Hate movie spoilers? Good! You'll get straight to the point, quick, and spoiler-free movie reviews to help you spend your time and money wisely on movies. I'll give you the Good, the Bad, the Reason, and the Rating about each movie. ***Please disable any popup blockers***
The Good:
From the very beginning of the film, it definitely isn't shy about setting the tone for the amount of action that will be on display. Most of the action scenes look very similar to some of Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible films. There were plenty of explosions, and chases, and of course Tom Cruise running. (Man, does he love to run.)
Besides the action, it was really interesting to see how this film was able to tap into its horror roots, so to speak. There were plenty of jump scares and "Zummies" (zombie mummies) to help create some really tense moments in the movie. I think they did a pretty decent job with the CGI effects for the most part. To top all of that off, there were some humorous moments of comic relief that may get a bit of a chuckle out of you here or there.
I think that without question one of the biggest highlights of this movie was Sofia Boutella who plays the Mummy. She was simply captivating every time she was on the screen. Dare I say, she was more intriguing to watch than Tom Cruise's character for the most part too. She was able to carry a sense of terror and beauty simultaneously.
The Bad:
*grabs some coffee & a Tylenol*
This movie tried to do way too much all at the same time. While it did have a mixture of action, horror and comedy it simply didn't blend well. (It reminds me of when you're trying to make a healthy shake without all the ingredients mixing well. Then when you drink it, there are lumps and chunks of random things you can no longer identify.) There were just one too many cheesy one-liners from Cruise in my opinion. Rather than allowing someone like Jake Johnson's character to shoulder the comedic relief, I think it was a misstep to have Cruise take that on as well.
Unfortunately, I can't go into detail, but I am not a fan of what they did with Tom Cruise's character. The way they end the movie, in my opinion, feels like the wrong direction if this will truly be a new "monster universe" film franchise for the studio. Cruise's character is left to make a decision by the end of the film, and I just don't think it made a lot of sense. Honestly, it was just really impractical and unbelievable. One of the reasons why is because of the forced and unrealistic relationship between Cruise and Annabelle Wallis' character ("Jenny Halsey"). Both of their characters have a rushed and unauthentic relationship that doesn't help make any sense of the actions taken later on in the movie.
I suppose it was also bit disappointing in regards to the lack of originality in this film. As I mentioned before, some of the action scenes looked really familiar to Tom Cruise's past films. In addition to that, there's a scene of the mummy that looked almost too familiar to the latest Power Rangers movie and Rita Repulsa's character coming to life. To make matters worse, the film's marketing probably didn't help with the spoilery trailers. They revealed, I think, too much with Russell Crowe's character. Even when we finally do see Crowe, his character is a bit underwhelming. They could've left his character as a shadowy figure that operated behind the scenes. Otherwise, some of his scenes could've been deleted and the movie wouldn't have skipped a beat. The Reason:
The movie studio is clearly trying to use The Mummy as a setup movie for their future "monster universe" films where they will be introducing more characters. (ie: Wolfman, Invisible Man, etc) It's really hard to see what direction this franchise is about to take. I can't tell if it wants to be something like Hellboy, Suicide Squad, or random monster movies in general. Given what we saw in The Mummy, I'm not all that excited to see what happens next. The story and the easter eggs just felt like they were all over the place and overexerting themselves to promote future films.
Unfortunately, I don't think that The Mummy will live up to the hype or expectation of a typical Tom Cruise movie, nor to the success of the the past Mummy films in the late 90's or early 2000s. While on paper this should be a solid home-run film, I think it's more a bunt play. (Whether they make it safe to 1st base will be your call.) If you're interested in the potential universe they are trying to create, then you obviously will have to watch this movie.
Oh and the 3D was simply not present enough to warrant seeing it that format. You get a few scenes here or there that pop out at you, but afterwards you forget you're watching a 3D movie. I think this movie is something you watch when your local theater is having a discount showing or matinee. At that point you can probably enjoy it a bit more. I think some people may still enjoy this film and ignore its many flaws, so I would just say go in with low expectations, avoid the trailers, and pass on the 3D. If you do that, you'll probably enjoy the film for what it's worth.
The Rating: 6.5/10
Don't want to miss future reviews and contests?
