Suicide Squad August 5, 2016

"Yeah I am bothered about it, I think it sucks, obviously we worked hard and tried to give the fans what they wanted," Jay Hernandez - a.k.a. Diablo - tells Digital Spy. "It's weird that some of the criticism I heard was that it was 'too much like a comic book', in terms of you have these characters being objectified like Harley Quinn, there are just certain elements that are just part of being a comic book. If you're trying to portray that on a film, you have to stay true to that, because if you don't, the fans of the comics are going to be offended." He then went on to say that the critics can kiss his ass.

I feel Jay’s frustration with critics. I sure don’t like it when people get on me about my poetry, my acting, my art. I spend lots of time developing my skills for whichever artistic medium I’m working in and I’d like my endeavors to be appreciated and NOT bashed by some damn, dumb-ass critic who doesn’t know a damn thing about my chosen art form!

However,

There are a few points that Hernandez makes in his rant that might be the reasons why critics and fans aren’t “appreciating” this particular film.

1.  “. . . obviously we worked hard and tried to give the fans what they wanted . . .” well, there’s your first mistake. You can’t tell exactly what your audience wants because they don’t know, and there aren’t enough surveys, polls and pie charts in the universe that can tell you, “THIS is what the audience wants.”  Suicide Squad is chucked full of scenes we’ve already seen in other movies. Helicopter crashes, Katana sword fights and heroes in a battle for life against an army that out numbers them twenty (or more) to one— And while I’m thinking about it, what the hell is up with these omnipotent beings that create wimpy-ass armies to fight their battles? Enchantress is an all-powerful being, why she create a Burnt Marshmallow Army that Deadshot wipes out in seconds is a mystery to me! Okay, admittedly, the scene were Deadshot goes all John Wick on the BMA is really cool. However, the lead up to it was simply the same old same old.

2.  “. . . If you're trying to portray that (comic books) on a film, you have to stay true to that, because if you don't, the fans of the comics are going to be offended.” Listen, Fanboys/girls are going to be offended no matter what you put up on screen because you are messing with something dear to them. And—

Oops! Sorry. Anyway, the movie does have a lot of problems mainly due to trying to be too much “exactly” like the comic in structure. Your movie can’t be the comic book because  . . . IT’S a MOVIE! It’s a different medium. What works on the page does not necessarily work on screen. Granted, there are a lot of movies that have no respect for the original material and create a disrespectful mess by trying NOT to be the original, written material. But there are also many successful filmed versions of novels, comic books that are able to keep the spirit of the original piece of art and create something new and different. The Walking Dead TV show has even added at least one character, Daryl Dixon, who doesn’t exist in the original graphic novel. Game of Thrones has a heated battle going on between fans of the books and fans of the HBO series because the TV production varies a lot from the books. But arguably, the TV show is just as good as the original material.

So, Okay. Suicide Squad is pretty much a messed up child because his parents couldn’t decide how do bring him up right. However, what makes me a fan of this “hot mess” is the work of the actors. The characters are fascinating to me. Listen, any movie that has Viola Davis in it can’t be all bad. She is an actor’s actor, and her portrayal of a harder than hard-ass patriot rivals Samuel L.’s Nick Fury. And yeah, we all know that Will Smith loves to “standout” in a scene, but when he does it in this movie it is something special. And yeah, yeah, yeah, his acting in this flick is a lot like all his other movies where he has to play more “streetwise” than he really is, but there’s something special about a psychotic killer, Deadshot, who loves his daughter more than anything. The scene where Deadshot helps her with her geometry homework is . . . Priceless. For me, Margot Robbie’s naughty, sexy, sweetly sociopathic Harley Quinn is masterfully portrayed and— like my opinion or not— Jared Leto’s Joker as a new dimension to this beloved madman in clown white!

So, Suicide Squad isn’t, overall, the best comic book movie ever made but it’s a hell of a lot better (primarily because of the acting) than most critics and fans will admit.

MOVIE GRADE 70% = C-

OVERALL ACTING GRADE 89% = B+

Star Trek Beyond/Ghostbusters August o6, 2o16

"Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before . . ." but not in this movie.

