Black Panther: Wakanda Forever

As Vision said to Wanda, "But what is grief, if not love persevering?" 

This sentiment held true in this Ryan Coogler helmed epic sequel where the grief and mourning of Chadwick Boseman and King T'Challa hung over the whole 161 minutes, and at times threatening to overpower and drown the narrative. 

The plot itself was potentially so rich but an over-reliance on the meditation of grief and how it affects people differently can only work if this was not a typical MCU tentpole where there was no necessity to shoehorn MCU continuity (why did we really need Martin Freeman's and Julia Louis-Dreyfuss' characters?), the mandatory CGI battles, a backdoor pilot for Ironheart, introduce a whole new superpowered culture/people and also a homage to Boseman. 

Too many subplots led to a messy, unevenly paced show that genuinely needed that whole bloated 2.5 hours + to fit everything in, but in so doing, it lost the originality and freshness of the first film that was unbeholden to all these (dead)weight. 

The prologue and the opening sequence set a high bar for the film. A succinct moment of storytelling that involved more showing than telling, but the film just gradually slipped lower and lower from there. 

Similarly, the first action sequence was stellar. Engaging, intriguing and thrilling. But everything else after was rote and anaemic. Except for perhaps the hand-on-hand combat between Danai Gurira's Okoye and the enemy, there were no memorable action sequences. The beautiful grace of the Dora Milaje was unfortunately neutered, and the big climatic final act fight was a boring, flat CGI "spectacle" that lacked urgency or immediacy. 

Even the inevitable fight between our titular Black Panther and Namor was uninspiring.

Speaking of Namor, here we had an antihero, like Killmonger from the first film, who was an antagonist that was grounded in a tangible ideology. But unlike Michael B Jordan, Tenoch Huerta was never given the opportunity to develop his character. There was an attempt to give Namor some complexity in the second act, but it was too rushed and superficial, and by the third act, it seemed all had been forgotten. Similarly, the whole Talokan storyline was shortchanged with their entire introduction rushed through in an expository flashback and a muddled underwater introduction that somehow lacked the wonderment when we first glimpsed the Afro-futuristic Wakanda.

Further, in this film we had two tribes of colour - Indigenous and Black - pitted against each other, indirectly by white colonisers, and Coogler barely mined the complexity of this situation. Instead we spent time being introduced to Riri Williams, which as cool as she was and as well-intentioned the actress Dominique Thorne was, was essentially a superfluous character that lost her individuality once we hit the second act. Her presence only seemed to introduce to the audience Ironheart.

As the new lead, Letitia Wright has a lot on her shoulders and to anchor the film. However, as good an actress as Wright is, she lacked the screen presence to anchor an MCU film. Coogler et al also did her no favour with a character that was annoyingly one note and repetitive for the first two act and was rushed through a character evolution in the third act and the final moments that was unearned and jarring. And Wright just could not do much with what she was given, her grieve for her brother was repetitive and lacked nuance. Yes, we get it! She is angry that she could not save her brother. But is there more depth to that anger? Unfortunately, we never got to explore that because we had to go save Williams, and then go underwater to check out Talokan, and then save Wakanda. Everything that could have been mined was waved off with a title card that said "one year later". All in service to the MCU-mandated story.

On the other hand, we had the gloriously fierce and magnetic Angela Bassett who may the only one who deserve any sort of award recognition, an equally fierce and unexpectedly emotional Gurira, and the luminescent Lupita Nyong'o who was possibly the emotional centre of the whole film with her quiet strength and private grieving. These three women were the MVPs of the film and their screen time together were the best parts of the film. That singular scene between Bassett and Gurira was one of the most powerful scenes Coogler had done. Beautifully intense and achingly honest, these two actresses just owed it. However, one great scene was not enough to salvage this film.

And, what a waste of Michaela Coel. Absolute disgrace. 

That brings us to the technical aspect of the first film. The music by Ludwig Göransson was excellent and gorgeously mixed in afro beats with latin influences. And again, Ruth E. Carter's costumes were on point, though more for the Wakandans than the Talokans. Also, Hannah Beachler's production design was astounding and rich, although there were scenes that did looked fat and artificial. Nonetheless, these three artists are likely to repeat their Oscar nominations. Don't count out Rihanna too for an Original Song nomination too for a song that worked well in context, better than as a stand-alone single.

