The Fantastic Four: First Steps. A Review

THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS

The first family of Marvel goes for yet another round of cinematic adaptation in The Fantastic Four: First Steps. There is the added bonus that, unlike the first three efforts, First Steps is tied to the world's longest and most expensive soap opera of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. First Steps is not the reboot that the MCU desperately needs. It is fine, neither a return to form from past glories nor a horror to suffer through.

In our alternate Earth, the 1960's are a fantastic world of bright colors and immense optimism. That is due to the superheroes known as The Fantastic Four. There is Reed Richards or Mister Fantastic (Pedro Pascal), a brilliant scientist who can stretch his body to immense lengths. There is his beautiful wife Sue Storm, also known as The Invisible Woman (Vanessa Kirby). Her powers involve not just invisibility but creating force fields. Her literally hot brother Johnny Storm or The Human Torch (Joseph Quinn) can fly and light himself on fire. Their friend Ben Grimm (Ebon Moss-Bachrach) is a man who is virtually indestructible due to his almost brick-like skin, earning him the sobriquet of The Thing.

They are celebrities, but they use their powers for good. Sue has brought about world peace. Reed creates great inventions and even squeezes in a kids' science show, Fantastic Science with Mr. Fantastic. Things can only get better once Reed and Sue find that she is pregnant. The public at first is mesmerized by the newest arrival, speculating on whether or not the child will have superpowers like his parents.

The public's interests soon turn away from that to more pressing matters. An alien has come to warn Earth that it is doomed to die at the hands of a giant space being known as Galactus. Despite Johnny's best efforts to catch someone whom he described as "a sexy alien", this Silver Surfer (Julia Garner) is the herald of Earth's doom. 

It is now up to the Fantastic Four to stop Galactus from destroying the Earth. Efforts at negotiations fail and nearly cost them their lives. It also causes Sue to go into labor and give birth to her and Reed's son, whom they name Franklin. The child has become important to Galactus. He has had to devour planets for centuries and now feels that Franklin could take his place and relieve him of this burden. They collectively flat-out refuse to sacrifice Franklin to spare Earth. This decision, however, is not met with enthusiasm by neither surface-living humans nor those living in Subterranea, ruled by Harvey Elder, better known as Mole Man (Paul Walter Hauser). The Fantastic Four do find a way to spare both Earth and Franklin. Will their efforts succeed? Will everyone survive this battle? Will the Silver Surfer end up as friend or foe?

I have been open on how I have never been a comic book reader. As such, I am sure that a lot of things flew over me while watching First Steps. For example, I simply had no idea who Mole Man was.  I also was not aware of how similar the Fantastic Four were to the Incredibles. This came to me every time I fought the temptation to refer to Reed and Sue's child as "Jack-Jack". I do not know if the resemblance was purely coincidental, but there it is. 

Fantastic Four: First Steps has as a major positive its overall look. The film is brimming with bright colors and a retro-futuristic feel that makes it both of a particular era and familiar. Credit should be given to the production and costume design, which brought this alternate universe into reality.

In other aspects, I found First Steps to be, well, fine. The performances on the whole were acceptable. Pedro Pascal's ubiquity is now a meme. Here, he was not terrible as Reed Richards. As a side note, it is interesting that for all his powers, Mr. Fantastic did not showcase them often. Pascal gave Reed a sense of perpetual worry, be it for his fathering abilities or his world-saving abilities. Vanessa Kirby was better as Sue Storm. I think it is because she was called to do more, particularly over her protectiveness towards Franklin.

It is interesting that the screenplay made motherhood an important aspect. It is more interesting when you see that all four credited screenwriters are men (Josh Friedman, Eric Pearson, Jeff Kaplan and Ian Springer). The desire to protect Franklin, to be fair, was shared by all four of them. I think that the focus on Sue, however, was stronger than that of say Johnny or Ben. They all loved Franklin, but I think his mother would be the one who would be the last to even consider sacrificing her child even if it meant saving the world. 

It is also to the film's credit that we never got, at least to my memory, any "but on the other hand" argument from anyone. Again, this is based on my memory of a movie I saw months ago. However, no one ever said that it would be beneficial to essentially bump off a baby to save the world. Yet, I digress.

What is weak about First Steps is that we really got very little from others. Of particular note is Moss-Bachrach and Quinn as The Thing and the Human Torch respectively. We got bits and pieces of who they were. We saw Ben Grimm go to synagogue to talk to a pretty teacher that he was enchanted by. We got a bit of Johnny Storm's stabs at being cocky. I think though that somehow, they ended up having little to do. Worse, they had very little in terms of personality. Whether it is due to Moss-Bachrach and Quinn's acting skills, the script itself or a combination of the two I cannot say for certain. For myself, I at times forgot that they were there.

I cannot say anything overtly negative about The Fantastic Four: First Steps. You can skip the second post-credit scene. I cannot say anything overtly positive about it either. Michael Giacchino's score was pleasant. Neither a restoration nor abomination, The Fantastic Four: First Steps is, in the end, acceptable.  

DECISION: C+

Superman (2025): A Review

SUPERMAN (2025)

When Mario Puzo, author of The Godfather, was working on the story and script for the original Superman, he remarked that Kal-El's origin story was a great tragedy. I got a similar feeling while watching the newest Superman, that it too was a great tragedy. However, I did not mean it the same way as Puzo. Superman is a great tragedy because the people behind it lost a great opportunity to reinvigorate this character. 

Superman (David Corenswet) has been defeated by the "Hammer of Boravia", a machine sent by the malevolent country to stop Superman from interfering with its invasion of neighboring Jarhanpur. His loyal dog, Krypto, spirits him away to the Fortress of Solitude, where Superman's robots help him recover. Once more into the breach, Superman takes on the Hammer which is really Ultraman. Ultraman is controlled by tech billionaire Lex Luthor (Nicholas Hoult), who harbors a passionate hatred for the Man of Steel.

One person who does not hold a passionate hatred for the Man of Steel is intrepid Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane (Rachel Brosnahan). Lois is so intrepid that she is fully aware that Superman is the true identity of her fellow Daily Planet reporter Clark Kent, with whom she is having a clandestine affair. She is not pleased that Clark interviews himself as he is essentially interviewing himself. She also is not keen on him getting involved in the Barista/Jodhpur war (by this time I stopped bothering to remember the nations and started calling them "Barista" and "Jodhpur"). 

A battle between a new monster and the combined forces of Superman and the "Justice Gang" is really a distraction for Luthor, his main henchman the Engineer (Maria Gabriela de Faria) and Luthor's Instagram-mad mistress Eve Teschmacher (Sara Sampio) to break into the Fortress of Solitude. Here, they come upon the message that Kal-El (Superman on his native planet of Krypton) had from his parents Jor-El (Bradley Cooper) and Sara (Angela Sarafyan) sent with him. That message has been garbled, but The Engineer has figured it out. 

Superman was not sent to Earth to escape Krypton's destruction or help the Tellurians. He was sent to knock up every woman and rule over humanity as their overlord. This news shocks the world. It shocks Superman as well. This news, however, causes Superman to allow himself to be taken into custody. To his shock and horror, the custody will be run by Luthor, who imprisons Superman in a pocket universe.

Now it is up to Lois and the Justice Gang members to save the world and Superman. Justice Gang ringleader Guy Gardner (Nathan Fillion), a Green Lantern, is not keen on involvement. His fellow Justice Gang member Mr. Terrific (Edi Gathegi) alleges that he too is not interested in involvement, but he does so in part to spite Gardner. The final Justice Gang member, Hawkgirl (Isabela Merced) is generally uninterested in either side. Mr. Terrific and Lois eventually manage to get Superman and Krypto out of the pocket universe. 

