Jasonic Reviews Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island

As a childhood and recent fan of Scooby-Doo, I see there's a certain charm about seeing it done in a way that's both different and done well. After the original show ended, not every iteration was an absolute success (i.e.: Scooby-Doo and Scrappy-Doo, Scooby-Doo Meets the Boo Brothers, etc.), but just for existing a long while, one ought to give them props for trying to revitalize the series multiple times. After many attempts at doing something different for its first few decades as a franchise, many would say that the first of many direct-to-video movies, Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island, from 1998 was the key to the franchise's relevance today as it allowed the talking canine continue to be relevant amongst today's generation of kids. Since the yearly release of Scooby movies continues even today, it's best to really look back and see what made this movie work and whether or not it holds up now.

A message from Morgan Moonscar: ***SPOILERS AHOY!!***

The film takes a massive departure from the traditional Scooby-Doo tropes in a number of ways. In it, the Mystery Gang reunites after a year long hiatus in an effort to discover real ghosts as part of a segment for the show that Daphne Blake (voiced by Mary Kay Bergman) is in charge of. After Fred Jones (voiced by Frank Welker) manages to get everyone back together, the likes of them, Velma Dinkley (voiced by B.J. Ward), "Shaggy" Rogers (voiced by Billy West), and Scooby-Doo (voiced by Scott Innes) travel to the city of New Orleans only to be met with an abundance of cases reminiscent of their old days. It isn't until they run into a young woman named Lena Dupree (voiced by Tara Strong) who invites them to her work residence of Moonscar Island in the bayou that they believe they're in for a real scoop. The island being allegedly haunted, the gang accepts the task to investigate the place, albeit skeptical of the possibility of there being real ghosts and monsters running around. Upon their arrival and investigation, however, more and more clues begin to emerge showing signs of genuine supernatural happenings and creatures popping up. And so, in a series of twists and turns, the gang finds themselves in the face of legitimate danger when captured by the least likely suspects.

The first and most notable thing about this movie is the fact that it goes against all the traditional Scooby-Doo tropes thereby giving the film a fresh direction. For starters, the characters are aged up and redesigned as young adults (see picture above) giving them more potential for them to evolve over the course of the film -- for example, Daphne becoming a successful career woman, being able to defend herself, and not be captured. Whereas Fred and at least one other character set off a trap that captured the villain at the end of every case, Scooby and Shaggy are the ones who actively neutralize threats, making them a lot more useful despite their classic quirkiness. And, of course, who could ever forget about the multiple twists the film takes to keep from repeating the same old, but somehow timeless formula? Long story short, the titular zombies turn out to be real and are haunting the place every night seemingly about to devour unsuspecting bystanders as zombies do. Moreover, the real villains are of the supernatural variety, being granted the transformation of "werecats" by a cat god and drain the life source of their victims in order to replenish their immortality -- the zombies actually being the good guys and trying to warn everyone of their potential fate. Tell me, does this sound like Scooby-Doo? It sure doesn't, but it definitely is done well and plays with everyone's expectations they've come to know from the franchise.

Simone: "I've had it with that meddling dog!"

Scooby: "Rog? Where?"

For a 1998 direct-to-video movie, the animation and art style in this flick is just as superb as many notable 2D animated films from the era. Every shot looks smooth and fluent, even more so than the old Scooby cartoons and made for TV films -- which, of course, were lower budget. The animators really gave it all they had with capturing the essence of the original cartoons in the way that the characters move and react to things, especially when Scooby and Shaggy get involved in cartoony antics and/or sprint away from whatever's chasing them. The characters themselves even resemble their original selves, but with updated wardrobes and even more detail applied to their overall looks -- i.e.: Fred and Daphne are given more detail in their eyes, Velma's given noticeable freckles, etc. Despite being set in a cartoon, the locales are given a lot of attention to detail in resembling the actual real life New Orleans; just looking at the city they travel throughout the unmasking montage or the bayou they venture into for the majority of the film could make one feel they've been whisked away to Louisiana. This amount of effort in capturing the feelings of real life locations would later go on to be a priority in later films and adaptations of Scooby.

If any kids or adults are gonna take away anything notable from the audio department of this film, it's the music. The film is packed with good music start to finish; from the cover of the original theme song in the opening chase sequence to Skycycle's "The Ghost is Here" from the aforementioned unmasking montage, the music is quite catchy that you might be wanting to look it up and sing along to it for days after. And who could possibly forget the real chase sequence in the film with "It's Terror Time Again", also done by Skycycle? While Scooby is known for its chase scene songs, never before has it experimented with power rock like such that sounds so legit it could even be played at a zombie walk in town and some may not even know it was originally from Scooby-Doo. And, to give credit where due, the voice actors did a good job at replicating the style of the original shows voice actors -- save for Frank Welker who reprises Fred here for the first time in years and has ever since. While some may disagree, Billy West does a good job sounding like Casey Kasem as Shaggy whereas Scott Innes was definitely a good successor to Don Messick (whom the film is dedicated to) in the few years that this same style of films was coming out. Lest we not forget that voice acting veterans such as Adrienne Barbeau, Tara Strong, Jim Cummings, and Mark Hamill were also in this film as Simone, Lena, Jacques, and Snakebite respectively. Seriously, for voice actor and rock music enthusiasts alone, this film may as well be one worth watching for a slice of obscure history.

'Cause it's terror time again!
They've got you running through the night!