However, cinematographer Autumn Durald Arkapaw's lensing was perhaps not the best for the film. Maybe it was my theatre, but most of the film felt underlit and the underwater world of Talokan appeared muddled and uninspired. Which was such a shame.

Coogler tried to do too much with this film. Undoubtedly, Kevin Feige was to blame too. The three acts of the film should have been expanded to trilogy or even a miniseries, the first part dealing with grief, the second part as an introduction to Talokan, and the third part as the clash between the two cultures. These three storylines ought to be separated to allow them to breathe, but instead we ended up with a messy mash-up that did no one any service (except Feige's pockets).

Decision to Leave (헤어질 결심)

Park Chan-wook's latest is best described as an erotic, noir-tinged crime thriller that lacked sex. Essentially mostly a two-hander between a gloriously enigmatic and magnetic Tang Wei and handsomely dignified yet befuddled Park Hae-il, Park is back with another deep dive into the minds and psyches of seemingly simple yet utterly complex characters but all presented.  

Co-written by Park, Decision to Leave, won him the Best Director at this year's Cannes and it was not hard to see why as this film was filled with extraordinary details - the detailed production design, and the immaculate costume and makeup, especially of Tang and Park's signature directorial flourishes - fancy editing, overhead god-views, unreliable narrators, flashbacks, dolly zooms, etc. In essence, a feast for the eye and the mind. 

This film, though ostensibly a crime thriller, was less of a whodunit or a why-dunit, but an intimate exploration into the minds of two lonely individuals and the complications of their somewhat-forbidden relationship. Park's camera lingered on their body (language) as the spoken word became less important than what was not being said. In particular, Tang's foreign-ness - Chinese in Korea - not only presented an additional air of mystery surrounding her character but allowed her enigma to become a character unto itself. 

However, before you know it, Park swerved hard left and the third act was almost another story. The slow burn of the first two acts quickly cascaded into a crashing denouement, and suddenly emotions were gushing forth and consequences were befalling. Yet, this third act never seemed rushed. It may have been unexpected (although on hindsight, much foreshadowing had been made), but it did not seemed out of place. 

And in the end, the conclusion was as emotionally powerful as it was enigmatic. A fitting end to a story that traded on the simple resonance of complex emotions.

Broker (브로커)

Hirokazu Kore-eda's latest Palme d'Or-nominated and Best Actor-winning Korean film was a simple, beautiful and tender film that explored big and difficult ideas. Similar to his Palme d'Or winning film, Shoplifters, this film was about family, the real biological ones, the chosen ones, the make-believe and the forgotten, and the complicated relationships that bind them together or drive them apart. However, on top of this, writer/director Kore-eda also used this film to explore other thorny and sensitive issues such as human trafficking, child abandonment, adoption vs abortion and parental responsibility. 

Thankfully, Kore-eda handled it all with the humanistic grace and gentleness that highlighted his films and it all never came off as overly preachy or conservative. The characters deftly discussed the complex morality and ethics behind these hot-button topics without forsaking plot and pace. It all flowed naturally and with a sincerity that never felt like an exposition dump leadening the film. 

Further, Kore-eda never forgot the humour. The film was peppered with humour but most of it arose from the naturalistic - and familial-like - chemistry between the cast. It was the friendly jibes between brothers, siblings, father and son, husband and wife, that brought on the levity and smiles. 

However, that was not to say that there was no drama. This was a Kore-eda film after all and there were moments of pain and heartfelt tenderness, but they never rallied into melodrama. Kore-eda, ever the empath, presented such moments naturally and with a sensitivity that felt honest and sincere. 

With all said and done, this film would not be as successful if not for the cast that Kore-eda had assembled. Like the makeshift family they represent, their chemistry evolved over the course of the film till the end where their familial bond seemed seamless.

Leading man, Song Kang-ho easily anchored the film with his everyman charms, but beneath that was a complex character that Song (and Kore-eda) slowly presented to the audience. Unlike a lot of Hollywood films, we are never spoon fed here, but the layers are there and we are trusted to be able to peel and reveal them ourselves.

Gang Dong-won and Lee Ji-eun completed the adults of the family unit and again, these two were complex characters, the latter more so. In particular, Lee, at the end, showed a range and depth that could not have been guessed from the beginning.