My [Loosely based] Ratings scale
10-9 = A Must watch at any cost. 8.5- 7.5 = Theater worthy 7-6.5 = Matinee/rental worthy at best 6 = Watchable (If it's free) 5 - below = Avoid at all costs
Enjoyed this review? Share it and let me know what you thought.
Click Here to join our weekly email list. One email, every Friday, to get my latest reviews. Don't forget to follow me at @SpoilerDashFree
The Good:
First and foremost, if there were any doubts about whether Gal Gadot could carry a movie, she certainly should put those concerns to rest. She did a wonderful 😉 job of portraying the iconic super heroine throughout the movie. You get to see Wonder Woman's emotional growth and maturity through Gal's performance. What I really enjoyed about this movie was the fact that we finally got a DCEU movie where the character is developed and relatable in a proper way. We get to see the certain events and situations that shape her mindset and her motivations that mold her into the hero that we've all known her to be.
I personally liked the mythological background of Wonder Woman's story. As with most superhero movies, it was fun to see the different Amazonian culture, her fight training, and Wonder Woman's discovery of her powers. It was interesting to see how her background influenced aspects of her character such as her sense of duty and morality.
The movie's got some solid action scenes that will probably remind you of the film "300" almost immediately. (It's really hard not to see Zack Snyder's influence all over this movie.) Unlike in Man of Steel with the blurry and hard to follow action scenes, Wonder Woman utilizes slow motion fight scenes that were much more pleasing to the eye.
As far as the story or plot, I appreciated the fact that it was rather straight forward in regards to the origin story. We do get a surprising twist, and there are nice humorous moments that keep this movie from going too dark. Wonder Woman's social interactions are probably one of the funnier moments, especially when she interacts with Steve Trevor (played by Chris Pine). Speaking of which, Pine also does a pretty good job with his character who was surprisingly better than I expected. The Bad:
Maybe it's because I've seen a ton of comic book movies before, but the origin story does seem a little redundant. You may see some very familiar situations through her discovery of powers similar to other superheroes we've seen in films. (i.e. Spider Man, Super Man, etc.) So unfortunately this kind of made a lot of the movie a tad bit predictable. The pacing in some parts also kind of drag a bit in my opinion. Personally I would've simply wanted more time spent showing her on the Amazonian island rather than the outside world. I just think that there was a bit more to explore and learn about their culture rather than speeding up to the events of the outside world.
Another issue is probably the main villain of the movie. I can't go into too much detail about the villain without ruining things so I'll just say that I would've really preferred a different actor for the role. While the build up to the final showdown certainly was executed effectively, the actual fight itself was a bit lackluster. At one point I felt like I was watching an X-Men movie from 2006 or something. The fighting itself was a bit disappointing when you compare it to the cooler fight scenes earlier in the film. Don't get me wrong, it gets the job done at the end of the day, but the way the battle ends didn't leave me wow'd. The Reason:
I think there are couple of things to consider with this film. The first thing is that this movie was a bit cookie cutter in terms of a superhero movie. I'd probably venture to say that this was not intended to impress comic book movie fans. Instead, I think this movie is geared towards people who probably are new to superhero movies and at least have heard of Wonder Woman in general.
The other consideration is that this movie is clearly appealing to a more female demographic of all ages. That doesn't mean men can't enjoy the film. I think it's just a matter of what this movie and the character of Wonder Woman represents. She was created to be a symbol of female empowerment and a feminist (in terms of gender equality.) One thing that I realized is that there are going to probably be certain scenes in this film that will intentionally resonate with women more than it may with some men on average. I noticed this in my own screening where some women applauded and cheered during those certain scenes.
At the end of the day, whether you like this movie or not, one thing that cannot be denied is that Wonder Woman will carry an intangible quality that will resonate with fans one way or another. This movie will be a dream come true for some. It may empower others. Either way, I think it's safe to say that this is the best DCEU movie to date. As a matter of fact, Wonder Woman is what "Man of Steel" (Review) should've been. Her character is much more relatable and developed than the current Superman we have now. If I had to compare, this movie is easily Captain America: First Avenger + Thor + Man of Steel. It's absolutely worth watching in theaters.