The film may not be absolute perfection, but almost nothing ill can be said about it in hindsight. Between its ambitious plot, the risks it takes along the way, the superb animation and art style, the music, and voice acting, all components work well together and don't trip over the other in an effort to make this a great movie. Even kids today would be surprised at how scary parts of this film tend to be because hardly any of the newer Scooby movies or shows for that matter tend to tread this area of risk taking and letting the monsters be real and deadly threats. The good news is that one show managed to play on its success in the form of Scooby-Doo Mystery Incorporated, but both have since faded into obscurity. Even so, I hope that somehow at some point every Scooby fan or superfan comes across this gem of a film of which I give a B+ and a worthwhile flick in the franchise.

Seriously, what are you waiting for?
Go watch this film this Halloween (or whenever you can)!
Bwahahahaha!

Jasonic Reviews Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

I figured it was only a matter of time before I revealed my Potter fandom side to the world; and the best way I could do that was by writing my thoughts on the series in the form of a review. Now it may not seem logical for me to start at the third movie for those missing out on the series at the moment, but I think even the Potter fans can agree that this movie is a decent starting point for re-watching the series should they feel obligated to skip the first two movies -- as they're basically the same story and most everyone now knows how it was all set up. Plus, as someone whose reading the books for the first time in his life (save for this one), this one was always my favorite and so I inevitably felt the need to go ahead and do this one followed by my most favorites in the series -- the blog is about my favorite movies after all. Now that does not mean that I will be comparing the books to the movies in my reviews (this is not a blog for complaining about differences between films and source material after all). So, without further adieu, let's get right to it with my thoughts on my favorite Harry Potter story, Prisoner of Azkaban.

***SPOILERIFIC POST AHEAD***

After learning of his magical history, discovering more of himself, and ending Lord Voldemort's first two attempts at resurrection in the previous two films, Harry Potter (played by Daniel Radcliffe) returns for a third year at Hogwarts only to discover news that a prisoner named Sirius Black (played by Gary Oldman) has escaped the wizard prison of Azkaban. Knowing of Black's intent to kill him, Harry must keep safe on the grounds of Hogwarts at all times especially with the dementors -- ghoul-like creatures that literally suck out people's souls -- guarding the castle grounds. In a series of spell-binding events (literally), Harry and his best friends, Ron and Hermione (played by Rupert Grint and Emma Watson respectively) will discover ways like never before to deal with their issues. Between learning how to ward of dementor attacks, going to multiple classes at once, and the connections between Harry, Black, and other Hogwarts professors, more of the larger conflict at hand will be unveiled before Harry's eyes. As Professor Dumbledore (played by Michael Gambon) says, "Happiness can be found even in the darkest times if one only remembers to turn on the light."

The biggest thing to point out about this film is just how different it is from its predecessors. Whereas the first two were largely lighthearted children's adventures full of warm colors, relatively innocent circumstances (though clearly Chamber of Secrets had darker events, but it still wasn't very adult), and was full of joyful events that make children happy and adults feel like kids again, this one takes things up a notch without there being a jarring shift in tone and aesthetics. Many scenes now, especially the ones where dementors are present, take place in the rain, fog, and cloudy skies, signifying a progression towards a bleaker narrative. Even some shots, like the long cut shot where George Weasley explains the seriousness (no pun intended) of Sirius Black's escape, are framed in such a way that conveys the seriousness of the narrative at hand. That and the circumstances for Harry are much more driven by teen angst; gone are his childlike wonders of discovering he's a celebrity wizard and learning to overcome all odds in favor him seeking revenge against his parents' supposed killer. Alfonso Cuarón was clearly the right director for moving the series forward and his decisions in the direction are among the main reason why I enjoy this film the most going forward.

Acting-wise, the film not only sees return many of the more prominent roles and side characters we've been following the last few films, but also introduces many veteran roles playing the parts of important supporting characters going forward. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson very much maintain their lovable personas we've all come to know and love for the previous few films. Side roles such as Tom Felton's Draco Malfoy, Matthew Lewis' Neville Longbottom, and Robbie Coltrane's Hagrid aren't as up front this time around, but still are fun to watch and consistent in their performance as before. The real highlights, however, are a lot of the adult actors, especially the new characters/actors introduced in this one. Gary Oldman's performance as Sirius Black is perhaps the biggest win of them all, conveying masterfully a man who seems like his sanity could be fading (because spending twelve years locked up for a crime you didn't commit would really do that to you) to later becoming a more at ease and inspiring mentor figure to Harry for later down the line. David Thewlis as Remus Lupin was also a good choice as he managed to portray a different side of  the usual shady the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher, one who, unlike the previous two, has no control over whether or not he turns bad due to his werewolf persona taking him over every full moon. As with a lot of his roles, Alan Rickman, though he doesn't have much significance as Serverus Snape this time around, he always brings his A-game to the role. And, of course, who could forget Michael Gambon, the guy who replace Richard Harris as Dumbledore for the remaining six Harry Potter films? Simply put, the cast was always good and really shines here.

As always, the film also finds ways to bring us into the wizarding world of Harry Potter with its score and atmosphere. This film, being John Williams' third and last time scoring for the series, wasn't exactly the most stand out entry in the soundtrack of the series, though it still carried the same magical feel that the previous films did full well to pull us in. Scenes like Buckbeak's flight give off the same joyful vibe as scenes in the previous films such as Harry's first Quidditch match and when Fawkes flies them all out of the Chamber of Secrets. Little numbers like the "Toil and Trouble" track sung by the Hogwarts choir also allow us, the audience, to return to Hogwarts with a sense of joy knowing that, despite the raise in stakes with a supposed killer on the loose, that there is still a wondrous sense of magic to be found in this universe. And the moment where Harry sees his time traveled self conjuring up the final patronus against the swarm of dementors only to later do it  has a neat little contrast that only keen-eared viewers would notice. The first time, the strings and horns clash adding a sense of dread based on the situation with some hope to be found in the midst of it. Later on, the horns become more prominent as Harry has come to realize how much he himself is a light in the darkest of times (not yet realizing the darkness inside himself yet) just as Dumbledore alludes to at the start. I love how poetic these stories get with their themes and music!