That, however, leads to the pocket universe starting to enter our world. This will mean the end of the world as we know it, but no one save Luthor is feeling fine. Will Superman, along with the Daily Planet staff and the Justice Gang, be able to defeat Luthor? Will they also stop Israel, I mean Boravia, from destroying Gaza, I mean, Jarhanpur?

I cannot say that writer/director James Gunn intended for Superman to go wrong but go wrong it did. My sense is that Gunn and everyone involved behind the scenes in Superman went against what original Superman creative consultant Tom Mankiewicz observed. He said that (the filmmakers) cannot be smarter than the material. You have to take the premise seriously, though you can have funny moments. 

Superman, conversely, has plenty of moments that are meant to be funny, but which are not. The quipping between Superman and his various robots was not funny. Krypto's dominance in the film was not funny. The commenting about the name "Justice Gang" (which no one apart from Gardner liked) was not funny. Sight gags, such as how Mr. Terrific's garage door opened slowly, were not funny. When the second monster was unleashed, I thought they had brought in Stich to do battle with Superman. 

It is surprising to me that people could botch such a simple assignment as Superman. I think it goes to again, the idea that they thought they had to be smarter than the material. It might also be the current notion to make this expansive universe versus a straightforward Superman vehicle. We had cameos from John Cena as Peacemaker. The film started with Superman being beaten down. You had Jimmy Olsen (Skyler Gisondo) being some sort of sexual catnip to all the women. He had Eve Teschmacher under his spell. 

All that is already curious. The problem that I saw is that Superman is essentially a supporting character in his own film. I presume that the Justice Gang was not actually the more dominant part of Superman. However, it felt that way at times. In a strange way, I felt that Superman was less about Superman and more about Krypto. A lot of time and energy were spent focused on the Super Dog versus the Super Man.

It did not help that Superman has him beaten and battered often. The film starts with him getting battered by Ultraman. He gets beaten by the Justice Gang. He gets beaten by both Luthor and Metamorpho (Anthony Carrigan), a fellow alien in the pocket universe who can turn himself into Kryptonite. He gets beaten up by what we discover are Superman clones, created by Luthor to anticipate all his actions. This is not a Superman. This is a Super Wimp.

As a side note, the way that Lex Luthor managed to create these clones is, intentionally or not, reminiscent of how Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor did the same thing in Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. 

One thing that was quite frustrating was how we are told one thing only to see that violated. When Mr. Terrific and Lois are looking into the pocket universe, we are told that a river within that universe would kill anything that comes into contact with it. Guess who falls into that river and manages to survive.  

I think the actors did their best with what they had. David Corenswet does look the part. He does have an earnestness and sincerity that the character should have. I do question why, as Clark Kent, he has such a deep and commanding voice. I am aware that Lois is fully aware of Clark Kent's other identity. However, there was very little of Clark Kent in Superman. 

As another side note, I do wonder why Gunn decided to essentially start our story in medias res. How DOES Lois discover Superman's other identity? Why, apart from what I understood to be jealousy, does Luthor harbor such hatred towards the Man of Steel? How did Jimmy Olsen of all people turn into such a super-slut where women find him irresistible? When it came to Luthor's mistress Eve Teschmacher, I spent much of the film wondering if she was his girlfriend or his sister. Either way, I got flashbacks to the two female roles in Superman III as she could have been either.

Corenswet was well-matched with Nicholas Hoult. Hoult was appropriate in his raging and malevolent turn as Lex Luthor. Brosnahan, conversely, was blank as Lois Lane. I did not care for Nathan Fillion or Isabela Merced's Hawkgirl. The former worked too hard to be abrasive, the latter was almost an afterthought. Gathegi was, along with Corenswet and Hoult, a standout as Mr. Terrific. He has a serious manner that works within the film. Mr. Terrific is not introduced in Superman, though to be fair no one is. As such, his mix of deadpan seriousness with actual skills showcases an interesting character. 

Superman, to my mind, is a lost opportunity. You can't thrill to a film that has a pocket universe where monkeys are typing out anti-Superman tweets. You don't care about the conflict that Superman is attempting to stop. If people want to draw a parallel between the Barista/Jodhpur war and Israel/Hamas, they are free to do so. I did not care and don't understand why Superman would side with one side over the other. At one point in the film, Superman insists that he is punk rock.

Superman is less punk rock as he is yacht rock. 

DECISION: D+ (3/10)

Wonder Woman (1974): The Television Movie

WONDER WOMAN: THE TELEVISION MOVIE

Film and television adaptations of Wonder Woman have been hit-and-miss. The 2017 film was successful critically and commercially. The 2020 sequel, however, was neither. On television, the 1975-1979 Lynda Carter series and its theme are still fondly remembered. The 2011 attempted reboot on the other hand was such a disaster that not only was it not picked up for series, but the pilot was also never aired. In the various attempted and realized adaptations, people forget that the year before Carter donned her satin tights, another Wonder Woman television series was planned. Wonder Woman is such a bizarre project that one should watch it only to marvel at how anyone in front or behind the camera thought that any of it was good. 

A television movie meant as a test pilot, Wonder Woman stars Cathy Lee Crosby as Diana Prince. She is an Amazonian who has made the great sacrifice to leave Paradise Island to go to the world of men, where there is evil at work. A notorious master criminal named Abner Smith has uncovered the identity of thirty-nine covert agents and will sell them to the highest bidder, putting all of them at risk. He will give the names back to the U.S. for $15 million, with them having three days to meet his ransom. While head spook Steve Trevor (Kaz Garas) has various men working on the case, he needs his secretary Diana Prince to go to France for a "dental appointment".

Once there, everyone knows that she is super-spy Wonder Woman. That includes Abner Smith's chief henchman George (Andrew Prine), who has both murderous and erotic designs on our heroine. She thwarts these assassination attempts with surprising agility and intelligence. No number of hired assassins or snakes sent to her various hotel rooms will stop Diana from pursuing Abner Smith. 

The ransom is agreed to be paid, as time is running short. It is an attempted trap to get Abner Smith to finally reveal himself, which he gladly does so when he captures Wonder Woman. The notorious Abner Smith (Ricardo Montalban) is charming and elegant. He also does not want Diana killed. George, already bitter that he has been rebuffed, chafes at the directive. However, George has an ace up his sleeve: renegade Amazonian Anhjayla (Anitra Ford), who has joined forces with George. Has Wonder Woman met her match? Will Abner Smith get away? 

The curious thing about Wonder Woman is, that apart from her origins on Paradise Island, there is absolutely nothing special or powerful about Diana Prince. Screenwriter John D.F. Black and director Vincent McEveety failed on every level to make Wonder Woman interesting. They decided that Diana had no great powers. Instead, she was in many ways almost ordinary. Moreover, a lot of Wonder Woman makes no sense.

Everyone working for Abner Smith knows who WW is, yet no one at the agency did. The various efforts to assassinate Diana range from bizarre to downright laughable. A group of men in one scene enter a moving elevator from above, and she is able to defeat them so easily that one thinks the scene is pretty pointless. Another time, a snake is sent to her hotel room. I will not diminish the threat of a potentially venomous snake. I will, however, question why Wonder Woman would open a box sent to her room so casually. I also have doubts on whether or not you can remove this threat by having Room Service send over a dish of milk.

I will also question why Abner Smith did not simply kill her when she goes into an obvious trap at a rented mansion. Is it even worth bothering at this point to wonder why "Abner Smith" seems such a ludicrous name for a master criminal? I wonder if George ever called him "Lil' Abner" behind his back.

Perhaps I can begrudgingly say that there is one semi-good moment of wit. When George and Diana are having dinner, George openly says, "Let me make love to you". Diana asks why. After pointing out his own virtues, Diana replies, "You misunderstood me. I didn't mean why should you want to. I meant why should I?". 

