't been around for eight years. what the fudge, Bruce? 

Also, Talia could have risked Ubu and his men for abducting the doctor who could do that for nothing, because she didn’t know that Bruce still had the fusion device. After Batman beats Ubu, Miranda reveals herself as Talia and that she was the kid that escaped the pit, and Ubu protects her from the other inmates. I'm confused by her motivations because one contradicts the other. First, she said I hate my father until you killed him, then she said I will honor my father by finishing his work. OK, if Talia hates her father as she claims, why would she want to kill the man who killed her father? She should be grateful that he killed him, I mean, he did abandon her and her mother in the wishing well with a bunch of men, and her mother was murdered. 

Also, she did something that contradicts that motivation. Early in the film, after Bruce made Miranda head of Wayne Enterprises, she slept with him. Why would she do that? I would understand if she did it to drop his guard and kill him, but that didn’t happen; this is weird. Did she do this to gain his trust? That can’t be it because Bruce made her head of Wayne Enterprises. Did she do it to break his heart? No, because there's no romance between these two. Was she trying to distract us from thinking she's the real villain? No, that’s what Bane and Daggett were for. 

Either this is her way of thanking him for killing her father, or this is fan service; the reason I said that is because in the comic, Talia is one of Bruce/Batman’s love interests. I wouldn’t sleep with the man who killed my father. If I was her, I would maybe give him a medal. How did she know that Bruce killed her father? I mean, this movie doesn’t tell us if she was also excommunicated from the league of shadows or was part of that group. Like I said before, Talia and Bane don’t operate like the League of Shadows. Also, Bruce/Batman, Commissioner Gordon, and Harvey Dent, both when he was dead and alive, fix the reason why Ra’s al Ghul wants to destroy Gotham, so what did she mean by I will finish my father’s work if you hate him? 

The bottom line is that she is another character that needs to be written out of the film. I mean, if Robin isn't going to be in this franchise, why should she be in it? Hack Ra’s al Ghul’s bodyguard wasn’t in Batman Begins. Speaking of Robin John Blake's legal name is Robin, so this is how you bring Robin into this franchise without actually doing it. Screw you, Mr. Nolan or whoever came up with that. 

P.S. her death scene was terrible.  
                 
Epilogue: As far as Selina Kyle goes, I just wish she had a bigger role in the movie. Her wanting to wipe her record clean and start over is ridiculous because her record is not all digital. What is she going to do about the papers that have her records? Also, it makes no sense for her to despise the upper class because we don't see them stepping on the lower class's toes. Also, Bruce's family has a history of helping the less fortunate, so what is she talking about? I don’t think this movie is terrible, it's just the problems in this movie bugs me, especially when this movie screams rewrite and contrivances. The other gripes I have with this film are minor, like the Batcave, some of the dialogue, making Bruce seem old, more plot holes, the eight-year gap, and the spare tumbles. I thought this movie was going to have Bruce still be Batman in the 8 years that passed, instead of him sitting in Wayne Manor. Also, have him start questioning if he's making things better or worse? Then have Bane show the people of Gotham that Batman is a man, not a symbol. After that, he takes everything away from Bruce/Batman, his wealth, alias, friends, home, and his well to live. 

Bane could have expanded on what the Joker did in The Dark Knight by driving the people of Gotham crazy to the point where they want to die. He could have done this by showing them what prison life is like. From Bane's point of view, prison life is no different from civilian life. The only difference between the two is that society has better carrots and sticks. You don't know what fear is until you know what prison life is like. I also thought that Bane was going to destroyer Gotham City from the inside out when I saw the stock exchange scene in the trailers.
I thought he was going to bankrupt the city, create an EMP, release the inmates, and hold the city hostage. Also, I thought the writers were going to do something with the screenplay about class warfare; this would fit into Bane and Selina Kyle’s backstory and motivations. They both grew up in a bad and poor environment. This movie could have made us ask questions like how much money means to us, can we thrive in a survival of the fittest, or might makes right society? 

The problem with that is the movie doesn't show that Gotham has a history of a class divide. This movie could have been better if the creators had worked Selina Kyle into the story. I mean, have her do some of the things Talia was doing, as far as have Bruce invest in Salina’s project that will make the Wayne enterprise bankrupt, they develop a romance, and then have her break his heart. After Bane executes his plan, we see she has a change of heart, so she goes back to Bruce to make amends, and they try to stop Bane. If any writer can take my suggestion and build a story around them, then it could have been a great film.      

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

My top 10 Overrated movies

My top 10 Overrated movies
Making this list was hard for me because there are movies that I already reviewed that I want to put on this list. The reason why there not on this list is because I can't think of anything new to say about them that's already been said. The films that I picked are movies that won Oscars, that were well received by the critics or the general public and became a franchise. I'm not trying to make people who like these films feel bad, and I don’t think they're stupid for enjoying them I'm just expressing how I feel about these movies personally. If you don’t want to hear anything bad about these movies, then don’t read this.


