Spider-Man: Homecoming [IMAX 3D]

As a second reboot, Spider-Man: Homecoming had a lot stacked against it, but what Marvel/Sony had wisely chosen to do was to steer away from the over-trodden origin story and instead focused on the growing pains of a being (super)hero. And also casting Tom Holland in the lead. With Holland, the MCU had hit another gold mine in casting like what they had with Robert Downey Jr. That being said, the film itself, unfortunately, was a mid-tier entry in the MCU. It was fun, enjoyable and entertaining - everything one would expect from a Marvel-film and a summer popcorn release. However. for all its quips and maniacal energy, it lacked the kinetic and effortless humour of Ant-Man, The Avengers (both parts) and Guardians of the Galaxy (part one only), and also the thrilling excitement and adrenaline-pumping actions of the first two Tobey Maguire/Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies and Andrew Garfield/Marc Webb's first The Amazing Spider-Man.

Jon Watts' direction was apt and competent, but his storytelling felt simplistic and lacked urgency. Partially it could be the invisible strings of the Marvel Studio at work as the film worked best when the story was simply focused on Peter Parker instead of trying to tie it neatly into the vast, money-making franchise that is the MCU. Perhaps because this is a co-production with Sony, but that integration had never been more apparent and jarring. Watts will likely be invited back for the sequel since he did complete the film without being fired (see Rouge One and the young Hans Solo film).

The army of credited writers could have also been a factor in the haphazard nature of the film. With so many voices, it was not surprising that the screenplay did not come across as entirely coherent.

Watts' ability was also lacking in the action sequences. There were not any big, exciting fight scenes nor were there any little, fun sequences (who could forget Maguire deftly saving his lunch in his first film? Or the epic, train sequence with Doctor Octopus?). So that was a real shame.

Luckily, we had Holland. For one, he looks and acts appropriately like a teenager. More so than Maguire or Garfield. Outwardly, he was a perfect balance between Garfield's dorky likability and Maguire's bumbling earnestness. He could also pull off the snarky, snippy, motor-mouth quips that the comic-book Spider-Man is known for. The show is built around him and revolves around him and it shows. However, his chemistry with the rest of the cast was weak at best and this was also perhaps due to the shadows cast by his predecessors. Holland and Marisa Tomei's Aunt May felt more like an Aunt-Nephew relationship than a close knitted one that it is supposed to be, unlike Maguire and Rosemary Harris or Garfield and Sally Field; Holland and Laura Harrier (as love interest Liz) did not had much chemistry, unlike Garfield and Emma Stone; Holland and Jacob Batalon (as best friend Ned) kind of lacked the depth and over-familiarity that was so strong between Maguire and James Franco. Maybe the next film, they can focused on rounding out Peter's character.

Michael Keaton's Vulture/Adrian Toomes was the rare superhero villain that was actually genuine sympathetic. Sure. Keaton can be scary as hell, but at least Watts et al tried to make his character less flat with proper "motivations" and purpose that was not all about death and destruction. That one scene in the car between Keaton and Holland was the best piece of acting from both parties and in the whole film.

Of the young cast. only the other big-named star - Zendaya - stood out. Mainly because of her character's enigma and nonchalant attitude.  And her character does not really revolve around that of Parker.

RDJ in small amounts is good.

Jon Favreau's Happy is the new Agent Coulson, the (cheap) glue to the franchise.

The other best casting was that of Jennifer Connelly aka Karen aka "Suit Lady" aka Mrs Paul Bettany aka wife of Vision aka wife of J.A.R.V.I.S. How meta!

Music was by Michael Giacchino and his output has been getting disappointing. Previously an exciting and innovative composer, now most of his recent scores had been for franchises and they have been generic and uninspiring.

The mid-credits scene was a great nod to the character involved. And the post-credits scene was a great gag/laugh.

3D was fun, as expected what with the web-swingings; IMAX was great but not really necessary.

Here's hoping Holland doesn't lose his way (remember The Impossible, The Lost City of Z and Billy Elliot).

