Yeah...About Spider-Man Joining The MCU

If I may quote John C. Reilly in Guardians of The Galaxy, "This may not be the best idea…"

There was a time when Spider-Man was one of the most popular superhero characters brought to film. Back then though, we had nowhere near as many superhero film franchises on the screen that we do now. Back then, we probably only had Spider-Man, Superman, and Batman with a few failed attempts at The Hulk and Fantastic Four scattered in between.

Let's focus on the mid-to-late 2000's. In 2005, Christopher Nolan began his Batman series with Batman Begins, but the world had yet to see how much this series would shake up the system. They would have to wait until 2008 for that, with the very successful sequel The Dark Knight.

In 2006, Superman made a mediocre to return to the screen with Superman Returns. The film failed to get the franchise going again, and fans would have to wait until 2013 for sadly another mediocre, successful reboot of the character in the form of Man of Steel. 

Then in 2007, came Spider-Man 3, making the web-slinger the first of the three to complete a…ahem, successful, trilogy of films at the time (By the way, we're ignoring the Christopher Reeve Superman films, and any pre-Nolan Batman right now).

Now we all know what became of Spider-Man 3, and frankly all of Sam Raimi's original trilogy hasn't aged too well. So while the world would wait for a Spider-Man 4 (and never get it), Superman would return to film-development purgatory, and Batman would continue to soar under the direction of Nolan.

The very same year The Dark Knight came out, Robert Downey Jr. walked up to a podium and said "I am Iron Man", and something truly special began. Of course I'm referring to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. A franchise of films produced by Marvel Studios themselves. These films soon gained a huge fan base, and gave heroes like Iron Man, Captain America, and Thor who weren't well known by the general public, a chance to shine.

After Phase One of the MCU came to a ground-breaking conclusion with The Avengers, the franchise continued to grow. Phase Two would give Iron Man, Capt, and Thor more to do, while taking a gamble with Guardians of The Galaxy. A gamble that turned into one of the most successful films of the year. Marvel was at a point where it seemed like they could do no wrong. The MCU is poised to raise the bar again this summer with Avengers: Age of Ultron, and end Phase Two with an introduction to another lesser known hero in Ant Man.

"Okay what about Spider-Man?" you ask? Well, in 2012 the franchise was rebooted with The Amazing Spider-Man. I myself have often heard mixed reactions to the film, but personally I find it better than the entirety of Sam Raimi's trilogy. Last year, its sequel was released. You'll remember I gave my own review of it, but the general consensus was The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was no good.

Sony Pictures began trying to fix their mistakes. The Amazing Spider-Man 3 was thrown into limbo, and the Sinister Six spinoff was pushed up a year. There was talk of another spinoff featuring all of Spidey's lady friends (Black Cat, Spiderwoman..), and another spinoff about…Aunt May??

Meanwhile, Marvel Studios showed their hand, and revealed the entirety of Phase Three. All of it. A third film for Captain America and Thor. Introductions to more lesser knowns like Doctor Strange, Captain Marvel, and Black Panther. And a culmination of everything that has come before, with a two-part event, Avengers: Infinity War. The world went nuts, while a certain Spider-Man, a character that was once one of the most popular superheroes out there, was taking a backseat to the likes of Rocket Raccoon and Hawkeye, and becoming as big a joke as a George Clooney Batman.

It was clear, Kevin Feige and Marvel were very confident in this plan that had been laid out, and couldn't wait any longer to reveal it to their fans. One has to imagine a plan like this had been years in the making, and carefully thought out.

(Alright. History lesson over.)

Then, a few days ago, what was only a pipe-dream for many fans became a reality. Sony agreed to play nice with Marvel, and Spider-Man was announced to be joining the MCU. After the initial shock, and letting more information get released, I've decided to voice my thoughts on all of this.

First off, I don't have a problem with Spider-Man joining the MCU. I want to make that clear. He's one of Marvel's most popular characters and he deserves to be back home, and under their supervision. My problem is how they're bringing him in. A new Spider-Man solo film has been announced for July 2017. The hardcore-nerds will remember that is when Thor: Ragnarok was supposed to come out. As a circumstance of the new Spider-Man film, the back two-thirds of Phase Three have been shuffled around.

