Bad Moms: 8/10

Ghostbusters was slaughtered and fed to the wolves in terms of box office because the feminist twang to the franchise was not well-received in the least bit. Some complained it was pointless, some complained it was just milking a franchise that is heavy in nostalgia, and others complained that it was pandering to the female-driven audience as opposed to the fanbase that had supported the franchise in the first place. Despite the good critic reviews, it became a major loss for Sony, and killed any hopes for a sequel.

Bad Moms on the other hand is the little summer film that could, taking a $20 million budget and already matching that amount after the first weekend. And with strong word-of-mouth and good reviews it continues to make decent money in a crowded summer schedule. This film also has a heavy feminism touch, yet hasn’t received the male-bashing you’ve been seeing from Ghostbusters. And that’s because the film from the ground up was made for moms, made for female millennials, and doesn’t hold anything back and keeps the focus on the ladies.

Led by the screenwriting duo that penned the clever original Hangover flick, Bad Moms is a cinematic stress ball for mothers around the world. It follows a trio of ladies fed up with their stressful lives and start rebelling against the norm. It starts a revolution amongst the community which counters the strict clockwork ways of the PTA---leading to a culture clash against its leader. The plot isn’t anything drastically revolutionary, but it has a lot to say about modern society’s difficult expectations for mothers.

With the plot being slightly thin, it gives plenty of room for the main cast to go vulgar, go nuts, go raw, before ultimately getting the point across. And Kunis, Kristin Bell, and especially Kathryn Hahn knocks it out of the park with timing, delivery, and a good range of emotions to boot. Mila Kunis’ character rises from humble soccer mom into a wild force of nature that results in crazy parties, rebellion against her children and deadbeat husband, and even nachos for breakfast (my hero). Step aside men as most of the focus was on the relationships between mother and child, with men popping in only once in a while. Then toss several funny scenarios, a wild cheap wine scene, and a couple fun cameos, and you’ll be seldom bored at the chaos that emerges once the second act rolls in.

This movie definitely isn’t perfect. The tone gets slightly uneven, the soundtrack is overindulgent, and the final moments doesn’t quite match the comedic wrecking ball of the second half, but if you are a mother this is your guilty pleasure. The cast is too fun, the movie doesn’t slow down, and it gets unapologetically vulgar and uncut and doesn’t let go.

Mothers: Bad Moms tailors to you, speaks to you, represents you, and challenges societal beliefs held against you. And prepare for the final scene once the credits roll in---it wraps up the motherhood themes perfectly. You can’t just switch genders on a film and try to staple a feminism theme and expect it to work---you need to fully commit to your audience and also explain what your 21st century movement is all about. Otherwise it feels like a gimmick. Ghostbusters was simply trying to ride the wave of feminism. Bad Moms actually has something to say, which is why ultimately amongst the flaws and hard-R rating it actually works.

Captain America: Civil War: 9/10

The cinematic equivalent to tossing dozens of awesome comic books in a blender with a heavy budget and pouring it out into celluloid, Civil War is not only a superb sequel and improvement to the Avengers films, but just might actually become the best MCU flick yet. And yes, the movie is extremely bloated. Yes, the movie becomes a bit of a downer especially after funnier offerings like Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy. But once the wheels start turning and the conflict shifts into the second act you will be enthusiastically entertained up until the final scene.

Civil War is honestly Avengers 2.5, but the half is only in terms of chronological order. In the third Captain America installment, the events from past Marvel offerings has the world afraid of the superheroes, and over a hundred nations want to be able to monitor and control where the Avengers goes and what they should do after an espionage mission gone wrong. This creates a rift between all the heroes, especially with Winter Soldier being a fugitive and another threat lurking within; and differing opinions on how to handle the situation. Civil War's biggest strength is the sheer amount of characters; as they bring back all the Avengers, and then threw in some new additions.

Black Panther was flawless in performance, visuals, and execution. Second-billing favorites like Ant-Man, Falcon, Black Widow (who deserves her own movie) and Hawkeye make an appearance and also greatly deliver. Lastly, Spider-Man undoubtedly steals the show and he barely makes an appearance here. After 14 years of cinematic Spider-Man appearances, Marvel truly gets it right this time. Unlike what happened with Age of Ultron (entertaining yet forgettable), you will be excited for future features based off the new characters you meet within the 150 minute timeframe----especially Spider-Man. Sadly not all the Marvel personas get enough screen time, but it's part of the sacrifices made when there is such a long guest list to the motion picture party.

The chemistry within the MCU is off the charts, and Civil War raises the bar even higher. What DC films are missing is this key element; mostly because we barely see any character development and consistent cast from sequel to sequel. The interactions between each of the heroes is what really allows this movie to go to the top tier of comic book mayhem, as even Bucky has his moments when involved with the others, especially (surprisingly) Falcon. The complicated relationship between Iron Man and Captain America is front and center, and both deliver spectacular performances as two guilt-ridden heroes desperately trying to avoid conflict even though all signs point to a clash.

Helping Civil War maintain its bite is a strong (and rather gloomy) script and flawless direction from the Russo Brothers, who have impressed mightily since their debut with The Winter Soldier. The film honestly has it all: deep themes, lots of loss, plenty of surprises, tons of drama, tons of action, controversial decisions, and a good amount of humor to mix it all together---even though we really could have used more jokes in the first act. The action scenes range from clever to intense to downright entertaining. The Airport Battle will become a part of Marvel movie history, I promise you. The scene will be embedded in your memory if you are a fan of the comics. Then there's the incredible Bucharest Chase that's the best chase since Raid 2. At the same time, the final fight will break your heart.

Painstaking amount of effort is given to not only making these characters come to life, but also making them likable and relatable. Marvel does a fantastic job picking the right staff behind the scenes, and does even better picking the actors and actresses to represent the MCU. Combine that with a proper budget and an extremely tight structure that connects all the films together and always leaves room for the upcoming sequels and you have a systematic series of films that resonates with the worldwide audience. Captain America: Civil War is now the peak result of this formula, as this is the first mega Marvel film since the original Avengers to appear to not pull any punches and maximize the content with the pieces allotted.

As a comic book fan, there's no way you can walk out disappointed. And as a summer blockbuster fan, you will also have a lot of fun while simultaneously think about the events that occurred long after the final punch is thrown. Civil War is absolutely fantastic, and among the best comic book movies of all-time. DC, you need to watch this and take notes.

The Continuing Frustrations of a Second Banana Comic Book Enterprise

Batman vs. Superman is here, it will make money----just definitely not Marvel money. And there is nobody but Warner Brothers and DC to blame.

The film has been riddled with controversy and problems ever since it was officially announced, and that came after over a decade of trying to get the project off the ground (Since before Christian Bale’s Batman by the way). Whether it’s the choice of Batman, the random inclusion of Wonder Woman (as opposed to getting her own movie first), the release date going up against the Marvel juggernaut Captain America: Civil War (which Warner Brothers would eventually cave in), Batman holding a massive gun in the trailer (do the writers even know Batman?) and even the prospect of this movie happening in the first place. And although it will make its millions in the first weekend only time will tell if it will revolutionize and revitalize the brand like Iron Man, or calmly crash and burn like X-Men: The Last Stand.

Odds are, it will make plenty of money, but won’t last long in the minds of moviegoers and comic book fans. Do recall X-Men Origins: Wolverine still made over $350 million, but it remains a bitter inclusion in the X-Men franchise. Batman vs. Superman might also develop this bitter aftertaste, and it has more to do with the in-house shenanigans as opposed to the competition, which has become a far more organized unit. Side-Note: Disney has been operating this ship extremely well, far better than any of us anticipated back when they first (shockingly) purchased them.

Do remember once upon a time DC was making plenty of progress turning Batman into even more of a household name in the 90s thanks to a good group of movies and a spectacular animated cartoon (Batman: The Animated Series still has the best version of Batman and Robin and the best version of nearly all the Batman villains). Do also recall that Superman had a popular show as well as a cartoon that would ultimately cross with Batman around the same time. Marvel in the meantime had good cartoons, but struggled in making movies and would nearly go completely bankrupt. To say DC has never been good with its IPs is silly. But the truth is: they need some help today. From 1998 on (Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze happened, accept it folks), its been overall tough to watch. 