Need I also mention the special effects? (I mean, duh, it's a Harry Potter film and that's only mandatory). Much of your usual Hogwarts magic remains with the moving staircases, animated paintings, and flying broomsticks that, by this point, have become standard for the series. This being a new entry in the franchise, of course, it tries many things new as well. For example, he dementors were originally considered to be puppets instead of CGI, but I believe CG did them justice with their bleakly obscure faces, scary clawed hands, and other ghostly features that make the grim reaper look adorable by comparison. This one also had more focus on CG creatures between Sirius and his dog animagus, Buckbeak the hippogriff, and Lupin's werewolf transformation; all three were animated exceptionally well and provided more of a sense of creatures of magical variety in this world -- and it would only become more prominent beyond this film. And lest we not forget the Knight Bus scene; that had some of the funnest bullet time sequences I've ever experienced in a film the way it races through the street and squeezes in between the two double-decker buses on the bridge. Trust me when I say that this whole series has wonderful special effects as well!

I think it's safe for anybody to assume that this is among my favorites -- if not my most favorite -- of the Harry Potter franchise both book and film. The film, in particular, has many notable highlights such as the reasonable progression in tone, a brilliantly acted cast, wonderful music, and great special effects that there's no denying that this is the wizarding world of Harry Potter we're in. And, as my favorite of the series as far as story goes, the writing definitely shows where this is going to take the series down the road and I applaud it for doing so in a logical fashion. And so, with all I've said, about this film up to now, I'm going to go ahead and give it a solid A and consider it a must see for everyone in the Potter fandom and beyond!

Thanks y'all for reading and, as always, I will see you in the next review!

Jasonic Reviews How to Train Your Dragon 2

In today's world of cinema franchises, it appears that the need to make a sequel for everything is a requirement on most fronts. Sometimes those sequels are genius extensions of the original, other times they're just phoned in cash grabs for the kiddies because, hey, kids liked the first one so they decide, without hardly any common sense, to milk it to death (i.e.: Alvin and the Chipmunks, The Smurfs, etc.). And so, with most animated kids films, a sequel may seem a bit concerning for the adults taking them to watch it, however, other franchises that started off with a bang, such as Toy Story, beg to differ. And so, without giving too much away right off the bat, I will say that How to Train Your Dragon, despite initial skepticism from some that a sequel would do the original justice, really earned it with becoming a series the way it did. But does it completely surpass the original in every way? Let's find out in my newest film review/critique!

***SPOILER AHEAD*** (it matters for this one -- you've been warned)

Five years following the first film, a lot has changed in a world dominated by vikings and dragons. The village of Berk has changed for the better in the sense that the vikings and dragons now live together in harmony; a twenty year old Hiccup (voiced once more by Jay Baruchel) now explores the world on a regular basis with his pet dragon, Toothless, when one day the former's father, Stoick the Vast (voiced once more by Gerard Butler), nearly forces him into becoming the village chief. Not wanting to become his dad and live up to his legacy, Hiccup soon learns of the existence of a dragon army on the rise lead by the likes of a madman named Drago Bludvist (voiced by Djimon Hounsou) and vows to persuade him to see dragons differently instead of go to war with him like his father would want. Along the way, Hiccup unexpectedly runs into his long lost mother, Valka (voiced by Cate Blanchett), whose been in hiding for years extracting and protecting dragons from the likes of Drago and other dangers of the world. With the help of his returning friends and his mother, Hiccup must discover his true identity and learn to protect his own.

From a synopsis perspective, one can tell this absolutely isn't a phoned in cash grab as some may have feared. Any lesser kids film sequel would have likely separated the main players and sent them on separate journeys before they realized how much they truly need each other (or quite possibly rehash the plot of the first movie by extension). Instead, this movie is clearly an extension of an already good story that continues logically in a way that mirrors The Empire Strikes Back, The Dark Knight, and Terminator 2 to name a few. For one, our protagonist has aged both physically and mentally, now sporting a more buff physique and improved upon his many skills, gadgets, and techniques since last time. Whereas the first film clearly paints him as a Harry Potter/Peter Parker protagonist, I'd say he's taken enough steps to be on par with Luke Skywalker at the start of Return of the Jedi in terms of characterization. Where one would expect Toothless to remain the static loyal pet this time around, there's quite a few twists that give him more development to work with (which I won't really spoil, but see for yourself). Sadly, the comedic side characters that had their fun little gags throughout the first film and continue into this one, including Astrid (voiced once more by America Ferrera) aren't as integral nor have they aged much like Hiccup, but they're still fun to watch nonetheless.