However, in all other respects Wonder Woman is oddball. Apparently, Abner Smith's plan was to kill Wonder Woman by trapping her in a sealed room and sending multicolored lava to smother her. This is after she has to follow a burro to find Abner Smith's hideout. A burro that Abner Smith sent Steve Trevor. A burro who is released with the ransom money by using the words, "Corras rapido, por favor", which translates from Spanish as, "Run fast, please". 

We never get an explanation as to who Anhjayla is, or how she managed to hook up with George (interpret that any way that you wish). She and Diana have a battle of javelins that essentially ends in a draw. "You know as well as I do that we will face each other again", Anhjayla tells her frenemy. I figure that was a tease for the hoped-for television series. We will never see this promised confrontation.

All the better, as Wonder Woman has some woeful acting. For most of Wonder Woman, Ricardo Montalban is deliberately kept off screen, with only his hands and voice to appear on camera. He's hamming it up for all its worth, delighting in the chance to be cartoonish. He was, I think, fully aware that Wonder Woman was not a pilot for a series but camp, silly and illogical. Pity that no one else got the memo. 

Former tennis pro Cathy Lee Crosby, I think, did the best that she could with the material. However, there was very little to show that she could have carried a full series. She as at times blank and wooden as Diana Prince. Fortunately for her, she recovered from this error when she later cohosted the television docuseries That's Incredible! but here she could not communicate much. Again, to be fair, Black's script and McEveety's directing were not helpful. 

Everyone else save Montalban gave a bad performance. Garas' Steve had little to do. Jordan Rhodes, who played the smitten agent Bob, was in one scene and added nothing to even a tease for a future romance or at least comic flirtation. Andrew Prine as George was done in not just by his overall bad performance. George is also a rather repulsive man. I get that as a male chauvinist pig he was meant as the opposite of Diana's enlightened woman. However, he was lousy no matter whom he interacted with. Anitra Ford's Anhjayla, like Crosby, I think tried to make this seem interesting. 

I think Wonder Woman, if seen at all, will be as a curiosity, a reflection of its time with "women's lib" becoming more dominant. This is not a good version of the superheroine, and it is good that they opted against a series which would have flopped. You've come a long way, baby, but when it comes to Wonder Woman, you had a little more way to go.

2/10

The Crow (1994): A Review

THE CROW (1994)

Whatever the merits The Crow may have, it will always be haunted by the death of its star Brandon Lee, killed on-set with only days before finishing his scenes. Under these circumstances, the filmmakers cobbled together a film that holds up remarkably well. Separate from that tragedy, The Crow works visually in its story of supernatural revenge.

In voiceover from Sarah (Rochelle Davis), we learn of the murders of Shelly Webster (Sofia Shinas) and her rock star fiancée Eric Draven (Lee). Draven had come back to their apartment to find four men beating and raping Shelly as warning against her advocacy for the tenants in their apartment. 

A year later, Draven manages to return from the dead. Horrified and angry about Shelly's murder, he now goes after the four men responsible for her death along with their boss Top Dollar (Michael Wincott), who wanted to push the other tenants out to get the building. Guided by the crow that brought him back, Draven tracks down the four killers: Tin Tin (Laurence Mason), Funboy (Michael Massee), T-Bird (David Patrick Kelly) and Skank (Angel David). 

He also shepherds Sarah's drug addicted mother and Funboy's lover Darla (Anna Thomson) to reuniting with her daughter. Police Sergeant Albrecht (Ernie Hudson), who attempted to save Shelly and stayed with her until her death, wonders if the dead Draven may have come back. As Top Dollar and his henchmen see the Crow and Draven targeting them, it becomes a battle royale to see who will find eternal peace.

It is impossible to know if what we ultimately ended up with is how The Crow would have turned out had Lee lived. I imagine that the film had to be reworked to make it cohesive, such as having Sarah's voiceover pop up from time to time and having the film have a lot of shadow (perhaps to hide Lee's absence). Given the difficult circumstances that director Alex Proyas faced, I think The Crow ended up holding up well. 

The film has an especially strong aesthetic in this dark world, dominated by rain and darkness. There was very little light that I remember, if any. The overall look of The Crow is well-crafted. While you do sense that some scenes were reworked to mask Lee's absence, such as Shelly and Eric's killings, they manage to make the flashbacks more cinematic and even gripping. This might also account for how despite being the lead, Brandon Lee does not appear to be a major part of The Crow.

He felt a bit spread out throughout the film, popping up when needed but also requiring scenes which focused on other characters. For example, we see more interactions between Sarah and Albrecht than between Sarah and Eric or Albrecht and Eric. This might have been the plan all along. I do give credit to screenwriters David J. Schow and John Shirley in managing to take James O'Barr's comic book as well as the revamped plans to make things work.

Again, it is impossible to know what turns Brandon Lee's career would have taken had he lived. Would The Crow had been the breakout role to make him a star in his own right? I cannot say for certain. I can say that, based on what I saw, Lee had great potential and promise. He had an intensity and focus as Eric, matching the character's drive and need for justice. His scenes with Thomson's Darla, where he firmly but gently urged her to take care of her daughter reveal that Lee was playing a complex character. He was driven by righteous vengeance, but he also had compassion.

Ernie Hudson is the de facto costar in The Crow. He was effective as this honest cop who cares about the people on his beat and wants justice for Shelly and Eric. Davis was winning as Sarah, the teenager who was Shelly and Eric's unofficial ward. I normally am not a fan of voiceovers. However, Davis made them work as she set up the story and gave us the summation. She and Thomson had a great scene when Sarah and Darla reconcile. It is unfortunate that it felt both brief and slightly distracting from the overall story of Eric's vengeance on those who destroyed his world. However, given what occurred during production, I will give this some slack.

The film is well-acted by everyone involved. Each actor knew his or her character and Proyas kept them to whatever level they needed to be, whether more grounded or more exaggerated. 

The Crow also has an appropriately dark look, visually impactful while still looking as if it were more fantasy. It also has a strong soundtrack that knows how to use its various songs well. There is the dark opening of The Cure's Burn to Nine Inch Nails cover of Joy Division's Deal Souls. The big song is Stone Temple Pilots' Big Empty, which you can hear briefly when the killers are driving. Here, I do not know if Big Empty's sense of loss fits where it was placed in the film, but it is not a distraction.

After seeing The Crow, I can see why it is so beloved by so many. I found it a surprisingly quiet and simple film, but that is not a negative. It actually makes the film more gothic, tragic and effective. All the elements in The Crow work well, more so given the difficult situation the film faced. One hopes that Brandon Lee can rest in peace knowing that The Crow has granted him immortality.

DECISION: B-

Kraven the Hunter: A Review

KRAVEN THE HUNTER

Perhaps at this point, one should not ask "What were they thinking?" so much as ask, "Why do they even bother?". This year we were treated to three films built around a Spider-Man villain. I did not hate Madame Web as much as most people, finding it an enjoyable bad film. I thoroughly detested Venom: The Last Dance, a confused and convoluted horror. Now we have Kraven the Hunter, a character that I think only more serious Spider-Man fans will have heard of. Neither having the sincere goofiness of Madame Web or the self-consciously goofiness of Venom: The Last Dance, Kraven the Hunter is not fun but not downright hideous but rather a lot of nothing. 

A young man is imprisoned in a high security Russian jail, but that was part of the plan. The young man is really a master assassin who takes down a Russian crime lord. the assassin then makes a daring and brazen escape, with the guards too late realizing that the prisoner was really Sergei Kravinoff, who has taken the nom de guerre of Kraven (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). 