Back to Batman vs. Superman. The reason why it looks more like a cash grab as opposed to an important chapter to a cinematic series is because there is no build up whatsoever, no time for anticipation. Ben Affleck’s Batman doesn’t have his own movie before this installment, and Man of Steel was the only film in Henry Cavill’s catalog. Now we have to look at Civil War: The same Iron Man has been in 5 movies beforehand, while the same Captain America has 4—not including their cameos with Thor and Incredible Hulk. In order for this movie to have a true impact, we needed to see more of this current Batman and Superman, see their personalities fully flesh out, and then have more of an emotional attachment.

Now, the real question is why didn’t Christian Bale’s Batman have the chance to go up against Superman? After The Dark Knight’s spectacular box office performance and appeal, that would have been the perfect next chapter. Why wasn’t Brandon Routh’s Superman given another shot? Believe it or not, Superman Returns made MORE money than Batman Begins (391 to 374 million) so even if the critical reception wasn’t as good, this reboot deserved at least another opportunity, maybe with a different director. You could have done two trilogies between the heroes and then had them go up against each other in the seventh film. That would have worked far, far better. Routh wasn’t bad, he was just given very little to work with. And everyone in this planet knows Kevin Spacey’s Lex Luthor would have been much better than Jesse Eisenberg’s. Christian Bale’s Batman wasn’t my favorite, but was well-accepted regardless.

DC is a disaster, and Batman vs. Superman is the latest example of the disastrous state of the “Robin” in the cinematic comic book universe. In my lifetime, I have seen 7+ Batmans (counting the animated series), 4+ Supermans (Smallville slightly counts), and 2 live-action iterations of The Flash happening SIMULTANEOUSLY present day! It is absolutely ridiculous that Grant Gustin doesn’t become The Flash in Justice League. Seriously, why not? DC forgets they need character development for us to truly root for the people. Now we have to see this new Flash and try to accept him.

Side-Note #2: I know some of you will bring up the THIRD cinematic Spider-Man in the last 15 years appearing in Civil War. But do remember I pointed out Marvel’s ridiculous decision-making in the 90s, which still affects Disney, Marvel, and some of the IPs to this very day. Trust me, Marvel isn’t perfect, but it’s doing a great job righting some of the wrongs-----with the help of Mickey Mouse.

Why couldn’t Batman just get the James Bond treatment and treat each film as standalone movies? I don’t need to see The Living Daylights and Live and Let Die to watch Goldeneye; but they each do still carry the same flavor of James Bond and still gives us a sense of familiarity. Batman would have been the perfect franchise to consistently mix comic book fun with adult themes and you know….actual detective work. This modern legion of Batman fans have forgotten that he is first and foremost a really good detective for Gotham. The Dark Knight remains a highly respected film because it’s a grounded cat-and-mouse fugitive hunt involving a man that wants to save a city against a man who wants to destroy it. This is a classic good vs. evil tale that didn’t require viewings of previous films to fully understand and fully get involved. The Dark Knight by itself is an impressive movie.

Superman is the defining example of a moral compass in the universe of superheroes, and could have also benefited from a slew of standalone movies before the crossover with Batman. If you didn’t plan on developing Bruce and Clark through connected films, at least beef up the resumes before the highly-anticipated showdown. The Marvel Cinematic Universe could not have planned Civil War better, any earlier it would have failed. And P.S., they know the power of television and Netflix by connecting nearly everything together. Agents of Shield directly influences Avengers: Age of Ultron, while Jessica Jones does a great job being part of the same environment without directly referencing it.

Then there is one aspect of DC’s recent film history that unexpectedly affected the entire company and warrants some sympathy for its current state of silver medal: Heath Ledger’s death. Heath Ledger’s Joker was an extremely compelling character that not only could have spanned multiple Batman sequels, but could have very well played a role in a Superman movie. The original idea was for Joker to wind up in court over his actions in the third film and cause more mayhem. Unfortunately, Ledger’s death would end any ideas with the character.

Personally, I would have continued the Joker storyline regardless because to “retire” the most popular comic book villain of all-time was a fantasy and we all knew it. Jim Carrey, Robin Williams, maybe even Mark Hamill himself could have carried the mantle. I’m almost positive Heath Ledger would have wanted it that way. Also, notice the minimal setback when the replaced Dumbledore and The Oracle between films in their respective series. I believe we would have accepted a different Joker just like we accepted the new (and improved) Rachel fully knowing the circumstances. Nonetheless, the idea was scrapped and we wound up with a ho-hum third chapter that would take place nearly a decade later and would end a storyline that really didn’t need to finish. Not continuing Joker was the right move, but the wrong move at the same time---and to this day the effects still linger…as does the heinous final act of Dark Knight Rises…

DC has forgotten its comic book roots and mannerisms. You need to build your characters, you need to give us time to get to know and love the iteration of the persona you are presenting on-screen. The Dark Knight trilogy featured 2 films earning a billion dollars because we became invested in Bruce Wayne’s story and wanted to see where it was going. It took two and a half movies before Christian Bale’s Batman was overpowered by Bane, leading to a tough sequence that affected moviegoers everywhere. We felt those punches, we felt his pain (Gonna be a buzzkill; but Christopher Nolan needs to learn how to film a fight sequence. Compare the Bane/Batman fight to the Spider-Man/Green Goblin fight and you’ll understand why).

Batman vs. Superman expects us to develop enough sympathy to feel worry about our (new) caped crusader tackling impossible odds in fighting a God within the time frame of 70 minutes---before the conflict actually takes shape. DC expected us to feel for an ultra-powerful character that didn’t have much of a bridge between the surprisingly violent neck-snapping scene of Man of Steel and his powerhouse showdown in the late second/final act.

In stories of this caliber, you need more time. Would the Batman/Superman fight in Dark Knight Returns back in 1986 have had the same impact if they had met earlier in their publication history? Most likely not, it’s hard to top over five decades of character buildup. Would Civil War have been as big a deal if it had directly followed the original Avengers? Not even close. Four years and three films separate their first minor tiffs and the upcoming battle which may even result in a major death.

Despite Batman being the best superhero and my personal favorite, I won’t watch Batman vs. Superman because I view this as more a pawn to make more money for Warner Brothers and DC as opposed to a film trying to really tell a story and continue the legacy of DC’s most popular assets. My heart just isn't beating heavy enough for this movie. I wanted to be excited, but after witnessing the trailers and seeing Batman rebooted (again) and seeing Wonder Woman just being thrown in for no legitimate reason, I see myself just hanging on to the money and waiting for the other comic book movie in the horizon. 





DC, get your act together. Don’t just pit a bunch of your heroes together, allow us to love them again. Because as of right now, I don’t know the superheroes I am watching.

Zootopia: 10/10

Some movies perfectly personifies the past (Saving Private Ryan), some movies predict the future (Fight Club), and some (like this one) perfectly nail the current issues so accurately you feel like they financed, wrote, and filmed the movie yesterday. Read the following sentence slowly because you might not believe it the first time you glance through it: Zootopia is the best film under the Walt Disney Animation Studios banner since Emperor’s New Groove, and is arguably the most important animated film since Princess and the Frog. Yes, the clock has to reach back 16 years before you can find a Disney Studios animated film as strong as this one. Between the layers of intense subject matter and a surprisingly strong mystery plot lies a beautiful message for the kids and tweens that needs to be heard, especially today.

Nothing on the surface can actually prepare you for what happens once you enter the setting of Zootopia. However, the surface is quite delightful to look at. The animation is spectacularly detailed and contributes mightily to the storyline about animals living together. The main city itself branches off into several subdivisions, each with its own distinctive personality. Unlike most Disney films, Zootopia itself is so massive its practically begging for continuations through film and television. It’s an expansive visual feast of colors and colorful characters, similar to the creative world of Wreck-It Ralph.

However, once the movie gets going you will quickly realize that although it is a children’s movie, there is plenty for teenagers and even adults to laugh at and to be moved by. The mystery is slightly more mature than what is expected, and we even reach quite dark territory once the second half kicks into play. This is a children’s movie, but has an incredible script full of heart, soul, drama, and necessary comedy to offset the bleakness. Using Pixar’s collective creativity technique (which has been rusting lately), we have three directors and nearly a dozen writing credits attached (two wrote the screenplay, many others contributed to the story). It is a miracle that so many contributors to a single script made a film that flowed so well.

Disney and Pixar are the best at coming up with the required vocal talents to bring the animated films to life, and this is no exception. Jennifer Goodwin and Jason Bateman are absolutely perfect for each other and play to their strengths: Goodwin with her charming all-American bubbliness and Bateman’s sly hustling ways. They dominate the film but luckily you’ll learn to love them immediately through their strengths and their flaws. And in keeping with recent tradition, you won’t know who the true villain is until later as the stakes start getting higher.