Here's Phase Three pre-Spidey:

• Captain America: Civil War
• Doctor Strange
• Guardians of The Galaxy 2
• Thor: Ragnarok
• Black Panther
• Avengers: Infinity War Part 1
• Captain Marvel
• Inhumans
• Avengers: Infinity War Part 2

and here's Phase Three with Spidey:

• Captain America: Civil War
• Doctor Strange
• Guardians of The Galaxy 2
• New Spider-Man Film
• Thor: Ragnarok
• Avengers: Infinity War Part 1
• Black Panther
• Captain Marvel
• Avengers: Infinity War Part 2
• Inhumans

I've spared the release dates, but as you can see, everything after Guardians 2, with the exception of Infinity War Part 1 and 2, has been pushed back a slot to make room for Spider-Man. This seems really confusing. Why was everything pushed back but Infinity War? The supposed grand crescendo of the MCU (Assuming whatever Phase Four is, if it even is). Black Panther, which was our last film before Infinity War began is now sandwiched between the two parts, and Inhumans has gone from being in-between the Infinity War's to now becoming the official(?) end to Phase Three, much like how Ant-Man  and Age of Ultron swapped spots in Phase Two.

So my question is, do Panther, Marvel, and Inhumans really have that little effect on Infinity War? I can't imagine so, except with maybe Inhumans. I see that one being like Guardians, off doing its own thing while The Avengers take care of everything on the other side of the universe. Safe money is on all of these characters getting in on the action in The Infinity Wars, just how and when has changed.

Now while I'm sure they already have a storyline/timeline planned for Phase Three, I think it's safe to say scripts for all of these films are still being written (or re-written if Spider-Man's really changing things up). Will what they had in mind for Captain Marvel or Black Panther back in October be completely different to what we'll see in a few years? Most likely. Was this plan for Phase Three not as concrete as originally perceived? Perhaps.

Ask for Spider-Man himself, well he will no longer be played by Andrew Garfield, which is sad. Garfield was a perfect Peter Parker, and unfortunately fell victim to a bad script and studio direction with The Amazing Spider-Man 2. It almost feels like unjust punishment to the poor guy, who was such a huge fan that he dressed up as Spider-Man at Comic Con many years ago, at The Amazing Spider-Man's panel. Reports say they're recasting someone younger, and looking to bring Spider-Man back into his high school days. One can deduce from that the continuity of The Amazing Spider-Man 1 & 2 is being thrown out the window. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 wasn't flat-out terrible. It had its moments, and part of me wishes Sony would finish what they started, but que sera.

So where's the beef? Well, look at it like this. Imagine every year at Thanksgiving dinner, your cousin, let's call him Marvin, got the best seat and say grace. Then he went to go work in some other country, and so gradually you took his seat at the table, and you got the honor of saying grace. Then wham. One Thanksgiving, Marvin finally comes home, and you know what? He took back his seat, and is saying grace. The seat and privilege you earned after he just went and left it, and he just took it back. You're a punk Marvin…anyway…

That's kind of what bringing Spider-Man into the MCU is feeling like. A lot of fuss is being made over the return of this one character, and everything is being changed for him. Captain America, Thor, even Groot, characters that by all accounts weren't expected to have become this mainstream, and dare I say earn their popularity, seem to be getting the shaft because cool kid Spider-Man's back in town.

Then you have Panther and Captain Marvel, who fans have been demanding to see on film for years, poised to finally get their chance to shine, are now getting put on a back burner for Spider-Man. Black Panther is set to appear in Captain America: Civil War, and supposedly so is Spider-Man, set to make his debut appearance in the MCU. I can't bring up too much issue with this. Spider-Man is a key player in the Civil War storyline in the comics, and Black Panther really wasn't, so we'll be getting a more faithful adaptation. Panther's appearing in Civil War before his solo film, and I'm betting we'll get a glimpse of him in Age of Ultron, so it's not like this character is disappearing into Spider-Man's shadow. Let's just hope he doesn't fall to what I'm going to call now "The Thanos Effect", meaning we'll only see one or two glimpses of him for years until his own film comes out.

But back to the likes of Captain Marvel, which brings me to my final point. If you asked me if I wanted to see another Spider-Man film or a Captain Marvel film…I'd pick Captain Marvel. I honestly think we've seen enough Spider-Man for awhile. If it were up to me, I'd save him for Infinity War, ushering him in as a key player in Phase Four or whatever the MCU becomes once Phase Three ends. I like that Marvel keeps giving us new characters to fall in love with, new heroes to root for. Spider-Man…I think we need a break from him. It's like Batman. Not a few weeks after Nolan's trilogy had ended, rumors of another reboot of The Dark Knight was coming. Now it's pretty much here with Superman Vs Batman: Dawn of Justice next year (A new solo Batman film has yet to be announced). Then there's the show Gotham, but another topic for another day.