No 10. Casino Royal: If this is not one of the worst Bond films, I don’t know what is and this is coming from a guy who doesn't follow this franchise. How this movie was well received is beyond me because it doesn’t have the things that makes a 007 movie like the gadgets, car chases, gun fights, Bond’s allies, his catchphrase, etc. I don’t mind this series doing something different however you can’t ignore the ingredient that made this franchise in the first place. I find it hard to believe that this is a reboot because this is kind of a remake of Casino Royal and a prequel. 
Speaking of Casino Royal, it took over an hour for the movie to get there and it's boring because we are watching him and the villain playing poker for half an hour. What the fudge? This is a 007 movie if I want to see people playing poker, I would watch people playing poker. As far as the villain I can’t take him seriously because he has a babyface. Not only that he’s not that bad so how can we be invested in the conflict between these two if there are no stakes? I also don’t like this James Bond because he keeps screwing up on his missions and he doesn’t seem to take his job seriously. Other issues I have with this movie are boring exposition, lame action scenes and dumb moments. This and the sequel weren’t the best way to restart this franchise I hope the third movie will make up for the last two movie's shortcomings.      


No 9. Paranormal Activity: How is a found footage film about doors and objects moving by themselves scary? This movie couldn’t scare a baby or a mouse for that matter. It would be a good twist if Casper was behind it the hold time. The good thing I can say about this movie is that there are no annoying jump scares. There is one scary moment in the film where something is pulling the woman out of bed, but it wasn't that effective. 
This movie is about a couple who move into a house haunted, wow like I’ve never heard of or seen this before. After realizing that the house is haunted the couple pack their things and move out, wait I’m sorry that's what someone with logic would have done. Instead of leaving they decide to record what happens in the house, this movie would have been over sooner if they just leave! This movie could have been scary if the so-called demon did things everywhere the couple go, killed people, or had the demon pose the man or woman. Speaking of the couple it's hard to be invested in them when we don't see them do things that couples do. This movie could have been scary if the execution was better.   



No 8. Star Wars Episode 3 Revenge of the Sith: This movie may be better than the other two in some aspects but that not saying much. There is no reason to like this film and not like the first two films. This movie had the same problems the first two had, doula characters, stiff acting and contradicting what we learned in the original trilogy. The only difference between this and the first two is this has more action, drama, the CGI looks good at times, does a better job of explaining things and Anakin and Obi-Wan he a better dynamic. I remember everyone in the movie theater clapping when Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader, why Anakin becoming Darth Vader was suppose to be a tragedy but it was handled poorly here. 
The fight between him and Obi-Wan drags on for way too long. Plus, it lacks the emotional impact it suppose to have because these movies didn't do the best job of reinforcing their friendship. This was done better in the tie-in game for the most part. The one thing I liked about this movie is the action scenes. This movie wouldn’t have been made if someone said execute order 66 on the battle of Geonosis. If this movie made up for the last two films I'm happy for you, it just didn't do it for me. 



No 7. Slimdog Millionaire: How does a film that has kids being tortured, people being killed and a Mumbai version who wants to be a millionaire won eight out of ten Oscars it was nominated for? This movie was stupid and contrived. The premise for this film wasn't bad, however, it wasn’t told well. This movie doesn’t have characters the main character Jamal makes Forest Gump look better, I mean Forest Gump reacts when things happen to him good or bad. This movie is about a boy name Jamal who grew up poor and became successful, it’s hard to care about Jamal or like him if I don’t know how his ordeals affect him. I wish we learn about these so-called characters and know them, 
The questions on who wants to be a millionaire gave us flashbacks of Jamal’s life and explain how he knew the answers, the problem with that is not all the flashbacks explain how he knew the answers or how he went from here to there. It's hard to agree with the movie’s message that money can make you happy and fix your problems; because money is the reason why people were doing bad things in this movie. Again, how did this movie won eight Oscars? 


No 6. Dream Girls: 2006 was not a good year for me in cinema and this movie was no exception, don’t get me wrong I don’t think this movie was terrible it was just so predictable you can tell by looking at the trailers. Really, I thought this was a remake of Sparkle or a biography of the Supremes, because this movie reminds me of those groups. There was an episode on Save by the bell that is similar to this movie, why didn’t that episode get the same praise as this movie or won an Emmy? The issue I have with musicals is the songs should help push the story or tell us something about the characters. This movie only has one song that does that. The only thing I like about this movie is one scene with Eddie Murphy, you will know what scene I'm talking about. With that said I would recommend this if you like musicals and I hope this movie didn’t offend people who are overweight. 





No 5. Titanic: Why is this movie called Titanic? Seriously this movie has nothing to do with what really happened on that ship. Hollywood should be ashamed that they're making films that are suppose to be based on true people, events and books and they're not. They have done this with films like I ‘Robot, Pursuit to Happiness and 21. That was the case here this movie was an insult to the memories of the people on that ship. It shouldn't take over three hours to tell a story about a ship sinking. What makes me mad about this movie is that the love story in the film overshadowed the real events of the Titanic. 
Speaking of the love story it was crap because it makes Roses look bad. What's so romantic about her cheating on her Husband!?! I don't care if her husband is a jerk marriage is a lifelong commitment either make it work or divorce him. Also, she does something towards the end of the movie that undermines her love for Jake. On the 100th anniversary of the Titanic, The Talk had a memorial of the movie instead of the Titanic. How can a movie about an unconvincing love story overshadow a story about tragedy and chivalry? Pearl Harbor did the same thing, that is adding a love story over the real event and that movie didn’t get the same praise as this movie, so much of respecting the dead or you won’t have a future if you don’t know your past.   