Rich Moore (most experienced of the three-director team) should be a bigger name because his directing credits includes the early 90s Simpsons and some of Futurama’s greatest episodes. What those shows and this film has in common is the electric mix of well-paced story, strong characters, and shades of drama and commentary that speaks to the current issues. Zootopia explores racism, sexism, classism, and diversity fears better than any of the trailblazing Disney animated films before it. That being said, it’s not a knock on Princess and the Frog, Mulan, or Hunchback of Notre Dame---the truth is Zootopia would have never been fully greenlit by Disney in the 90s, and even the 2000s.

Disney has gotten gutsier and ballsier in recent years with the Too Big to Fail attitude, and although the company definitely remains officially mum on the current political turmoil, Zootopia can and should be its resume and cover letter concerning what side of the fight they are on. Zootopia is a daring animated film that will frighten you (especially the youngsters), will emotionally hurt you, and will leave you thinking long after Shakira’s gazelle character lets out her final note. It’s the perfect concoction of mystery, comedy, action, and social commentary that not only allows it to become an early entry for Best Animated Feature, but (dare I say it), a Best Picture nomination.

Zootopia on the surface, beneath the surface, and everywhere in between is essentially flawless. It has something for everyone, although the youngest ones will struggle as it gets darker. Through its importance as well as the engaging, ever-revolving plot, I give this film the highest marks. Zootopia will stand as one of the best in all of 2016, and among the best works of animation this entire decade. Disney has unveiled its stance through adorable animals while simultaneously proving that it remains the animation king of the world.

Deadpool: 7/10

Finally we have a decent X-Men origin story with plenty of heart, spirit, chemistry, and good connections with the original source. The baffling thing is that we receive this gift in the form of the most incoherent and random Marvel character in the entire universe. The character that least requires an explanation gets the most structured and most engaging Fox Marvel film since X-Men 2. But of course, the behind-the-scenes licensing drama and the infuriatingly small budget (compared to what the storyline demands) entangle the film quite a bit.

Ryan Reynolds might be the only man in the history of film to totally mess up a cinematic character, and then get a second chance at getting it right by starting entirely from scratch. With the rated R guaranteed and a looser approach to Deadpool, Reynolds knocks it out of the park with a much more accurate performance, and one with plenty of depth and sympathetic pull. His chemistry with the rest of the cast reminds you why he’s much better unhinged and uncut (Waiting, Adventureland).

Reynolds has actually been the main catalyst at making sure that he helped right the wrongs caused by X-Men Origins. He helped fight to keep the R rating, helped increase the (already small) budget to make this a reality, and has helped craft the flood of social media hype. The hard R rating was the biggest requirement in making this film work; the story and mannerisms of Deadpool are not for the faint of heart. Deadpool is far more in the realm of Spawn as opposed to Fantastic Four in terms of adult content.

The script is formulaic in nature, but fresh with crisp dialogue, great one-liners, constant shifts in timeline, and plenty of fun sidekicks to be entertained by. Sadly, because of obvious budget constraints, we are treated to only two major action sequences (the first one overshadows the finale by a long shot), not a single major X-Men cameo, throwaway villains, and most of the time being spent on the creating of Deadpool as opposed to the anarchy that follows. 10 years of production hell and dozens of re-writes could doom most screenplays, but Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick do a great job saving whatever was left.

The biggest achievement of Deadpool is how closely it resembles the source material and personality despite getting less money. If you enjoy Deadpool in the comics, you’ll enjoy him here as well---even if the eccentricity is toned down just slightly enough to keep the plot structured. The action is intense, the injuries are gruesome, the humor is dark and crude, and the movie never really takes itself seriously. Fourth walls go down, it reveals its own production setbacks within the film, and it has this kinetic comic book flavored energy that hardly ever slows.

It might be a case of less money = more freedom, but the lack of funding really tarnishes the movie. Part of the glee of Deadpool in the Marvel universe is his wild interactions with other characters, especially the X-Men. But to put Deadpool in the same supposed Marvel universe as the X-Men and then refuse to have any of the popular characters join in on the fun is baffling and infuriating. Even worse is that we have long-unused X-Men like Gambit (especially) and Cable available. In a tragic case of the production team having more faith than the studio itself, the limitations aren’t obvious but become apparent once the final act rolls in and you are left desiring more Deadpool chaos.

As a risqué, adult version of The Little Engine That Could, this was a comic book film that was supposedly doomed, expected to fail, and was released with minimal hope---only to be saved because of the strength of the Marvel brand, the incredible online/Reynolds marketing campaign, and a legitimate effort to stay true to the source. Great cast, great energy, and great humor is restricted because of Fox and the ridiculous guidelines everyone has been forced to follow since Disney purchased the property. Deadpool can become a successful franchise as long as they are willing to tie him closer to the rest of the X-Men and Marvel movies---and as long as we keep the same dedicated staff. Don’t expect pure unadulterated crazy here; but do expect a great blend of crazy, heart, and entertainment---wrapped together in a limited budget.

Most importantly, this is much, much better than X-Men Origins: Wolverine. 

The Hateful Eight: 5/10

Kendrick Lamar was the best live performance I've ever seen. April 2014, he rocked UCF. However, we had to endure two hours of mediocre rappers before getting to the main event. By the time we got to the very good part of the night, we were emotionally, physically drained. Lamar did his best, but Orlando struggled to maintain the energy. This is Hateful Eight in a nutshell.

It is extremely hard to get mad at Tarantino and the Hateful Eight project as they went through extreme lengths to ensure that it felt, sounded, and looked like a Western straight out of the 1960s. From getting Ennio Morricone to compose the soundtrack to using the same cameras used to film Charlton Heston, Tarantino and friends reached far back into cinematic history and moved it to present day. This alone propels the movie to become a unique experience, as there is actually an overture and then an intermission about halfway into the film.

But leading up to that intermission is where the film really struggles. Throughout his career, the better Tarantino's script is, the better the movie will become—regardless of all the other intangibles. Death Proof's climax rivals as one of the best in the past decade, but the ho-hum dialogue and unlikable first round of characters prevented us from truly enjoying it. In the meantime, Reservoir Dogs is one of the rare movies in which literally every word said is important, making it one of the best indie films you'll ever see.

There is a lot of what I like to call abe dialogue (already been established) in Hateful Eight—leading to a lot of repetitive dialogue, repetitive conversations, and verbal revelations that we had already encountered. As a matter of fact, you could have cut the first third of the movie because the facts and characterizations created were re-created once the movie's setting becomes more claustrophobic and remains in the cabin. Part of Tarantino's magic was his ability to create awesome characters without revealing too much about them. Sadly we don't get much of this in Hateful Eight.

The Tarantinoisms (good music, sharp imagery, inventive directing) start taking off once intermission ends and the intriguing mystery begins, as the tension suddenly revs up. In the second half is when things become interesting and the actors (and lone main actress) can start chewing at the scenery. The words suddenly become important, the details become more prevalent, and the audience has become much more engaged. In spite of this, the length of the film and the over-indulgence of throwaway dialogue weighs down on you and never allows for Hateful Eight to really reach the quality lengths of Tarantino's other hybrid westerns like Django Unchained and Inglorious Basterds.

Hateful Eight is like a large fluffy pound cake, a lot of density but lacking in flavor and substance. Tarantino directed this with his usual precision and quirkiness, however it lacks an outstanding moment, it lacks an outstanding character, and with the climax being delayed in favor of displaying past events it's hard to find the pulse of this irregular heartbeat.

In order for lengthy movies to maintain interest you have to cover a lot of ground in terms of whether years or space. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly covers an insane amount of Western territory, leading to every minute being required. Shawshank Redemption covers over two decades of prison life, so it too needed every minute. Hateful Eight is a cinematic bottle episode that could have been much shorter, much tighter, and with that each detail and word being much more vital.

Somewhere in that cabin lies a good story, and overall a good movie. You just have to get past the thicket of words to find it.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens: 8/10

Let’s get one thing clear: there is absolutely no way in the modern economic structure of filmmaking and Hollywood are we ever going to get a sci-fi trifecta as good as the original Star Wars trilogy. Just ask Indiana Jones what happens when you try to revive a severely beloved franchise in a new era decades later (*screams in agony*). And with the Disney Regime having their fingerprints all over the product you know there will be limitations, there will be questionable decisions, and the eggs will never be in the same basket.