We then go back sixteen years where young Sergei and his brother Dmitri are spirited away by his father, crime lord Nikolai (Russell Crowe). In his view, the best way for his boys to handle the offscreen suicide of their mother is by going hunting to Ghana. There, Sergei is almost killed when he hesitates and is taken by a lion. Fortunately, a young woman whose grandmother is into voodoo is around to provide a magical potion to save his life. Moving back into the present day, Dmitri (Fred Hechinger) is the owner and star of his own London club, where he is perfectly able to sound exactly like everyone from Harry Styles to Tony Bennett. Nikolai is still disappointed in Dmitri and Sergei is a stranger to him.

Sergei for his part has become an animal rights vigilante, going after poachers. This brings him into conflict with Aleksei Sytsevich, also known as The Rhino (Alessandro Nivola), who abducts Dmitri as insurance against Nikolai. Kraven, who loves his brother and unlike Nikolai is not willing to see him killed, turns once again to the voodoo queen who saved him, American lawyer Calypso (Ariana DeBose). She is somewhat helpful, but it is now up to Kraven to fight against Rhino and save Dmitri. This is complicated by Rhino's master assassin, a shadowy figure known as The Foreigner (Christopher Abbott). He is able to move fast enough to not make his targets aware of where he is, giving him the chance to kill them unaware. Will Kraven the Hunter be able to defeat his newest foes? Will Dmitri prove himself or prove that he is a future great danger? Will Calypso find powers outside those from her friends on the other side?

I do not think we need worry about the rise of Dmitri as the future villain Chameleon. Kraven the Hunter seems to have gone almost out of its way to ensure that no one will care. It is to where at one point I was getting Dmitri and Sergei mixed up, so bland the characters were. Everyone in Kraven the Hunter was bland, both in their characters and in their performances. You forget that the film has two Academy Award winners in its cast, yet watching Russell Crowe and Ariana DeBose here, one wonders how they have managed to put themselves in this willingly.

My guess is that director J.C. Chandor did not look on Kraven the Hunter as a passion project because no one had any passion. As stated, everyone looked bored and oddly disengaged from things. DeBose looks downright bored with things. Calypso was a nothing character: not interesting, not exciting, serving no purpose other than to bring about Kraven's rescue on two occasions. Hechinger, I think, was trying to make Dmitri a tragic figure, but he had little to work with. Overall, there was nothing in any performance that suggested those in front of the camera genuinely cared if Kraven the Hunter was good.

Perhaps I can walk that back a bit when it comes to Crowe. He seemed to want to camp it up with his faux-Russian accent but couldn't quite commit to being deliberately over-the-top. It soon becomes The Battle of the Bad Accents in Kraven the Hunter. I at least knew that Crowe's Nikolai was meant to be Russian. Try as I might, I was not sure what Nivola was supposed to be. That also goes for Abbott's The Foreigner, whose nom de guerre would probably elicit chuckles more than gasps. I cannot say that his charcter was ill-defined. I don't think he was defined at all.

When I look at Taylor-Johnson (separate from his buff body), I see someone who I think might have been sincere in an effort to make Kraven the Hunter if not good at least serviceable. It is, I think, unfair to place blame on him for how bad Kraven the Hunter is. He had a great opening in the film, the prison escape being a highlight and strong way to start. It is once we go to a flashback that I think is around forty minutes long that Kraven the Hunter starts coming undone. The flashback is too long, gives us a very silly way to have the characters interact and stops the momentum cold. Once we go back to the present day, the film builds up almost a sluggishness to it all. 

The visual effects were at times almost shockingly bad. What is meant as a climactic moment where Rhino reveals his true self and fights both Kraven and a buffalo stampede looks dull and terribly fake. The same with Kraven's attempted rescue of Dmitri. The score too attempts to build up what is meant to be one filled with tension and excitement. It could not.

Is Kraven the Hunter one of the worst films of 2024? I think not, for there are many films that are worse and which I would choose Kraven the Hunter to see again. That does not mean that I would want to watch Kraven the Hunter again.  It is, however, a final end to any hopes of any hoped-for franchise. No one will be craving more Kraven. 

DECISION: D-

Venom: The Last Dance. A Review (Review #1889)

VENOM: THE LAST DANCE

I have not been a fan of the previous Venom films, though in retrospect, I think Venom: Let There Be Carnage is mildly passable junk entertainment. Not so Venom: The Last Dance, a nonsensical, chaotic piece of garbage that is so awful it manages to dislodge Argylle as the Worst Movie of 2024 (so far). 

Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) and his symbiote Venom continue hiding out in Mexico, hoping to clear their names for a killing from the last movie. However, the shadowy villain eventually revealed as Knull (Andy Serkis), who has been forced into a space prison, finds that Venom contains the Codex, the MacGuffin that will free him. With that, Knull sends his creatures to find Venom.

Also looking for our odd couple is General Strickland (Chiwetel Ejiofor), who wants to capture another symbiote whom he considers menaces to humanity. Not with him on that idea are Doctors Teddy Payne (Juno Temple) and Sadie Christmas (Clark Backo), who are determined to investigate what the symbiotes are and what if anything they can do for humanity.

Eddie manages to get into the United States despite both the military and Knull's crickets after him. He bonds with a group of alien enthusiasts determine to get to Area 51 before it is officially decommissioned. They take him to Las Vegas where Eddie gets into the luxurious Paris Casino, loses what little money he has, and dances with a clearly happy Mrs. Chen (Peggy Lu), with whom Venom dances with to Dancing Queen.

Captured, Eddie/Venom are in great danger. Martin (Rhys Ifans), the alien enthusiast, is also in family as are his wife and kids when they sneak into Area 51 before the climatic confrontation, where the escaping symbiotes by accident or design bond with hosts to fight off the growing army of Knull's crickets. Who will live and who will die in this battle royale to save or conquer Earth?

Twenty minutes into Venom: The Last Dance, I pretty much checked out because I simply did not care. There was nothing in The Last Dance that was interesting, not to mention cohesive. I will walk that back a bit, for there was one interesting thing in The Last Dance. That was seeing Tom Hardy evolve into Nick Nolte in voice and in looks. I am often told that Tom Hardy is a serious actor devoted to his craft. That can be the case, as The Bikeriders has shown. However, it is hard to think of Hardy in such lofty terms when he not only appears in junk like The Last Dance but has a story credit with its writer/director, Kelly Marcel.

The Last Dance is rushed to where it is incoherent. I figure that for those well-versed in Venom lore, everything was clear. I however, simply had no idea who the shadowy villain was and by the end, he proved to be nothing that I wondered why we needed him in there. Well, perhaps to set up more films. I would like those who know the name of every symbiote in The Last Dance to explain why we needed a running gag of Eddie constantly losing whatever shoes he had. I cannot explain why anyone thought that was funny.

There was a lot that The Last Dance thought was funny, such as when Eddie/Venom go into the Paris Casino, dance with Mrs. Chen (an entirely pointless section) or Ifans' hippie-drippy alien enthusiast. We could not have original characters with Martin's family: you had the equally addled supportive wife, the sullen and bored teenage girl, and the more enthusiastic but sweet younger brother. I figure they have names, but The Last Dance cares so little for them that I don't think we got them. I found the lot so boring and useless that when they faced mortal danger, I actually wished the guard tower would fall. 

I was amused by Backo's Sadie Christmas only because I asked if her name was some kind of odd homage to Denise Richards' Dr. Christmas Jones from The World is Not Enough. I spent much time wondering why her name was Christmas, which is a sign of how bored I was at The Last Dance. 

As a side note, I did wonder why Mrs. Chen and Venom opted to dance to Abba's Dancing Queen and not Donna Summer's Last Dance. 

There are no performances here. Hardy, continuing some oddball voice, struggles to be funny or menacing. Ejiofor does nothing but look stern, but given the circumstances I can give him credit for not consistently laughing at what he had to do. I'm sure that I have seen Juno Temple in something, but she had no real character to play. Lu is the only one who is clearly having a ball, fully aware that this is nothing but just so glad as to be getting paid for all this.

