AVENGERS INFINITY WAR - RANDOM RAMBLINGS REVIEW (SPOILER-FREE)

So, ever since a guy dressed in purple prosthetics turned to the screen and smiled in the mid-credit sequence of the 2012 Avenger’s Movie, ultimately causing an untold amount of mild-mannered comic book readers to Google-search who is Thanos; this is essentially what the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been building towards. Six years later, twelve feature films, in excess of 23 recurring new characters and five seasons of … shudder… Agents Of Shield we finally arrive at Thanos’ big entrance in Avengers Infinity War. 

As we know, we’ve got the character of Thanos, who’s moved from prosthetic extra to CGI Josh Brolin. He has sat in his chair, made idle threats, picked up the Infinity Gauntlet whilst saying he’d do it himself, yet still waited seven films and three years to actually do anything. Now he’s out to collect the Infinity Stones that were featured in the original Avengers, Thor The Dark World, Guardians Of The Galaxy, Age Of Ultron and Doctor Strange and of course if he is able to gather all six stones he could destroy life on a scale hither to undreamt of (insert Tony Stark’s line) hence the need for all the heroes on Earth and across the galaxy to join together to stop the Mad Titan before he gets.. out of his chair… 

Ok I’ve just gotten out of the film and holy ducking shit it was amazing. The pace of the film is relentless, the ambition and the stakes that are set in this film are friggin’ headache-inducing (in a good way), every character is given a moment to shine, every character serves a purpose to the overall story and ultimately, any theories you had about the film, from who would live and who would die, to the location of the soul stone, to what happens in the end - can all just be thrown out the window. The Russo Brothers basically just tore up the rule book with this one. 

I certainly don’t want to spoil anything in this film but there are some questions that can be answered:

Is Thanos another in a long line of lame Marvel villains? 

Hell no. This movie, despite its massive cast, universe-spanning settings and ticking time bomb of a narrative, is really Thanos’ movie. We follow his journey, learn his motivations, come to empathise with his mass-genocide approach to balancing the universe. His motivations may differ from the comics but within the first five minutes of the film where he establishes himself as the mother of all villains, I don’t think anyone will care. 

Is it just Ironman and The Avengers or even Black Panther 1.5? 

Definitely not. Writers  Christopher Markus and Stephen McFreely have written a script that balances each character, each character serves a purpose and propels the story forward. Outside of Thanos, Thor is probably the next character with the most screen time but hero really feels shortchanged. The Russo Brothers have managed to effortlessly move from one setting to another without any of it feeling jarring. We move from furthest reaches of space to New York, to the planet of Knowhere to Scotland, to Thanos’ home world to Wakanda and back again without even breaking a sweat. Each setting serves as its own little vignette to shuffle the film along - it keeps the pace going non-stop and expertly balances the many balls (or should I say Infinity Stones) in the air. 

Now there are very few things to complain about or criticize when looking at this film. At an absolute push, there are some scenes where Thanos’ CGI is a little too obvious and even though Thanos is probably the most fleshed out villain Marvel has ever done, the same can’t be said for The Black Order who are very undercooked and underused. 

I’m sure some may criticize the cosmic coincidences within the film, but often I feel this has been covered via comments characters make throughout the film to justify how certain people show up at convenient times - so for me, this is not a concern of any kind. And of course, I imagine others may feel that there is just too much going on and too many things to keep track of, however, there’s no denying that this is what Marvel films are all about: the continuous stories, overlapping narratives and multi-film character arcs is what Marvel has been about for over a decade. These films require the dedication to details when moving from one film to the next - yes it may not be user-friendly to new viewers, but it certainly rewards long-time fans. 