I am not a studio executive or Hollywood insider. To self-depreciate for a moment, this is nothing more than the ramblings of a cranky nerd. I'm well aware that everything is still in a stage of "what if". Scripts are probably still being written, actors are probably still being cast, and this deal was probably months in the making. Feige and Marvel probably had this as a Phase Three-Plan B if the deal with Sony ever went through. Call it the result of the North Korean/hacking of Sony awhile back, or the failure of The Amazing Spider-Man 2, but this is now happening. Perhaps Spider-Man joining the MCU will have a barely noticeable change to Phase Three. I mean as of right now, the shifting of Ant-Man appears to have had no effect on Phase Two, so who knows. Only the people at Marvel and Sony know. For now, I remain cautiously optimistic.

One thing that can be certain, is we can expect to see a fresh and superior take on everyone's friendly neighborhood Spider-Man in a few years. Welcome Home, Spidey.

Film Review- "The Interview"

The Interview
Directed by Evan Goldberg & Seth Rogen
Starring James Franco, Seth Rogen, and Randall Park

Unless you've been living under a rock, you already know the story of this film's release. I don't want to spend too much time on the controversy itself, though I feel that film is an art form, art is form of freedom of speech, and the threats against this film was unjust. I mostly want to talk about the film itself though.

At last free of North Korean threats, and having to drive twenty-something miles to the nearest theater showing it, The Interview arrived on Netflix this weekend. After having see this film for myself, I can honestly say this film was not worth all the hullaballoo. If it was a better film, maybe it would have been. Let's begin.

The film focuses on Dave Skylark (Franco), a television talk-show host, who's biggest stories are getting Eminem (playing himself) to come out of the closet, and talking with a goat Matthew McConaughey supposedly had relations with. His producer/best friend Aaron (Rogen), wishes they could do more serious journalism. They get there chance when North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un (Park) reveals he's a big fan of Skylark and grants him an interview. This is when the CIA steps in a recruits the two men to assassinate Kim Jong Un.

The story isn't that bad. It's the usual formula we get out of these Rogen & Goldberg/Apatow & Friends films. Friend A is loving life, Friend B wants a change. Friend A & B have a falling out, then make up in time to save the day. What makes this formula fail here, is that unlike Pineapple Express or This Is The End, the film just isn't that funny.

There were very little times where I actually laughed out loud. Some jokes got a smile or soft chuckle, but most of the time the jokes fall flat. Franco and Rogen are again probably as good as they ever been. Lizzy Caplan as the CIA agent tasked with supervising their mission is delightful. Randall Park gives a pretty good performance as Kim Jong Un.

The characterization of Kim is for the most part, harmless. It's clear this film was never meant to be a piece of propaganda against the North Korean Leader. There are little moments that comment on the actual man and how he leads his country, but for the most part, the film is concerned with saying he's a guy with daddy issues, who loves Katy Perry's music and partying. Because of this, the tone of the shift is slightly unbalanced, teetering between satire and lowbrow comedy.

The hype and controversy around The Interview will definitely overshadow the film itself in the years to come. If this had been a better film, things might have turned out different, and maybe the people who lashed out against it may have had a stronger argument. On the other hand, if they had seen the film before jumping to conclusions, they would have realized that they were really making a fuss over nothing. This is just a ridiculous, lowbrow comedy, that has next to no real laughs, and nothing more.

Top 10 Films of 2014

That I've seen….so far….let's just get this over with.

10. Big Eyes
Directed by Tim Burton
Starring Amy Adams, Christoph Waltz, and Danny Huston

Finally, another great Tim Burton film, and it looks and feels nothing like a Tim Burton film. While the story didn't sound too compelling at first, it's the cast that brings it to new heights. Christoph Waltz is absolutely despicable, in one of his best performances. Amy Adams is as perfect as ever. It pains me that neither of them have received Oscar nominations this year. Nevertheless, Big Eyes is a wonderful little film led by two wonderful actors.