The Rating: 8.0/10 Don't want to miss future reviews and contests?
My [Loosely based] Ratings scale
10-9 = A Must watch at any cost. 8.5- 7.5 = Theater worthy 7-6.5 = Matinee/rental worthy at best 6 = Watchable (If it's free) 5 - below = Avoid at all costs
Enjoyed this review? Share it and let me know what you thought.
Click Here to join our weekly email list. One email, every Friday, to get my latest reviews. Don't forget to follow me at @SpoilerDashFree
The Good:
Michael Fassbender gives a really effective performance. His character is by far one of the most intriguing ones to watch on the screen. He does an excellent job of displaying a wide range of emotions within his role that helps you gain insight into his character’s motivations. Along with Fassbender, Katherine Waterston continues the responsibility of being a strong feminine lead in the footsteps of Sigourney Weaver. I think I was probably the most impressed by Danny McBride's performance. If you're familiar with his comedic style, it'll be really refreshing to see him show a much deeper side when he's placed in difficult situations.
I really liked how there were a lot of religious themes throughout the film. There's a sense of tension between both logic/reason and faith. Without giving anything away, the religious themes play heavily in some characters. They really inform you as to the mental state of certain characters and their motivations.
The Xenomorph aliens are back and better than ever! These aliens were faster, stronger and so much more terrifying. They bring back the sense of horror that Alien (1979) brought to the table so long ago. Besides that, Alien Covenant does not shy away from the body gore that has made the film franchise so memorable. If you have a weak stomach then you will want to bring a vomit bag or something. Things are popping out of people, body parts flying around, and blood…lots of blood.
The Bad:
The pacing is a little long and unnecessary. Unlike in Prometheus where the slower pacing was necessary to help build the upcoming movie franchise, Covenant doesn’t need to follow suit in the same way. It was nice to see more dedication in building the mythology, but a lot of scenes, especially with the expendable crew, could’ve been cut.
Speaking of the crew, THEY WERE SO STUPID! It was almost like they were allergic to common sense. They created so many of their own problems that it's really hard to even care about them at all. Unfortunately, I have to lay that blame on the writing and directing. The characters and their dreadful situations were just really poor setups. I believe that in order to have an effective horror, you can't show us (the audience) something that we would say, “Why did you do that?!” We should see the characters doing things that we would do. That would help us relate much more with them and their state of terror. We should be able to feel sorry for them.
Lastly, the story itself is rather predictable. Full disclosure: I did end up watching a lot of the Prologue videos that 20th Century Fox has released. Unfortunately, if you pay a lot of attention to films the way I do, you'll put the pieces together really quickly. So for me (and maybe you) you may see the big reveals and plot twists coming from a mile away. I should also mention that I was really disappointed that we didn't get to see or learn too much about the Engineers either. While Prometheus teased us greatly into who/what they were, Covenant failed to deliver anything of substance to give us more information about them.
The Reason:
Alien Covenant is like Prometheus 1.5. If you didn’t know, Covenant is a direct sequel to Prometheus. If you're still confused about what order you should watch the movies in, watch my video below about "Everything You Need To Know Before Watching Alien Covenant".
With that said, it’s really important for you to watch Prometheus first. If you haven’t seen Prometheus in a while, you should still watch it again since Covenant picks up just 10 years after Prometheus. If you've never seen Prometheus, I’d recommend watching the Blu-Ray with the alternate/deleted scenes. That helps to explain more of the story. (Click here for an Amazon link)
Director Ridley Scott has previously announced that he had four more sequels to add on to this current Alien franchise. He then dialed back on that announcement and said maybe two more or so. Either way, don’t expect Covenant to answer all the burning questions you may have had in Prometheus. If anything, Covenant may raise new questions.
Alien: Covenant is definitely worth the watch in theaters. If you’ve been a fan of the franchise then you’ll probably like the fact that Covenant draws from a lot of the things that you may have enjoyed with the previous Alien movies.
The Rating: 8/10 Don't want to miss future reviews and contests?
My [Loosely based] Ratings scale
10-9 = A Must watch at any cost. 8.5- 7.5 = Theater worthy 7-6.5 = Matinee/rental worthy at best 6 = Watchable (If it's free) 5 - below = Avoid at all costs
Enjoyed this review? Share it and let me know what you thought.