In terms of the audio and visual aspects of this movie, everything is very much on par with, if not more so, than the original. Everyone from the original cast as well as the new additions really sell the film with outstanding performances from everyone. Jay Baruchel has surprisingly improved as Hiccup, Gerard Butler's awesome voice is just as powerful, and Cate Blanchett really sells the mother role like I personally believed she could to name a few. And the score, done once again by John Powell, is just as impressive and really whisks you away to this other world full of dragons and vikings. Sure, there are no slow, gripping, dialogueless scenes with songs like "Forbidden Friendship" this time around, but John Powell manages to create gripping action and flight scenes with his music regardless. The graphics are very much upgraded to where everything looks and feels more real; the snowy mountain environments induce chills, the clouds make you really feel like you're up in the sky, and underwater scenes look... well, underwater. And lest we not forget the fact that they managed to squeeze in so many little animated figures in the big battle scene toward the end of the second act. Never before has there been so much crowd simulation in an animated movie that to witness such a technical feat was amazing at the time! The action in general was also more engaging as the dragons and vikings have clearly learned well how to combat others in the air and on land.

The movie may have a few faulty bits such as underused side characters and the lack of investment in the main villain aside from one bit of dialogue about his backstory, but I, in no way, hold it against the movie nor do I consider it that much worse than the first film as a result. As a matter of fact, the main reason why I like this movie much more so than its predecessor is the bold decision they made with its direction. Dean DeBlois clearly knew what he was doing in making this all about Hiccup's coming of age story where he must essentially give up his old, crazy ways of "goofing off" (according to Astrid) and be forced into leadership to protect his own. As much as I wish to talk about it in-depth -- save it possibly for a whole separate analysis -- I will say that it's much like The Lion King in terms of the way it goes a ballsy direction and impacts the audience hard in an emotional sense. In trying to defend this franchise from those who claim it's "just for kids", I use this movie and, if they're aware of what happens, the scene I'm referring to as an example as to why the How to Train Your Dragon films aren't just for kids and nobody else. The way it deals with darker, more mature themes than the first film (not that the first film wasn't completely innocent in terms of subject matter) is what really hits home for me personally for this installment and makes me all the more excited to see how they ultimately conclude the series when How to Train Your Dragon 3 (yes, a THIRD film IS in the works) hits theaters in a full year from now!

Based on what I've said now about this film, it goes completely without saying that I generally prefer this one over its predecessor and I absolutely enjoy it when an animated film franchise takes a step in the right direction for a change. Despite a few minor faults that don't truly affect the overall product, How to Train Your Dragon 2 is a visually stunning, well-acted, excellently scored, emotionally investing logical continuation of an already awesome family-friendly film that more animated movies should follow by example. The way it delivers on so many levels makes for a thrilling experience that I'd be more than personally willing to share with anyone regardless of if they've seen the first film or not. All things considered, the film gets an A+ in my book and is on my recommend list for everyone!

Thanks y'all for reading and, as always, I will see you in the next review!

Jasonic Reviews A Bug's Life

With Pixar being one of the biggest franchises my family loves to quote and the fact that this one, like Toy Story, is near and dear to my childhood, I didn't think I could leave this one alone. Sure, nobody, even Pixar themselves, really recalls this movie off the top of their heads, but it is still memorable in my mind. It may not have or ever be getting a sequel/prequel like every other Pixar film up until Cars, though I still believe it has and should get some recognition in today's world even almost twenty years after its release. So, without further adieu, here's my thoughts on why I think Disney/Pixar's A Bug's Life is a brilliantly endearing animated flick that, despite having some flaws, still holds up relatively well today.

*This movie's plot is rather basic and familiar, so I won't tag SPOILERS, but will still encourage cautious reading for those who haven't seen it*

The plot of this movie, while familiar in a number of areas, doesn't truly bother me. It's a basic story about an awkward, outcast ant named Flik (voiced by Dave Foley) who tirelessly tries his utmost to bring new ideas and inventions to his colony who, year after year, gathers all the food on their island for an offering to a gang of bully grasshoppers keeping them in line. When Flik screws up big time by accidentally getting rid of the food offering, the grasshoppers's leader, Hopper (voiced by Kevin Spacey), demands they double down on their end of the bargain before the summer ends. Despite his huge mistake that has the colony endangered, Flik is granted permission by the colony's leader in training, Princess Atta (voiced by Julia Louis-Dreyfus), to go out and find a bunch of "warrior bugs" to forever rid them of Hopper and his gang. Just when the princess and the other ants believe they had gotten rid of Flik to prevent any further mishaps from him, Flik surprisingly returns home with a troupe of circus bugs whom he mistakes for warriors when they put on an act in the city. Misunderstandings awry, Flik desperately tries to cover up their acting as warrior bugs in hopes to finally prove that he can make a difference.

Although the story itself is full of tired, predictable tropes, I've never actually been bothered by it so much. As a kid, this movie was my introduction to such a stock story format so I was never sour about Flik being the dweeb protagonist who later becomes the respected hero, his "liar reveal" that gets him banished permanently, and the fact that the ants in the colony don't get much development (but I wouldn't say they're all completely forgettable either). In fact, I found back then as I do now that what made it enjoyable, despite the predictable story beats, was the character interactions and I still believe this holds true. This is more apparent in the actions and personalities of the circus bugs themselves; you have Heimlich (voiced by Joe Ranft), a caterpillar with a German accent and a huge appetite, Francis (voiced by Dennis Leary), a ladybug who often gets mistaken for a girl, and Slim (voiced by David Hyde Pierce), a stick bug who is cast in shows as nothing but stick-like objects. Their fun, silly interactions are the highlights of the story and they, alone, keep things fresh for those big moviegoers who are tired of seeing the same story time and again. Plus, as a Pixar film, it allows for subtle adult humor with enough innocent fun mixed in to keep the kids entertained.