Finally! A Star Trek movie that breaks with the traditional: a script has got to say something about the human condition! Yeah, baby! We ain’t interested in that crap! Let’s just get to the action! No, not just action but action that is filmed so poorly that it’s unwatchable—Seriously, the first battle sequence where the Enterprise is totally destroyed (AGAIN!) had so much shaky cam going on that it made me physically sick—or  so laughable—I mean what the hell was that with the motorcycle and the portable transporter bit? I thought I was watching a Sonic the Hedgehog cartoon— and what the hell is it with alien Kung Fu? How did Jaylah, the beautiful alien scavenger, learn to use fake Chinese martial arts? Did Einstein get it wrong? It’s not time that’s a constant in the universe, it’s badly executed Kung Fu? I’m being a bit too hateful here. I don’t know for a fact that it was “baldy executed” martial arts (or that Einstein actually believed that time was a universal constant)  because it was gorged with shaky cam shots, close ups, a frigging car load of jump cuts and so much clutter that   . . . I COULDN’T SEE IT! What the hell, man? What is it with you guys; can’t you film a descent fight scene? If you don’t have a clue how to shoot fight action, checkout John Wick (2014) or the beautiful crafted Haywire (2011) or if you want learn how to stage a BIG battle sequence, study the Game of Thrones episode: Battle of the Bastards.

So, do I not have anything good to say about this movie? Well, the tribute to Leonard Nimoy was first class. They were able to blend it into the so called “storyline” naturally, and it was the best, best part of the movie. And the bromance scenes between Spock and Bones were really hilarious and . . . NEW RULE . . . Simon Pegg needs to be in every movie . . . no seriously, every movie ever to be made.

Grade: 70% = C-

I know this is supposed to be a review about the movie Ghostbusters and not a critique on social norms and fan behavior, but with the most recent twitter attack directed at Leslie Jones (who portrays Patty Tolan in Ghostbusters) I can’t get on with the review until I’ve had my say. You folk who are shocked, dismayed and angered that anyone would dare remake a far too precious classic like Ghostbusters  . . . get over yourselves. It’s not like they burnt up every copy of the original Ghostbusters and said, “Thou shalt watch no other GBers but the one WE made in 2016!” You can still watch the original anytime you want. Hell, TCM has been showing the original and the sequel at least twice a day all last week.  What difference does it make if we get a remake? Nothing’s lost! The original is still the original. And also, what the hell is all these nastiness about the remake being an all women Ghostbusters? Again . . . so what? “Oh, but it’s so sacrilegious! Only GUYS can ghost bust!” YIKERS! What? Did we time warp back to the fifties? No, my brothers and whichever misguided females may be in this herd of haters, it’s the 21^st century and artists should be able to do whatever they think will work even if it is going against traditional type casting. It’s a new century my pretties, Time you all realized that. That doesn’t mean that you have to like what the studios put out there. No, you can raise artistic questions about the movie based on production quality the acting, the direction, script, etc., just don’t incite the villager to charge Frankenstein’s castle while yelling “KILL THE MONSTER!” when there is no monster to kill. And don’t give actors a hard time; don’t make your attack personal. There are quite a few times in my reviews when I “go off” on actors. But it’s based solely on their acting skill (or lack thereof) and not on what they look like, what gender they are, Their RACE?!  Seriously, are we still talking about RACE?! Okay, I know we are and I know that it is a touchy subject that our bastard American ancestors started way back . . . when they thought enslaving a people was a really cool economic idea. Yes, we still have a racial divide in this country . . . but we shouldn’t have one when it comes to acting because . . . Hamlet, Othello, Blanche Dubois  . . . these are literary characters. They don’t have a race because they are not real people. Actors, no matter what the Chevy commercial says, are real people and we should like them or not like them based on their skills as actors and nothing else. Anyway . . .

Ghostbusters (2016) is an extremely funny movie. I, my sister and the whole audience, (which included a bunch of little kids that really thought the fart humor was quite  . . . hilarious!) were cracking up.  And yes, Okay, I admit, we adults found the fart joke pretty funny also. For me, the funniest scene had the Ghostbusters interviewing the very sexy Kevin, played by Chris Hemsworth, for a receptionist job. The funny part is that Kevin is a total airheaded honey baby that can’t even answer a phone or take a message, but they hire him anyway because he is some sweet eye-candy. Yeah, the GUY is eye-candy! Get it?

The problem with Ghostbusters isn’t that it’s NOT funny because it is. It’s just funny in the wrong way. What? How can that be? Well, this Ghostbusters feels more like a series of unrelated SNL skits stitched together without any thought as to whether they relate to the main storyline, which involves busting ghosts! The movie isn’t titled, “Hey! There Are Not Enough Wonton In My Wonton Soup!” Yeah, the recurring wonton soup bit was funny, but how does it advance the story? For my sensibilities, humor in a movie is funnier when it relates to the story, when it is generated by the main actions of the characters. And speaking of character? Every character in this movie is a funny character. There is no “straight man” to bounce the comedy off of. Nothing is funny if everything, every moment is a punchline to a joke. Also, Ghostbusters lacks even a tiny bit of scary. The main antagonist, the “evil” dude who wants to bring forth a supernatural apocalypse is just way too goofy to be taken seriously.