Transformers: The Last Knight

A typical, mindless, over-bloated, all-out sensory assault by Michael Bay that although was just slightly more coherent than the previous "Age of Extinction", it was also less exciting and adrenaline pumping than an usual Bay fare which was very unfortunate since that was the least of all expectations. 

Like the past entries, the story here was a distant third place to CGI and action, with acting a pithy consideration. Even if all that was expected, the film would have benefited a lot more from being shorter. Maybe trim off about 20 minutes and skip the whole unnecessary prologue which served no narrative purpose other than for Bay to do an Arthurian ripoff. And maybe because dragons are wicked. 

Also we could have easily skipped the ridiculous "Stranger Things" homage too and the unnecessary child actor inclusion. 

This go round the main action sequences were more human centric and less Transformers-bases action. And even less Transformers vs Transformers one which is generally what most fans are looking forward to. We barely get a good full body shot of the dinobots or the damn dragon! 

There were some attempts at humour, mostly from the sidekicks, but most were lame and off-timed. 

Anthony Hopkins and Mark Wahlberg were clearly doing it for the pay checks. At least the surprisingly best parts were with Anthony Hopkins and his C3PO-ripoff manservant; those moments at least got a snide chuckle. As for Wahlberg, one would barely even remember he could be a half-decent actor. Even his action sequences here were phoned in with mostly faceless choreographs. 

The end credits scene teases another inevitable sequel and maybe it is time to watch this franchise out of the big screen. 

The Mummy [IMAX/3D]

Generously speaking, The Mummy would have made for a good TV-movie and be better appreciated as a standalone film in itself rather than as a reboot of the Branden Fraser's 1999 hit.  Even Tom Cruise's innate charisma could not save it from its poor writing, mundane blandness and generally bad acting. However, having said that, there were four really, really great action sequences that were a lot better than anything in Wonder Woman, so there's that. But still, Penny Dreadful this ain't.

The potential of this Dark Universe, monster vs monster franchise is surely there, but director Alex Kurtzman and the whole team of writers basically just gave us a tone-deaf version of what could have been great (again, see John Logan's Penny Dreadful). And it all starts from the miscasting of Cruise. Or better put, the mischaracterisation of what a typical Cruise-character should be. To his credit, Cruise has an insane amount of charisma, but it plays much better when he portrays a character in-charge rather than as a passive stumbler of luck and contrivances.

Then we have the female companion. Annabelle Wallis was badly miscast. She and Cruise barely had any chemistry and she was utterly unbelievable as whatever her character meant to be. To make things worse, she was really a few steps back in the evolution of Cruise's female partner, i.e. a damsel in distress that needed Cruise to save. What happened to the strong, independent women like Cobie Smulders in Jack Reacher: Never Go Back, or Rebecca Ferguson in Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation, or Emily Blunt in Edge of Tomorrow?

Next we also have the miscasting of Russell Crowe. Boy, is Crowe really desperate for work? Too many elements in this film distracted from the promise of an exciting premise.

Jake Johnson replays the wise-cracking sidekicks that often occurs in Cruise's films, but it was unfortunate - and blind of Kurtzman, et al - that Cruise's character was named Nick when Johnson is probably more well known for his role as Nick in TV's New Girl.

Lastly, we have the poor Sofia Boutella. So pretty but such a bland character.

The film ran for 107 minutes but yet felt as long as Wonder Woman need. The Dark Universe franchise has so much potential that I really do hope we get to see more of it. But better.

IMAX and 3D not necessary.

Wonder Woman

As a DCEU film, Wonder Woman was definitely less dour and more lighthearted than the other Zack Synder entries, but Patty Jenkins still managed to make it take itself a bit too seriously and all amidst DCEU's usual gloomy palette; as a superhero-origins film, it delivered the heroics, the awe of self-discovery and also the extravagantly megalomaniac villain; but as a film in itself, it lacked a strong thematic cohesion, was saddled with a rambling narrative that could be at least 20-30 minutes shorter, multiple poor script choices with plot holes and contrivances, and beats telegraphed miles away, lackluster and often uninteresting - to the point of bland/boring - action sequences that relied on too much (bad) CGI, and bad banter. However, through it all, Gal Gadot was the absolute star and saving grace of the film and proved that her appearance in Superman v Batman: Dawn of Justice was no fluke.