9. Dawn of The Planet of The Apes
Directed by Matt Reeves
Starring Andy Serkis, Jason Clarke, and Toby Kebbell

A sequel that both surpasses its predecessor, and at that same time, stands well enough on its own. The rare summer blockbuster that's also thought-provoking. For a film with little to no dialogue, its heavy on drama and emotion. The action in the film is fantastic. Of course, Andy Serkis's motion-capture performance as Caesar is again the tour de force. He, alongside Toby Kebbell as Koba give unforgettable performances. One slight fallback, is the human characters and side of the story fall short. Nevertheless, Dawn remains one of the strongest films out of 2014's summer box office.

8. X-Men: Days of Future Past
Directed by Bryan Singer
Starring Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy, and Michael Fassbender

I love the Marvel films, specifically the Marvel Cinematic Universe films. The Spider-Man films, don't get me started. The X-Men films, I've never been a huge fan of. Then First Class came along, and they had my attention. Then The Wolverine, and I found it pretty entertaining. Now we have Days of Future Past. This was the first X-Men film to geninuenly blow me away. It takes the strongest elements from both the old and new films, including a remarkably strong cast. Funny, action-packed, and emotionally gripping, I'll go so far as to say Days of Future Past is one of the best superhero films ever made. The X-Men films have won me over.

7. Foxcatcher
Directed by Bennett Miller
Starring Steve Carell, Channing Tatum, and Mark Ruffalo

This is a unique film. Throughout the entire thing, I felt very awkward and uncomfortable. The whole tone of it is very unsettling, like waiting for a two and a half-hour time bomb to go off. Yet I could not look away. Foxcatcher is a gripping thriller, and all the credit goes to the three men leading this film. Carell is unreal. It's a complete transformation for him. Tatum is incredible, and Ruffalo is the rock the other two characters both lean on and clash against. It does stink that only Carell and Ruffalo got nominated (Not happy about this year's Oscar nomination by the way), but no doubt this film is a high point in the career of all three actors. Foxcatcher is an intense, gripping film.


6. Into The Woods
Directed by Rob Marshall
Starring Meryl Streep, Emily Blunt, and James Corden

In a world where updating/twisting/remaking fairy tales has become a regular trend in film and television, Into The Woods is one of the strongest efforts in the category. Probably because the Stephen Sondheim musical it's based off of was around before the whole trend became a quickly tiring effort. The songs are memorable, wonderful, and will stick in your head for days. The ensemble cast is incredible, personal favorites being Emily Blunt as The Baker's Wife, Anna Kendrick as Cinderella, and Chris Pine as Cinderella's Prince. While the film does start out slow as we jump through each character's story, once they all start to intertwine and interact, that's when things start getting good. Into The Woods is a very entertaining film that the whole family can enjoy.


5. The Lego Movie
Directed by Phil Lord & Chris Miller
Starring Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Morgan Freeman, and Will Ferrell

Lord and Miller have done it again. After Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs and Jump Street, they've taken an idea that probably shouldn't have worked, and made it work. Incredibly I might add. Originally I wasn't thrilled, but in repeat viewings I fell in love. Of all the animated films I've seen, this is one of the best voice casts ever assembled. Chris Pratt as Emmett, Alison Brie as UniKitty, Will Arnett as Batman, I could go on and on. The animation is incredible, you would have no idea it was CGI and not stop-motion. Then at the end of it all, is a touching message that can resonate with any viewer. "Everything is Awesome" with The Lego Movie…including that song.
Also again, Oscars, what the heck? No Best Animated Feature nomination??

Original Review: http://flahertysfilmfindings.blogspot.com/2014/02/film-review-lego-movie.html

4. Gone Girl
Directed by David Fincher
Starring Ben Affleck, Rosamund Pike, and Neil Patrick Harris

My God this film. Kudos to the people who edited the trailers and ran the marketing campaign. I can't even go into too much detail about this film without spoiling. All I can really say is there's a huge game changer halfway into the film, and when it happened, simultaneously, my friend and I turned to each other, jaws dropped. This film is edge-of-your-seat, mind-rattling incredible. Rosamund Pike gives one of the best performances of the year, Ben Affleck is once again a strong leading man, and Neil Patrick Harris all but destroys his How I Met Your Mother persona with a positively creepy character.
And for the FOURTH time in this post, I damn this year's Oscars because why did this film not get more nominations?!?