Donna Bae led the subplot which in the beginning felt superfluous and tiresome, but - trust Kore-eda - dovetailed beautifully into the main story and film's themes. Bae was as effortlessly engaging as always, and the film's standout moment - an homage to Paul Thomas Anderson's Magnolia - belonged to her. 

Broker was a beautiful film to watch. It may not be as powerful as Shoplifters but it still offered a tender and gentle, yet emotional, ride that promised hope and faith in humanity. 

Thor: Love and Thunder [IMAX 3D]

A short, just under 2-hours (119 minutes), runtime made Thor: Love and Thunder, a well-paced, tightly constructed and riotously funny, space adventure/rom-com. However, at the same time, the length also resulted in many moments of  plot holes and logic leaps, and also a distinct lack of emotional heft. In particular, the central romance between Chris Hemsworth's Thor and Natalie Portman's Jane Foster, could at times felt rushed and partially unearned. 

Taika Waititi's signatures were all over the film, from the brightly-coloured palette to the almost-cringey/awkward humour - but boy, did we love those goats and their screams! Waititi's New Zealand-accented voiceover, by way of, Korg, was also a perpetual delight. 

On the other hand, the worst of his impulses were also magnified here as with the film's budget, again the juvenile-esque humour, the over-cluttered imagination/set pieces, and the mishandling of the non-children dramatic sequences. Waititi excelled with depicting the emotional landscape of children, but when it comes to adults, his films always seemed to reduce them to binary terms and over-simplifies their relationships.

Visually, the film's biggest standout moment was the shadow realm/planet set piece. That was a stunning piece of cinematography and cinematic moment. Even the action sequence there was also the best of the film, the sequences before and after were generally unimpressive with some scattered standout hero moments (The Mighty Thor and Mjonir and the mass final battle scene), but on the whole was unexciting. 

There were also some CGI issues throughout the film from obvious green-screen sets to mismatched eyelines which was distracting, especially during the slower bits of the film.

Well, at least the needle drops were impressive and on point, and far less grating than what James Gunn did for Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2. Although they did distract from Michael Giacchino's score which, other than the main themes, felt mundane and generic; almost a perennial problem with MCU films.

Hemsworth, like the other OG Avengers, has now clearly embodied Thor. Even more so after the character reboot from Waititi during Thor: Ragnarok. He clearly relished the comedic (read: himbo-ic) side of Thor and his comedic timing was golden. In addition, Hemsworth also nailed the dramatic moments, especially the final bit, except it was a shame he was relegated to bro-mode most of the time with no need to exude unnecessary drama. Nonetheless, obviously he and Waititi understood each other very well to craft a character that was entertaining and engaging. 

Now we just need to cast Hemsworth in a proper rom-com!

Portman, on the other hand, seemed unsure of the comedy. She, clearly, had no problems with the dramatic beats, but most of her Waititi-jokes did not land as well as they could. However, at least her chemistry with Hemsworth seemed to have improved. She also made a very fine Mighty Thor and perhaps with the right writer/director, her character could have a bigger/better impact.

Tessa Thompson was great too and had some good quips. However, she was shortchanged in terms of character arc/development, but at least she did what she could during her brief scenes.

Christian Bale was terrifying.  His Gorr may not make much sense (see above re: plot holes), but Bale was downright scary at most times but there were moments of empathy and sympathy too. That was acting.

And lastly, shout out to Russell Crowe who was a hoot! He seemed to be having so much fun chewing up the scenery. Orgy!

Thor: Love and Thunder may not be top-tier MCU, and did minimal to both deepen Thor as a character and expand on the MCU's grand plans for Phase 4 and beyond, but, nonetheless, it was a fun and entertaining ride. Fun in IMAX but 3D was not necessary.

As usual, stay for both the mid and post-credits stingers. Both seemed to suggest potential storylines for future Thor films.

The Northman

The Northman was Robert Eggers on 'roids. This is what happens when Eggers get a studio-sized budget. He gets to indulge his whims - extended ritualistic sequences, long shots with a large cast, a large cast of extras to lend further credence of authenticity, and an extravagant, period-specific production design that allowed for gorgeous natural-esque lighting. In all, an immersive and engrossing historical epic. No wonder Shakespeare was inspired by the legend of Amleth to create Hamlet (come on, even Hamlet is an anagram of Amleth).