Perhaps that is harsh on Ifans, who is also aware that The Last Dance is not worth anything other than I hope a good paycheck.

If anything, Venom: The Last Dance makes an effort to get us to feel sad when Venom sacrifices himself. The film pumps out music to try and have us sob both in Dan Deacon's score and the use of Maroon 5's Memories. I did not feel sadness, only a mix of irritation and chuckles. 

I held out as long as I could. I fought off strong contenders like Deadpool & Wolverine and A Family Affair and Joker: Folie a Deux and The Crow. However, I have to finally throw in the towel. Venom: The Last Dance is worse than Argylle. 

DECISION: F

Skippy: A Review

SKIPPY

One should know that what was once insanely popular in one generation is pretty much forgotten in the next. Such is the case with both the source material and film adaption of Skippy. Innocent, sweet and charming, Skippy is a delight.

Little Skippy Skinner (Jackie Cooper) is at heart a good kid, though prone to get into trouble. Though he is the son of wealthy Doctor Skinner (Willard Robertson), Skippy likes to slum it on the literal wrong side of the tracks, which he considers more fun. In Shantytown, Skippy is unofficial leader of a tween gang and soon bonds with a local boy, Sooky (Robert Coogan). Sooky's whole life is his dog, Penny, though the dog is technically illegal as Sooky's family is too poor to afford the $3 license.

Skippy does his best to scheme his way to get those $3. His efforts at getting at his savings flop, so he organizes a benefit, where Eloise Sanders (Mitzi Green), the girl who is sweet on Skippy, will be the openly hammy star. It is all for naught, as the evil dogcatcher Mr. Nubbles (Jack Rube Clifford) uses the money raised to repair the windshield Skippy and Sooky had accidentally damaged. It does not help that Mr. Nubbles is father to Harley Nubbles (Donald Haines), the Shantytown tween bully. More complications come when Skippy learns that his father believes the best thing to do is shut Shantytown down and has the power to do so. Will Skippy succeed in his efforts to save Penny and Shantytown?

What makes Skippy so successful is that we get this story from the kids' point of view. Skippy does not pretend to be highbrow. Instead, it is very open about how these kids, in their own world, operate. There are little touches that give us this perspective which make Skippy so sweet and delightful. At the benefit show, there is an offer for what they bill as a "cachurs gluv" for 31 cents. The use of the phonetic spelling shows the first commitment to making Skippy as real as possible.

The simplicity and directness in Skippy become more amusing when these kids attempt to take adult situations. Skippy's best friend and Eloise's brother Sydney (Jackie Searl) tells Skippy that he cannot fight anyone, even the smaller Sooky. "I'm nervous and I'm strung high", he tells Skippy. Later, Skippy asks Sooky, "What does your father do?". Sooky replies, "He just stays where he is. He's dead". It is said so matter-of-factly in a thoroughly innocent and guileless way that it makes it all the more hilarious.

A perhaps less-noted aspect in Skippy is how the kids are quite free of prejudice. There is one black member of Skippy's Shantytown gang, the perhaps ironically named Snowflake. None of the kids ever exclude him from the goings-on. His race is never mentioned or noted. He even participates in the benefit show when he is part of the sawing in half act. The fact that Sooky, who is supposed to be the one being sawed in half, has a white head but black feet make the scene sweeter. 

Director Norman Taurog, who won Best Director for Skippy and was the youngest Best Director winner for decades until Damien Chazelle won for La La Land, should be credited for being able to get solid performances from his mostly child cast. Granted, the story of how Taurog got his nephew Cooper to cry by threatening to shoot his dog is cruel.

Minus that, the performances from everyone in Skippy are delightful. Jackie Cooper received a Best Actor nomination for the title role, making him at age nine the youngest nominee in this category. He more than earned that nomination. Skippy is sweet and well-meaning even when disobeying. Sydney bemoans how he and Skippy went to Shantytown despite Skippy's promise to his father that he would not go over the railroad tracks. Skippy replies that he kept his word to Doctor Skinner in that he did not cross over the railroad tracks. They went under them. 

We first see Skippy calling out to his mother that he is getting dressed even though he is still in bed. Once he hears his father calling, one never saw a kid jump out of bed that fast. Cooper had the comic bits down well. However, Cooper was able to move your heart and bring you to tears. Late in the film, Skippy is praying for Sooky, devastated by the loss of Penny. Skippy's sincerity and compassion gets to you. Few child actors were able to cry as effectively as Jackie Cooper, his sweet face and genuine acting performance moving the viewer.

The other child cast members were equally strong.  Robert Coogan was delightful as Sooky, so much so that he got his own film in a sequel. To be fair, Coogan was not on Cooper's level, but as he was much younger one can cut him some slack. Coogan has a wonderful moment where he applies a certain logic on how Penny is more thoroughbred than genuine thoroughbreds. It is an amusing moment where Coogan draws attention away from Cooper, not an easy task.

Searl and Greene were amusing as Skippy's wealthy friends, forever getting roped or roping themselves into Skippy's newest ventures. Haines' Harley Nubbins balanced being the bully with being himself bullied by his father. 

In one scene, Harley was actually sympathetic. In their efforts to get money to bail Penny out, Skippy and Sooky see that Harley had bought himself an ice cream cone. Both of them do want the money but also a taste of Harley's ice cream. For once, Harley is the innocent party as his frenemies attempt to hoodwink him out of money and ice cream. 

Skippy is a genuine cinematic treat: sweet, innocent and appealing to mass audiences. I think both the film and the comic book series it is based on have mostly been forgotten. If anything, more than likely if Skippy is mentioned, it will be the peanut butter that comes to mind, not the Academy Award-winning film. That is a real shame, for Skippy is a wonderful film, taking the child's perspective and giving us a nice glimpse on their unique brand of logic. A simple story told and acted well, Skippy charms. 

DECISION: A-

Joker: Folie a Deux. A Review

 

JOKER: FOLIE A DEUX

Maybe it is true that you can't go home again. After scoring a critical and popular triumph with Joker, director Todd Philips and star Joaquin Phoenix reunite with Joker: Folie a Deux. This is not a cash grab from a popular film. This is not the newest part of the saga for the Clown Prince of Crime. This is an absolute abomination, perhaps the worst film of the year. At minimum, Joker: Folie a Deux is a film that delights in hating its audience. 

Arthur Fleck (Phoenix) is awaiting his trial for committing five murders, including that of television host Murray Franklin on live television. Currently at Arkham Asylum, Fleck is seemingly meek and broken. His attorney Maryanne Stewart (Catherine Keener) will push an insanity defense where Fleck is a split personality. There is Arthur Fleck, troubled man, and then there is his alter ego of "Joker", criminal mastermind. It was Joker, not Arthur, who killed.

While at Arkham, he makes the friendship of Lee (Lady Gaga), who is infatuated with Arthur ever since she saw a television movie about him. She tries to help him escape but they are caught, and he is thrown into solitary. Nevertheless, Lee manages to get to his cell for a one-night stand. She also stands by him after her release from prison, where she is one of Fleck/Joker's eager fans attending the trial of the century.  

At his trial, Fleck finds himself facing off against Assistant District Attorney Harvey Dent (Harry Lawtey), who has a strong case against Fleck. Fleck shocks the court by first firing Stewart and representing himself, then by appearing in full Joker makeup and wardrobe. He earns the ire of the Arkham guards, including his frenemy Jackie Sullivan (Brendan Gleeson). The testimonies are devastating to Fleck's case, but he is not worried. He's got Lee Quinzel on his side. He still loses, especially after his closing arguments are that he is guilty. 

He still has fans, however, willing to bust him out with a car bomb. He also still has enemies, who will sexually assault and break him. He does not have Lee, who has abandoned him and faked her whole life story. Will Arthur Fleck find redemption or damnation at the end?