3. Birdman
Directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
Starring Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, and Edward Norton

This film is a ride. A really, really fun ride. As someone who loves the entertainment industry, show business, I couldn't help but enjoy this film. The story of Riggan Thomson is one surely anyone in the business can relate to, and Michael Keaton is absolutely perfect casting. Emma Stone gives a compelling performance as Riggan's daughter, and Edward Norton has some great moments as an actor cast alongside Riggan in his play. The way this film is shot is remarkable. I could barely tell when the camera cut between shots. It's appropriately filmed like a play, and that feeling resonates with the whole film. Birdman is a wonderfully crafted film, led by a career-defining performance by Keaton.

2. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
Directed by Anthony & Joe Russo
Starring Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Samuel L. Jackson, and Robert Redford

I originally said this one of the best films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and I still stand by it. It ups the ante from Captain America: The First Avenger, from The Avengers, and for the entire franchise. It's  like a gift to Marvel fans. Heavy on drama, action, and plenty of Easter eggs for the fans to hunt for. The film displays some of the best performances from Marvel's usual players. This film is a complete game-changer for the MCU. Sophisticated and packed with non-stop thrills, Winter Soldier is one of the best films of the year.

Original Review: http://flahertysfilmfindings.blogspot.com/2014/04/film-review-captain-america-winter.html

1. Guardians of The Galaxy
Directed by James Gunn
Starring Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, and Bradley Cooper

Back in 2012 when I heard this film was being made, I thought Marvel was heading for a disaster. A talking raccoon and a talking tree? A film heavily set in space? I mean we all saw Green Lantern. How wrong were my suspicions. This has quickly become another one of the best MCU films, my favorite film of the year, and one of my all-time favorite films. This cast is so diverse in terms of where all these actors come from, but they work together so well. Each is given the proper amount of time to shine. This has been quite the year for Pratt, between this and The Lego Movie. You can't help but love all these characters. The action in this film is as good here as it is in any other Marvel film. The soundtrack is fantastic. The jokes, gags, and one-liners are hilarious. Most importantly, the film has a huge heart. Who would have expected that from a film with a talking raccoon and tree? I understand that the "group of ragtag losers joining together to save the world" storyline isn't the most original, but it's all these other elements that bring Guardians to spectacular heights. This is my top film of 2014.

We Are Groot.

PS: 2015 New Years Resolution: Write More.

Film Review- "How To Train Your Dragon 2"

How To Train Your Dragon 2
Directed by Dean DeBlois
Starring Jay Baruchel, Cate Blanchett, Gerard Butler, and America Ferrera

It may not mean much for me to say How To Train Your Dragon 2 is one of the best animated sequels ever made. The likes of Disney direct-to-video aside (Not quite done talking about those by the way), many are quickly pumped out of a studio for a cash grab, and are often a significant downgrade in quality compared to their predecessors.

Regardless, I still say How To Train Your Dragon 2 is one of the best. If I had to list the top 3, it would definitely go Toy Story 3 and 2, and then Dragon 2.

Set a few years after the first film, the village of Berk has fully accepted dragons into the community. While many vikings enjoy the sport of dragon racing, Hiccup (Baruchel) and his dragon Toothless are out exploring the world outside their island. Hiccup's father Stoick (Butler) is eager for his son to take over his place as chief, but Hiccup would much rather be out with Toothless.

It's while out on one of these explorations that he and his girlfriend Astrid (Ferrara) are ambushed by a gang of dragon hunters, led by the dragon trapper Eret (Kit Harrington). They soon learn of Eret's employer, Drago Bloodfist (Djiimon Hounsou), and his plans to take over the land with an army of dragons. Hiccup and Toothless set out to confront Drago. It is then they uncover a secret dragon oasis, protected by Valka (Cate Blanchett) who is revealed to be Hiccup's long-lost mother. I'm not spoiling that by the way. They haven't made any effort to hide it in the trailers.

Dragon 2 goes bigger in emotion and action, and the animation is once again spectacular. You'll be on the edge of your seat, while at the same time reaching for some tissues. The story isn't too heavy, and it continues the "coming-of-age" tale that began in the first film. It's the characters that really drive the script. They're well-crafted and performed. This is one of the best voice casts I've ever seen in an animated film. Props to Jay Baruchel and Gerard Butler for being as incredible in their roles as they were the first time around. Once again Craig Ferguson as Gobber is one of the funniest things in the film.

One thing brings the film down though, and that's its villains. Eret is a very annoying character. Maybe it's Kit Harrington's voice, maybe it's how he was written, but I didn't like him nor did I see any real purpose for him in the film. Drago, is a weak villain. While he does do some horrible things that make you hate him, we learn virtually nothing about him. There's a few lines of expository dialogue in a scene with Hiccup, but it's not enough for the audience to connect with the character.