However, Star Wars: The Force Awakens is not just a step in the right direction; its many many steps in the right direction. Despite the impossible odds to live up to the Original Three, The Force Awakens delivers an exhilarating experience that will revitalize your love for the franchise, and will give you strong anticipation for what the future holds within the LucasFilm universe. Although the movie definitely scales back some of the plot for future installments, it is still chock full of surprises, lovable characters, and the Star Wars magic that we haven’t experienced in a very long time.

J.J. Abrams revs up the nostalgic factor by not only doing several callbacks to the original trilogy, but but by crafting a storyline that builds and evolves in similar fashion to the original 1977 masterpiece. Without spoiling too much secrets are being pursued, rising evil is threatening the galaxy, and we see heroes coming from unexpected sources--these are all factors coming into play in Episode VII. Force Awakens actually takes off a lot quicker than Episode IV, but the difference is the 2015 revival slows down slightly to allow for more storylines to build (and not always necessarily conclude within the two hour timeframe). Don’t let George Lucas fool you—there were no plans for a sequel back then as A New Hope tossed the entire kitchen sink in terms of budget to give you the most complete riveting experience possible.

The Star Wars tropes are all far too present, and some with upgraded elements: our villain is quite menacing, there is a great cast of characters we wish we could spend more time with, the robotic creatures are lovable every second they are on screen, and of course there is the underrated variety of vehicles and weapons and creatures that we see in the Star Wars universe. Those expecting or hoping for a big deviation might be slightly disappointed. The production value of The Force Awakens was mesmerizing, from the battles to the outstanding cinematography supported by the booming John Williams score. Complementing the art direction is the CGI being kept to an absolute minimum (although the film really should have taken a page from Return of the Jedi and reached out to the Jim Henson Company for a few scenes).

It paces like Star Wars, it looks like Star Wars, and it definitely feels like Star Wars. The Force Awakens has a major element preventing it from becoming the cinematic game-changer Star Wars was back in the 70s: the planned structure technique of Disney. The 1977 gem was layers ahead of the next best-looking film while simultaneously nearly bankrupting everyone around them. It would change the way we see, experience, and film special and visual effects. It was also a fresh new concept that had a wide open door of possibilities—leading to all the extra books and media filling in the structural blanks. Disney is going on a schedule, is going on strict guidelines (More money was spent on budgeting then the film itself if that’s saying anything), leading to less power to the fans (we won’t be seeing dozens of Star Wars books like in the past) and less attempts to ever fully finish the story. Love or hate Disney, they know how to keep a property from becoming stale but profitable.

Can The Force Awakens be a better film? Of course, with more time, less limitations, more actually-completed storylines, and a lack of planning of milking the franchise. But Abrams and company still gives us a very entertaining film that begs multiple viewings to witness the new coming, and skim through all the details and potential clues to where the franchise is heading. Star Wars fans should not be disappointed, especially after what we witnessed during the darkest of times being a fan (The Prequel Trilogy).

The Force Awakens is a dazzling blend of old-school Star Wars magic with new-school thrills and fresh blood that will revitalize the brand throughout the upcoming trilogy and all the spin-offs that follow. Thank you Abrams, thank you Disney, and thanks to all the participated: Star Wars is back and has removed all the stench of the past couple decades. 

The Doomsday Trailer that Killed Batman vs. Superman

(I would put spoiler alert, but....its in the stinkin' movie trailer....)






This is how you destroy momentum, by delivering what is probably the worst movie trailer in the last decade. And I honestly mean that, from the bottom of my heart. It ruined every single bit of excitement that had been delivered from the first trailer, it revealed the entire plot, and showed off so much that we weren’t thirsty for more---unlike the Civil War trailer (Yea, I had to throw in a Marvel reference).

Many revelations could have been kept as a nice surprise for when the movie actually comes out—which included Lex Luthor jumping in on the tense Wayne/Kent conversation, Batman and Superman eventually joining forces, Doomsday making an appearance, and Wonder Woman stepping in to help the other heroes. The entire storyline of this film has been spoiled to no end in the already-lengthy 3 minute trailer.

Now we know what Lex is up to. Now we know this Lex Luthor resembles very little of the villain we all know (Jesse Eisenberg needs more of his Social Network banter and edge). Now we know that the climax won’t be the Superman/Batman fight (when it really, really should). Now we know Superman figures out who Batman is. Now we know how Doomsday came about. Now we know that Wonder Woman will also be battling at the climax. We’ve just seen so much. We’ve seen too much. And it has left very little to the imagination to debate, to ponder, or really do much of anything before May rolls around and we see the surprise-free film. The movie shifted from a great-looking film with two superheroes that operate very differently, to an overbloated DC project that is merely using the brand names to sell tickets.

I have no idea why DC and Warner Brothers thought that a second 3-minute trailer would do anything but harm to the mystique and intrigue of the Superman vs. Batman premise. I have no idea why they thought this footage would have a chance at matching the far-superior Civil War trailer. It was too long, too stretched out, revealed far too much, and lacked the epic feel of the first teaser that actually gave DC and comic book fans some hope that there would be some redemption for the final act of Man of Steel and Dark Knight Rises (you know it to be true).

This will be known as the trailer that killed Batman vs. Superman, and only further pushed Marvel’s grip on all things comic books---including television (Agents of Shield, Jessica Jones and Daredevil are creeping closer to DC’s entourage of television shows).



DC, get your act together.

The Peanuts Movie: 9/10

The Peanuts Movie is just like a puppy: adorable, irresistible, charming, and absolutely worthy despite any flaws it may or may not present. This extremely well-made movie does exactly what adaptations should do: be very faithful regardless of current audience, keep it very close to the source, don’t try to spice it up with unnecessary additions, and do plenty of callbacks to the original work. Blue Sky does an absolutely phenomenal job transforming the world of Schultz into the computer-animated-obsessed cinematic world we see today. This is the best Blue Sky has released since the also-faithful Horton Hears a Who and one of the best films of the entire year. Seriously.

Peanuts has been so embedded in American society that we forget how groundbreaking and how seriously funny the original comic strip was. What Winnie the Pooh is to Disney, Peanuts was to the newspaper---a reliable source of entertainment and harmless beauty. Side-Note: Disney’s 2011 Winnie the Pooh revival was criminally underrated. Transforming Peanuts successfully requires tons of research and special care since Schultz and most of the magical staff behind the specials and movies are no longer with us unfortunately.

The details is what makes The Peanuts Movie phenomenal. The more you loved the comic strips, the more you’ll appreciate the effort. From the art style to the running jokes (Curse you Red Baron!!!) to the fact that the Red-Haired Girl never reveals her name so we can all relate to our childhood crushes, to even the fact that they recycled the sound clips of Snoopy, Steve Martino (delicately directing this with lots of care) and company continue carrying the torch behind one of the most beloved groups of children in the history of cartoons. Peanuts Movie also doesn’t even try to sneak in any adult humor: it sticks to the kids and the kids-at-heart, as well as those that grew up watching the delightful specials. The art style alone throws you right back to the first time you saw A Charlie Brown Christmas. 

Charlie Brown is still a wonderful relatable boy, despite his social insecurities and bad luck. Snoopy is still that trustworthy best friend despite his eccentricity. Linus, Sally, Schroeder, Peppermint Patty, Woodstock, and the rest of the gang all don’t skip a beat despite it being nearly four decades since the last movie, and years since the last special. The plot never thickens or gets deep, it never outstays its welcome, and never loses the tight focus on Charlie Brown/Snoopy while simultaneously giving the other kids their moments to shine. It’s a miracle that they found a cast that matched the voices of the predecessors so well. The fact that there is not a single adult seen (or coherently heard) is a perfectly executed idea that adds to the childhood innocence tone of the film.

You can nitpick and (try to) find some flaws, but I was far too busy smiling at the perfect art style and the light humor that decorated the carefree 88 minutes. I was far too busy rooting for Charlie Brown to finally have his moment. And lastly, I was far too busy enjoying the wild imagination of Snoopy and Woodstock as they take on their version of World War I. Fast, yet harmless and irresistible, The Peanuts Movie will appeal, delight, entertain, and cheer up anybody that decides to give it a chance.

Charles M. Schultz would be extremely proud.

