Iron Fist: Lacking focus, needing passion

Netflix's last Marvel show before it's Defenders series kicked off, Iron Fist, was met with what can be called a less the warm reception. It is now, infamously, one of the harshest reviewed Marvel projects since the Disney buyout. Criticisms focused on bad writing, an unlikable and uninteresting main character, and from my perspective, a lack of focus. The show has its faults, but much like Batman V. Superman, if you look deeper in it, there are some interesting thing bubbling below this smelly swamp of a series.

Before we get into the series, we need to look back on what happened before cameras were rolling and before any real plans were put into place. Back in the year 2000, Marvel was planning on making an Iron Fist film that would star Ray Park (who had played Darth Maul in the Phantom Menace and was a very skilled martial artist). But this was way back in the day when they thought Ben Affleck as Daredevil was a good choice (it wasn't). The project went through multiple directors until it was put indefinitely in development hell. Marvel started hiring writers to work on their less known properties like Iron Fist and in 2010 Rick Wilkes, writer of the xXx Vin Disel films, was hired to write a new draft for the film. Three years later, Marvel said an Iron Fist project would be happening in the near future.

That project however, was not a full length feature film, but a live action series for Netflix. Near the end of 2013 Marvel announced that it would be preparing series for the characters of Luke Cage, Jessica Jones, Daredevil and yes, Iron Fist. These four series would lead into a Defenders miniseries that would happen after each show had finished. It would be two years until the public heard anything about the Iron Fist series as rumors were circling that Marvel was planning on canceling the series in favor for a Punisher series. Those rumors were debunked as a Marvel executive said that they were holding off on Iron Fist news until Jessica Jones finished, probably to see if the format was the success they thought it would be.

Iron Fist was supposed to come out after Jessica Jones but instead was replaced by Luke Cage after the charcters' breakout performance in Jessica Jones. Scott Buck, a writer and showrunner for the show Dexter, was brought on as the showrunner. This choice, in my opinion, is a large reason why Iron Fist failed as a show but I'll get back to Scott later. It was announced in 2015 that Finn Jones of Game of Thrones fame would be playing Danny Rand/Iron Fist. Immediately cries of white washing ran afowl as Danny Rand in the comics was Asian and was going to be portrayed by a white male as what was seen as a role for an asian actor being turned into another white male savior role.

To be fair, Finn Jones is decent as Danny Rand. I think the writing is to blame for Danny's unlikable at times whinny character. This is where I believe the one of the big problems lie in not only Iron Fist but also in the upcoming Inhumans series and that problem is Scott Buck. Buck, for all your Dexter fans out there, was the showrunner in the three final and worst seasons of Dexter, season 6 being the lowest reviewed out of 8 seasons Dexter had. He had worked previously on the show as a writer, even getting nominated for some awards, but once he was promoted to showrunner the wheels started falling off. Bad storytelling and writing plagued Buck's first run as showrunner and those issues are present in Iron Fist. But Scott Buck is not the only one to blame, some of the blame lies on Marvel themselves.

The truth is, Marvel had no solid plans for the show or the character. What started out as big budget movie was turned into a small budget web series. Also, keep in mind the MCU had not delved into the mystic arts before they announced Iron Fist and the plans for Doctor Strange, Marvel's first attempt at exploring mysticism in their world, were not solid yet. Basically, Marvel had put themselves in a corner. If Doctor Strange bombed financially and critically, mysticism and Iron Fist would be swept by the wayside for other characters and stories. However, Doctor Strange proved to be a success so Iron Fist moved forward. The problem was that now they had to rush everything and rushing never leads to a good product being put out. Add to that the poor choices for writers, both for the movie and the show, as well as a bad choice in showrunner and you have a disaster on your hand.

Can Iron Fist be saved? Yes it can. I believe Finn Jones can do this character right if he has good writing behind him. Marvel has already made the smart choice of removing Scott Buck from the show and replacing him with Raven Metzner, who  most recently worked on the show Sleepy Hollow. Hopefully Metzner will breath new life into the show and the character of Iron Fist. Sadly, Scott Buck is still a part of the Marvel family and his poison is once again striking with the victim this time being the Inhumans show. Criticism over the pilot have been scathing and looks like once again Marvel is paying poorly for their decision to put Buck with another set of characters they had no idea what to do with. Clearly the Buck needs to stop here and Marvel needs to bring on people who are passionate about the characters in order to put out a good product. Scott Buck may be a talented writer but he lacks the passion and skills to do the characters justice as well as put out a good show. While the show Iron Fist lacks focus, what it needs is passion behind it.

How effective was The Blair Witch Project?