Ultimately, this film should satisfy even the pickiest of Marvel fans. Much like how Joss Whedon’s original Avengers felt like peeling open a fresh new comic, Infinity War feels like feverishly reading through an event onimbus by Marvel. One thing that really needs to be commended about the film is how much they have been able to keep under wraps from the public: from surprise character appearances that answer questions from all the way back in Phase One to character deaths and character arcs that no one saw coming - the films trailers sent out quite a few red herrings and when all is said and done, I challenge anyone to be able to confidently say what will happen in Avengers 4. Even with my own wealth of knowledge about Marvel, I was left watery-eyed and at a loss as to what happens next. You’ll be left satisfied, but man, it is going to be a long 12 months waiting for the follow-up. 

As a comic book fan, Avengers Infinity War gets Six Infinity Stones out of Six, but as a film fan, Infinity War gets a firm Four and a Quarter Stars out of Five. 

You can follow Chris Gooch for more reviews via: 

Twitter: twitter.com/GoochmiesterC

Instagram: instagram.com/chrishateshashtags/

DUNKIRK: SPOILER-FREE REVIEW:

War movies. Let’s face it, they’ve been done to death. We’ve seen every type of war movie and in many respects, they all kind of blend into one with a lot of the same characters, same moments and same beats just repeated over and over again with just a different set of actors and interchanging between different eras of war in the 20th and 21st century. War movies have in many ways, gone the way of the Western, not really feeling as relevant as they used to. So I guess the big question is, why would Christopher Nolan delve into such a well-trodden genre? Well much like Film Noir, the Comic Book genre and Science Fiction, to reinvent them in his own Nolan-esque way. 

So Dunkirk is based on the true story of 400,000 allied soldiers stranded in the town of Dunkirk in France. Surrounded by German soldiers, these worn down men are just trying to get home, but when they can’t get off the beach to get home, home comes to them. We have Tom Hardy in the sky, Cillian Murphy at sea and Harry Styles on land; Hardy is trying to keep the enemy at bay and himself out of the ocean, Murphy is in the ocean trying to get to any land other than Dunkirk and Styles, along with so many other soldiers, is just trying to get away. So in-between a story that takes place at land, on sea and in the air, Christopher Nolan adds an extra element to the storytelling: all three stories are told in three different timelines, over a period of one hour, one day, and one week. 

Yet again, Christopher Nolan uses discontinuous editing to force us as an audience to pay attention. It’s not enough that the film already has rich visuals, a nerve-wracking soundtrack and intense challenges for all involved, Nolan demands your full-attention by effortlessly switching between each of the three timelines as we witness a war film that really harkens back to the kind of films that inspired many other great filmmakers. 

But what else has Nolan done to reinvigorate a rather dormant or at the very least repetitive genre? One of the big things which is a staple of a Nolan blockbuster is his insistence on scope and scale. With Wally Pfister moving more into the director’s chair, Nolan returns with the cinematographer from Interstellar who just knows how to fill the frame. Each shot has incredible depth and when the action happens, intensity kicks in for the simple fact that you can always see the danger getting closer and closer as our characters try to figure out what to do. Whether it be bullets or bombs there’s something about the cinematography that really grips you as each character struggles for their own type of survival in this film. 

Adding to the scope and scale of the cinematography, is just how much of the footage has been done in camera. Sinking real ships and flying real planes adds to the realism that Christopher Nolan is projecting towards the audience. Yes of course there is some CGI in the footage, but only to enhance what is already there as opposed to over-powering what is already there. However there is no doubting just how scary these sequences would be in reality when we see water engulf hundreds of soldiers trapped in a ship or the height in which soldiers travel in the air when an explosion hits. Nolan pushes the IMAX format in ways that just constantly reminds you of how many people were trapped on that beach and delivers some powerful vertigo in the dogfights which makes you realize why George Lucas watched World War II dogfight footage and felt inspired to make Star Wars. It only makes me wonder what kind of filmmakers will emerge after seeing this film. 

Of course it wouldn’t be a Christopher Nolan film without a Hans Zimmer soundtrack and this time he hasn’t fallen asleep on the organ like he did on Interstellar but rather gives us an intense soundtrack with an incredible sense of urgency that is driven by the constant ticking of Nolan’s own stopwatch. The music is expertly placed and keeps you on the edge of your seat. In the quiet moments, the ticking reminds you that you are never safe, but when it’s loud, it has meaning, it has an effect and it has you squirming in your seat. 