Spectre: 5/10

James Bond suffers from the Simpsons Syndrome: its biggest enemy is its collectively stellar past, and its refusal to attempt to shake things up often (ironically, the beginning of the end of the Simpsons was a poorly-done shakeup involving the death of Maude Flanders). Bond has been exploring beautiful places and wooing beautiful women for decades, so when the formula gets stale it really meanders deep into the production. However when the franchise flips the switch and alters things while still sticking to the roots, we get cinematic gold. Goldeneye, Casino Royale, and Skyfall are the best of Bond within the past 25 years, and it’s for those reasons. Spectre unfortunately fails to attempt anything groundbreaking.

Daniel Craig is still fantastic. The cinematography is still top-notch. The directing (when the budget and script allows) is quite good. Waltz and Bautista were great adversaries (but with very little material). But underneath that, we have a Bond movie that struggles to live up to recent adventures. We have a Bond villain that doesn’t quite match up to sinister folks of the past. We have a series of locales that had been explored before. And lastly, the producers should have known better then to not bring back Adele after her Skyfall song became the best Bond theme since the 70s. Sam Smith had no chance.

What hurts even more is that the beginning was phenomenal, from the opening shot to the opening action sequence that follows. And just like Skyfall, it was so good that the rest of the movie struggled to truly catch up. What instead follows is a more realistic and grounded approach to the expected and familiar Bond formula; and to be honest it used to be effective but the competition of your exotic action movies in European territory has increased significantly---Jason Bourne, Mission: Impossible, and even the revived Fast and the Furious series. Making the movie a rough 150 minutes doesn’t help at all either; it even felt like the budget ran out towards the end.

The grounded formula was a shake-up to the Bond clichés, but by the end of all this you’ll be clamoring to bring these clichés back. You want the entourage of gorgeous vehicles back (as opposed to several helicopter scenes), you want the outlandish villain back (Give me more 1960s Spectre please), and you want the clever gadgets back. As a matter of fact, I want the cool and calm spy back. In Spectre, they cringingly kept referring to him as an assassin—never a spy. It’s a slight dialogue mishap but it speaks layers as to what we are currently seeing from MGM’s final moneymaker. Remove Bond from the equation and you have a decent summer assassin flick. But as a Bond movie that has seen so many precious films and delightful moments---the past harms the quality.

This is the weakest Bond since Die Another Day, another Bond movie that was ruined because it became too formulaic and frayed far from what we saw in the first act. The movie isn’t a dismal failure, nor is it a total sequel disaster to the likes of Amazing Spider-Man 2 (Yep, went there). The Bond recipe is all here, but it’s been diluted by too much filler and not enough flavor. Trying to connect the recent Bond movies together also didn’t help its chances---James Bond wasn’t meant for continuity because they can never add up no matter how hard you try. Spectre went through four writers, and the result was still messy.

Don’t expect peak Connery/Craig Bond, expect more along the lines of late 70s Roger Moore Bond---when it was obvious that change was needed. Perhaps they’ve run out of ideas with Daniel Craig and Sam Mendes. Perhaps more time is needed between Bond movies (the three great Bond flicks I mentioned had many years between installments). It might be time for that shake-up again. I wonder if Tarantino is still interested…

Jafar: The Best of the Disney Villains

Aladdin is finally getting that blu-ray release in the United States. Several years late, but at least it’s actually happening. Aladdin as my better friends know is an animated masterpiece I hold high and mighty and rank it as among the best Disney has ever released. In my latest rankings, it’s the fourth best Disney animated movie of all-time. The music, the humor, the characters, the action----it was all perfect. It had peak Disney Renaissance quality and peak Robin Williams mixed in for good measure. But we aren’t here to talk about Aladdin, we are here to discuss the most underrated aspect of the film.






Jafar, the all-time champ for best Disney villain.

Oh yea, better than Maleficent, Gaston, Hades, Frollo, Man, and everyone else you can throw into this conversation.

Before we even get to meet Aladdin, we see Jafar in the middle of the desert in the middle of the night. No backstory required, we already know he is bad news---especially while waiting for a murderer doing his dirty work. Who knows how many people he has killed on his way to being in that moment at that point of time? And after the “humble thief” gets buried in front of Jafar, he’s just upset because the victim wasn’t worthy of entering the cage. No remorse, no sadness, back to the business of trying to achieve his goal.

Unlike most of your villains that just slouch around and get upset over things (Ursula, just what were you doing all this time?), Jafar has clearly worked his way to the top. Becoming the sultan’s top adviser with leader-like powers (ordering Aladdin’s arrest? That’s some power) without a family connection must have taken years upon years. Want more evidence? Who could possibly have had the time to build an underground lair underneath the palace? Jafar is not after lots of money, he’s after the sultan’s throne, and position of power. And he was as far as he could possibly go without the help of some magic.

The man is absolutely driven, and was willing to take down anyone that could be a roadblock. Aladdin helps him out by entering the cave later in the movie and barely surviving by the skin of his teeth. Yet after Aladdin gives him the lamp in the midst of the collapsing cavern, Jafar was still willing to kill him—despite Aladdin never really being a genuine threat. He tries to stab him, then throws him into the cave and towards his intended death---along with Abu (that monster!) And of course, instead of remorse over potentially murdering yet another man, he’s upset because he lost the lamp.

As a matter of fact, Jafar nearly killed our hero five times: stabbing, throwing into cave, drowning, shipping him off into God-knows-where, and lastly in the final battle. If it weren’t some ingenuity and Aladdin’s friends, the story would have definitely ended sooner. Of course it’s a Disney movie and happy endings are always guaranteed----except for Fox and the Hound (I’m still not over it). Nonetheless, “How many times do I have to kill you, boy!!” is hands-down the best villain line Disney has ever created. In Aladdin, Jafar was always lurking in the shadows, which makes him a bona-fide threat at all times.

Jafar is the only Disney villain to actually have a good share of success before his eventual defeat (Nobody mention Scar, did he honestly better his situation? Not really, they were all going to soon die of starvation). He did indeed achieve the goal of being sultan, made Jasmine a sex slave, became a sorcerer, and even the most powerful genie in the universe (that last part was short-lived). Jafar is also one of the few villains to actually have an awesome sidekick, as Iago is no slouch either.





Oh yea, he also turns into a freakin’ snake. I’m done.

Children of Men: 9/10

If you are an aspiring director, then this is your film to watch and take notes.

Children of Men is an exercise in precise and flawless filmmaking, from the positioning of the shots to the kinetic movement of the shots. Alfonso Curason takes a high-budget idea with a minimal budget (for its genre anyway) and manages to pierce together an intense relentless experience that pulls no punches, and practically throws you in the exact center of the action. In usual science fiction and action movies you are an observer from a distance; with Children of Men you practically become an unwilling participant. You can smell the chaos, feel the blood (and at some points see it spilled on the camera), and sense the grimness that swallows the decaying environment of England.

In one of the best-directed flicks in the past several decades, we follow an everyman (Clive Owen) get caught up in an extremely dangerous mission to transport an important woman out of the country during a time when children cannot be born—leading to panic and apocalyptic results. The cast is small but very effective, from the reliable Clive Owen to the always-entertaining Michael Caine in a small but poignant role. Not to knock the actors or the writing staff (which also includes Clive Owen), but the biggest strength of this movie are the visuals. We'll get to that soon.

Themes of immigration, faith, motherhood, and fate are mixed together in this hearty soup of a script that raises important questions, parallels important issues that have taken place in modern day society, and also dwells into religious tropes. There is a lot of beauty that looms under the shadows of extreme violence and mayhem that will keep you riveted and afraid for what happens next, even if some of the post-apocalyptic clichés pop up in the final act. Children of Men establishes the issues plaguing the society and the characters in the first act, and the film takes off like a lightning bolt starting from the first cleverly-staged action sequence.

This film belongs to Curason and Emmanuel Lubezki, the directing/cinematography duo that have worked well together before (Y Tu Mama Tambien) and since (the also-visually stimulating Gravity). Here they make beautiful dark music together, as they flawlessly and seamlessly shove the camera in the direct center of all the conflicts, and you watch the action and startling images emerge from all different angles as the scene unfolds and becomes lengthier. Why neither got Oscar wins (let alone nominations) remains a major travesty, and same goes with the editing. This was 2006's most impressive technical cinematic work---and don't anybody mention Pan's Labyrinth.