It may be hard to imagine but there was a time when making a horror movie with only hand held or low resolution cameras was an unheard of idea. Today, we see a lot of these "found footage" horror movies that have the story told through the video lenses of one of the movies characters. Movies like the Paranormal Activity franchise, The Gallows and As Above So Below have used this method. And I know that now every time a trailer for one of these movies pops up, there are bound to be groans and comments like "really, another one of these?" a bound. So why o why does Hollywood studios greenlight these kind of movies. Well for one, they are incredibly easy to make and require a small budget so even if the movie fails the company doesn't loose money. Another reason is that Hollywood someday hopes to recapture the magic that was The Blair Witch Project.

The 1999 horror movie about three teens getting lost in the woods while researching the legend of a witch whose spirt haunts the woods blew audiences away with its found footage style. Keep in mind, around this time this was ground breaking cinema. Audiences had never seen something like this before. Now they could see what the characters were going through and even feel like they were part of the movie. But look at today with all the found footage horror movies we have today and you might find nothing special about this technique.

For something being billed as "ahead of its time" it seems very dated today. But I will argue that The Blair Witch Project is one of the better found footage horror movies. For stars, it had a damn good marketing project, so good it got people debating on whether the "footage" was real or not. Keep in mind this was when the web was in its early stages and people actually trusted most information. Crew members would go to film festivals to add fuel to the realism side by handing out fliers and asking viewers to come forward if they had any information about the "missing" kids. Staged interviews and fake police reports were even made about the disappearance of these made up characters and the public ate it up. Because the movie had no major stars it had to put its hardest effort in to get the word out about this movie. It had a bold marketing campaign and it was a bold movie, even by today's standards.

It never relies on the typical jump scares found in the Paranormal Activity series but more on the mood and environment. The legend of the witch early on is built up as this legend everyone in the town takes seriously as many people have gone missing or worse, found dead, from going into the supposed cursed woods. Already the viewer knows the outcome but its that little nudge given by the townsfolk treatment of the legend that gets the viewer.

And these woods are pretty damn creepy. This movie capitalizes on those who fear getting lost in the woods. In fact, its kind of like a messed up version of Hansel and Grettle. Think about it: kids go in woods even though they are warned of the danger in the woods, kids encounter danger and nearly die. The nearly part is not in the movie as (SPOILER ALERT) the fate of the three teens is not revealed though its a good chance they are dead. And the funniest thing about the movie is that even with how much they build up this witch, we NEVER see it. That, in my opinion at least, works for the film as it keeps the audience guessing if the witch is real or if something else is going on. It gives that extra fear of the unknown audiences want.

By the end of 1999, this was one of the biggest hits of that year. For a movie made with a $60,000 budget it made nearly $250 million dollars. The equivalent of a home movie was raking in millions by the day. Naturally, the big suits at Hollywood had an idea that would create a major trend in horror movie and movie making in general. They could make a movie for dirt cheap, release it and watch the cash flow in. But if recent found footage movie profits show, that idea failed due to movies in that genre following a formula: People go to weird/haunted place, someone in the group is filming the whole thing for reasons, weird stuff goes down, people die and the movie ends with something jumping at the camera. After a while audiences got fed up with this trend and moved on to something new.

Which brings us to 2016 where a sequel to the popular movie is set to be released in September. It follows the same story from the first movie as a group of teens go into the woods of the Blair Witch, but this time the group is in search of answers to what happened to one of their friends sister. Glimpsing the synopsis you feel the trends coming back and the dread or meh feeling about the movie. But then you see this movie is directed by Adam Wingard. Go ask any fan of horror movies who Adam Wingard is and best guess is they'll say he's one of the best horror movie directors of the modern era with hit movies like The Guest and You're Next under his belt. The guy knows how to make a good horror movie no doubt, but whether he can have the success of The Blair Witch Project has yet to been seen.

Fame was not kind to those involved with the project as most of the cast has gone on to lack luster film success at best. One would think being in one of the highest grossing movies of the year would get you on the map. But no, the movies' stars and directors (yes this movie had TWO directors) all fell off the map with one failed project after another. Seemed like there was a real curse on anyone involved with the project but hopefully the follow up will give its cast some good fortune going forward.

Doctor Strange Review

                                             

The latest entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Doctor Strange is a visually stunning journey into a different side of the M.C.U. we've never seen before.

First, I need to say that I had very little knowledge of the character Doctor Strange or his adventures so I was going into this was a fresh perspective. I should also note that I saw this movie in IMAX 3D and I have to say you are cheating yourself if you see this movie in any other format. The visuals in this movie are mind-binding and stunning, I dare even say that the effects in this movie are better than Inception. I know the trailers made this movie feel like Inception but it's anything but.

In Doctor Strange,  famous doctor Stephen Strange (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) goes through a life changing experience after a car crash leaves him without the use of his hands and his search for his cure leads him to a mysterious enclave. He soon learns that this place is on the front line of a battle against dark forces bent on destroying our reality. Strange must now choose between his previous life or a new life as a powerful sorcerer that protects the world.