This is definitely one of Nolan’s strongest films to date, however, this film will not be for everyone, sometimes it will not be for every Nolan fan. Those accustomed to the traditional tropes and conventions of a war movie may feel a little disconcerted by some of Nolan’s choices. One of the biggest things you will notice in the film is that there is very lite on dialogue - as a matter of fact the films entire dialogue probably fits on maybe five to six pages of the completed script. You would struggle to be able to name any of the characters because most characters don’t talk to one another. There are no moments where characters are sitting around campfires sharing stories from home, there’s no ham-fisted expositional dialogue to let the audience know the name, rank and serial number of any of the characters - it’s just a very believable way in which these characters would interact in a situation like this. When the enemy may shoot at you from any possible vantage point, why would you talk, let alone whisper? When you are trying to survive amongst guns and explosions, do you really need casual discussions for the benefit of the audience? This may throw some people off, but it’s hard to argue that it’s not a more realistic take on the situation. 

Another thing that may throw some fans of war movies is the complete lack of blood. Done countless times in films like Saving Private Ryan and Full Metal Jacket we were given insight into the horrors of war and this time, Nolan takes a different approach. Much like Spielberg threw us into the thick of it at the start of Saving Private Ryan, Nolan immerses us in the experience through the noise, the dirt and the uncertainty - he just doesn’t show the blood, we see the impact of these events on the characters through their actions and the creases in their faces and this is just as effective, but some war movie buffs may find the bloodless battle a detraction. 

Ultimately, with Nolan doing what he does best thanks to scale, scope, realism, Zimmerism along with discontinuous editing, we get another film that will appease most Nolan fanatics and please many a war movie fan. With some elements that some may struggle to get past for enjoyment, there is no denying that the film is intense, engaging and lean thanks to Nolan’s shortest runtime since his first film The Following. Nolan fans will argue where this ranks amongst all his other work but when the bar is set so high with Nolan, it’s an argument worth having, although the benefit of time and hindsight may help to properly rank when all is said and done.

Dunkirk gets Four and a Quarter really solid Stars (yes, even the quarter star is solid) 

BABY DRIVER: SPOILER-FREE REVIEW:

You know, there has been so much talk about how “cool” Baby Driver is. So many critics and people saying, “man it’s so cool”, “it just oozes coolness”. The film has been a long time coming and now that it’s finally out and I’ve seen it, and I finally get it: this film is cool. It’s so cool that it’s almost like James Dean, Quentin Tarantino and David Bowie just got together and made “Three Men & A Baby Driver” kind of cool. 

So the film stars Ansel Elgort, who plays Baby, an incredibly talented getaway driver who drives to the beat of an astounding soundtrack. When Baby has finally paid off his debt to a criminal mastermind played by Kevin Spacey, he is pulled back into the world of bank robberies, car-jacking and danger around every corner when this new job pairs Baby with some volatile yet indispensably cool characters including Jamie Foxx, Jon Hamm, and Eiza Gonzalez. In between all this Baby is trying to run away with his new love Debora played by Lily James and try to protect his ailing foster-dad played by CJ Jones - oh yeah and it has a killer soundtrack and was written and directed by Edgar Wright.

Now it has been a long time between drives for Edgar Wright with one of the more obvious reasons being his commitment and then departure from 2015’s Ant-Man however this film really does feel like the return of an old creative buddy who wants to show you his latest batch of awesomeness. Of course no sooner than five minutes into the film we’ve had smarter storytelling, better cinematography and more creative car stunts than all of the Fast & Furious films combined. 