One of the biggest issues with Joker: Folie a Deux from viewers is that the film is a musical. More than one person has told me that they were shocked to find that Joker: Folie a Deux has musical numbers. I am somewhat surprised that people walked into the film unaware that Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga would perform song-and-dance routines. It was not a secret, though judging from audience reaction, it was not emphasized either. 

On that level, Joker: Folie a Deux is an absolute failure. A good music, even one that uses previously written pop standards like That's Life or For Once in My Life, will use them to express character moods or move the plot forward. This film does neither. I could get the argument that For Once in My Life does express Fleck's rediscovered joy through Lee Quinzel (the name Harlequin is never used). 

However, you cannot have it both ways. The musical numbers veer from Fleck's fantasies (such as when he and Lee perform To Love Somebody and Gonna Build a Mountain) to real-life (such as the aforementioned For Once in My Life and If My Friends Could See Me Now during their attempted escape). I could have accepted the use of The Joker when Fleck fantasizes about killing the jurors and judge. However, that is not what Joker: Folie a Deux did.

I am not sure if even the film knew what it wanted to do with the musical numbers. The one takeaway that I got from the musical numbers is one of contempt for the audience. As Phoenix gleefully tap dances while Gaga covers Gonna Build a Mountain, all I could think was that everyone involved in Joker: Folie a Deux are all laughing at the audience. I felt that the people behind the film simply hated the people who liked the first film and wanted to ridicule them. In a certain sense, they treated the audience how Gotham treated Arthur before he lost all grip of reality. 

The split in Joker: Folie a Deux can be best summarized when Gary Puddles (Leigh Gill) returns from the first film to give testimony. Gill is playing this extremely straight, delving back into Puddles' deep emotional trauma of seeing a man murdered in front of him but being spared by his then-friend Arthur because Puddles was the only person to show Fleck any kindness. This shows a strong, dramatic, even emotional situation. 

On one side, there is the drama. On the other, you have Phoenix, careening between a Southern accent even Daniel Craig would say was cartoonish and a Cockney accent going on about how he could not believe the witness' name was "Puddles". Yes, Joker might not take things seriously. However, you have one character taking this extremely seriously, the other not. The split between them reveals how tonally unbalanced Joker: Folie a Deux is. We are watching a film at war with itself, attempting to be clever, perhaps even daring by having musical numbers but also wanting to say something. No one is quite sure what it wanted to say, but it took a long time in saying nothing.

One last part on the musical numbers. I can cut Joker: Folie a Deux some slack as I do not think Arthur Fleck was meant to be a singer. However, why give a non-singer like Joaquin Phoenix so many songs? Moreover, why have Lady Gaga there if all she is going to do is do admittedly good covers?

It is surprising how unorganized Joker: Folie a Deux is. Lady Gaga's character seemed so unnecessary to the overall story. We can't even say that the character was there for name recognition, as again the name "Harlequin" was never used, and she was always called "Lee" versus the more familiar "Harleen". Keener, one of our best actresses, was not only underused in the film, but dismissed once Fleck decided to represent himself. Steve Coogan has one scene as a tabloid interviewer, but again this was unnecessary.

In fact, the first thirty minutes of this two-hour-eighteen-minute film could have been removed altogether. From the opening animated sequence through the first meeting with Lee, it felt as if things were dragging, waiting for the story to begin. You had the repeated appearance of Ricky (Jacob Lofland), a timid young man who seemed to have a romantic yearning for Arthur. He first comes up to Fleck and tells him that the guards told him that Fleck is a good kisser, and since Ricky has never been kissed, he shyly asks for one. It is so random and bizarre, with no rhyme or reason. The same goes for the various songs the film uses, there being no blending of how the musical numbers flow into or out of the film.

The ending, where Arthur Fleck is knifed and dies, is also seemingly random. Fleck's killer, billed as "Young Inmate" (Connor Storie) is seen once, maybe twice, in the background. That they offered to not give him a name shows one of two things. Either the theories that Arthur Fleck is not THE Joker are true, or the film just wanted to give one "shocking" twist that was not. Nothing in Joker: Folie a Deux lands with the shock or horror or pathos they thought audiences would get.

Perhaps grudging respect can be given that the prison shower rape scene Arthur goes through at the hands of the guards is nowhere near graphic. However, it does not have any emotional impact. Joker's fantasies about going on a court-filled murderous spree or the car bomb that lets Arthur escape (and has a blink-and-you-miss it suggestion that this is when Harvey Dent starts shifting into Two-Face) does not either. 

The performances are fine. Gill is a standout in his brief moment as Gary Puddles, about the only one showing what Joker: Folie a Deux could have been if it had abandoned the notion of being a musical. Phoenix is fine, not great but fine. Same for Gaga, who did what she could and had good musical moments. 

Joker: Folie a Deux is a terrible, terrible film. It has nothing of redeeming value. It is a total waste of time and effort. It is pointless. If I am honest with myself, it may be worse than Argylle. 

DECISION: F

The Crow (2024): A Review (Review #1857)

THE CROW (2024)

I am often chastised for not having seen certain films before I tackle either their remake or the most recent entry in a certain franchise. It should therefore be no surprise that I have, as of this writing, never seen the 1994 version of The Crow. With that, I enter the remake thirty years in the making with blank eyes. I cannot compare this The Crow to the original. I can say that, independent of that original, this The Crow is a dull, bleak affair despite its lead's best efforts.

Troubled recovering addict Eric (Bill Skarsgard) is at a recovery center that looks like a prison. Into this place comes Shelly (FKA Twigs). She is locked in due to the police having found drugs in her bag when she was fleeing a potential killer. Shelly, a talented pianist, was videotaped with her bestie Zadie (Isabella Wei) involved in something dark and dangerous. This prison-cum-recovery center is probably the best place for Shelly, at least initially.

Shelly and Eric fall quickly in love, but now she has been tracked down by Marion (Laura Birn), someone who works for the evil Vincent Roeg (Danny Huston). We discover that Roeg has lived for centuries, having made a literal deal with the devil. In exchange for sending innocent souls to Hell, Roeg gets an extended life. All this matters little to Eric and to a lesser extent to Shelly. Having escaped from their confinement, Shelly and Eric embark on a passionate romance and in making music. 

That blissful time is cut short when they are found and killed. That is, it appears that they are killed, though while Shelly is slipping into the lower depths, Eric is caught in a netherworld. As his love was pure, the figure Kronos (Sami Bouajila) says that he can float between worlds, feeling physical pain but not dying. He now has a chance to set things right and bring Shelly back if he eliminates Roeg and his minions.

Eric begins his task but when he sees the video, which is of a possessed Shelly killing someone, he wavers in his belief in her. That is enough to send him back to the netherworld and now Shelly is condemned to be separated from Eric forever. Eric, however, will not let Shelly go and offers to take her place in Hell in exchange for her being restored to life. Kronos agrees but he must go back and complete his mission. It is a bloody fight back to bring Shelly to life and Roeg to justice.

Since I have yet to see the original The Crow, I am not in a position to know how close or far this remake strayed from it or from the original comic books.  However, I did overhear a group of women, some of whom had seen the 1994 film. They said that apart from the love story, everything in this The Crow was different. Moreover, they all commented on how violent it was. 

On that point, I agree: The Crow is a surprisingly graphic film when it comes to violence. The final battle at the opera house where Eric, now in goth makeup, eliminates the various bodyguards is quite a bloody affair. I figure a samurai sword can decapitate someone. I did not figure it could sever a jaw in half. The Crow is understandably violent. However, I think at times it might have been better overall if director Rupert Sanders had opted to pull back and leave things to the imagination versus showing people stabbing themselves.