Overall, it’s not a bad movie; it’s just not inspiring enough to give it more than one watch. And that’s a shame. You have these top of the heap comedians without a well-crafted storyline and funny lines that make no sense within the context of that storyline. So, who you gonna call? Ghost writers!

Grade: 76% = C+

Independence/Warcraft June, 2016

Independence day: Resurgence

To be totally honest with you, dear reader, I really, REALLY loved Independence Day: Resurgence the first time I saw it back in 1996. Yeah, you heard me right. The major problem with the script to Independence Day: Resurgence is that the production company didn’t bother writing a new script; they just used the original script and made a few awkward changes two it. Most of the scenes in this awful “sequel” were burgled from the original script. Yeah, sure, they made a few changes here and there, instead of the “good guys” flying an alien craft to the mother ship, they fly alien enhanced fighter jets to go and . . . piss on mama alien. Yep, flew all that way just to urinate on the alien spacecraft. THEN when aliens get all mad about it and destroy the alien enhanced fighter jets, our spaceship pissers commandeer THREE alien ships and the chase is on just like in the original.

One of the great things about the original was the sense of humor. And of course, this “sequel” has lots and lots of “funny” lines, lines so “funny” that I forgot to laugh. The humor in the original was organic. In Resurgence the jokes are forced onto the script, and most of them have actually nothing to do with the action. There are two characters (I junior fighter pilot and a computer guy of some kind) that appear in the middle of this battle between humans and alien bug-people to tell jokes. No, seriously, they have no reason to even be in this movie other than to come up with some witty little thing to say about what’s going on. And their witty little remarks are “not funny.

Warcraft

As we were leaving the theatre right after watching Warcraft, my friend Khoo said, “Well, the moviemakers had a real problem. They had to please two audiences, the movie goers and the gamers.” That pretty much hit on the head for me. This movie was more video game than it was a thought out movie. Don’t get me wrong, I love playing video games. But just sit and watch a video game it gets uninteresting to watch very fast. The script for Warcraft is bad; it’s just too thin. Feels more like the first draft and not a complete script and lacks detail. And the actors are really not up to the task. Except for Ben Foster, the entire “human” cast just doesn’t have the vocal chops for the period acting style suggested by the dialogue. The only thing of interest in this movie is the CGI and that’s not enough to sustain the audience’s attention.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows June o3, 2016

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows

At ten years old, I was already the biggest horror/sci-fi movie freak I knew! One of my favorite flicks was the original The Fly (1958). It was all about this science guy who invented teleportation in his basement. One day he decides to take the trip from one of the basement teleporters to another teleporter one twenty feet away in the same room. And wouldn’t you know it, a damn fly inadvertently got in the teleporter with him; on their trip they swap some DNA and the scientist winds-up with a fly head and a fly arm! Eeeeew! Definitely scary. That movie stayed with me forever! Well, at least until twenty years later. So, I’m going to college, I’m living with this other drama geek, and guess what? The Fly comes on cable TV. I was so excited. I mean, I hadn’t seen it since that one time back in 1958. I told my roomie about it and he got excited too. We popped off some popcorn, grabbed a few beers, sit down on the couch, started watching The Fly and . . . damn, how disappointing. What an awful movie. I couldn’t understand why even at ten years old I could’ve been so off the mark. The movie wasn’t the horror masterpiece I had thought it was. The special effects were laughable and the acting was atrocious. I couldn’t believe how horrible this beloved movie of my youth turned out to be.

If I had seen Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows when I was ten years old, I might have really liked it. Unfortunately, I didn’t see it as a kid. I watched as an adult in the 21^st century, and let me tell you . . . it was awful. Don’t get me wrong, it was sort of okay. It was put out by Nickelodeon, and it did stay true to the idea of the comic book TMNT image, very flashy, VERY cartoonish, insipid dialogue, scary but not too scary. It was almost refreshing to see a movie that didn’t try to terrorize the audience but tried extremely hard to be funny and “kid friendly.” Yeah, it was almost refreshing but no cigar. I mean, it wasn’t even good sized cigarette butt of a movie.