            
No 4. Forest Gump: This movie is about a man name Forrest Gump who lived his life and throughout his life he meets famous people and was involved and witnessed historical events. I know I'm doing this movie a disserves by breaking it down to its essentials but that's what this movie is about. I appreciate that this movie is an underdog story for people with low IQ's the problem with telling this story is that we don't see Forrest struggle in this movie. Well, he did struggle with one thing but that was beyond his control. What's the point of establishing that this character is not that bright if it won't be a factor in the story? 
The Forrest Gump character is also problematic because he's flat. I mean we don’t learn much about him, he doesn’t develop as a character, and he just goes through the motions. I didn’t get it what's the point of showing us historical events from the point of view of this character if we don't get any inside from him? Another thing the way he let Jenny treat him makes me sick! He wants to be with her although she disrespects him and takes him for granted. Come on man have some self-respect. This movie is not completely accurate to the novel, they left a few things out from the book. If the writers made life is like a box of chocolates quote a theme in this movie it, could have been better, I mean this movie could have been about not giving up on your goals and dreams despite the roadblocks and hardship.                 

 
No 3. Saw: This movie should have been called Traps because that’s what it is a bunch of people that we don’t know or care about in traps. How can a movie this stupid get so much praise, the last thing this movie is scary, if people are putting movies like this in high regard is there any wonder why the horror genre is losing its novelty? We don’t see the killing in this movie, the characters are dumb, and the mystery of who the killer is a joke. The killer Jigsaw is another problem I have with this movie. 
We were told that the killer gets people to kill themselves and that’s not true he has killed people by putting them in his death traps. It doesn’t matter if they died trying to get out of the trap it wouldn’t have happened if he didn’t put them in a life-or-death situation. Also, Jigsaw’s motivation for doing this is because he can’t stand people who don’t appreciate life. I like that he has a GOD complex that doesn’t change the fact that he doesn’t appreciate his life to do anything else but kill people. Also, how is putting them in traps going to help them appreciate life? If I was in one of these traps and managed to escape, I would be happy that I’m out of the trap. I know the sequels fixed this give or take but that doesn’t change the fact that this was not a good first outing for this franchise.         


     
No 2. Honey, I Shrunk the Kids: I feel like I’m cheating by putting this movie on the list because this is a forgotten franchise. With that said it was popular enough to get two sequels, a TV series, an award for its effects, be referenced in other TV shows and a theme park ride. This movie wasted the concept of shrinking people or objects, I mean more could have been done with it besides giving us an adventure movie. Don’t get me wrong I’m not against the directing this movie took but when Power Ranger does it better you know you screwed up. 

Is it me or does this movie remind you of The Land Before Time? I’m surprised that the kids are not traumatized by this experience, I mean they face danger so many times in this movie they should be on edge. That’s the problem I have with this movie there aren’t enough light-hearted moments to balance this out. The kids going on this adventure to go back to their normal size has no payoff for them personally. Besides one of them having a crush on the other they are indifferent to each other and that hasn’t changed in a believable way. If this franchise used shrinking to solve world hunger or fix the economy, I would understand why this movie was a hit, but it was wasted by giving us more of the same.       



No 1. Avatar: The fact that this movie made over 2.7 billion dollars and won Oscars is a slap in the face to all the films this movie rips off. Seriously this movie steals from The Last Samurai, dancing with WolvesThe Fast and Furious, Ferngully and No Man’s Land. 
WOW! This is one heck of a copyright lawsuit. I say that because it didn't do the best job of telling the story that the other movies I've mentioned have told. This movie is Cell from DBZ. Look I don't mind that this movie borrows from each other films the problem I have with it is that this movie gives no nuance to the stories that we've seen before. When you tell a story that has been told so many times you can get people interested by playing with our expectations or subverting them. This movie did none of these things. Also, how the story plays out is contrived, I mean why do the humans need clones of the Navi if they have suits that can help them breathe on Pandora? Why didn't the Army invade their land sooner? 
Jake (The main character) is another problem I had with this movieI'm not convinced that he bonded with the Navi, especially with the one he spends the most time with. It seems that he likes the Navi’s (the natives on the planet) just to get out of his dilemma and ride flying creatures. He shouldn't be that impressed with them because the Navi’s culture reminds us of Native Americans or African American tribes. Also, Jake goes through a nature vs nurture arc, my gripe with this is we don’t learn or know anything about him or the supporting characters to appreciate that arc. The only thing we know about him is that he's not close to his twin brother I mean he doesn't talk about him or is upset that he died. This movie started some controversy in Hollywood. Some people thought the movie was racist, anti-military and Catholics were offended by this movie. Let's be honest with ourselves this movie was an event, If the movie came out in 1997 and the CGI wasn’t groundbreaking this movie wouldn't have been memorable.