The story is a resemblance of the first Iron Man in that someone who believes the universe revolves around them learn that they are only a small part in a large universe. Where the two stories differ is that Strange's journey is more spiritual and Stark's is more moral. The tagline to the movie is "Open your mind. Change your reality." a kind of spiritual message that represents what Strange goes through. He's been taught to accept the limitations of our reality but in order to become a powerful sorcerer he must forget everything he knows and open his mind to a world beyond his knowledge.

I like how the movie blended deep spiritual themes with mind bending action. The movie took advantage of the fact that these sorcerers could bend time and reality and created some interesting and unique action scenes. One of my favorite scenes was where Doctor Strange and his friend Mordo (played by Chiwetel Edjiofor) are being chased by the villain (played by Mads Mikkelsen) and his henchmen and the villains use their powers to basically turn New York into an M. C. Escher painting. Powers like that are impressive to look at and make you wonder how they will affect the larger M.C.U. in the future.

I highly recommend seeing this movie, especially in IMAX. It's an entertaining adventure that satisfies both long time fans of the character and anyone new to Doctor Strange.

Finding Dory Review

     Finding Dory, though an unnecessary sequel, is still a solid emotional family film that is up to the high standards audiences set for Pixar films.

I was never of the belief that Finding Nemo needed a sequel, none the less having it to do with the character of Dory, a fish with short term memory. Don't take it the wrong way, I like the character of Dory. She brought humor when it needed to be present and was not as annoying as she could have been. I just did not see the potential of basing a movie around this character, especially given that she had a great story arc in the first movie. Also, Disney has not done well with animated sequels (Toy Story aside). Most end up going straight to video and are basically babysitters for young children as they add no value to the story and botch, or worse destroy, traits of beloved characters. With a character like Dory, there was the risk of making her memory loss trait very annoying and maybe even uncomfortable given that memory loss is a very serious mental disorder. But thankfully, the good people at Pixar put their best into this and what we got was a surprisingly good film.

The story takes place one year after Finding Nemo, and focuses on Dory trying to find her parents after remembering them. And its not just, "oh she left home and her parents were just inside the house the whole time", she, much like Nemo, was taken away from her parents by forces out of her control. It's the basic formula for Pixar movies, character gets taken out of home/comfort zone and must find a way back home or get somewhere safe. But it is the characters and the emotions they go through that get us invested in these stories. We want to see Woody and Buzz get back to Andy, we want to see Marlin find his son, and we want Dory to find her parents. It's the characters and their journey that make the story work.

And probably for the best, this movie has a lot of good characters in it. A good Dory movie would have her interacting with characters and have the characters work off of each other. You have a squid voiced by Ed O'Neil who wants nothing more than to be in Cleveland, a pair of whales voiced by Ty Burrell and Kaitlin Olson, and a pair of seals voiced by Idris Elba and Dominic West. The movie does have scenes with Dory on her on and it is very dramatic (I say this in the best way possible). It goes with her character and gives us the emotional moments we look for in Disney movies.

Finding Dory is just as good as its predicessor and is a great film for all members of the family.

Rating: 4 stars

Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping Review

Popstar makes use of its star filled cast and musically talented stars to give us an entertaining movie experience. The movie stars the comedy music group The Lonely Island (led by SNL alumnus Andy Sandberg) and focuses on an over the top flamboyant artist after his break up with his former band (which consists of fellow Lonely Island members, and directors of the movie, Akiva Schaffer and Jorma Taccone) forces him to go solo. The movie is a mockumentary of movies like Never Say Never (the Justin Bieber documentary) or This is Us (the One Direction documentary) as it focuses on a musician and the ups and downs of his career.

Fans of The Lonely Island will be more than satisfied with all the new songs the team has created for this movie. After listening to the album I can say that this is my favorite Lonely Island album out of all of them. There are so many catchy and funny songs on the album that will make any fan of the group laugh out loud.

Popstar is not one of those movies you need to think about to much. If you take it at face value you will have an enjoyable time. It can get a little low-brow at times but for every joke that falls flat there's two good ones waiting in the distance. If you are looking to sit down and have a couple a laughs for a while than this is the movie for you.

Rating: 3.5 stars

Warcraft Review

     Warcraft's excellent dedication to the source material its based on should satisfy fans of the game, but for those who are not familiar with it will find that the movie looks beautiful and has stunning action scenes but it lacks an easy to follow story and has some confusing character motivation and choices.