But what is that makes Edgar Wright a one-of-a-kind director. It’s hard to pick a director that has the same type of creative energy and enthusiasm as Edgar Wright, and that’s no disrespect to other directors, it’s just that Edgar Wright films have a very unique feel. A rewatch-ability built from some incredibly passionate and layered filmmaking; from the storyline, to the cinematography, to the editing, to the unadulterated embrace of the genre, Edgar Wright films always have that special something. And Baby Driver is no different.  

So what makes Baby Driver’s storyline so good? Well, it’s fairly simple: clear good guys, clear bad guys, clear motivations for all characters involved and ultimately this leads to Edgar Wright being able to layer the film with lots of incredibly subtle foreshadowing which will have you wanting to watch the film again and again. Be it the simple turn of phrase by a character, a innocent looking action of one of the key cast or something simply happening in the background; all of this adds up to great foreshadowing that links every element of the story together. 

The cinematography is slick once again thanks to Edgar Wright’s third collaboration with The Matrix’s Bill Pope who has really helped to craft some of the most intense car and foot chases since The French Connection and as I mentioned before, leaves the Fast & Furious franchise in the slow lane. But beyond this, Bill Pope frames each shot to have impact, to have meaning; this obviously feeds into Edgar Wright’s foreshadowing and storytelling, but ultimately means your eyes are glued to the screen at all times. 

Add to all this, Edgar Wright’s editing style which keeps the story moving, keeps the film lean and only enhances Bill Pope’s cinematography. The film moves so fast that blinking seems like a sin and reinforces yet again that the film needs to be seen more than once just to absorb everything that is infused into the film. Much like his previous films, this movie is edited in time with the soundtrack, however this time the soundtrack plays an even bigger role. It drives the story and sets the pace, and like all the songs featured in the film, it is fast, lean and pulsating to say the least. 

Of course, the editing, cinematography and storyline are all in service to the getaway driver genre - much like all of Edgar Wright’s films, he fully immerses himself and the audience into the genre. Every word, every action is in service to the genre: characters act the way we expect in this genre, the beats hit the way they should in this genre and Wright manages to imprint a freshness to all these elements due to his passion for a project. 

But is this film for everybody? It should be, but it won’t, some viewers may find the convenience and connections within the film all too… convenient. The humor may not be to everyone’s taste and the genre may not necessarily be that appealing. However, if you are looking for something fresh, fun and most importantly in a world filled with prequels, sequels, inbetweenquels, adaptations, and remakes, something that’s original; you may just find something to watch and rewatch again and again. 

Baby Driver gets Four and a Half mixtape burn-out getaway good times out of Five.

SPIDER-MAN HOMECOMING: SPOILER-FREE REVIEW:

In one of Marvel’s more riskier moves, in the wake of Captain America Civil War, Doctor Strange and Guardians Of The Galaxy Volume 2, we get a film about a teenage boy being, mentored shall we say, by an eccentric older gentleman who happens to be a billionaire and insists on making said teenage boy wear skin-tight spandex and perform acrobatics.  However, in all seriousness, it’s the movie that every Marvel fan has been waiting for for nearly a decade now: a Spider-Man film set within the Marvel Cinematic Universe; but the big question is, is this film “amazing”? 

No, no, no, no…. It’s not “amazing”, it’s “spectacular”!!

So it’s two months after the events of Civil War and eight years after the Battle Of New York and a minor headache trying to figure out the timeline considering The Avengers came out in 2012; we have a young Peter Parker balancing high school and aspirations to be an Avenger. He’s dodging his friends and other responsibilities all in hope of Iron Man giving him a call for a new adventure. Meanwhile, Adrian Toomes, played by the original Batman Michael Keaton has been secretly scavenging weaponry from all of The Avengers previous battles, however when Spidey and The Vulture cross paths, things escalate for everyone involved. 

Now Marvel fans do not need to be convinced to see this film - they’re all already up to their third screening of this whilst I’m furiously working away on this review - however, what about general audiences who are on the fence with yet another Spider-Man reboot or just aren’t as invested in following the ever expansive cinematic universe and dump-trucks filled with money that is also known as Marvel Studios? 