Weak villains aside, I still give How To Train Your Dragon 2 a 9 out of 10. It's a more than worthy successor to the original, and builds wonderfully off the foundations it set. It is definitely one of the best animated sequels ever made, and maybe even one of the best sequels ever made, in general.

Film Review- "A Million Ways To Die In The West"

A Million Ways To Die In The West
Directed By Seth MacFarlane
Starring Seth MacFarlane, Charlize Theron, Liam Neeson, and Neil Patrick Harris

I guess you could say in the debate of wether to like or dislike Seth MacFarlane, I lean more towards like. I lost interest in Family Guy a long time ago, although I do enjoy the older episodes. Ted is one of my favorite films, I thought his album "Music Is Better Than Words" was good, and I know I'm in the minority when I say I thought he was good hosting the Oscars.

However, I know that MacFarlane can do as much bad as he does good. I'm looking at you The Cleveland Show, American Dad, and short-lived Fox sitcoms Dads and The Winner. After the success of Ted, combined with my love for Blazing Saddles (The original western-comedy), I had high hopes for his next feature film, A Million Ways To Die In The West.

It goes without being said, but A Million Ways is no Blazing Saddles.

The film centers around Albert (MacFarlane), a sheep farmer in the old west. After chickening out on a gunfight, his girlfriend (Amanda Seyfried) leaves him for mustache aficionado Foy (Harris). Shortly afterwards, the wife of an outlaw (Theron) comes to town. She takes a shine to Albert, decides to teach him how to shoot, and hopefully win his girl back. Of course they start to fall for one another, which of course is a problem, seeing is how Anna's husband, outlaw Clinch Leatherwood (Neeson), is on his way to town.

It's a unique enough story for the western setting, but what about the comedy? Where Ted was  charming, outrageous and crude, A Million Ways is outrageous and crude, sans charm. A lot of the jokes seem like they were scrapped from an episode of Family Guy. There is plenty to laugh at, but I found throughout the film I was chuckling and smiling to myself, more than laughing out loud.

At some points, MacFarlane is definitely at his crudest. I never thought I'd see a Neil Patrick Harris take a dump in a hat, or a sheep's penis in a film, but there it is. That's not a spoiler by the way, no, that's a warning. Speaking of spoilers, while one great cameo was given away in the trailers, there a few more that are just fantastic.

This is an impressive cast as you can probably tell. The big problem is they aren't really given the chance to exercise their funny bones. Most of the comedy is given to MacFarlane, who as a leading man, is just okay. Charlize Theron get some laughs. Sarah Silverman and Giovanni Ribisi get their fair share of the comedy, but others like Neil Patrick Harris, Liam Neeson, and Amanda Seyfried are criminally underused.

A Million Ways To Die In The West is not Seth MacFarlane's best, but it's also not his worst. The good outweighs the bad, and you'll definitely laugh. But the cast isn't giving the performance you'd hope they would, and the script isn't as well polished as Ted was. If you see it once, that's probably enough. If you don't see it all, no big deal.

Film Review- "Maleficent"

Maleficent
Directed by Robert Stromberg
Starring Angelina Jolie, Elle Fanning, and Sharlto Copley

There are villains, and then there are Disney villains. A delicious gallery of rogues that have stood the test of time and become some of cinema's most captivating antagonists. Quite possibly the most popular of all Disney villains is Maleficent, from the animated masterpiece Sleeping Beauty. Logically, if one were to make a film based around a Disney villain, Maleficent would be a wise choice. She's an iconic villainess. The self-proclaimed mistress of all evil.

Unfortunately, in Walt Disney Pictures' Maleficent, the mistress of all evil is nowhere to be found amidst this frustrating mess of a film.

The film begins by telling us Maleficent's previously unknown origins. As a young fairy living in the mystical land of the moors, alongside a population of CGI rejects from The Lord of The Rings and the Neo-Pets, she meets an orphan boy named Stefan. The two grow closer and closer over the years, and eventually fall in love.

Time passes, and as Stefan (Copley) grows he distances himself from Maleficent (Jolie). He works his way up to becoming a trusted knight of the king, who is ought to destroy Maleficent and the moors, fearing her power. After a rough battle, the king declares whoever can kill Maleficent, shall be his successor to the throne.