I should start off by noting that I have not played World of Warcraft (or WoW as some call it), the game the movie is based on. I am familiar with some of the terms as the game had a massive presence in pop culture. It's clear that this movie is looking to fill the void left by Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, The Chronicles of Narnia and many other fantasy franchises that just never got off the ground. The movie also has to fight the uphill battle of adapting a video game with a dedicated fandom into a movie,  a feat never done successfully in Hollywood as seen by critical and box office bombs like Pixels, Mortal Kombat: Annihilation, and anything Uwe Bowl has directed. 

It's a tough job adapting something like WoW into one movie with its deep lore. Warcraft focuses on the battle between the humans and orcs , a race of creatures who must leave their homeland as it is being destroyed by a dark power and must now conquer the world of the humans in order to survive. This simple premise is buried under many different plots scattered in the movie. You have the conflict, as well as the drama involving the character of "The Guardian" and his magical powers corrupting him, plus the drama in both the orc and human camps, and the idea of an orc/human half breed and a spell caster society and thousands of other non important elements that bog the movie down. It's becoming more common that a movie based on something like a TV show or a video game must cram everything it can into one movie. Imagine having two seasons of Game of Thrones shoved into one movie. There is too much story to follow and very little time for the audience to take a break and get to know the characters.

But it is the deep lore that got people interested in the game in the first place so in a way, it is one of the better video game movies to come out. You can tell that the people involved in the project are fans of the source material and want to make sure it gets adapted in the best way possible. Its a movie for the fans and in that sense is where the movie was destined to fail. Audiences aren't flocking to the fantasy movie like they've done before. This can be chalked up to a lot of things: the rise of comic book movies, the backlash the genre gets due to its very bizarre fandom, how liking anything to do with fantasy (except for Game of Thrones) is viewed as childish and border line bizarre, franchises like The Hobbit wearing people down with its complicated story and many characters, the list goes on. Stories about knights fighting creatures do not have the draw like the stories of caped crusaders fighting men of steel do. But through the change of pop culture, the fandom to WoW has stayed steady and the loyalty to the game's company, Blizzard, has only grown as the years have gone on.

Warcraft represents the good and bad of video game and fantasy adaptations. Convoluted stories that have too many characters and are not easy to follow but it still has that feeling of epic that can only be found in fantasy movies and video games. If you are a fan of the source material and even if you're a little curious to see something like this I recommend you see the movie but those not aware of the source material can skip it.

Grade: C-

X-Men: Apocalypse Review

     Bryan Singer's latest entry to the X-Men franchise may feel by the numbers but delivers the fun and entertainment expected from the franchise with a few nostalgic nods thrown in.

It's the 1980's and after the events of Days of Future Past, mutants have been exposed to the general public and many go about it in different ways.  There are those like Professor Charles Xavier, a mutant pacifist with telepathic powers played by James McAvoy, and Raven a.k.a. Mystique, a shaped shifting mutant played by Jennifer Lawrence, that seek to help and protect mutants and even teach them how to use their powers. On the other end of the spectrum lies those like Erik Lehnsherr a.k.a. "Magneto", a mutant that can control magnetic fields played by Michael Fassbender. He goes into hiding only to be drawn out by the ancient mutant known as Apocalypse. Apocalypse is considered the world's first mutant and has superhuman abilities stronger than any mutant that is played by Oscar Isaac. Apocalypse has awaken after a long slumber and now looks to destroy the Earth so that he can rebuild it in his image with the help of his Four Mutant Horsemen: Magneto, Storm, Psylocke, and Angel, and its up to the X-Men to stop him.

It's a very stuffed plot for sure but its easy to follow. What may confuse some viewers is the re-introducing of characters like Jean Grey, Cyclops, Storm, and Nightcrawler, all characters we've seen in X-Men movies before. The timeline of the X-Men franchise is confusing given what happened in Days of Future Past. Certain movies like Origins: Wolverine and The Last Stand were removed from continuity given the events of the last movie and now with Deadpool who where the story goes. It's that kind of continuity that holds back the X-Men movies from being a continuous story line. It's not something that can be avoided, as actors age the studio needs to look for younger talent to fill the roles of the old cast. It's easy for a reboot to do that if the previous movies failed but with the X-Men movies hold up pretty well so its hard for some people to adjust to these new characters after we've seen them already.

The characters we do know like Xavier, Mystique, and Magneto are given their time here but most of the movie revolves around Apocalypse and the young students. Apocalypse is a great villain, he is menacing, powerful and threatening. A lot of people criticized his look when they first saw it but he looks fine in the movie. The costuming in this movie is bold and stands out as it gets most of the characters in their iconic look and costumes. But back to the story and characters, where First Class and Days of Future Past focused on the Xavier, Mystique, Magneto relationship, this movie puts that on the side in favor of the young X-Men, which is fine even they can be a bit on the bland side save for Nightcrawler and Quicksilver, who again has another gorgeous scene displaying his speed.