Aesthetically, A Bug's Life is one of those animated flicks (no pun intended) that just pops! Everyone  who's aware of the history of the history between Disney, DreamWorks, and their competition to see whose movie about bugs would turn out better (Antz vs. A Bug's Life) would be pleased to find that, when compared to Antz, A Bug's Life is the brighter, more colorful movie. Sure, the ants mostly look the same, but the circus bugs come in all types, shapes, and sizes to a point where you'd immediately recognize who was who based on personality and looks. Similar to the ants, the grasshoppers mostly look alike, but Hopper and Molt (voiced by Richard Kind) look different enough from the rest to where you can at least tell who they are -- which is especially saying something for me since Molt is actually my favorite character with his humorous one liners and his reformation at the end. And the one thing that nobody ever talks about is the "city" under the trailer; to me, it's an interesting, somewhat engaging set up for a city made for bugs (buildings made of discarded trash, bigger bugs transporting smaller bugs, etc.) that could have been interesting to explore more in a sequel. Of course, this movie never warranted a sequel despite Flik and Heimlich talking about it in the Toy Story 2 outtakes and I've never been desperate for one, but I'm getting off topic. All in all, I'd say I'm satisfied with the movie's presentation and the fact that it remains a standalone.

To say that the sound design of this movie was great would be an understatement... it's brilliant! One of the most engaging parts for me and my family is, without a doubt, the voice delivery that makes the lines so appealing to all of us. Many of the voice actors from Julia Louis-Dreyfus as Princess Atta to Richard Kind as Molt is so comically engaging that, even if the lines themselves sound generic on paper, the actor's delivery of the line is what makes it so memorable and easy to quote for us (i.e.: when Molt says, "Yeah! Where's the food?"). The sound effects themselves are well done too; while the scenes with the grasshoppers may seem a bit violent for an animated kids movie, you can really feel the impact of them breaking into the ant hill at the start as well as Thumper and Hopper beating Flik around toward the end. And, of course, the music! The music of this film was a standout moment for Randy Newman (known also for his work in Toy Story) and the orchestral score throughout definitely has an impact with the scenes they go along with -- the music by itself doesn't really stick with you, but it still works as music. The ending theme, "The Time of Your Life", may not give the same feeling of long time remembrance as Toy Story's "You've Got A Friend in Me", though Newman's voice is still just as distinct as ever and it wraps up the film nicely.

So, overall, as the second Pixar film, and the one I've probably seen most after Toy Story, A Bug's Life may not be perfect, but it's still had a lasting impression on me. Despite somewhat forgettable main characters and a story full of tired tropes, it's easy to remember the comedic side characters, the aesthetic designs, the Foley artistry, and music that went into it. For what it is, I say that if you're a Pixar fan or are looking for something entertaining for your kids to watch to go ahead and give this one a watch if you, yourself, can get past some of the less than memorable, overused elements. All things considered, I give this film an A- and will definitely recommend it to anyone looking for a good fix in their appetite for animated films.

Thanks y'all for reading and, as always, I will see you in the next review!

Jasonic Reviews Spider-Man 3

When a trilogy as good as the original Sam Raimi Spider-Man Trilogy rounds about, it's only natural that the audience would expect it all to go out with a bang. That was everyone's expectation about Spider-Man 3 prior to its much anticipated release in 2007... but then reception turned out rather mixed especially amongst the critics and fans. As a Spider-Man fan myself, I can honestly say I couldn't leave this one alone -- especially not after the Blu-ray release of Spider-Man: Homecoming. Before we get into it, I'll admit that it actually wasn't my favorite of the Raimi trilogy for a number of reasons. Regardless, each Spider-Man movie, no matter how good/bad, has at least one standout element that makes it unique and this one is no exception. Knowing how much backlash this film has gotten in the past, I will do something different and examine what worked and didn't work and do my absolute best to stay positive about it!

***SPOILERS AHEAD***

So the film is set roughly a year or so after Spider-Man 2 -- the passing of time/time of year is never made apparent in this series, but that's my educated guess. This time, Peter Parker (played once more by Tobey Maguire) is a widespread icon as Spider-Man and has his life in order for a change. In the midst of his fame and recognition, he plans on taking the next step in his relationship with his now girlfriend, Mary Jane Watson (played once more by Kirsten Dunst), who is struggling with her self-confidence after being rejected from her Broadway play. Meanwhile, Peter's former best friend turned enemy, Harry Osborn (played once more by James Franco), seeks vengeance against him for supposedly murdering his father, still blissfully unaware of what actually happened and who his father really was. In addition to everything else going on, an escaped convict from Rykers known as Flint Marko (played by Thomas Haden Church) tries desperately to get the money to heal his sick daughter and inadvertently becomes the "Sandman" when coming in contact with a molecular science experiment while on the run. When Peter learns of Marko's identity as his uncle's real killer, he utilizes a mysterious black alien suit that came from outer space and attached itself to his suit, causing him to break out his inner-aggression and seek vengeance on Marko. Throw in the Bugle's newest photographer, Eddie Brock (played by Topher Grace), trying to expose Spider-Man as a thief and it appears as though Spidey is in for his biggest, most riveting adventure yet!