Stefan returns to the moors, and although he doesn't kill Maleficent, he does drug her and cut off her wings. He presents the wings to the king (claiming Maleficent is dead), and the king appoints him the new king. This all sends Maleficent down the dark path that transforms her into the villain we all know…or at least thought we knew, as this film claims…horribly.

Right after this point is where the film progresses into its own twisted version of the original Sleeping Beauty narrative, and into a downward spiral. This is not the Maleficent old fans have come to expect, and the filmmakers completely ignore what made the character great, and what drew audiences into the theater into the first place. Because of this, as they try to make Maleficent out to be this "misunderstood" character, they in turn tare down what the original Sleeping Beauty established.

The original characters you know and love aren't in this film. If you're a fan of Sleeping Beauty, then you'll be rolling your eyes, groaning, and even tempted to leave the theater at every change in the story. Even the littlest changes that make no sense. Why only change the three fairies names when everyone else keeps their names? Why make the green one the idiot and the blue one ditzy and sensible one when it was the other way around? Why??

Everything in Sleeping Beauty is brought down, to build Maleficent up into this hero character. She's not plotting to find and get Aurora. She's…getting to know her and watching over her? What?? I'd love to list all this film's sins, but I respect the sanctity of spoilers. But this film is afraid to make Maleficent the real villain she is. The best example that come to mind right now is The Lorax, where The Onceler is made not the greedy business man from the book, but the Lorax's conflicted "bro". Ugh. Let the villains be villains!

Maleficent is a perfect example of a film that goes for style over substance. The visuals are nice but the script isn't strong enough to justify them. The script is underdeveloped, which is a shame considering it's written by Linda Woolverton. I mean this is the woman who wrote Beauty & The Beast and The Lion King! Tim Burton's Alice In Wonderland too but…come on! Again, the first act is the strongest, and builds up a lot of wasted potential in a rush to get to the "meat" of the film. We barely get to touch on Maleficent and Stefan's relationship so we really don't have time to get caught up in their conflict.

The effects are nice and the world they create in the moors is pretty enough, but essentially they're just trying to do what every fantasy film since Avatar  has done. Imitate Avatar's effects. I already mentioned The Lord of The Rings and Neo-Pet rejects (Seriously what are they doing in this film??).

However, amidst all this, are instances of a good film trying to get out. The saving grace of it all is of course Angelina Jolie. She is Maleficent, and gives a great performance. Even when she's not playing the Maleficent we know, she still gives an emotional, compelling character. I must say, despite this film's flaws, the recreation of the scene where Maleficent crashes Aurora's christening and curses her as a baby is great. Jolie's performance, supported by the practical and visual effects, make it like the scene from the original has literally come to life.

Elle Fanning is good but not great as Aurora. Sharlto Copley almost looks like a real-life version of the animated King Stefan, and he works in the role. Sam Riley, who will forever be known now as Discount Orlando Bloom, plays Dival, this film's version of Maleficent's raven, here her shape-shifting servant. He's alright, and the adaptation of the character is creative, but he also pulls in my opinion the biggest middle finger of all (You'll have to watch and see).

Prince Phillip is nothing but a footnote here, and played by who looks to be a lost member of One Direction that missed his tour bus. I've heard the three fairies in Sleeping Beauty be called annoying before. Well wait til' you see them here.

Starting out with a strong and compelling first act, Maleficent soon degrades itself into a film that's difficult to watch, despite a wonderful performance from its lead actress. If you're not a fan of Sleeping Beauty, or willing to ignore its existence for two hours, maybe it's a better film for you. Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that it's underwritten, over-stylized, and ignorant to its own source material. That last part being the biggest offense of all, considering the original was made by the same studio. I can only hope parents of younger children will show their children Sleeping Beauty, and not just Maleficent. That way they can see what true evil looks like.

Disney Sequel Showdown- "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II"

Disney Sequel Showdown: Round #2
*Spoilers included in this review*

The Hunchback of Notre Dame II
Directed by Bradley Raymond
Starring Tom Hulce, Jennifer Love Hewitt, and Haley Joel Osment

Remember how I said maybe part of the reason Pocahontas II was made was to give Pocahontas the standard Disney-ending, complete with handsome prince-type character? Well, The Hunchback of Note Dame II  was DEFINITELY made to give Quasimodo the standard Disney-ending, complete with beautiful princess-type character.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame definitely doesn't get the credit it deserves, and has always been overshadowed by more popular films from the Disney Renaissance period, like The Lion King and Beauty & The Beast. It's a great animated film, and one of my favorites. It's sequel, not so much.