X-Men: Apocalypse is entertaining enough to keep you invested in the story but lacks that special something that was in its previous entries. I hear rumor that this is the last X-Men movie Bryan Singer will direct so it will be interesting to see who he wants to take the helm of director for the franchise and where Fox decides to go from here. Do they continue on in their own universe or be like Sony and lend the characters to Disney to be a part of the M.C.U.? Time(and probably reviews and box office numbers) will tell.

Grade: B

The Nice Guys Review

     Director and writer Shane Black's throwback to 70's style buddy cop comedies is a retro, hilarious joy that benefits from its two leads.

Ryan Gosling and Russel Crowe play two detectives in the late 70's brought together by a case surrounding a missing girl and find that there may be more to the case than whats known. It's a basic set up for a buddy cop movie but what more would you expect from the man who wrote Lethal Weapon and Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. Director and writer Shane Black has a knack for the old throwback buddy movies and again his brilliance shines through here both with his writing and his two stars.

Russel Crowe plays Jackson Healey, an enforcer who gets the job done by any means necessary, and Ryan Gosling plays Holland March, a former police officer turned private detective who has a bit of troubled past. Both actors real life personalities come through these characters as Crowe can sometimes be a violent jerk and Gosling a lovable idiot. Each man's crazy balances out the others. Compairing it to one of Black's first films, the duo resembles a little of Riggs and Murtaugh. Healey and March are not total opposites but their personalities do clash when it comes to their work and when it shows it makes for some great comedy.

And while Gosling and Crowe give great performances, for me the show stealing performance came from Angourine Rice who plays March's daughter Holly. This is a strong and determined kid character who is sort of the middle ground for both men. While she could have easily been a burden and annoying she instead is motivated and sympathetic. She, in my opinion, is the heart of the movie. Her character goes through a lot as her dad has fallen on hard times and is not the adult he needs to be but she still sticks with him because she knows he loves her and wants the best for her. In the end, she ends up affecting both men's way of life and changing them and that too me shows that her character was vital to the story.

The Nice Guys is a great neo-noir buddy cop movie that should satisfy both casual movie goers and fans of the genres.

Grade: A

Captain America: Civil War Review

     Captain America: Civil War is, in my own opinion, one of the best superhero/ comic book movie of all time. It's writing is strong, its characters have depth, it continues the story of many Marvel movies, introduces new characters perfectly, and all the characters have proper motivation to be fighting each other. I will say though, it is getting harder and harder for casual movie goers to jump into the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Civil War is the 13th film in the M.C.U. and is a follow up movie to most of the Marvel movies. One of the biggest problems of the M.C.U. is that there is no easy jump in point, you have to have followed the universe to know who is who and what is going on.

What is going on is that after the events of Age of Ultron, specifically the destruction of the nation of Sokovia, The Avengers are split on an accords plan that would have the United Nations monitor and control The Avengers. Tony Stark, a.k.a Iron Man, supports the accords while Captain America does not as it would hinder his search for his friend Bucky Barnes, The Winter Soldier. Their disagreement splits the team in half and now its Team Cap vs Team Iron Man.

The movie does a good job juggling a lot of characters and their stories. You have the feud between Cap and Iron Man, as well as Cap looking for and helping Bucky, plus the introduction of characters like Spider Man and Black Panther who both give show stealing performances. Yes there are a lot of characters but each of them are given time to leave an impression on you.

And yeah lets talk about Spider Man. He's great and Tom Holland does a great job with the character of Peter Parker. I like how in this version you feel like he is a teenager, which was one of the major things that got people interested in Spider Man. You can have guys like Batman or Captain America but they do not speak to most people like Spider Man does. Spider Man is a teenager who hasn't been doing this a very long time like most of The Avengers have, he makes little jokes during fights and for the first time in his movie portrayal does not have a 35 year old playing a teenager.

Civil War also, in my opinion, succeeds where Batman V. Superman failed. Where Batman V. Superman crammed all this new information and events in one movie, Civil War has the advantage in that most characters and their personalities have been established before this. It also gives a better light to the argument Batman V. Superman tried to do, is what should be done the right thing to be done? do heroes need checks and balances? All very important questions Batman V. Superman raised but they were overshadowed by the already dense story. Heck, this movie basically asked the same questions Daredevil's second season did with The Punisher. Is what Frank Castle did right? Should be praised or vilified for his actions? But what this movie and Daredevil have that Batman V. Superman doesn't is that there is clear a grey area between arguments and that the argument is in the fore front and not stuffed behind a bunch of other plots.

Captain America: Civil War is the superhero movie that should please both casual movie goers and long time Marvel fans. Each character has their moment to shine and the scene at the airport is one of the best action scenes I've seen in a superhero movie. If I had to say something negative is that the story can be confusing to anyone not familiar with the Marvel universe and it can be a slow burn to the action scenes. I remember hearing the person next to me start snoring during once all the action had slowed down too much. But even with that, the movie is still entertaining and fun to watch. Time will tell if the Marvel movies hold up but for now, this one is one of the best.