The biggest problem with this particular movie was the very amateurish CGI. The movements of the Ninja Turtles were way too fast, too blurry to even see what the hell was going on! Yeah, I know what you’re thinking, I’m old and my eyes aren’t what they use to be. Turtle-poo to that, buddy. It was just very bad CGI. From the very first scene where the Turtles free fall from the Chrysler Building, whooping it up as they plummet towards Madison Square Garden (to catch the Nicks), the action just stopped! Yeah, how can that be? Well, basically, you couldn’t see it. The Turtles are moving so fast that they’re just a globular blur! The movements are all mushed together. As I said, it was just really bad CGI. ALL the action scenes were so incoherent I fell asleep. No, seriously, I don’t sleep in movies. But the action sequences in this mess were so tedious and so long and so disconnected and so DAMN blurry, my eyes rebelled! “Screw it! We’re going to sleep.” My head almost beat me to death with its nodding off!

The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it did use the New York City environment really well. There were lots of great shots of the streets, the different areas of New York and the beautiful, iconic buildings and bridges. The opening shots of the skyline were breath taking. This production was able to capture the mystical, mysterious arura of NYC. But that was all it was capable of doing well.

The Nice Guys May 2o, 2o16

Abbott: Strange as it may seem, they give ball players nowadays very peculiar names.

Costello: Funny names?
Abbott: Nicknames, nicknames. Now, on the St. Louis team we have Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know is on third--
Costello: That's what I want to find out. I want you to tell me the names of the fellows on the St.

Louis team.

Abbott: I'm telling you. Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know is on third--
Costello: You know the fellows' names?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: Well, then who's playing first?
Abbott: Yes.
Costello: I mean the fellow's name on first base.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The fellow playin' first base.
Abbott: Who.
Costello: The guy on first base.
Abbott: Who is on first.
Costello: Well, what are you askin' me for?

Who in his proper mind would ever think to blend elements of slapstick comedy, vaudeville and film noir all together into one movie AND then set that movie in the cocaine candy world of 70’s Los Angeles, AND on top of that, I mean, what director/writer with just a cat lick of sense would even imagine casting Russell Crowe and Ryan Gosling as a classic comedy team?! Shane Black, you’re clinically insane.  A genius for sure, but you are totally mental.

The Nice Guys is a brilliant Comedy/Thriller/Action/ Film Noir Detective movie that doesn’t misstep in either script or acting. Seriously, I haven’t seen a 21^st century movie as of yet that can take iconic bits and pieces from popular movies from the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, sew them all together and create something that’s fresh and overall “entertaining.” Yes, I know, you’re checking the basement for seed pods because I never use the word entertaining . . . ever. But this movie is a rollercoaster ride of laughs, intrigue, chills and thrills! Hell, it’s just damn entertaining! Yes, it’s a story we’ve seen before, read before in many Raymond Chandler classic gumshoe novels or any  Mickey Spillane potboiler, but the creative filmmaker can figure out a way to take an old plot and twist it just enough to make something new, fresh and timely. He knows how to suck you into a scene by making it predictable in the beginning and then slapping a new spin on it. For example, his two main characters Holland and Jackson are pinned down in a house by a machine gun totting bad guy named John Boy (and if you don’t get the reference, stop reading this review. You are too young. This review is not for you). Jackson has lost his gun and asks Holland to toss him his and Holland does but with such force that the gun sails passed Jackson’s head and out the window. In the trailers for The Nice Guys they always show this bit from the movie and I can’t help but laugh at it no matter how many times I’ve seen it.

Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe are casted perfectly as a couple of wannabe gumshoes who are less Sam Spade and Mike Hammer as they are Abbott and Costello. I kid you not, these two playoff each other as well as any of the great comic couples in film history. Gosling in particular shows a mastery of the physical comedy that rivals the greats of silent film. Russell Crowes gives us the threatening thug character he created in L.A. Confidential but about sixty pounds heavier and a hell of lot more world weary. And all though the whole film belongs to Gosling and Crowe, Angourie Rice as Holly March, Holland March’s thirteen year old daughter, takes command of every scene she’s in. As a sort of cute Moe Howard type, she alone is able to control our beloved duo of bungling detectives to such a degree that they finally bring down the bad guys and save the day . . . almost.

There’s a lot of movies out there this summer that are packed with thrills and humor and action. But none of them are quite as clever and freaking funny as The Nice Guys. Hopefully, The Nice Guys will find a bigger audience than it appears to have right now and then maybe there’ll be a The Nice Guys 2. I’d definitely go see it.  