Children of Men is a dizzying action-packed journey worthy of multiple viewings, worthy of many awards that it inexplicably never won, and worthy of being one of the better science-fiction thrillers this entire generation. It is the complete package of a great soundtrack, slick editing, good script unveiled well by a wonderful cast, and then a directing effort that certifies Curason as among the best in the business. Dim the lights, rev up the sound, and prepare for a hell of a trip.

Straight Outta Compton: 8/10

This movie would not have been greenlit 15 years ago.


And this movie took a decade to finally receive the full backing it needed to fully produce the story behind the rap group that started it all.


Perfect timing too.


Straight Outta Compton a surprisingly powerful and deep film that looks into the trials, tribulations, successes, and failures of the three main men behind N.W.A.; a group that fueled a short-lived but powerful revolutionary run of success with its urban attitude, strong lyrics, and absolutely biting commentary on devastating realities that music had never dealt with up to that point. N.W.A. became notorious for bringing light to living in the deepest parts of California while dealing with a society that constantly makes it difficult for them to branch out. This film doesn't just highlight their beginnings and eventual rise to success, it also deals with the outcome of their decisions and what happens when the wrong people are mixed in.

Some have argued that the aftermath bogs down the movie, that the third act becomes a slight drag. But truth be told, no storm literally or figuratively is at its strongest in the aftermath, but at the point of impact. From the first tense scene on, Straight Outta Compton holds very little back in terms of the lyrical content, the violence, the drugs, and the disturbing environment they have to survive in as they fight for a way out. Gang members pleading for the next generation to stick to their books, cops destroying houses they believe might have drugs, and a systematic cycle of violence and grimness that comes with the impoverished life. The script gives light on the good, the bad, and the ugly part of representing the hood culture that N.W.A. managed to (slightly) escape with their bittersweet poetry.

Movies representing this lifestyle and the people in it hardly get a good budget and good production value to back them up. But thanks to the powerhouse moneymakers that Dr. Dre and Ice Cube have become, it is now a hell of a lot easier for them to tell their story: and they got a great writing cast, great production team, and a superb director (F. Gary Gary has Friday and Italian Job in his resume) to back them up. Back then you couldn't have dreamed of an N.W.A. movie containing great cinematography, wonderful editing, and fantastic musical score (outside the source material) to follow a talented young cast that emulates the men behind the group perfectly. The movie is sleek, crisp, and sounds better than most of your biggest blockbusters.

There is no scaling back the content and the lifestyles during Dr. Dre, Ice Cube, and Easy-E's rise to the top. Some of what you see is concerning and slightly paints some ugly on their personalities, and that's why the third act albeit not as energetic is required. Consequences are indeed dished out, people are lost, friendships and partnerships are tested, and devils left and right challenge the foundation and wellbeing of our main cast. The story is never pretty, whether they are buying a new house or losing it. This is why Straight Outta Compton succeeds as a film, very little sugarcoating while giving each character their good side as well as their dark side.

The sugarcoating does exist though. With Ice Cube and Dr. Dre producing, I'm sure there were some skeletons in their closet that were not going to be revealed; especially when it involves the N.W.A. tours, the nasty rap beefs that followed (back when rap beefs had some actual meat), and especially during the darkest days of Death Row Records (led by rap music villain Suge Knight). Reputation is key, and I'm sure that Cube and Dre want to avoid any further controversies as their market value remains strong. They are now businessmen far removed from the dirty days of mixing records and avoiding arrest for being black. But hey, it's their money, so it's their story.

Straight Outta Compton is a big budget biography that hits all the right notes, even though it doesn't aim to tell the entire story. But there's a lot that needs to be said, and plenty was unveiled within the 140 minutes of great acting, superb writing, and tight direction. It is a rags-to-riches story, except for the fact that the rags followed them long after the riches came pouring in. If you think it's just a simple movie glamorizing the gangster life then you aren't seeing this with an open mind and both eyes open. The story took a while to be displayed on screen, but thankfully the moment has finally come, and it definitely doesn't disappoint.

The Top 7 Marvel Cinematic Universe Films

Phase 2 of Marvel is finally complete, billions of dollars and several successful movies later. Marvel has come a long way from nearly going bankrupt and ruining everything that they had built. They were on some positive momentum before Disney came in and practically shifted the entire focus of the enterprise. Now it’s become synonymous with the film industry, the gaming industry, and the entertainment industry altogether. Marvel is a powerhouse and in nearly full control of its destiny. Now, we are going to take a look back at all the films in the current Marvel Cinematic Universe and list which ones are the best and most impactful.

Without glossing too much, one has to be amazed at what Disney has pulled off: a purely unthinkable experiment of making yearly films and managing to connect each and every single one of them through plot, characters, cameos, and other details. This has revolutionized the film and even television industry, as now we see IPs and franchises blending together far more often than before. So even if a movie is slightly mediocre (Iron Man 2), it’s still essential viewing because it will provide hints to what is coming up.

Marvel can’t be beat, not for a long time. And even with rising competition (DC) and potential sabotaging of its IPs (Fox’s Fantastic Four) the brand will remain one of the most successful in all of entertainment. And here are Marvel’s 7 best films in the current Universe.





#7: Avengers: Age of Ultron

This movie went through a few obvious issues involving pace, length, content, and overall tone as Disney/Marvel and Joss Whedon were definitely seeing different ideas with the highly-anticipated sequel. Adding to the behind-the-scenes issue is that Marvel is running out of the big popular names to throw into the universe. With Spider-Man and X-Men not available, and even the concept of Mutants not allowed, Age of Ultron is proof that Marvel can really use some of the franchises that have been handed to other film companies way before Disney took over.

Despite all the edits from Disney, we still have a very entertaining film that delivers plenty of humor, plenty of fun, plenty of action, even if it lacks an edge and lacks the tension and suspense that could have gotten the audience’s attention more in the final act. It’s well-directed, well-paced, and really doesn’t make you squirm, but it does slightly leave you empty and asking for more.





#6: Iron Man 3

The silent lesson learned from here is to never give the franchise to someone that doesn’t really care much about it. Shane Black has the experience, has the skill set, but really doesn’t have the required love to give Iron Man the right cohesive story to continue the franchise. Instead he decides to twist and turn some of the Iron Man credentials like the strength of the suits and of course his biggest enemy the Mandarin. Why Marvel let this script slide remains a mystery, they perhaps assumed that all the action and rather dark turn would overcome our absolute rage towards the twist reveal.

This issue aside, Iron Man 3 is still very engaging and quite grounded, as it humanizes Tony Stark and does a great job following up on the events of The Avengers. Plenty of thrills, lots of humor, its pure blockbuster entertainment, with a slight comic book edge. Even in the midst of all the blasphemy, there’s still plenty to watch and enjoy.




#5: Guardians of the Galaxy

The totally unexpected global smash of 2014, Guardians of the Galaxy is a cinematic treat full of heart, soul, humor, action, surprises, and characters to root for. From the emotional beginning to the cheeky finale, Guardians never lets go, and refuses to carry the now-predictable tropes of origin stories in comic book movies. It’s the cool kid in the class of Marvel movies, as it doesn’t follow many rules, doesn’t lay out a predictable path, and has a unique look and feel that separates it from your average blockbuster.

The cast is excellent, even if Vin Diesel probably has the easiest role in the history of film. This made Chris Pratt a star, and Zoe Saldana a sci-fi queen, and ushered in a new era of fans to some 70s/80s classics. Unlike most of our heroes that have been put through the ringer time and time again, I’m actually looking forward to the sequel, to see just what else the Guardians can run into.





#4: The Avengers

Some can argue that the Marvel Cinematic Universe peaks here, and will never hit this plateau again. I went to the midnight premiere, and it was such an immersive experience. I went to the sequel’s premiere, and it didn’t have the same energy. The uniting of our heroes the first time is a unique and spellbinding experience, and luckily for all of us it definitely did not disappoint. Not only were all the heroes entertaining and with their own moments to shine, we had a sinister villain to counter the gang with Loki (always played brilliantly by Tom Hiddleston).

A perfect mesh of action and comedy, The Avengers stays very true to the comics that inspired it, and gives us so much content that no Marvel fan will walk away dissatisfied. A film of this caliber and this momentum had not been done before, and the world of cinema will never be the same after it struck gold in terms of money, and in terms of viewership appeal. Trust me, the success, peak starpower, and impact of The Avengers will never happen again. It also has the best scene in the history of Marvel filmmaking (Loki vs. Hulk).