With Jenkins at the helm, Wonder Woman definitely felt unlike any other previous DCEU films but it was a shame that she could not instill her voice definitively into the film. Synder's fingerprints were clearly visible in almost every scene. It was also a shame that this film was not used to explore deeper into the potential thematic quagmire of patrimony, unlike its comic books source. Furthermore, as the ending showed, Diana Prince ultimately fell prey to a chauvinistic view of the the world and heroism.

Kudos to DCEU for getting Jenkins to direct Wonder Woman, but maybe it would have been better if female writers had been writing for it too. Writer Allan Heinberg had ideas but a lot of it were not completely realised and his bantering was weak which seemed to suggest that his characters were not as well thought out as could be. In all, perhaps this is where MCU's Captain Marvel can improve on, with a all-female writing team and a female co-director. Then again, we do have Joss Whedon taking over the Justice League film (banter galore!) and his take on Batgirl to look forward to.

Other than the plodding narrative, the action sequences also left much to be desired. For one, the action sequences kept getting interrupted and Jenkins never really managed to reach a climatic adrenaline surge in any of the scenes. The action choreography was also sloppy with an over-reliance on rapid cut edits and poor CGI resulting in inorganic fight scenes especially in a film that relied much on hand-to-hand combat. The end result were action sequences that lacked the kinetic energy and adrenaline charge of more accomplished/confident action directors.

Lastly we had the villain. Without spoiling anything, the villain felt too generic and many times conjured up images of the way scarier Voldermort. That climatic fight scene could also have been longer and victory more hard-earned.

For all its faults, at least there was Gadot to save the day. She could be the Robert Downey Jr of the DCEU, in that I do not think anybody else could have played the role as well as she did. Gadot had charisma and charm. She could do humour effortlessly - that single eyebrow raise! - but yet also exuded a strong and fierce determination for justice that did not appear faked or false. Her solo, non CGI-ed, fight scenes were believable and should have been utilised more. With a better script, Gadot could really banter with the best of them. The only weak spot - which is more due to script issues - were the emotional beats between her and Chris Pine. Jenkins and co should have either left that out or just plainly allude to it.

Part of the problem above was the chemistry between Gadot and Pine. There were moments between them but much of it fleeting. Pine may be the superhero girlfriend-equivalent in the film but he definitely was not subjected to the usual feminist constrictions in a male superhero film. At times, his character seemed to overshadowed the more passive Diana. On his own, Pine was engaging and did imbue in his character a sense of righteousness and justice on par with Gadot's Diana Prince.

For the rest of the cast, only Lucy Davis was a stand out and a scene stealer as Steve Trevor's secretary. David Thewlis was a lot creepier and scarier in the current season of Fargo. Similarly, Robin Wright exuded more strength and commanded the screen more as Claire Underwood in House of Cards than as General Antiope. Ewen Bremner, Said Tagyhmaoui and Eugene Brave Rock were there simply as comedic relief and even then were barely effectively used.

Other than the main Wonder Woman theme, the rest of the score by Rupert Gregson-Williams et al (4 other credited writers!) was unmemorable and generic. Lensing by Matthew Jensen was also similarly unmemorable.

Wonder Woman was an entertaining film. It was fun for what it was, and a definite step-up from all the other non-Christopher Nolan DCEU films. However, for all its feminist leanings, Wonder Woman still remained a decidedly chauvinistic film and that is a shame.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales

This was a surprisingly fun and entertaining film only because there was little to no expectations of it going in. And that really is the key to enjoying Johnny Depp re-inhabiting, albeit still rather successfully, the tired trope that is Jack Sparrow. Otherwise, the best part of the film was hearing Hans Zimmer's familiar score throughout the film (now interpreted by his protege Geoff Zanellli). The rest of the film was a tired mashed-up of incoherent, paper-thin, un-inspired storytelling with lame humour, bland characters and an plot twists telegraphed a mile away. Although the end-credits scene does hold potential to a possibly meatier storyline. Though that could just be wishful thinking.