Captian America: Civil War May o6, 2o16

THERE MAY BE A FEW SPOILERS! BEWARE!

All week long on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon, Fallon was gushing all over Captain America: Civil War. “Oh, man, it is so action packed! I mean, it is NON-STOP ACTION!” Well, actually, Jimmy, it’s not. I know, you have an obligation to get people into the theatres to see a movie and the best way to do that is to hype the ACTION! But Civil War is a different kind of action movie. Most of the scripts depicting Marvel’s super hero universe use dialogue to set up the action sequences. This script differs from those others because it uses the action sequences to set up the scenes of thoughtful dialogue between the characters. In fact, the weakest parts of this movie are the action sequences. Wait a minute, my Marvel Universe Geeks, don’t get you pocket protectors in a bunch. Yes, the BIG action sequence at the airport, GREAT, well thought out, well-choreographed and filmed perfectly. But most of the other fight scenes and chase scenes were clumsy and awkward. They used too many camera tricks that only blurred the action so the audience really couldn’t see what was going on. And what’s up with the frigging camera shaky stuff? Yes, I know the documentary footage from Vietnam was all shaky, but that wasn’t an artistic choice on the part of the filmmakers. The shaky camera, the jump shots, filming the fight scenes on high speed film really just makes a muddy mess of the scene.

And while I’m bad mouthing the visual effects, the worst action sequence (the idea stolen by the way from the movie G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra) from CA:CW has got to be the foot chase through the tunnel between Bucky, Black Panther and Captain America.

Okay, I get it. Super Heroes are faster than cars, faster than trucks, more powerful than a speeding motorcycle, but the running and jumping over cars and under trucks shouldn't look like a Wile E. Coyote cartoon gone crazy. Only saving grace in the whole laughable sequence was when Bucky (with the good hair) plucked a flying motorcycle out of the air and rode off on it. THAT was cool. In that specific moment  the jump cuts worked for the action sequence instead of against it.

But let me get back to the good stuff, the script. I don’t think there’s a more literary action movie out there. This isn’t a movie just about fighting and blowing things up. It’s about ideas, particularly the moral implications of war. AND even more to the point, this script deals with the ramifications of “collateral damage.” Yeah, you know that phrase. Every time Obama sends a drone out to KILL the bad guy in some foreign country we never heard of, some innocent civilian winds-up getting killed. And whenever that happens, the State Department comes out with some sort of glib statement about collateral damage. “Hey, you know, we didn’t mean to kill little Suzie Q while she was outside her house bouncing her red rubber ball . . . But accidents happen! The good news is we KILLED the bad guy.” There’s also a lot about revenge in this movie. In fact, the whole story is motivated by the need to kill the people who killed somebody's a loved one either intentionally or by accident. And the script isn’t just a casual debate about war and its horrors. It’s not just an intellectual exercise. The issues are discussed in very human ways leaving the audience not sure just who are the good guys and who are the big guys. It’s neither pro-war nor antiwar although it does layout both sides of the argument in clear and precise strokes.

The acting has never been better. Chris Evans and Robert Downy Jr. never played these characters better. But they did have a kick-ass script to help them along. All the head-butting these two characters have done in every movie they’ve both  been in has finally come down to the final show down. I know the movie is called Captain America: Civil War, but it’s just as much about The-Rich-Kid-From-The-Penthouse as it is about The-Poor-Boy-From-The-Bronx. Sabastian Stan’s Bucky (with the good hair, see? I’m pretty hip to the new century’s pop! Hee!) is psychotically charming as the Winter Soldier trying to come in from the cold. And I’m pretty sure his horrifying journey is a metaphor for PTSD. And the rest of the cast is just brilliant even though they don’t have much screen time. But one standout in this supporting cast has got to be the new (and improved?) Spider-Man played with wonderful, teenage awkwardness by Tom Holland. 

So, except for my constant hounding about phony baloney action sequences (which I’m hard pressed to understand WHY more people aren’t complaining about it) Captain America: Civil War is probably the best executed Marvel movie we have seen yet.

Grade 89% = B+

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice March 2o16

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Alfred: You're gonna go to war?

Bruce Wayne: That son of a bitch brought the war to us.