#3: Captain America: The Winter Soldier

There are certain ways to shake up a franchise or a series without losing some of its identity. Iron Man 3’s twists and turns defied the brand quite a bit, which turned off some people. The Winter Soldier however shook the foundation of the Cinematic Universe to its core as the final act would create a ripple effect that touches upon nearly movie from here on out. It would also lay out the foundation for the entire next phase of the Marvel films. If that’s not enough to shove this movie way up the list, then let’s mention the flawless action directing and editing that would focus less on special effects and far more on clever practical effects and excellent stuntwork.

The Winter Soldier’s conflict would be the most realistic and most relatable as it involves a modern world with evolving technology and the ever-growing danger that comes with trying to use it to combat evil. The political and sociological taint that comes with the relentless action and immense tension would make this the best of the Marvel sequels without a doubt. It does what all blockbuster sequels need to learn to do: raise the stakes, improve the villain, don’t be afraid to improve the hero, increase the content and scope, and lastly don’t be afraid to throw in a few surprises that spike the formula of the original. Empire Strikes Back was the first to do this successfully, and one can argue that Winter Soldier is the Empire of the MCU.






#2: Ant-Man

So let's get this out of the way: Ant-Man as a superhero is nowhere near as compelling as Iron Man, Wolverine, or even Black Widow. But thanks to Edgar Wright's original vision, with the assisting humor of Paul Rudd and Adam McKay we have a heavily-character driven film full of humor, soul, and then a great third act to wrap it all up.

Ranking Ant-Man this high might seem controversial and baffling, but consider this: it has the no-rules attitude of Guardians, the likability factor of Iron Man, some deep family themes that seep into your better Disney movies, and combine that with a great blend of thrills, comic book espionage, and comedy that resonates through the entire flick. There is hardly a dull moment as the superb cast delivers quite a gem that emerged from a project with minimal anticipation and lots of production hell. Yes it’s not as serious as your usual Marvel and DC fare, but for sheer movie-watching value this one ranks way up there.









#1: Iron Man

It is hard to dethrone the original that starts it all. Iron Man created the blueprint for all to follow, and it had the absolute least amount of restriction in the MCU since it was the first. Robert Downey Jr.'s portrayal of Iron Man was nothing short of perfect and even Oscar-worthy. The origin story here never feels like its dragging in the mud; a lot happens within the two hours and we see a full transformation of Tony Stark and he leaves us practically begging for more long after the surprising final bit of dialogue.

Much like how Chris Columbus’ Harry Potter doesn’t get enough credit for laying the foundation of what the franchise should look like, Iron Man deserves more credit as to how Marvel movies should look and sound. All the tropes are here: strong main characters, villain that’s connected, plenty of one-liners, great special effects, plenty of action, nice easter eggs, strong female characters, a few surprises, and few clues as to where the franchise is heading next. Iron Man remains the best, because it doesn’t have the upcoming lineup to prevent it from going truly off the rails. It was the beginning of a beautiful friendship between the viewers and the Marvel lineup.

Ant-Man: 9/10

In the midst of all the behind-the-scenes chaos, what we see here is quite possibly Marvel's best film since the original Iron Man. Containing the extremely-loose approach of the Phase 1 Marvel flicks, the delightful quirks and details from Edgar Wright's script, and the carefree fun of Paul Rudd (Role Models) and Adam McKay (Will Ferrell's best work), Ant-Man is comic book brilliance that substitutes style for wonderful characters and plenty of content to chew at. Of course let's not forget the slew of Marvel surprises that we honestly didn't see enough of in Age of Ultron. Thanks to the strict organized approach from Disney, it is safe to say that Marvel is still leagues ahead of the competition in terms of comic book and summer blockbuster films.

The staff is incredible, and must have made the director's job quite easy. Starting with the always-reliable Paul Rudd and the silently-efficient Evangeline Lilly, we have an excellent entourage bringing what is a relatively unknown comic book to life. Rounding out the staff is the very serious and engaging Michael Douglas, an unexpected addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The themes presented in Ant-Man are a bit more personal than your usual blockbuster fare, with plots involving redemption, forgiveness, and father/sibling relationships all blending in together---and this requires better performances from even your villains. From our villain (Corey Stoll bringing some depth to our mad scientist) to our father figure right down to the partner-in-crime (Michael Pena, also excellent) Ant-Man boasts one of the strongest lineups in all of 2015. Honestly though, what's with Disney and fathers?

Usually creative differences from the writing squadron in the midst of filming will result in mixed content throughout the finished product. Disney's very own Brave is one of the better recent examples, with the first and second half of the movie being extremely different in tone, pace, and even character. Quite miraculously, you don't get this sensation in Ant-Man, from the first act origin story right down to the exciting climax that delivers enough action to cover the extensive prologue. It has obvious touches of Edgar Wright's quick-paced humor and character depth, but has Rudd's clever subtle comic timing and McKay's humorous mayhem. A four-team staff complied the script, and what could have been a disaster actually results in a complete screenplay with a little bit of everything: humor, heart, action, and tons of connections to other Marvel properties.

Peyton Reed has a resume that could raise some eyebrows (sneaky-fun Bring it On, could-be-better Yes Man), but doesn't disappoint here. Although he has far less action to work with, he manages to keep Ant-Man fun, grounded, and simple. It has its share of emotion, but it never drags too far or mucks up the blockbuster glee. He treats it like a heist film, with unique circumstances. Under the hook/line/sinker approach, the biggest sequence is saved for last and will keep you on your toes, while also laughing along the way thanks to the sprinkles of humor flung in for good measure.

Similar to the equally-unique Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man is enjoyable because it never feels like its holding back any punches to save for the next (obviously going to happen) installment. Unlike Age of Ultron and Thor: The Dark World, it feels like a complete story, and will keep you asking for more---especially after the post-credits sequences. It fires on all cylinders with the permission of Marvel and the Disney Marketing Machine, and despite not having the previous popularity credentials of a Batman or a Spider-Man, Ant-Man leaves a nice footprint in the cinematic comic book universe. Don't let the slightly campy outlook of Ant-Man fool you, this is a seriously entertaining picture worth a thousand words of praise.

Trainwreck: 7/10

Continuing the fantastic Summer season for females (Charlize Theron, Melissa McCarthy, Anna Kendrick) we have Amy Schumer branching off from her stand-up and television success (Comedy Central: Still Trying to Replace Dave Chappelle) to deliver a fine performance in an Apatow movie that has all the typical Apatow strengths and weaknesses. Just like Apatow's best, we have a delightful staff delivering the laughs and the dramatic undertones to make up for sloppy directing and loose editing that we've seen far too many times from the Team Apatow comedy circle.

We've seen this movie before, and we know the destination. Regardless of how raunchy or how off the PG-13 spectrum, romance movies carry the same formula and usually produce the same results (With 500 Days of Summer and Before Midnight being notable recent exceptions). We continue watching these because of the joy of said journey. Amy's voyage as she tries to shed her provocative past to become happy is a lengthy yet enjoyable watch, mostly because of her slick and slightly jagged sense of humor. This is her script and it has her brand of comedy sprinkled all over the place. Expect off-the-cusp movie references, uncomfortable content, good raw emotion, bite of New York flavor, and even some MacFarlane-like unpredictability.

Schumer has the comedic chops, and will earn your attention even when she is at her least charming. Helping the movie is Bill Hader, who played the perfect straight man getting caught up in Amy's whirlwind of a life. Although the cameos are a bit distracting (This Family Guy-like technique dates the movie slightly), LeBron James, John Cena, and a few others provided a surprising amount of laughs, with Cena being especially impressive in a short yet pivotal scene.

Apatow still lacks the ability to chop the movie to a more acceptable length. This has killed/damaged his recent efforts like This is 40 and Funny People (especially). Trainwreck once again has that slowdown period that has people checking their phones and watches, which especially hurts after a strong first half. And as previously stated, we know the destination, the journey has to maintain its interest. Despite the strongest efforts from everyone involved, it gets a little tiresome before the heartwarming finale. Unless the movie spans decades, no romantic comedy should run past two hours. All of the best romantic movies (Princess Bride, Eternal Sunshine, Beauty and the Beast, Before Sunset/Sunrise) run under two hours.

Yes, I know the gem Love Actually breaks the rule I just placed. Moving on....