Click Here to join our weekly email list. One email, every Friday, to get my latest reviews. Don't forget to follow me at @SpoilerDashFree
The Good:
One thing that I found interesting about this film was how it wasn't entirely about King Arthur himself. While Arthur is obviously a main character in the film, he's almost like a co-star to the sword itself. It was nice to see more of the origin of the sword, and the literal power that it possessed. If you're a fan of anime cartoons, then you will easily see the similarities this movie adapts when it comes to the power the sword gives to the wielder.
Charlie Hunnam was clearly in a role that catered to a lot of his strengths. He could be witty, charming, inspirational and physical in the action scenes. Eric Bana was a personal favorite of mine. I can't exactly put my finger on it, but I just felt he played his part so well that he's probably one of the few characters you may actually connect with despite his smaller role.
Another aspect of the film that I enjoyed was the notion of sacrifice. It was a theme that gets played in a number of ways with various characters. In particular, I loved how it was used with Jude Law's character. It added a level of depth to his character that makes him a more complex villain in the movie.
The Bad:
The movie has a lot of long and slow pacing parts. The film is about 2hrs and 6mins but it really felt like 2.5 hrs. The dialogue and banter contributes to this greatly. Furthermore, the story in itself is rather predictable. While this is a fresher and probably more original take on the story of King Arthur, you can see the intentional twist and turns coming from a mile away.
I can't help but to think that maybe the combination of the thicker English accents and dialogue were a bit of an issue. There's a lot of dialogue used to tell the story (or hypothetical situations) and it can maybe get a little confusing mixed with the constant camera visuals switching back and forth.
When you think of King Arthur and the sword Excalibur the one other character that typically gets associated is Merlin the wizard. I was really disappointed in the fact that they only mentioned him by name and briefly showed him on screen. It would almost be as if one were to watch the Lord of the Rings and only hear mentions of a wizard named Gandalf. I think that was a missed opportunity to highlight one of the central characters to the legendary story.
When it came to Jude Law's character, he felt like one of the bigger disappointments. His character felt poorly developed despite the fact that his character had a lot of potential to be really deep. We don't get to necessarily see what motivates him to do the things that he does outside of just a generic reason like "I want power" or something to that degree. It's hard to really tell why he chooses to do the things that he does, and to some degree you just stop caring and go along with it.
Lastly the most notable issue with the film is the blurry CGI action scenes. Similar to my criticisms in Man of Steel, a lot of the fast paced action scenes were really blurry to make out. To the film's credit, they did provide some slow motion sequences to help you follow the action, but overall it was poorly depicted. In so many instances you'll feel like you've gone from watching a movie to a video game. (You may even notice the Mortal Kombat similarity with the final battle.)
The Reason:
This film had a lot of potential to be much better than it was. As an admirer of the King Arthur tale, I really wanted to like this movie. I don't terribly dislike it. It just feels like it'll be forgettable in about a week or so. I completely disagree with the reviews who claim that this movie is "trash" because we've seen far worse movies than this.
This is a Guy Ritchie film. He's the same guy that brought you the Sherlock Holmes films with Robert Downey Jr. (Which I loved) and Man from U.N.C.L.E. (which was okay). He's got a very distinct style to his movies. As with any distinctive art, you will either hate it or love it. For me, this movie wasn't one of his strongest films.
While King Arthur: Legend of the Sword may not be something you have to rush to the movie theaters to see, I can still see some appeal in it. If you're a Charlie Hunnam fan, then this will be watchable for you. Given the number of Game of Thrones characters in the film this movie felt like Game of Thrones + Assassin's Creed. You can most definitely wait on seeing this film.
The Rating: 6/10 Don't want to miss future reviews and contests?
My [Loosely based] Ratings scale 10-9 = A Must watch at any cost. 8.5- 7.5 = Theater worthy 7-6.5 = Matinee/rental worthy at best 6 = Watchable (If it's free) 5 - below = Avoid at all costs
Enjoyed this review? Share it and let me know what you thought.
Click Here to join our weekly email list. One email, every Friday, to get my latest reviews. Don't forget to follow me at @SpoilerDashFree