The main things to address are the concerns these people may have: first off, the film does not rehash the origin story yet again, we are not inflicted with another tortured angst-ridden Peter Parker, it’s a kid who actually enjoys being Spider-Man; Even though Robert Downey Jnr. features heavily in the trailers, this is not Iron Man 4 (or Iron Man 5 if you consider Civil War to be Iron Man 4) - Tony Stark and Iron Man show up in very small chunks and at no point overshadows the story of Spider-Man. The one-and-done bland villain problem of other Marvel movies is absent in this film because Michael Keaton creates genuine motivation for his character and can flick between charming and menacing with seasoned ease. There’s no light-beam in the sky or death from above tropes to this film, Spider-Man Homecoming keeps it grounded whilst still providing some really spectacular aerial acrobatics.  Overall, for a character who has been in seven films in total over the last fifteen years and seen three actors portray a well known and well-treaded character, Spider-Man Homecoming manages to keep things fresh.  

This no doubt comes down to the talent on-screen. Tom Holland is the Peter Parker and Spider-Man you never realized that you needed so badly. His childlike glee and fascination with everything is accompanied by insecurities and a unsureness that are relatable and endearing. Whether he is hyper-actively asking a thousand and one questions to Happy Hogan or his suit, or hanging his head sheepishly when being spoken down to by Tony Stark or The Vulture; Tom Holland is easily the most fascinating of the Spider-Men we have had over the last fifteen years. Thankfully Tom Holland is also supported by a diverse cast which once again keep this interpretation feeling fresh. It is more representative of a high school environment and adds new layers to characters that we may or may not have seen before. For example, Tony Revolori’s Flash Thompson is still a bully, but a different type of bully to previous versions of the character - and of course, Jacob Batalon’s Ned Lees and Peter Parker are just the most adorable best friends I’ve seen on screen in a long time and easily has become a new #FriendshipGoal.

If there was one complaint or fault, and it is only minimal, is that with such a large and diverse cast, some characters don’t really get an opportunity to properly shine or reach their full potential. Now some may say that the casting choices of the smaller roles were nothing more than stunt casting, however I would say that casting people like Donald Glover, Hannibal Burness and Martin Starr in these smaller roles helps to make those smaller moments stand out. Each adds their own charm to characters that could easily have been ignored otherwise. 

Of course it wouldn’t be a Marvel film without Easter eggs and this film has more Easter eggs flying left, right and centre than a meth-fueled Easter bunny trying to stash the evidence before the Easter bunny police arrive. Keen eyes will see lots of references to the previous films, there is some real world-building of just the Spider-Man universe with things that are said, characters that show up along with other great things that include very subtle visual explanations for why actors such as Kenneth Choi shows up in this film despite already having played a character in Captain America The First Avenger. 

Ultimately, Spider-Man Homecoming is a welcome return to form after several poorly conceived Sony Spider-Man films. This movie builds on the promise shown in Captain America Civil War and offers a wide range of fresh possibilities for Marvel’s favorite future Avenger. With Avengers Infinity War only ten months away, Spider-Man Homecoming will have you thwipping for more. 

Spider-Man Homecoming gets Four and a Quarter out of Five meth-fueled Easter bunnies showering us with lovely Marvel Easter eggs.

TRANSFORMERS: THE LAST KNIGHT: SPOILER-FREE REVIEW:

You know, after five films over the span of the last ten years, you could be forgiven for thinking that Michael Bay actually likes Transformers, however, five films in and all evidence points towards one thing: Michael Bay doesn’t give a f*&k! He doesn’t care for characters, for mythology, he doesn’t give a f*&k about storytelling, aspect ratios and doesn’t give a f*&k about the human f*&king race!!

OK, so before we start, I should say that this will probably turn out to be more rant than review. 