The film was fantastically anchored by the charismatic and magnetic Alexander Skarsgård with great support from a fearless Nicole Kidman, an equally commanding villain in Claes Bang, an all-in Ethan Hawke and a surprisingly restrained Anya Taylor-Joy. Björk and, Eggers' staple Willem Dafoe, were essentially cameos but, boy, were their moments on screen utterly memorable. 

The story was familiar and has been retold in countless variation, most notably by Shakespeare as Hamlet, but what Eggers did was to boldly imbue and enrich the script, that he co-wrote with Sjón, with both the language and legends of Old Norse. The magical realism and fablistic retelling of the revenge epic was brought to life with a mix of CGI, gorgeous cinematography, haunting score and uncompromising direction. 

Although the film did meander a bit during the second act, but the strong first act lent it enough goodwill to trust that Eggers will bring it home in the third act - a bit of self-fulfilling prophecy to be honest. However, once the final act kicked in, we were in for a ride as secrets spilled and blood were shed. Ultimately culminating in an ending that had the cheesiest SFx of the film and inevitably echoed Star Wars (especially since Obi-wan Kenobi was running on Disney+ too).

Audiences familiar with Hamlet would more or less be aware of how the story of Amleth would end. Therefore, what Eggers did successfully was to make that journey interesting enough to hold the attention. But also, the casting was crucial, and no other actor could have been in that role other than Skarsgård. 

Skarsgård was not only physically imposing and impressive as the bear-wolf (another hah!) savage ex-viking Prince, but he had a silent charisma that demanded attention. As he hunched and hid, somehow Skarsgård managed to look small and unassuming. But when he stands tall and fight, he was fierce, confident and terrifying. 

It was a bit surprising to hear that Kidman was cast as Skarsgård's mother, but that role required a ferocity and nakedness that not many of today's actresses seemed to possessed. Kidman's one main scene was a standout as she was equal measures terrifying, seductive, manipulative, vulnerable and scared.

As aforementioned, the rest of the cast were spot on, and with The Northman, Eggers has shown that he does have an eye for casting the characters that he has created/envisioned.

Undoubtedly this film, like Eggers' previous films, will be more of an art-house/indie favourite rather than to the general audience, because despite the budget and the studio-backing, it was still essentially a film that relied on richly written characters that wrestled more with internal conflicts rather than a Nordic, action-piece that the marketing seemed to want the audience to think it is.

Jurassic World Dominion [IMAX]

Well at least with this film, this double-trilogy is now finally over. Hopefully. 

With each successive film, they have managed to continuously downgrade the good faith and awe generated from the incomparable first film. With each new entry, the spectacle of seeing dinosaurs on the big screen just seemed to slowly evaporate. It could be a consequence of time or the saturation of the modern movie-going experience with CGIs, but undoubtedly it was also due to the lack of realism from the practical effects that made Steven Spielberg's very first Jurassic Park such a wonderous milestone in cinematic history. It almost felt like the dinosaurs' CGI are getting cheaper with every film.

Then of course, Colin Trevorrow's direction is not at the level of Spielberg yet. Granted, Trevorrow had a couple of great scenes. However, those involved mainly the dinosaurs and action set pieces. They were tense, well-framed and exciting. But, the scenes that involved human interactions and dialogue exchanges were flat and lifeless. 

The messy screenplay by him and Emily Carmichael definitely did not help. Too many ideas, too many characters, too much exposition. It was like Jurassic Park meets Indiana Jones meets James Bond meets Taken meets Godzilla. Tonally inconsistent and not even fun while doing it.

The persistent lack of chemistry between Bryce Dallas Howard and Chris Pratt did not help. Pratt remained a blank slate here as his leading man character who just so boring and vanilla; Howard at least had a little more emoting to do here. 

Although the addition of legacy characters played by Sam Neil, Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum were welcomed - the strains of John William's classic score underlying Neil and Dern's first meet was giddily fun - they were let down by a clunky script, poor direction choices and a huge sense of "why are they even here in the first place?". Goldblum provided some humour playing, essentially, the same act he has honed through these recent years. Nothing new but pleasant nonetheless. 

Music was by Michael Giacchino and it was unimpressive. One of his most rote and unimaginative score. John Schwartzman lensed the film and there were a couple of great shots but sadly not when the film needed it most.