New franchise directors, Joachim Rønning and Espen Sandberg, the Norwegian duo that gave us the excellent Kon-Tiki, did try their best to reinvigorate the story and this was encouragingly apparent in the first act - after the prologues (two of them!). It was the most adrenaline-filled and theme park-like fun in the whole film even with the nonsensical plot and contrived narrative which was written by Jeff Nathanson (story by himself and Terry Rossio). And there was one genuine moment that was unexpected (in terms of execution) that was really just laugh out loud funny.

And once we hit the second act, things just slowed. Almost 15 - 20 minutes could have been trimmed from the story just to tighten things up a bit. And really, the love story between the two young things was both cliche and unnecessary, other than to set up for some sexual innuendo-laden punchlines. In addition, both Brenton Thwaites and Kaya Scodelario, as pretty as they may be, had little to no chemistry. And that was a stark contrast to fans who remembered the rather sizzling chemistry and repartee between Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley.

Lastly, the climatic showdown was a let down. From the sets themselves which looked like they ran out of budget and the eyes-roll inducing resolution of the conflict. It was as if everybody just ran out of steam by then and just wanted to quickly get those scenes shot and over with.

Depp reminds us once again why he got an Oscar nomination for this role. Although, undoubtedly Captain Jack Sparrow has been reduced to a caricature of himself in the sequels, Dead Men Tell No Tales see him in a slightly more restrained role. Depp effortlessly mixes the broad buffoonery with a tinge of heroism and heart. Sparrow remains his greatest creation this century.

Javier Bardem was terrifying as the main antagonist this time. But other than looking scary and sneering and lamenting about the past, he did not have much else to do. Although the CGI used to create him (and his crew....and also young Depp!) was brilliant.

Geoffrey Rush reprised his role as Hector Barbossa and his was the most human of all the characters. Rush has always been a reliable actor and his chemistry with Depp was apparent.

Thwaites was pretty, but boring, although at least he was not annoying; Scodelario was also pretty but succumbed to a failed subversion of the feminist damsel. Aussie and Iron Fist's alum David Wenham was barely recognisable. As was Paul McCartney's brief cameo.

The scenes set at sea (filmed in Queensland) were gorgeous but other than that the other set pieces were less impressive. Similarly, the CGI worked well only sometimes and in particular for Bardem and his crew (humans and animals).

Like aforementioned, Zanelli's score was a standout and mainly because of Zimmer's outstanding themes for the previous entries. Nonetheless, Zanelli did his own spin but wisely kept the spirit intact.  

Stay to the end for a post-credits scene that hints at a likely sixth instalment. Hopefully the powers that be can see in them to streamline the plot and trust the audience.

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

A largely entertaining film by Guy Ritchie with all his signature directorial flair and screenwriting panache that unfortunately was frequently out of sync with its source material and the story he was trying to do. Everything about the film seemed familiar and there really were not any moments that stood out to make the film fresh and exciting.

However, credit where it is due, Ritchie has an excellent eye and hand for action choreography and it was really the action sequences (and the musical montages) that really helped to lift the film from up the doldrums of its oft-ridiculous and schizophrenic narrative (a product of too many writers/storytellers meddling). It shows a lot when a director has the guts to film a whole sequence in daylight and still manages to capture the kinetic energy and thrill of a chase. The street chase/fight was almost as exhilarating as Steven Spielberg's brilliant one-take in Tintin.

But Ritchie also seemed overwhelmed by both the budget afforded to him, letting the CGI run amok when presented with the opportunity. There were successes like the solid opening scene, but more often the CGI was used to create large set pieces that did not serve to enhance the moment.