So five films in and we’re still doing the same damn things. Yes Shia LeBouf is no longer here but we’re stuck with Marky Mark and we still have the same story being recycled over and over again: As always, we discover that the Transformers have been on Earth before, impending doom is on the horizon and a Earth-saving Maguffin is found by a human and both the Autobots and Decepticons are both in pursuit of said Maguffin. A whole bunch of human characters chew up screen-time which ultimately adds up to nothing more than padding. Big battles, non-sensical action, pointless plots and sub-plots, cringe-inducing humour, over-stuffed climax, convenient plot-devices to wrap up the finale, end with Optimus Prime sending out yet another message to Transformers to visit Earth to set up yet another f*&king sequel. 

The film offers very little in new material and offers us all the same things that we have seen before/ suffered through before. You’d hope that after five films, Michael Bay would have learned a couple of things about story-telling but unfortunately, we are stuck with the same problems that we have had in the previous four films. What problems you may ask? 

Well yet again we have set up that leads to no legitimate pay-off let alone a connection to what passes for a storyline. Remember we saw dinosaurs at the beginning of Age Of Extinction and that had nothing to do with the rest of the film let alone the Dinobots?  Well this time we have Stanley Tucci playing Merlin in Medieval Times; there is no attempt to explain or resolve why Tucci is playing two different characters in the same film franchise. We have humans working with Decepticons again for… reasons. Yet again, a bunch of robot characters are introduced, they are all broad stereotypes and then none of them actually feature in the film in favor of a bunch of useless human characters who are all equal parts annoying and assholes. The film decides to retcon the mythology set-up in the previous films yet again - meaning lots of expositional bullsh*t that eats up the run-time and makes all previous storylines defunct, questionable and overall frustrating. 

Of course, Michael Bay also considers himself a comedian, and we are not spared from his perceived “comedy gold” in this film. Bay thinks he’s a funny guy but his “comedy” is even more frequent in this film and more tone-deaf than ever. Comedy is just wedged in the oddest places in this movie and interrupts any flow or momentum the movie might be garnering. On top of this, as always, Michael Bay’s idea of funny harbours deep-seated racism, misogyny, homophobia and sexism whether it be one of these things or a combination in a single character or moment, be it directly, indirectly or back-handily; yet again, Michael Bay has not learned anything from previous films. 

If I had to award this film one credit, it’s the same credit that you have to award the previous films: Industrial Light & Magic’s special effects are jaw-dropping, they really have managed to create photorealistic giant talking robots that look like they exist in the real-world (just as long as the real world doesn’t have to include physics or gravity).  However, even these great visual effects are undercut by Michael Bay’s insistence on switching between three different aspect ratios throughout the film - does he use this in a smart way that enhances the story? Well, to summarise, Bay likes to use the I-Max camera whenever he is filming this installments “hot chick” played by The Inbetweeners’ Laura Haddock and then uses a regular old boring 35mm camera when shooting Marky Mark - even when they are in the same scene together! So yeah, no real artistic integrity can be argued here….

Now as a fan of the original animated series, I just struggle to see how this franchise has always managed to get it so wrong. I don’t want a carbon copy of the animated series, but I always feel that these films have just missed the point of what made the original TV series so great. It was a simple story about good guys and bad guys. The bad guys wanted to rip the Earth of its’ natural resources with no care for human casualties, whilst the Autobots did everything in their power to protect. The show was filled with great themes of honour, loyalty, deception and betrayal - yet was essentially one giant toy commercial. Somehow these films have only ever focused on being a toy commercial, a toy commercial with lots of sponsors and product placement. Moving forward, if this is Bay’s final outing, I hope that the franchise tries to capture the simplicity of the TV series and not get bogged down in all these unnecessary sub-plots and pointless Maguffin-quests. 

Transformers: The Last Knight gets One Star for visual effects and a thousand prayers to whatever god you pray to that this will be Michael Bay’s last swing at this series. 

BAYWATCH: SPOILER-FREE MOVIE REVIEW:

If there is one thing that you can say about Baywatch is that it is full of eye-candy. It’s not just one-sided eye-candy, doesn’t matter if you’re into guys or girls, Baywatch has eye-candy for all, so much eye-candy in fact that it’s bound to give you ocular diabetes. Unfortunately though, the storyline and plot points in the movie-adaptation of the cult TV series from the 90’s is also a lot like candy, except it will rot your brain. 