Well... not exactly. Reading all that right off the bat, you may be wondering how exactly that all ties together. Some superhero movies in the last decade or so have been known for over-cluttering their plots with needless usage of characters and subplots to a point where it doesn't exactly flow smoothly together and this is no exception. Thing is, the film starts clear as day with Harry as the villain and, just when the rivalry action breaks out between him and Peter... he gets knocked on the head, losing his memory; and just like that all enmity between the two best friends that had been built up through the previous two movies is lost, but only for a while. During that time, Sandman takes over as the main villain before Symbiote Spider-Man seemingly kills him... and then we're back to Harry... and finally Eddie Brock who finally becomes Venom and teams up with Sandman. Long story short, the story, three villains amongst a number of other things, is very jumbled, each hour seeming almost like a different movie at some points. This may cause some to point fingers at Sam Raimi for lazy writing, but personally, I don't blame Sam Raimi or even the actors for any of it. What it boils down to is studio input; during production, Sony were pressuring Sam Raimi for the inclusion of Venom as well as Gwen Stacy (played by Bryce Dallas Howard -- more on her later) due to fans demanding that such characters seeing the light of day in film. That said, with a limited time to write the script, the writers couldn't seem to find a way to naturally incorporate everything the studio wanted and hoped it would stick.

Though that approach didn't really hit the mark for me personally, that didn't stop the film at all from being entertaining. People too often give this film flak for being "too cheesy" without realizing that the two previous films were just as so; in fact, I say I'm okay with their continued use of comedy bits (i.e.: J. Jonah Jameson's "pill buzzer" scene) as it reminds the audience that this is a Sam Raimi Spider-Man movie. On top of that, the action set pieces are some of the best in the series. Bits like Spider-Man getting caught without his suit and fighting the New Goblin, the black Spider-Man vs. Sandman fight, and, ultimately the finale with Spider-Man and Harry against Sandman and Venom  allow for a huge variety of action. In those three scenes alone, you have your standard above the city sky battle, an attempt to capture the thrills of the train fight from Spider-Man 2 (which is the best fight in the series, my opinion), and a fascinating climactic battle between the film's main four players in and around a construction site. Each are shot and choreographed fantastically and help the film feel fresh at every turn.

The main problem I have with the film's transitions between each action scene, however, is how unnecessary some scenes and plot points feel in the grand scheme of things. For example, Harry's amnesia, though it's a cool reference to the comics, doesn't seem to go anywhere; well, come to think of it, it foreshadows Harry's sacrifice for his friends at the end, so I'd say it's not all terrible. The main gripes I have are actually the aforementioned inclusion of Sandman and Gwen Stacy. Though Sam Raimi made it clear that he wanted Sandman to be the main villain above all else (even the former inclusion of Vulture he talked about ages ago), he wasn't exactly written in the best. Just as we're getting to see the initial developments between the three friends, we suddenly cut to Marko on the run; it's not the worst intro ever, but a little exposition prior to his intro would've helped. And then, of course, that dreaded retcon that everyone complains about, I would have to agree with; the previous two films had established that the carjacker was the one responsible for Uncle Ben's death so to rewrite the whole thing to say that "Sandman did it" feels a bit jarring and unnecessary, but it does make for an interesting resolution for Peter with his choice to listen and forgive him in the end. Ultimately, though, Gwen Stacy didn't need to be there and seemed to only further disrupt the possibility of Peter and MJ getting married like the film was implied to be about. I won't go on a tangent about why this doesn't work, but I will say that, upon my initial look at the film's trailer, I would not have guessed that Gwen Stacy was ever supposed to be apart of it in the first place.

And don't get me started on how the black suit storyline played out; I mean, it was a good device for making a darker movie, but then it's never really explained why it got there other than being from a meteorite that just happened to land next to Peter's bike in the beginning. Moreover, it takes a while, like an hour or so, before it finally attaches itself to Spidey's suit (further proof that Sam Raimi didn't want Venom in the first place). Strangely enough, I actually think the Saturday Night strut scene is funny in its own right, but then... the DANCE SCENE! Naturally, my cringe was off the wall at that point, but enough of this negativity -- we don't want to act like we're wearing the suit after all. As a positive critic, I won't trash everything about it so, instead I'll say that if I were in charge of writing the film, I would have effortlessly written it into the story to play out like so:

1. Spidey acquires the suit and learns its abilities in the first half hour
2. With everything going wrong in his life, Spidey uses the suit to feel good again
3. The suit causes him to unintentionally hurt his friends without his awareness
4. He tries to get back at his best frenemy and nearly kills him
5. Ultimately, he crosses the line when he seemingly kills his newest foe and tears it off

I may have even saved the introduction of Venom for the previously announced Spider-Man 4, but I'm through talking about "what ifs". If anything, I'll say it wasn't my favorite depiction of the black suit arc, but it wasn't the absolute worst either.

For that matter, this wasn't the worst Spider-Man movie either. Sure, it had its ups and downs and the bad seems to outweigh the good at some points, though I wouldn't call the worst Spider-Man or comic book movie in general. It had some good action, some fun laughs, good acting, and, overall, the spirit of the Raimi films was still there. In fact, I'd say the actors weren't downright terrible despite what some may say; I personally found Tobey's happy-go-lucky attitude in the beginning to be his way of implementing himself into the character he had played now for three films -- like he's telling the audience, "I own this character now!" Kirsten I can't say had much improvement (maybe some character development, but that's about it), but James Franco, like he said in the movie, is "So good!" Like he really owned Harry Osborn to where I could almost say he was Harry Osborn. Topher Grace wasn't as bad as people say either; his personality fit well with the rest of the comical vibe the series aimed to give. And, I can't believe I skipped over Rosemary Harris and J.K. Simmons' marvelous (no pun intended) acting as Aunt May and J. Jonah Jameson respectively in the previous two reviews. Jameson especially was a highlight in this series and has me eagerly awaiting to see if J.K. would be up for reprising the role in the next live action Spider-Man movie (seeing as he's already done so several times in the animated shows). Lest we not forget that, despite feeling shoehorned, Thomas Haden Church is an all around good actor; he looks like the Sandman, gives him his own personality, and very well conveys a tortured sympathetic villain that was interestingly reminiscent of Doc Ock. I would've loved if everyone gave it there all to end this trilogy with a bang, but, for what it was, I can say I generally enjoyed the series as a whole regardless.