Grade: A+

Keanu Review

From the visionary minds of Key and Peele comes the film Keanu. The comedy duo of Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele are best known from there sketch comedy show "Key and Peele" and long time fans will even remember their MADTV days. Keanu marks the first time the duo have paired up for a film and for a first outing I would say they did pretty well.

Jordan Peele plays a man who after a bad break up, finds an adorable kitten on his door step and decides to care for him and name him Keanu. When the cat is stolen by a gang, the man and his cousin (played by Keegan Michael Key) go out looking for him. Their search gets them involved with a local gang, some assassins and a bunch of other crazy characters.

The premise alone is enough to get any fan of the comedy duo excited and it does lead to some funny situations. But a few days after watching it, I can't remember that many jokes from the movie. The best humor comes when the duo works of each other and other characters as well as like some comedies of this year, using George Michael music.

Keanu  is one of those comedies that you can enjoy if you pop it in every once in a while or watch when its on TV. Not a very memorable movie, I don't expect it to be on my best of list, but if you're up for a comedy with a cute animal in it, I would give it a recommendation.

Grade: B-

Disney's The Jungle Book Review

The Jungle Book delivers the epic feel of adventure that is great for the whole family.

I have to admit I have never read Rudyard Kipling's book but from what I can grab it focuses a little on the adventures of Mowgli, a young boy being raised in the jungle, but also includes short stories like "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi" and "Toomai and the Elephants". When it comes to the film adaptations of this story, most movies stick with the Mowgli plot save for its conclusion. If you're looking for a faithful adaptation of Kipling's novel, you'll be kind of disappointed.

This new adaptation from "Iron Man" director Jon Favreau is more of a live action/ CGI adaptation of the Disney animated movie from 1967. The story is about Mowgli having to journey to the man village in order to escape the wrath of the vengeful, man hating tiger Shere Khan. Along his journey he meets animals like a python named Kaa, lazy brown bear named Baloo and a monkey king named Louie. It's beat for beat a re telling of the 1967 movie except for the ending and having less songs. Yes there are songs in this movie but it's only the two well known songs ("Bear Necessities" and "I Wanna be Like You").

What separates this version from the animated one is it's look and performances. It blends CGI and real performance together nicely and gives us some incredible visuals. The animals look great and the voices they have are near perfect. Idris Elba gives Shere Khan a menacing cunning feel that only Elba can bring and Bill Murray and Ben Kingsley were pretty much born to play Baloo and Begheera. The only ones I had an issue with were Christopher Walkin as King Louie and Scarlett Johansen as Kaa. They do okay but every now and again I felt like all I heard was Christopher Walkin and Scarlett Johansen, not the characters. Everyone else does okay.

While not at times seemless, the backround and set pieces are nice to look at. My favorite has to be King Louie's palace. It looks like one of those abandon Indian temples that looks like danger is every corner, again, like Indiana Jones would do. And that's not a bad thing, as it fits with the whole journey aspect of the story.

It can get shockingly dark and scary at times, like a jungle would be. This comes not only from the jeapordy Mowgli is put through but also the little hints at how dangerous humans can be to the natural world. Fire, or "the red flower" is a key part of the movie depicted as the one thing that can give you absolute power through its use, be it destructive or protective. While not a spot on adaptation of the classic novel, Jon Favreau's The Jungle Book takes audiences on an adventure the whole family can enjoy together or by themselves

Other Junk: Daredevil Season 2 Review

After the mediocre performance of the Ben Affleck led Daredevil, Marvel entertainment was looking to find another way to introduce audiences to the character. Once Disney came in and bought up most of the characters, people were unsure if the character would ever get another chance to come to life. But to most people's surprise, Marvel announced that they would be creating 5 new shows for Netflix, 4 based off separate characters and 1 that would bring all these characters together in a group. Those characters ended up being Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage and Iron Fist. These 4 will eventually team up to be known as "The Defenders" a sort of street version of The Avengers. Daredevil was the first of these series and it made a huge debut on Netflix. People could not stop talking about it and for good reason. It did not have the restrictions the movies and Marvel's only show on TV at the time Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. No, this show felt like something that you would find on HBO or Showtime. It was dark, violent and at times a little heavy. It caught a lot of people off guard and I believe that's what led to its success and the clamoring for a second season. Well only a year later, we got our wish.

Daredevil focuses on Matt Murdock (played by Charlie Cox) who is a blind lawyer who runs a firm Hell's Kitchen, New York with his associates Foggy Nelson and Karen Page. What most people don't know is that during the night Matt takes justice into his own hands as the vigilante known as Daredevil. The first season focused on Matt and his firm trying bringing down the powerful criminal Wilson Fisk a.k.a Kingpin (played by Vincent D'Onfrio). It was a solid first season with great performances and gripping story.