Let me go back to 2o15 for a minute. My favorite movies of last year are: Ex Machina, Room, Brooklyn, Carol and Trumbo. They are my favorites because all five movies are more character studies than anything. Yes, they’re different genres, but they all delve into studying and (perhaps) understanding the way individual human beings interact with each other. And much to the chagrin of many Batman and Superman fans, Batman v. Superman tries to explore what it might really be like IF there really were super heroes living among us. How would we respond to them and how would they respond to each other, and how would they respond to the actions of their individual selves?

What the production team of Batman v. Superman has done is to explore the lives of these comic book heroes as if they were real people living in America.  The Superman character gives the director a chance to talk about one of the hottest, button pushing topics that’s as old as America itself, immigration. Oh, yeah. America has always hated and loved immigrants. Hate and suspicion of foreigners, you know, “THOSE people NOT like us,” has never been more heightened than in this 21^st century America we all love! And Superman IS the ultimate “illegal alien.” Where the comic books and movies about the Man of Steel always show the relationship between “law abiding” humans and Superman as an everlasting love fest,  this movie looks at Superman with a suspicious eye. I mean, come on! This super powerful dude shows up one day and starts protecting us? Why? I mean, he’s an alien! Why is he messing in our business? What does he really want?  But the real fuel for this suspicion, this xenophobia  is the fear itself. The unknowing of what someone who is “different than us is up to.There’s a small scene in the beginning of BVS where Lois Lane is being held captive by a gun toting terrorist and Superman crashes through the roof and without much effort slams the terrorist into a brick wall. It was one of the most horrifying scenes I’ve ever seen because it highlights just how powerful Superman is, and if he wasn’t habitual  “nice guy” he could destroy this planet, kill everybody on it breaking a sweat.

And then there’s the Batman played to demonic perfection by Ben Affleck. Yeah, we know all about batman, don’t we? He’s whole reason for existing is to protect the innocent, stop the “bad guy” and all that because he witnessed the murder of his mother and father when he was a kid. In this movie, Bruce Wayne is tormented day and night by the image of his parents’ death, tormented to such a extent he becomes totally obsessed with protecting the good and defeating evil to the point where his actions are psychotic. So, when he witnesses the battle between General Zod and Superman (Man of Steel 2013), sees the carnage, the loss of life caused by this frigging aliens, he snaps. He’s not going to bring Superman to justice because there is no justice for a genocidal maniac with super powers, no. Death, execution is the only way to stop this monster. I had reservations about Affleck playing the Batman, but his interpretation of the Dark Knight is a masterpiece of darkness and insanity.

However, as much as I loved the ideas in this movie, how much I enjoyed the performances of Affleck and Henry Cavill (Superman), there are problems with this movie which are caused primarily by the director, cinematographer and the film editors. The biggest mistake was in expressing the intimacy (that any character study needs to be considered a character study) with only one set of rhythms and tempos for all the quiet, scenes, and then putting those scenes so close together that there’s no sense of life, no sense of movement or growth. Every scene seems to be saying the same thing in the same way over and over again, and that is extremely boring to an audience. Even if a scene is dealing with the same ideas as the one that went before it has to be different, it has to be a scene that just doesn’t repeat what went on before, but digs deeper into the subject. The other fault I find with this movie is a pet peeve of mine. Directors, action directors in particular, think you create intimacy between characters by putting them in close ups! “How do I know this is an intimate, personal scene? Well, they have the actors in a two person close up, it MUST be personal.” But the opposite is really true. The movies I mentioned above, the ones from last year that I really liked? They are very personal, very intimate, and very human and all those films have only a few close ups of the actors. The directors of my favorite movies know that creating the connection between characters is primarily the work of the actor and not the camera. Yes, camera angles, camera movement can enhance the work of the actors, it can help to develop the emotion in a scene, but first and foremost the camera is there to support the work of the actors as is every element of movie tech.

A lot of my friends really dislike Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice because the pretentious production team had the NERVE to mess with the mythology of their beloved super heroes. I mean, Batman killing people on purpose with a . . . with a GUN?! Planning the “execution” of Superman without any remorse at all? Come on! Batman’s not like that. He stands for justice not murder. And Superman, he runs around (flies around) in this movie like a love sick puppy dog. “Oh! My girlfriend is in harm’s way!  You people in that burning house are gonna have to fend for yourselves, gotta go!” Swhoosh!  I can see why my friends are upset by this hoodlum director coming in and destroying these iconic characters. But they got to remember, the Batman and the Superman of old no longer exist. Over the years both characters have been developed to be more human, have more faults and darker sides. Like I said, I don’t have a problem with the changes they made in these characters, but I do believe the movie was just not realized as a solid study of human (and inhuman) existence.