Quasimodo (Hulce) has been fully accepted and integrated into Parisian society. The Festival D'Amour (Festival of Love) is approaching, and Quasimodo wonders if there's someone out there to love him. A circus comes to town, led by a wicked conman named Sarousch (Michael McKean). He's out to steal a famous, jewel-crested belle named La Fiedele from Notre Dame. He sends his assistant Madeline (Hewitt) to case the joint. She runs into Quasimodo, they hit off, but she is frightened by his appearance. Personally, I don't know what her deal is. Especially when this little…guy, was hanging around her boss the entire time:

Where is his eyes?!?

Anyway, you can pretty much guess where the story goes from there. Slowly but surely, she starts to fall for him, but she still has her ties to Sarousch and his plot, eventually she'll be exposed, they'll have a fall-out, then they'll make up, typical romantic-comedy bull.

Let's discuss this whole "Quasi gets the girl" angle for a bit. I understand maybe audiences were upset Quasimodo and Esmerelda didn't get together in the first film. It's one of the ways the film stays true to the Victor Hugo novel (For those of you that don't know, the original novel is far more darker than the Disney adaptation, so obviously there were a few liberties taken). You could say, "Well if they changed so much from the book, why couldn't Quasi get the girl too?" Well to that I say, why not?

Stepping away from the book, let's look at the Quasimodo we're presented with in Hunchback. This isn't a character desperate for love. This is a character who wants to get out of his home/prison and explore the world. By the end of the film not only does he accomplish this, he discovers, as an old trailer for the film states, "the magic within himself".

Story-wise, it's not a huge deal for this guy to find a girl. Sure, it's nice to see him find one, and it's nice of Hunchback II to give its younger audience the message that there's someone out there for everyone. Well, Disney did another, much better film, that carried that same message…called Beauty & The Beast. 

Wanting to give Quasimodo a girlfriend isn't a good enough reason for this film to exist, and the whole "steal the bell" subplot doesn't do much to buffen up this scrawny script. The film barely hits the one-hour mark. Not to mention the film does a lot of treading on what Hunchback did. Quasimodo goes through another "I'm not good enough" episode and it hurts to watch. Gypsies/circus/street performers, which were fighting unjust persecution in Hunchback, are bad guys here. Then on the flip side of that is Pheobus, who was intelligent and non-prejudice, is now dense and suspicious of these people.

The animation is simply not good. It pales in comparison to that of Hunchback's. There are moments where they try to recreate shots from the first film, and it just doesn't work. Quasimodo, who was drawn rough on the edges but easy on the eyes, does not look good at all here. At some points he resembles a melting Peter Griffin, but maybe that's too harsh. The songs fail to reach the emotional heights of the ones from Hunchback, but "Ordinary Miracle" is a nice little number. Sarousch is not a compelling villain, and unworthy to hold Frollo's giant hat. In fact, it's a little weird how much he fawns over himself in the film…

But…there is some good in this film. All the returning cast members do a good job, and you can tell they still care about these characters. More importantly, you still root for Quasimodo and connect to him, and I think a lot of that is due to his voice actor Tom Hulce. You do want to see him get the girl. Jennifer Love Hewitt does fairly well as Madeline, and while her and Quasi's "flirting" does get kind of annoying, you still want to see them get together. One more bad note,  Haley Joel Osment as Pheobus and Esmerelda's son Zephyr is the most annoying thing ever. That is all.

Hunchback of Notre Dame II doesn't do enough to justify its existence. If this were an hour-long series finale to a Hunchback of Notre Dame animated series (Thank God there was never one of those), maybe audiences could have passed better judgement. But it's not, it's a direct-to-video sequel with weak animation and a weak script, to an animated masterpiece.

I haven't seen every Disney sequel, believe it or not, and I'm sure there are worse ones out there (I hear Fox & The Hound 2 is a midquel about Todd and Copper joining a band. Ugh.) If I took the time to watch them all, and do a "Top 10 Worst Disney Sequels",  I honestly think this one would end up lower on the list. Unfortunately, that's still not enough for me to recommend a viewing of it.

Oh, one more thing…

It escaped imprisonment?!?!? Five buck says if there was to be a Hunchback 3, that little Gollum wannabe was going to be the villain….*shudders*