Jude Law was spot on as the villain. Law effectively oozed menace but unfortunately his character was as one-dimensional as MCU villain.

Charlie Hunnam on the other hand was a tad miscast. He has the looks and the brawn, but lacked the charisma of a king, even an unwilling one. However, Hunnam and Richie should really get together again and do another film.  There was definite chemistry there with him sprouting Richie's classic quick-edit, rapid fire, flashback narrative.

Djimon Housou was under-utilised and seemed like the token diversity role. Aidan Gillen should stick to being Littlefinger. Astrid Berges-Frisbey needs to stay away from big Hollywood franchises/blockbusters. Eric Bana was solid but too brief. And David Beckham was a hoot.

This legend can be interpreted in many ways, but it was obvious that in this case too many people have plastered their fingerprints all over the story that they wanted to tell. And eventually, the final product was a schizophrenic film that was largely a Guy Ritchie's heist-like film but mixed with a large dose of fantasy and RPG-genre schlock.

Alien: Covenant [IMAX]

A consistently gorgeous, often exciting and occasionally philosophical - and theological - entry into the Alien franchise that reflected a back-to-form for good storytelling by Sir Ridley Scott. There were enough scares and excitements despite the predictability of the plot, but at least significantly less ridiculousness than "Prometheus". And this time there were double the Michael Fassbenders who really carried the film on his god damn perfectly composed shoulders. 

From the opening shot and scene, Scott, his frequent cinematographer Dariusz Wolski and co-writer John Logan (he of the beautiful "Penny Dreadful" musings) established the aesthetics and theme of the film. Together with the ending, the short prologue beautifully bookend this film and heightens the expectations for the next instalment of the franchise. 

One of the biggest challenges of this franchise really how to keep it fresh. By now, even the most casual fans will know how the Xenomorph (or its variants) propagates and their arrival almost usually means a death (or two or three...) of the cast. Therefore, Scott really has to work on the origin story and also amp up his game on delivery thrills without turning in horror cliches or turning into torture-porn. And at least this round, with Logan, he weaved a philosophical - albeit superficial - exploration into Creationism and Free Will. 

Ultimately, kudos to Fassbender for effectively bringing this vision to life, alhough his experience in "Assassin Creed" must have came in useful. Nonetheless, Fassbender really has evolved into one of the more charismatic actors these days and he will often be the brightest spark in even the silliest and dullest film (see above "Assassin Creed"). 

The film's most beautiful scene was just an amazingly lensed, contemplative, long shot between two Fassbenders. The beauty was only broken by the nagging tug of "How did Scott et al shoot this scene?!"  

David may be one of Scott's greatest character creation in a long time, and this prequel series (almost like a mini-Prestige TV series) will hopefully afford Scott and Fassbender (and ?Logan) to do a deep dive into this fascinating Synthetic. 

Katherine Waterston carried on the mantle of the franchise's strong female lead but she fell more into the vein of Winona Ryder rather than Sigourney Weaver or Noomi Rapace. She was more believable in the quiet emotional scenes rather than the explosive badass moments. Her big fight moments felt under baked and victory undeserved - more luck than pluck. 

Billy Crudup replayed his usual character that he has so often been asked to portrayed. The stubborn, self-righteous pseudo-alpha. His character had potential but somehow just ended up being more bluster than real action. I have a feeling that his religion would have been more in the forefront if Logan had his way. 

Sadly, the rest of the crew were forgettable. Even Danny McBride's fourth-in-command was a thin sketch of a character. And if you had watched the pre-film teaser, don't expect James Franco to be any thing more than a blip; similarly, the LGBT couple had been scrubbed to "buddies" rather than lovers. 

As mentioned, Wolski did a great job lensing the film and Jed Kurzel scored the film adequately. And Milford Sound was a gorgeous choice to set the film in. 

When will the next film be out? And what will it be about now? Hopefully, maybe, Scott will turn the table around and do a quieter entry into mythology of the Xenomorphs.