Season 2 sees Matt and his friends dealing with the debut of 2 new characters, both with major significance in the Marvel world. The first of these characters we encounter is Frank Castle, better known as "The Punisher". Castle is an ex-military soldier who comes home from war only to have his wife and kids get murdered by the mafia and is now a ruthless vigilante who hunts down and kills criminals with military precision. He is eventually caught and is put on trial with Murdock's firm being Castle's attorneys and the public split on whether Frank is a hero or a threat. As the show goes on we learn more about Frank and what may have caused his families death. Jon Bernthal does a magnificent job bringing Frank Castle to life. He has the menacing presence of the character and the range to go from compassionate to unhinged in seconds. It's a show stealing performance to say the least.

The next new character is Elektra, Matt's old girlfriend. Her story ark takes up much of the season as Matt is torn between helping her with her quest to find out more about a secret society known as "The Hand" and his firm with the Castle case and for the most part it works fine but it does drag the season down a little. We already have the drama with Castle and now to add Elektra and her drama to the already busy story we have going on with our three main heroes and it reaches a point to where you think stories have been thrown aside. I talked about it a lot in my Batman V. Superman review and while both have that problem, Daredevil pulls it off better. In Batman V. Superman it felt like each scene was that, a scene. We'd see Batman do Batman things and then cut to Superman and his drama. But I've already went into detail about that so why does it work here? Well for one, it's a show, stories can be stretched out farther and secondly the show gives us enough time with each story. It can get overwhelming at times but each story does get its time in the spotlight. I still do not like it when superhero movies have to throw everything at us but the show's pacing gives us the audience enough time to take everything in.

While the show does get bogged down by its many storylines, ultimately Daredevil season 2 builds off of what made its first season great. Hypnotizing action scenes, deep and interesting characters and heavy drama. If your a comic book fan or love the superhero genre, defiantly give this show a watch. And for those who have finished the second season and are looking for other shows to fill the void I recommend Arrow or Jessica Jones. Both carry that same type of tone and feel with Arrow having the more vigilante feel and Jones as a psycho-thriller noir story.

Grade: A

Coming Attractions:The Jungle Book and possibly another think piece. 

Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice Review

When the early reviews came out for Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice came out critics were slamming it, HARD. At the time this post was written the movie has a "rotten" rating of 29% on Rotten Tomatoes, a score lower than Ben Affleck's last venture in the superhero genre Daredevil which sits at 44% (a "rotten" rating). However, it's audience score (at the time this review was written) sits at a positive 73%, a staggering difference to say the least. So what has split critics and audiences? Well lets take a look. (SPOILERS AHEAD!!!)

Batman V. Superman takes place after the events of Man of Steel which saw Superman destroy the city of Metropolis in order to stop General Zod from destroying Earth. A government case is made which puts Superman on trial for his actions. While some view Superman as a hero, other see him as a threat. One of the people who sees the man of steel as a threat is Bruce Wayne, who witnesses first hand the destruction Superman is capable of and because of what he saw has started a crusade as Batman to bring down Superman. His quest to fight Superman leads him to discover some interesting scientific expeditions led by Lex Luthor, who is also on Superman's watch list. Lex apparently has files on select Metahumans (humans with exceptionable abilities) like Barry Allen (The Flash), Cyborg and Aquaman. One person looking for those files is Diana Prince a.k.a Wonder Woman. Lex has also been medaling around with Kryptonian technology to bring about the end of Superman. Lex has discovered that Wayne knows about his experiments and kidnaps Superman's mother to blackmail Superman to kill Batman, all while preparing the creation of Doomsday (A being that can kill Superman).

So yeah that's a lot to take in during one sitting. It feels like there are 3 different movies taking place. One theory I'm floating around is that the movie's director Zack Snyder wanted to make an adaptation of the Batman story The Dark Knight Returns but the studio wanted the movie to bring about the creation of the Justice League. These two stories that do not work well with one another are jammed into the movie in an attempt to set up an "extended universe" as DC and Warner Brothers call it and let me tell you it shows, badly. On the one hand, there is this excellent recreation of The Dark Knight Returns that is bogged down by sloppily shoe-horning in Justice League set up because the studio said so. It's only an opinion but it does have some credential to it.