It is interesting that we do not see much of Shelly killing someone but do see more of Zadie's end. For all the violence in The Crow, it does not leave a major impact apart from slight disgust. What is meant as a shocking and dramatic moment when Eric crashes the end of the opera with severed heads is shot in a way that both draws attention to itself but leaves you cold. Moreover, there is something almost rote about the killings. There is no sense of justice or shock, just a sense that it is something to go through.

The Crow is a dark film in a literal sense. There are endless scenes that are so opaque that Gotham City looks like the Hundred Acre Woods by comparison. I understand that it is meant to show the oppressed, despairing world it inhabits. It just ends up making things hard to see.

One, perhaps grudgingly, can give Bill Skarsgard some credit for doing his best with his role. He does well as the traumatized Eric when he is locked up. He also puts in an effort when showing his seemingly intense love for Shelly and in his final transformation as the Crow. Bless Skarsgard for trying, which is more than can be said for FKA Twigs. I am not familiar with her musical career, and the only film Twigs has been in that I have seen is Honey Boy. It is a sign of how bad she was there that I don't think I even mentioned her in my Honey Boy review.

Now, I can make amends for that oversight by saying that FKA Twigs, based on The Crow, has no business being in a movie as an actress and should be kept away from the screens as a service to humanity. She was absolutely abysmal in The Crow. Blank, emotionless, with a look of almost disinterest. Twigs should be a frontrunner for the Worst Actress Razzie, as her appearance in The Crow is a sheer embarrassment for all concerned: cast, crew and audience. 

Huston, under normal circumstances, would waste his skills in being something this awful. However, I figure that he was well paid, so I do not begrudge him that.

Zach Baylin's screenplay spent so much time attempting to foster this alleged love story that it becomes almost parody. It does not help that only Skarsgard even attempts to sell the love story.

Do I think that The Crow is better than Argylle? That is a tough one. Deadpool & Wolverine briefly managed to dethrone Argylle as the worst film of 2024, though in retrospect I would rather sit through Deadpool & Wolverine than Argylle. In a similar vein, I think I would rather endure The Crow than Argylle. I'll give this to The Crow: it made me think whether it was worse than Argylle, so that's something of an achievement I suppose.

DECISION: F

Deadpool & Wolverine: A Review (Review #1829)

DEADPOOL & WOLVERINE

I was pretty much appalled by Deadpool, snarky and violent. I was in the minority though, as millions loved it precisely for those qualities. I cannot remember if I saw Deadpool 2, but now we have Deadpool & Wolverine. It is what I figure Deadpool and Marvel Cinematic Universe fans wanted: the blending of the unserious Merc with a Mouth and the uber-serious Logan. If that appeals to you, then I figure Deadpool & Wolverine is right up your street. If you don't, and you don't keep up with every minute detail of the world's longest and most expensive soap opera, then there is nothing in Deadpool & Wolverine to convert you.

Wade Wilson/Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds) is searching for Logan/Wolverine, but surprisingly finds him dead. That does not stop him from using Logan's remains to fight off a group of fighters while dancing to N*Sync's Bye Bye Bye. Why does Deadpool need Wolverine? Well, we have to back up a bit.

Deadpool wanted to join the Avengers but was rejected by Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau). Dejected by being rejected, Wade has been miserable working as a used car salesman with his friend Peter (Rob Delaney). His birthday party causes him no joy since his ex-girlfriend Vanessa (Morena Baccarin) is also there. Things pick up a bit when agents of the Time Variance Authority come in to take him to renegade TVA bureaucrat Mr. Paradox (Matthew Macfayden). 

Paradox tells Deadpool that the Sacred Timeline is being affected and that while he can remain, his own timeline has to be obliterated due to the death of Deadpool's anchor being. That anchor being is Logan. Rather than see his loved ones erased, Deadpool will find his anchor being and prevent him from dying.

That's thirty minutes before we go back to where we started and move forward. 

He does eventually find Logan (Hugh Jackman), though his Logan/Wolverine is the worst of all of them. Thrown into the Void, Logan and Wolverine must join forces to fight both Paradox and Cassandra Nova (Emma Corrin), unofficial ruler of the Void and Charles Xavier/Professor X's twin sister. 

As a side note, is baldness both a hereditary trait and requirement in the Xavier family? 

From there, they meet various heroes and villains from past MCU movies, even those not from the official Marvel Cinematic Universe. There's Johnny Storm/Human Torch (Chris Evan), Elektra Natchios (Jennifer Garner), Gambit (Channing Tatum), Laura/X-23 (Dafne Keen) and Blade (Wesley Snipes). There are also villains such as Pyro (Aaron Stanford) working against the Resistance, as well as those in between such as the various Deadpools in other worlds. Nicepool (Reynolds in a dual role) is in the Void as well. Ultimately Deadpool & Wolverine must fight to keep all the timelines intact.

Deadpool & Wolverine has five credited screenwriters including both Reynolds and director Shawn Levy. I always take such a high number of credited screenwriters as a cause for alarm. It smacks of writing by committee; it suggests that there are too many cooks in the kitchen who couldn't form a unified vision. It also tells me that there were probably more hands on the project than people are willing to admit. 

With so many people hacking away at a script, it looks like Deadpool & Wolverine opted for a "more is more" plan. All kinds of fan service were thrown at the viewer (Chris Evans as the Human Torch from earlier Fantastic Four films! The original Blade is back! The Alabaman Channing Tatum as the Cajun Gambit!). Double, triple, quadruple down on all these callbacks and throw in some more. Shoutouts both metaphorical and literal to Furiosa and the demise of Twentieth Century-Fox. 

For me, a reason as to why I thoroughly disliked though not detested Deadpool & Wolverine is what so many people loved about it. The various callbacks, the fourth wall breaking, the "aren't we being clever" bits did not impress me. There were many people laughing at various parts, such as a major fight between Deadpool and Wolverine to Grease's You're the One That I Want. I do not take away from anyone's enjoyment of such things. I just want, for myself, something with a little more substance, even in a comic book film.

Pointing out things like montages or how a particular creature was in a Loki episode cuts no ice with me. In fact, it separates me from any serious stakes. Why Logan in particular is Wade's anchor being is unclear (and I think I'm being generous in using that word). The few times Deadpool & Logan pause to give Jackman a more dramatic moment seems jarringly at odds with all the craziness going on around here. Far be it for Wade/Deadpool to have a serious moment. I think the film tried, but no one would believe it. 

Moreover, since we have all these variants going on in multiple universes, there are no stakes to anything here. 

The various cameos did not impress me. I get that Tatum was always in the running for a separate Gambit film. However, separate from the fact that Taum has no acting skills or any real skills apart from taking his clothes off, the deliberately exaggerated Cajun accent was maddening. Pointing out that he was almost unintelligible is not clever. It only draws more attention to a gag that was not funny to start with. Having Snipes say, "There's only going to be one Blade!" could be mildly amusing. Having Reynolds as Deadpool face the camera to give us a knowing look is not. 

Also, why throw in a Furiosa reference when presumably in any of their worlds the Mad Max franchise would not necessarily exist. 

I don't think there were any performances here. People came, cashed their checks, and moved on. Taking jabs at the presumably high salaries is not impressive or clever. After Evans' Johnny Storm is killed, Reynolds' Deadpool tells Logan "Do you know what he was doing to the budget?". Sure, the audience laughed, but I did not. I did not laugh once at Deadpool & Wolverine, though did find myself nodding in agreement when Logan mocks Deadpool. Wolverine rants that Deadpool can't save the world, he couldn't even save his relationship with a stripper! Yet I digress.

I suppose it's nice for Jackman to show off his incredible physique at age 55, but it would be nice if he actually moved on in his career. The same for 47-year-old Reynolds, who has been doing the same snarky schtick since Two Guys, A Girl and a Pizza Place back in 1998. I liked the show, but how is he still doing a variation of Berg all these decades later. Jackman did best in the few dramatic scenes he was in. His Logan was fine, but I was not overwhelmed. Macfayden could have been fun as Paradox, but I wonder if he even knew what was going on. Tatum did not make clear whether Gambit was the joke or just in on it. Garner looked bored and almost desperate to get out of things. Snipes looked like was having a good time.