Without further adieu, here are my final thoughts regarding the last film in the otherwise good Spider-Man Trilogy. Despite its heavily apparent flaws of a jumbled story, contrived transitions and plot points, and an odd attempt at a darker movie through use of the black suit, the comedy was great, the action superb, and the acting done well enough for the viewer to enjoy. I can't say it was the best film I've ever reviewed (it might even be the worst so far), but still, for what it is, I can't say it's dumpster fire, but good in some aspects. In other words, I give it a C+ rating and label it passable for anyone looking to see what the film as to offer (whether it be their favorite character, pleasing action, or decent bits of acting).

Thanks y'all for reading and, as always, I will see you in the next review!

Jasonic Reviews The Social Network

As somebody who uses social media on a regular basis, it's interesting when you come across a movie that addresses the founding of one of the biggest social media sites of all time. It's one thing when a movie documents a real-life event that involves the creation of something revolutionary like Facebook -- which I am ironically sharing this review link on as you read. But the movie I'm about to talk about is no documentary; it's a series of events based on real life told through an entertaining screenplay. To talk about this details of this movie right off the bat, however, I feel would give too much away, thereby rendering the following paragraphs redundant. So, without spilling anything besides basic info in this introductory paragraph, I hereby address my thoughts on what makes the movie, The Social Network, a great flick.

*No need for spoiler tag here*

Based on the book, The Accidental Billionaires, which itself is based on real-life events, the film is essentially an exaggerated documentary, as I like to call it, about the creation of the Facebook website we know and love today. In it, Harvard student Mark Zuckerburg (played by Jesse Eisenberg) finds himself being dumped by his girlfriend, Erica Albright (played by Rooney Mara). Upon returning to his dorm to write insulting blog entries about her as well as create an attractiveness rating site called Facemash. Though it crashes much of Harvard's network, the site's popularity reaches the likes of the Winklevoss twins, Cameron and Tyler (played in double by Armie Hammer), who give him the idea to start a social networking site called Harvard Connection. Zuckerburg steals the idea and renames it "The Facebook"; with financial assistance from his close friend, Eduardo Saverin (played by Andrew Garfield), Zuckerburg manages to build the site, which becomes highly successful to the point of panning out to several other schools in the U.S. Meanwhile, the Winklevoss twins discover the similarities between their idea and Zuckerburg's site and forward to file lawsuit for intellectual property theft. In a series of depositions intercut between the main events, Zuckerburg makes many friends while also making a few enemies.

For starters, the film has a way of being cleverly entertaining that's somehow on par with an action blockbuster. The dialogue exchanges between the cast are rather down-to-earth, yet somehow manage to remain fun and entertaining all at the same time. I can't really explain how it is, but hearing Zuckerburg's techno, code-working babble and Sean Parker's (Justin Timberlake's character) entrepreneur business talk is very engaging when it could've potentially been rather boring for me. For that matter, despite the fact that I am no computer technician or hacker (thankfully), seeing and hearing Eisenberg deliver such information makes me curious as to if I could do what he does for a living. In a sense, it's a lot like Tony Stark's building montages in the first Iron Man because it gives off that sort of resonance that makes me excited about the topics being presented despite the fact that I lack experience in such advanced fields. And, without a doubt, each actor manages to act their role very well with Eisenberg, Timberlake, and Garfield all owning the show throughout. For a dramatized biography, it really manages to keep me invested.

Much of it could be the fact that, as mentioned before, the film takes a lot of artistic license in portraying its events. According to Facebook's creator, Mark Zuckerburg, a lot of what happened in this movie is false when compared to real life events. For example, Eisenberg manages to handsomely portray a greedy, arrogant, sex-motivated guy who just got dumped by his girlfriend out to make a name for himself, but, given what we know about the real Zuckerburg, I doubt he's that much of a narcissist. That and the parts where Eisenberg and Garfield are arguing back and forth about the rash, even self-centered decisions the other makes seems to be a series of events created solely for the purpose of dramatic entertainment. Despite sounding negative from a certain point of view, the film, by no means, is any worse for having this much creative leeway put into it; in fact, I say it's more appealing to watch that way! If nothing else, the little "decorations" the film applies to the story make it so that nobody gets easily bored of watching and leaves the movie feeling much more of an impact.

Another standout portion that makes the film what it is would have to be the music; scored by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, the soundtrack might as well be one of the most unique tastes of movie music we've had in the last decade. The energetic and electronic feel generated from most of the tracks (including the somewhat somber opening piece "Hand Covers Bruise") gives it a flavor that really drives in the techno side of the film. It's no wonder some of the songs also give off a bit of a video game vibe a Reznor himself has scored some video games in the past. Really, a lot of talent went into the music despite it going barely noticed amongst the general public. For the hard-working people out there as well as those who are pushing to get homework done in the nick of time, it really gets your brain going to where you're concentrating like crazy just trying to crank out whatever it is you're writing/completing. Ironically, this is me listening to the soundtrack now as I write about it. Oh, what irony I've brought into this post!