Despite the flaws of time and distractions, Schumer does a great job in her debut cinematic vehicle. I can see a good future with her as long as she works with the right people and expands her range. She's funny, fearless, and has a nice dosage of New York charm. All of those ingredients make this an entertaining viewing and far better than Apatow's previous flicks. It won't shatter the movie industry or alter your perception of her or the genre, but it won't be a total disaster sitting through this---you'll find plenty to laugh and be shocked at.

Spy: 8/10

Similar to us seeing peak Jim Carrey in Dumb and Dumber or seeing peak Will Ferrell in Anchorman, we have seen peak Melissa McCarthy and it is glorious. Spy is a cluttered, ridiculous spoof action comedy that doesn't quite set a consistent tone but gives McCarthy the role of a lifetime, and in return we get the performance of a lifetime. Even though you never quite know if you should ever take any part of Spy seriously, the movie entertains, thrills, and has a shocking amount of gruesome action to coincide with the plethora of jokes flying left and right throughout the two hours.

Under the helm of Paul Feig (which has McCarthy as his muse ala Woody Allen with Diane Keaton) providing the writing and directing, Spy is a wildly violent and relentless sendup on action movies of all types, from spy movies to the physics-ignorant Statham flicks that we've seen in the past decade. What starts off as a where-is-the-bomb plot dwells deeper with twists and turns and has the mild-manned Susan Cooper (usually working behind a desk) traveling to Europe to complete the mission.

The cast is what ultimately delivers and carries this movie past any potential setbacks. Melissa McCarthy is phenomenal as her blend of sarcasm, physical comedy, and biting insults with perfect timing works perfectly here. Unlike most of her previous work, she was not just the overweight woman in an unlikely situation, there is much more to her personality in Spy that makes her much more likable, and much easier for us to root for her. We see much more of her when compared to Bridesmaids and The Heat and it gives her a chance to truly stand out and shine---and she does not disappoint.

But kudos to everyone else, especially Rose Byrne as one of the antagonists (Byrne deserves much more praise in the film industry--she is a talented gem) and Jason Statham as a spoof of himself. A good comedy relies more on chemistry and talent level on screen above the script, despite that breaking most screen writing rules in the spectrum. Spy has the Caddyshack syndrome; whenever the storyline starts to drag at the slightest (the movie does get unnecessarily complex) you have the cast keep you engaged and entertained.

What sets Spy apart from the spoofs is the surprising amount of action. We are treated to car chases, brutal fights, shootouts, and even a big final rousing sequence---albeit having an unexpected ending. What also allows Spy to stand out is the abundance of strong powerful women; from Susan Cooper herself to her co-workers, her boss, and even her adversary. It is a welcoming change and a drift from the norm in this genre of film---even though Mad Max Fury Road may have stolen some of its feminist thunder.

This is Paul Feig's best work, McCarthy's best performance, and one of the best movies of the year. Funnier than you'd expect, more action-packed than you would anticipate, and then throw in Jason Statham tossing some of the most astonishingly hilarious work out of any non-comedic actor I've ever seen. This film is a hoot plain and simple, and should finally allow us to take McCarthy much more seriously.

Inside Out: 9/10

20 years in the film business, Pixar has given us masterpiece after masterpiece even if its best days are probably behind them. They know how to toy with your emotions, add depth to their characters, and best of all know how to deliver very unique stories in very unique perspectives. Director Pete Doctor's previous movie Up is a grandiose example of being an excellent film despite being far off the norm. Inside Out is no exception as it tackles a very complicated yet creative concept of exploring the emotions of a person while giving personalities to emotions---which is no easy task.

Inside Out being made into a feasible family movie is quite the accomplishment. Even if the deeper emotional moments and better jokes will be lost on the children, this film has something for everybody to see, from the visuals to the creative stylings of the human mind. Combine that with the perfect (Its honestly flawless) voice cast and a well-rounded script, you have Pixar's best since Toy Story 3.

Joy (The perfect Amy Poehler) leads the cast as she attempts to dominate the mind of an 11-year-old and keep the other emotions (Anger, Disgust, Fear, and especially Sadness) in check---especially once the family relocates across the entire country. The conflict arises once Joy becomes unable to run Riley's emotions, leading to a lot of problems inside the mind and outside. Although Pixar runs in the Disney family and you secretly know how it will all pan out, the adventure and discoveries leading up to the inevitable conclusion is what keeps you engaged. There will be the classic Pixar mix of laughter, tears, and surprises throughout the quest to save Riley.

Establishing the universe is essential in movies like these, where environments carry its distinctive logic, its distinctive gravity. Inside Out starts out slow so it can mesh out the characters and give us a good idea as to how to approach the world of the mind. By the time you reach the dramatic conclusion, you would have witnessed Riley's imaginative world, her abstract world, her dream machine, as well as her biggest fears. The journey is far from predictable, as Inside Out explores a concept rarely executed (save for a 90s cartoon and a hilarious Spongebob bit).

Pixar has had a rough run lately, with delays and disappointing movies mixing together this decade. Inside Out is a step in the right direction thanks to a great script, delightful originality, and the great mix of great animation, laughs and heartfelt moments that we last experienced in the epic Pixar run of 2007-2010 (Ratatouille, Up, Wall-E, Toy Story 3, etc.). It might be slower or more bizarre then what you are used to seeing in animation and blockbuster season, but this film is a fresh visual treat from start to finish.

Mad Max: Fury Road: 9/10

So this is what happens when you give George Miller a good budget.

Completing a recent trifecta of spectacular world cinema in the action category (The Raid 1 and 2), Mad Max Fury Road not only easily becomes among the top movies of 2015, but arguably amongst the best action movies this century. Two hours of absolute post-apocalyptic mayhem, this is one of the rare sequels that not only stands tall with the originals, but actually surpasses them. What used to slightly restrict the previous Mad Max movies were budget and technical limitations. But in the 21st century, with more money involved, and more resources to tap into, George Miller's decade-in-the-making vision comes to life in the most entertaining and thrilling way.

Fury Road may have the Mad Max tag, but his story is just one of many that roam around. The most impressive amongst the cast (Tom Hardy as Max really didn't have much to do outside participation in the carnage) is definitely Charlize Theron, who plays the tough-as-nails woman that jump-starts the action that will preside over the last 100 minutes of the film. Without mentioning too much, Theron (has there been a quieter action career than Theron?) as Furiosa steals a massive armored rig and raises absolute hell as she tries to make it to her childhood homeland with other prisoners. Crossing paths with her is Max, a loner with recovering from his past who also has been taken prisoner. Even though plot isn't usually a focus point in action movies of this caliber, there is plenty of social commentary and feminist themes to stir the pot.

While the verbal and storyline aspects are nothing to scoff at, the technical details of this movie is the headlining show here. Nearly flawless, from the art direction to the cinematography to the editing, the apocalypse has never looked so beautiful. The colors pop out at you, and the camera-work isn't shy of displaying the miles upon miles of nothingness that surrounds the characters. It truly feels like the end of the world as you see the small shadowy figures of vehicles maneuver through the layers of sand or see dark blue darkness when the sun mercifully comes down. And then you have the wide array of visually unique characters that look straight out of your pulp comic books (Yes, the guitar-playing fiend deserves his own story). It's a hauntingly beautiful ride.

Miller's directing is what makes the movie stand out. The action sequences are intense, relentless, and done with so much precision and attention to detail; you cannot look away from the screen a millisecond as you see the next round of carnage take place. This movie tries excruciatingly hard to separate itself from the pack of normal summer blockbusters, and it succeeds by pacing like a video game; continuously escalating and topping the previous action sequence.

The Raid movies also notoriously saved their best tricks for last. And my friends, even if you might be the slightest bit underwhelmed just wait until the final 30 minutes. Be prepared for some of the tightest and well-choreographed action since the criminally underrated Adventures of Tintin (The "Opera Chase" deserves much more love). The mix of special and practical effects blends in so well you swear you can smell the burning tires. The movie is one big long vehicular chase, and one that never starts feeling stale.

Summer may have peaked extremely early, because it will be very difficult to top the vicious joyride of Fury Road. From start to finish, from the top-tier acting right down to the sound effects, this Mad Max installment is the best hands-down, even though Hardy is no vintage Mel Gibson. Not sure what happened to American action filmmaking, but now Australia and Indonesia own the right to claim their country has produced the finest action flicks this decade. If you are in the mood for a highly entertaining yet original action extravaganza, look no further. By the time 2015 finishes, I can guarantee you that Mad Max Fury Road will remain as one of the best movies in the entire year.