So you’ve got The Rock playing Mitch Buchannon, your normal everyday, run of the mill life guard who is just testosterone squeezed into a swimmer’s rashie and when he takes on three new trainee lifeguards which includes Alexandra Daddario as attractive swimsuit model number 3, Jon Bass as chubby comedic relief and of course walking human perfection, Mr. Chiseled-Jaw and rock-hard abs-man Zac Efron. The storyline is, well, what you’d expect from a Baywatch episode: drugs, murder, explosions, and apparently the only people who can stop it all are the Baywatch-crew. 

Before I completely bash the film, it should go without saying that Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Zac Efron have excellent chemistry together. They’re both charming, they bounce off each other well and I would definitely pay to see them in a movie together again, but maybe not a Baywatch sequel. The comedy is funny, it’s just a pity that we don’t get anything fresh from the film that wasn’t featured in the trailers. 

Unfortunately outside of Zac Efron and The Rock, the rest of the cast are mostly a let down - not because of their acting ability, but just because they have just shy of literally nothing to do. The female leads have nothing to do, often you forget that many of them are there, the male support cast show up randomly and are often there to do short burst of ad-lib comedy, and unlike their bathing suits, none of the characters are really fleshed out. You have Jon Bass as the chubby comic relief and Kelly Rohrbach as CJ Parker whose relationship can only be described as screen-writer masturbatory fantasies of the most unrealistic order - although it’s hard to identify which of the nine screen writers credited to this film is responsible for such limp masturbatory-fantasies. 

Outside of this though, the film does struggle quite a bit: firstly, and this is just my nit-picky personality, but the film is just a train wreck of continuity issues - I think the continuity guy on set was too busy inspecting the thigh-gaps and not paying attention to their actual job. The film also has clearly missing scenes along with plot points that are completely forgotten about and are left completely unresolved.    

So look, I’d never pick a fight with Dwayne Johnson, however I do know that he said that this film was made for the fans and not the critics. I thought to myself, fair enough, but what does he mean by “fans” - I think people sometimes confuse remembering a TV show existed and being a fan… I know at one point, Baywatch the TV series had a world-wide viewership of a billion people, but I’ve never heard anyone ever clamoring for more Baywatch; I’ve never heard anyone say that they own all the episodes on DVD or that they are glad that they held off for the Blu-Ray anamorphic remastered editions of the series, I think most people would struggle to remember a single storyline from even one episode - the show is not available on Netflix and most young viewers today have never heard of it. I’ve never heard of people cramming into “Baywatch conventions” so while I appreciate that the film was made for “fans” all I ask is, which “fans” are they talking about?

Overall, the film had potential to be good, but it squandered this potential by prematurely ejaculating all of their best material in the trailers. The Rock and Zac Efron are great, but vacuum up all the screen time and charisma of those around them. Some more self-aware humour and saving some of your A-game comedy for the silver screen and taking just a little more time in the editing room and maybe the promise of a sequel during the end credits might have been more welcoming…

Baywatch gets One and a Half jokes out of Five that would have made the film better if we hadn’t seen them across the three dozen trailers and TV spots prior to release. 

WONDER WOMAN: SPOILER-FREE REVIEW:

So Wonder Woman is out in cinemas and a lot riding on her immaculately well-toned shoulders. Despite it being 75 years in the making, and the first female-lead superhero movie providing you don't count Supergirl, Tank Girl, Barbwire, Catwoman and Elektra; this film has staggeringly high expectations and trepidation due to being the fourth film in the DC Extended Universe and putting it politely, the first three films garnered mixed responses; putting it more accurately though, the first three films made the internet a very unpleasant cesspool where, mostly angry and insecure middle-aged men, hurled verbal abuse and death threats towards one another for a couple of months after each films release. So after a nervous wait for many people, it is Lasso Of Truth time to find out whether there is room for a strong female hero in the capes and codpiece cinema landscape....