This film was just all over the place and had so many ideas but yet so little conflict to engage an audience. It was almost as if the humans and their concerns were secondary to the spectacle of the dinosaurs.  But even then, the dinosaurs were losing their lustre and allure. And if even that is gone, what more can the Jurassic Era offer?

At 146 minutes long, this film was easily 20-30 minutes too long, and IMAX was definitely not necessary for this. Honestly, nowadays, maybe even wait for it to come to streaming.

Top Gun: Maverick

If there was one reason to go watch a movie in IMAX, Top Gun: Maverick was it. This was one film that deserved to be watched on a big screen, and the high octane, adrenaline-pumping, nail-biting flight sequences/dog fights fully utilised the magnificence of an IMAX screen and the superior surround system offered by an IMAX theatre. Sonic booms and missile launches never sounded more visceral. And above it all, it was simply a highly enjoyable film. 131 minutes just went by. There was humour, drama, pathos, love, romance and nostalgia. Lots of nostalgia. For those thinking of money, it really made the IMAX admission price worth it (the last film to truly did that was Avatar).

Director Joseph Konsinski had assembled an amazing creative team. The excellent music were credited to Harold Faltermeyer, Lady Gaga, Hans Zimmer and Lorne Balfe; the brilliant cinematography (those in-plane shots! WOW!) by Claudio Miranda (who won an Oscar for Life of Pi); the superb editing was by Eddie Hamilton (those mid-air scenes were edge-of-your-seats exciting). And most importantly was the cast led by the infinitely charismatic, he of the mega-watt smile who we sometimes forget can really act, Tom Cruise. 

The story line was basic. It was simple and rote, with a nefarious, ill-defined villain, for us to root against. But it served it purpose. It brought Cruise's Maverick back to Top Gun. It outlined the main conflicts and internal turmoils of our principles, and the rest was up to Cruise et al to deliver the predicted outcomes without being boring (with some help from Lady Gaga, David Bowie, Kenny Loggins and Jerry Lee Lewis).

In particular, Gaga's refrains from her inevitable Oscar/Grammy-nominated single, Hold My Hand, were expertly and effectively weaved in and out of the film until her soul-belting moment. 

The cast had great chemistry together with the new pilots being especially well-gelled. 

Miles Teller had a lot of Anthony Edwards' Goose's mannerisms down and he was a surprisingly good second lead. His arc, like most on the show, was simple and predictable, but Teller managed to make his character both empathetic and likeable. 

The standout of the cast was Glen Powell who inherited the Val Kilmer's Iceman role as the handsome, cocky showoff. However, Powell's infectious grin and non-malicious. male-aggro competitiveness will endear him to the audience (both genders alike). 

And speaking of Kilmer, this was a very respectful way to bring him into the film. Respecting both the character and the actor. That scene between just Kilmer and Cruise was powerful in its simplicity and rawness.

Nonetheless, Top Gun: Maverick as the title clearly stated was all about Cruise. Boy, did he deliver. Everything you liked about Tom Cruise was here. We have the action hero, the daredevil stuntman, the emotionally attuned modern man, the loyal brother-in-arms, the cheeky, rule-breaking bad boy with the heart of gold, and of course we definitely did have, Tom Cruise the movie star. There are only a handful of actors like him now, someone who can open a film and hold your attention just by being on screen. He just needs to finally win an Oscar.  

However, to be honest, this film was not without its fault. For all the simple, unequivocal enjoyment that it brought to a movie-going experience, it was also laden with issues. Top Gun: Maverick was also unabashedly a pro-war, military propaganda. It was also misogynistic in its absence of fully realised female characters (maybe then don't have any at all?). If not for Jennifer Connelly, Cruise's love interest would have just been another pretty face. But thankfully Connelly managed to make her somewhat interesting instead of just the  beautiful china vase the screenwriters wrote her out to be. Monica Barbaro was the featured female fighter pilot, but other than allowing the men around her to utter lines that speak of supposed woke-ness and feminism, her character could essentially have been male. There was supposedly another female fighter pilot in the mix, of Asian descent (why are they all POC?), but other than a brief glimpse of her once in a group, there was nary another mention nor appearance. This film basically failed the Bechdel test.

Regardless, and especially because of COVID, Top Gun: Maverick was truly the first film in a long while to prove that cinema is not dead. No, it wasn't Denis Villeneuve and Dune, nor definitely not Christopher Nolan and Tenet that heralded back the box office. It was Cruise (sorry Konsinski).