Oddly, I did not find Deadpool & Wolverine to be as violent as I thought it would be. Yes, you do get graphic depictions of all sorts of killings. However, I was curiously numb to it all. 

The entire premise of Deadpool & Wolverine (Deadpool doing what he can to save his friends) got a bit lost in the Paul Rudd jokes and shade throwing. I did not know those characters enough to make the stakes feel high. I just did not care for the film on any level. 

"I don't want to spend my life being an annoying one-trick pony," Wade Wilson tells Happy Hogan early in Deadpool & Wolverine. That's about the only funny thing in Deadpool & Wolverine since that's the only thing Deadpool has ever been. Deadpool & Wolverine sorely test whether it is better than Argylle. Very briefly, it was worse than Argylle. It is teetering on the edge, but Deadpool & Wolverine did not leave me in a state of shaking fury as Argylle did. It left me cold, which may be worse. 

DECISION: F

Madame Web: A Review (Review #1795)

 

MADAME WEB

When is a Spider-Man movie not a Spider-Man movie? 

I was, to be honest, unaware that there was such a thing as a Spider-Man Cinematic Universe where our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man does not actually appear or is even mentioned by name. Instead, we get various characters from his world with the vague notion that he (be it Tobey Maguire, Andrew Garfield or Tom Holland) is hovering about somewhere in Queens. 

All of these films have some connection to Spidey but don't actually feature the webslinger. There were Venom and Venom: Let There Be Carnage, films that proved wildly popular and successful which despite all logic I did not end up hating. There was Morbius, as great a debacle as any in the comic book film genre.  Now we get Madame Web, the newest effort to create a franchise that seems doomed from the get-go. Perhaps it is to the film's credit that I did not end up hating Madame Web, even if I cannot speak for other members of the audience, but more on that later.

Darkest Peru, 1973. Constance Webb (Kerry Biché) is a pregnant scientist searching for a mysterious spider with healing properties. Once found, however, her fellow explorer Ezekiel Sims (Tahar Rahim) betrays the group, killing everyone to get the rare spider. Connie is hit in the chaos, but the Arañas, a mysterious people who have been the protectors of the rainforest and have spider-like abilities, manage to save Connie's baby if not Connie herself.

Move on thirty years, where that baby is now Cassandra Webb (Dakota Johnson). She's a cynical, emotionally distant EMT in NYC, saving lives but vaguely aware of whom she is saving. Her closest friend is her EMT partner, one Ben Parker (Adam Scott), and even that is not a particularly close relationship. Cassie has a near-death experience that leads to her having visions of the immediate future, though that future is not set. 

Good thing that Sims is not aware of Cassie's clairvoyance or her connection to Connie. He is too busy trying to track down three teenage girls whom he has recurring visions of them killing him when he is older. Sims figures that if he can kill them now, he can avoid his fate. He uses vaguely futuristic technology to track down the three troublemakers. There is sweet-natured Julia Cornwall (Sydney Sweeney), sarcastic rich bitch Mattie Franklin (Celeste O'Connor) and timid Anya Corazon (Isabela Merced). 

Cassie eventually finds that they are all connected, and she becomes their unofficial protector when she has a vision of a strange spider-like man hunting them all down. She asks Ben to care for them while she goes to Darkest Peru to uncover the past that binds them all together. Ben, who has his own issues in caring for his pregnant sister-in-law Mary (Emma Roberts), does his best, but they still face great danger. Will our heroines save themselves and bring Ezekiel down? Will Ben Parker be a good Uncle Ben to his new and unnamed nephew?

Is it damning with faint praise to say that Madame Web is not the worst film of 2024 that I have seen so far? Out of the six 2024 film releases that I have seen as of this writing, Madame Web is the second-best. That is not a compliment: Madame Web is so clunky, lifeless and pointless that it is inexplicable as to why Sony and Columbia in association with Marvel continue plunging into films that just do not work. 

Everything in Madame Web is pretty much a fiasco. Right from the beginning, director S.J. Clarkson makes one oddball decision after another that it quickly becomes a fun experiment finding which element is the worst one. The film opens with a very poorly shot sequence, where the camera for no discernable reason zooms all over the place while also indulging in various Dutch angles. One genuinely wondered if the cameraman was having a stroke and they decided to just keep rolling. More bizarrely, this same sequence was essentially replayed later in the film.

Granted, the information Cassie is presented is new to her. However, not once did anyone ask when going over Clarkson's screenplay (writing along with Matt Samaza, Burk Sharpless and Claire Parker) why they just couldn't go flashback instead of repeating themselves. Add to that the sheer illogic of it all: Cassie, who is technically a fugitive, leaves three teen girls with her bestie, flies to Peru, goes into the jungle, manages to find the mysterious Spider-People and then returns to New York in apparently a matter of hours? This trip would have taken days if not weeks, with Cassie and the girls being hunted down at every second. You can suspend disbelief for only so long before it becomes too ridiculous.

The screenplay, over and over, appears to go out of its way to be idiotic. What the villain actually does is unclear. Did he gain fame and power with the spider? How does he get visions of his future assassins? How do he and Cassie manage to communicate telepathically? Why insist on killing the three in one blow when killing them one-by-one would have been easier? 

If that weren't enough, having a call-out to a previous Spider-Man film is eyerolling. "And when you take on the responsibility, great power will come," the Spider-King tells Cassie. On a myriad of levels, this does not make any sense. "With great power, comes great responsibility" is from the 2002 Spider-Man film. However, Madame Web cannot tie itself into the Tobey Maguire version because Uncle Ben is already a senior citizen and Peter is a teenager. Madame Web, moreover, is set in 2003 and the unnamed nephew to Ben Parker is born at the end of the film. It can tie in, albeit forced, with the Andrew Garfield version, but again it still would be almost impossible to do so. Forget the Tom Holland version. Neither Garfield or Holland, to my recollection, quoted the "Great Power" line, so why use it here?

Actually, forget connecting Madame Web to any of the "Sony-Verse" films. 

Madame Web's disaster goes beyond the screenplay. Everyone in the film is so blank and emotionless. It is astounding to see such a collection of bad performances. One bad performance, I can understand. Having the entire cast be awful is on the director. 

Dakota Johnson is not even trying. One wonders if she was literally drugged into performing. She recited her lines as if she was trying to figure out what the words meant, bringing nothing to the role. Cassie has no personality, no charisma, nothing that indicates she is a functioning human. The trio of Sweeney, Merced and O'Connor all similarly look expressionless. They never connected to each other, but oddly they never looked like they were in conflict. 

Tahar Rahim is an interesting case. He is French, and as such I do not know how strong his English is. He may be quite fluent, but Madame Web can't show us how. There is a curious disconnect between when he speaks and when we see him speak, like the dubbing is off. At times, I wondered if the film was trying to hide him speaking (hence the strange use of Dutch angles and negative space). Scott and Emma Roberts as Ben's sister-in-law Mary were there to do a job and move on.

Madame Web is a nothing. While I have read and heard the vitriol about it, calling it the worst film they have ever seen or the worst ever made, I thought of it more as an enjoyably bad film. It is not good. It is not even a "so bad it's good" film. It is just that in a world that has Lisa Frankenstein and Argylle, I cannot call Madame Web the worst film of 2024.

The best summation that I can give Madame Web comes not from me but from another audience member at the screening I attended. While he did not shout out his comments, he was audible enough in his succinct review. He said, and I quote, "This movie sucked". That pretty much captures Madame Web perfectly.

The Original Madame (Web)

DECISION: D+