The story telling in this movie is atrocious. One moment we're with Superman as he saves Lois Lane from terrorists, then we go to Batman waging war on Superman, then we cut to Lex Luthor being evil, and so on and so forth. There is no seeable thread tying these stories together. It feels like a scene happens and then we  move on to another scene. It's messy storytelling if I've ever seen it. With so much story being thrown at the audience in such a messy way, they have no idea how to react to it. I saw this movie in the same theater I saw Force Awakens when it opened and compared to Star Wars, this audience was dead. Whenever something epic like Wonder Woman's appearance happened, I only heard a few people silently cheering. In Force Awakens, when a character like Han Solo showed up the audience went nuts. It shows that throwing everything story wise at your audience is not a good idea. It didn't work with Spiderman 3, The Amazing Spiderman 2, and Daredevil season 2 but will get to that in due time. Bottom line: Don't give us 3 stories in one movie.

But enough negativity, lets focus on some positives. Ben Affleck is great as Batman showing once again that the internet shouldn't over react to casting choices. In fact, most of the cast does a great job with their characters. Your mileage may vary on Jesse Eisenberg's Lex Luthor though. I could see him being the son of a Kevin Spacey/Frank Underwood style Lex Luthor but his spastic and annoying attitude can ware on a man quickly. Back to positive stuff, the visuals in this movie are spectacular. Zack Snyder's bread and butter is his visuals and no where does he shine better than with comic book movies. You feel like the pages from a comic are leaping out on to the screen. Anything having to do with Batman is the highlight of the movie which got me to wonder if Zack Snyder wanted to make a Dark Knight Returns movie.

Sadly, that is not what we got. We got an over 2 hour mess of a movie with glaring problems overshadowed by certain positive aspects. All in all, Batman V. Superman is a failure for DC comics and Warner Bros. as not only has this movie further divided the fan base but it might have turned people off to the DC movie universe entirely. If the rest of DC's films mirror this one, expect groans every time the DC comics logo appears at the beginning of the trailer. The studio should take a step back and look at Marvel's universe. Giving us bits and pieces of other events in movies based around one of many major characters instead of trying to put as much into one movie as possible. Is it a 29%  worthy movie? For me, no, it was entertaining enough to feel like a quick sit and some positives over shadow the negatives. It's on par with Man of Steel, a sentence the studio wanted to avoid as much as possible given the reaction to that film but sadly these two films having glaring problems. If you are curious about seeing it I do recommend it but if you hated Man of Steel I say avoid this movie.

Grade: C-

Looking Back: Man of Steel

After the succe of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, DC comics decided to role up their sleeves and start working on their own cinematic universe. While Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice will show the vastness of its world and characters lets not forget that all of this started with the Superman reboot Man of Steel.

Man of Steel is popular for being one of the most polarizing movies for comic book fans. It gives audience a new look on Superman but at the same time it betrays some the classic tropes that fans of the character admire. I found the movie to be too long, trying to hard to be like The Dark Knight, too much obvious Jesus symbolism and having blatantly obvious product placement. I did enjoy Henry Cavill as Superman and the idea of Superman being a polarizing figure. I find it to be mirroring how our society would react. He's a hero but some wonder what if he decides that Earth is not worth it. Dawn of Justice, hopefully, will dive deep into what it means to be a hero and a defender of Earth.

Man of Steel is an origin story and basically combines the story of the first two Superman movies that starred Christopher Reeve. A child by the name of Kal-El is sent away from his dying world of Krypton and ends up on Earth where he is found and raised by Jonathan and Martha Kent. The child, now going by the name of Clark Kent, grows up learning to control his special abilities and tries to figure out where he belongs in the world. But when Earth is invaded by Kryptonian forces that were banished from the planet before its destruction, it's up to Clark to stop them and save Earth.

During the battle, much of the major city Metropolis is destroyed. And someone who witnessed this destruction first hand was Bruce Wayne, a.k.a. Batman. Wayne's witness to the destruction caused by Superman will be the reason to why he will be fighting Superman in Dawn of Justice, which is a sequel to Man of Steel.

The dark tone that was criticized seems to be amped up for Superman's battle with the Dark Knight of Gotham. This works for me as director Zack Snyder stated that a lot of the movie would be borrowing from comic book artist and storyteller Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, a story that focused on an old Bruce Wayne coming out of retirement to be Batman one more time and in the process has a battle with Superman. The big difference is that the movie is seeting up the creation of The Justice League and the DC universe, a lot to do in one movie. It's no doubt obvious that DC is playing catch up with Marvel and their cinematic universe. Unfortunately, they are about 8 years late to the party. Batman V. Superman has to build a universe in one movie, a task that took many years for Marvel to do.

Man of Steel is not one of the worst comic book movies to come out but its not one of the best either. Like I said previously it had its faults but it had some good stuff in it. Like it or hate it, it's up to you. It will be interesting to see how the reaction to DC's other films compare to this one, especially ones like The Flash which will in no way will be tied to the popular CW series of the same name and character. And lets not forget Marvel and their stacked line up. Only time will tell if DC and its Extended Universe will be something to look forward to or something to dread.