So Wonder Woman is set in World War I, where we start in Themyscira, head to London and then find ourselves in the middle of The Great War. We meet Steve Trevor, a pilot played by the new Captain Kirk, Chris Pine, who crash lands on an Amazonian Island, he meets Diana Prince who travels with him to London to learn about the world of men and help win the war to end all wars. In between all this we get something very different from the most recent DC films: it's colourful, meaningful, humorous and most surprising, enjoyable.

Now look, we could waste time talking about the similarities with Captain America The First Avenger’s war setting and the first Thor film’s fish out of water plot-line, but honestly it’s pointless because you may as well blame every other World War set film and fish out of water storyline for just reusing the same tropes. We could also talk about the undercooked villains and the overcooked final fight but that’s just par for the course with superhero films; you either go big or go home, or you have a really fleshed out villain to enhance the overall film, but at the expense of the heroes story. 

So let’s talk about what really separates Wonder Woman from the other DC Films and even all other comic book movies: the films incredible ability to convey empathy. Not since Richard Donner’s original Superman movie have we had a comic book hero show such earnest and empathy. It’s actually refreshing to go back to the storytelling of yesteryear yet still feeling incredibly modern. Wonder Woman herself along with Pine’s Steve Trevor struggle to come to grips the horrors of war and even goes as far as to show that it’s not just black and white, or good vs. evil. There are some great little references to Christopher Reeve’s Superman with gender-reversal twist, but still managing to make Chris Pine and Gal Gadot’s characters equals as opposed to the old damsel in distress syndrome. Of course in between all this fleshing out of war and gender roles back in the early 1900’s, the film also takes time to comment on the inequalities between men in a man’s world - highlighting how the color of one’s skin and entitlement really benefitted white men. It’s not labored on, but it’s surprising to see that kind of commentary in a big tentpole blockbuster. 

The other really refreshing thing about the latest DC Film is that the story has been put first over moments, plus every single moment feels earned. The film takes time to breath-in the worlds of Themyscira and London, we get to know Diana Prince and Steve Trevor long before she takes to the battle field and when she does, it’s an earned moment that sits up there with Superman taking his first flight or Batman’s first big reveal. Unlike the other recent DC Films, this doesn’t rush through everything, nor does it expect the audience to have a detailed knowledge of Wonder Woman’s comic book back catalogue in order to get lots of throw away references. There’s no dream sequences within dream sequences, no sudden character personality flips or Martha moments - in comparison to the other films in the DC Cinematic Universe, it plays it safe - but that doesn’t mean it’s not still a highly enjoyable film.  

The film’s dialogue can be a little clunky at times, but the it is more natural than the other DC Films and many of the Marvel Films. There is still pontificating and still a lot of expositional dialogue, but it is all delivered in a way that seems fitting as it is often filtered around some good conversations and debates between Pine and Gadot. Add to this director Patty Jenkins work on television to still allow for the quiet moments that would normally get lost in a big blockbuster. From learning how to dance, discussing aspirations outside of being a soldier to the discussing social conventions, it is these smaller moments that make the bigger more bombastic moments all the more meaningful.  

Ultimately, this is best film that’s been released to date by the DC Extended Universe, yes at this stage that’s not that high a bar to jump, but jump it does and in the most spectacular fashion you could hope for. With splashes of colour in the right places, characters you actually care about, moments that are threaded together between scenes instead of one moment rear-ending into another moment constantly, it feels like DC might finally be getting onto the right track. The jury is still out on The Justice League and I’m still a little apprehensive about that coming out in November, but the best compliment I can give Wonder Woman is that it is the first film from the DC Extended Universe that I want to have in my Blu-Ray collection. 

Wonder Woman, the film that’s so good it could be mistaken for a Marvel movie gets Four Marvelous Stars out of Five.