So, overall, I say that The Social Network, being what it is and essentially documenting the rise of one of the biggest social media sites of all time, is a very well done movie for what it is. It's got great dialogue exchanges with great acting to boot, a meaningful story full of artistic license for entertainment purposes, and a really great soundtrack on top of that. That said, it's no wonder it won so many awards for having such an amazing premise among other factors that continue to make it relevant in our social media-infested world today. In terms of rating, I personally give it a solid A and consider it a must see for those willing to check it out for what it is.

Thanks y'all for reading and, as always, I will see you in the next review!

Jasonic Reviews Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

"So what's all the buzz about Star Wars?" an average non-fan might ask. Aside from being the biggest, most epic space opera in cinema of all time, there are literally multiple stories to uncover in the massive galaxy the original built over forty years ago. From the various expanded material written throughout the years to the many video games indulging in cool ideas for players to try themselves, there's almost no where the saga hasn't gone (except maybe R-rated territory if you're talking the movies -- which Revenge of the Sith almost was). As of the release of The Force Awakens, there have been more and more side projects for Star Wars releasing in between each new main saga installment. With the release of The Last Jedi just around the corner, I thought I'd go back and take a look at last year's surprise spin-off hit, Rogue One. Right off the bat, it's clear that the movie is rather different from its predecessors as it is the only live action -- I say that because there's also the animated Clone Wars movie -- Star Wars film to not feature an opening crawl, but the differences don't stop there.

***SPOILERS AHEAD***

The film is a direct prequel to the original Star Wars (better known as Episode IV: A New Hope) and is perhaps the most mandatory prequel story in the whole saga. In it, a young criminal named Jyn Erso (played by Felicity Jones) is rescued from Imperial labor by the Rebel Alliance. With help from intel officer, Cassian Andor (played by Diego Luna), she is tasked with finding her father, Galen (played by Mads Mikkelson), in order that they may acquire more information on the Galactic Empire's superweapon, the Death Star of which he has reluctantly helped construct for years. Meanwhile, a defect Imperial pilot named Bohdi Rook (played by Riz Ahmed) has been tasked with delivering Galen's message, which reveals a flaw in the Death Star; a flaw that, if exploited, will pave way for the Alliance to destroy it should they get their hands on the plans. As they team up with the likes of Chirrut Îmwe (played by Donnie Yen), Baze Malbus (played by Jiang Wen), and K-2SO (played by Alan Tudyk), they must conquer any and all odds stacked against them to retrieve the Death Star plans and ultimately bring hope to the galaxy no matter the sacrifices they make.

For starters, the entire plotline gives us a deeper look into the Star Wars galaxy and answers the one crucial question many nitpicking viewers have had for years: why was the Death Star so easy to destroy? To some this movie's sole existence is to justify that with Galen Erso's explanation, but I see it as more than just simply that. Whereas the Original Trilogy only gave us hints toward life in the galaxy under the Empire's rule, this gives us an up close and personal glimpse at it. Details like the Stormtroopers roaming the streets of Jedha City to the skirmishes incited by Saw Gerrera's extremists show that the many conflicts of the Galactic Civil War weren't just limited to good vs. evil; there were obvious grey areas and even the main characters show that. Innocent as she looks, Jyn is clearly ready to break the necks of anybody who crosses her while Cassian is very much the opposite -- is essentially a hired killer who recognizes his poor choices even under the cause of the Rebellion. Though we have seen many grey areas throughout the Star Wars mythos, it's nice to see a more down to earth take on the worlds and characters that, while sci fi to us, very much realistically depict war from an average person's viewpoint.

Speaking of the characters, one of many complaints I hear is that the characters (especially the Rogue One squad) aren't developed enough and that they don't resonate with us like those from the main saga. Well, I'm here to tell you that that's the point; the objective of the movie is not to make us care about those Rebel spies mentioned in the opening crawl of A New Hope, but rather show how the Death Star plans were acquired and add some humanity to the conflict. To have everyone talk extensively of their backstories would have likely weighed the film down to a point where we're distracted from rooting for them to work together to complete the mission. For example, Saw Gerrera (played by Forrest Whitaker) had a presence in only the first act without us even knowing much about his story -- except for those who watch The Clone Wars, which I hardly did -- and died as if sacrificing himself when he barely left an impression. To some, that may have been too quick of an entrance/exit that means nothing other than for him to reunite with Jyn and show her father's message, though it's made clear that he's a physically broken person ("There's not much of me left.") and is tired of running from danger by the time the Death Star fires for the first time. All in all, the fact that all the new cast members die off in the end not only is a different way to cap off a Star Wars film (especially in Disney's case), but each of the cast gets enough development to where we're hopeful that they'll overcome all odds while not too depressed the moment the movie's over.

Though most of the movie's down sides are easy to rectify, the main negative I can agree on with this movie is its use of CGI to recreate dead or aging actors. I'm sure everyone knows what I'm talking about when I say that the way they used CG to essentially resurrect Peter Cushing's Grand Moff Tarkin and de-age Carrie Fisher's Princess Leia at the time didn't turn out as well as you might think. Despite noble efforts on the special effects crew's department, it's just too easy to tell they only animated someone's likeness over another actor's face; in other words it doesn't look real enough. Specifically with Tarkin, the moment you see his head turn around as the Death Star finishes construction, the way his face moves as he talks is so clearly animated, I almost thought I was watching one of the animated shows for a second. That said, prosthetics might have done the trick in a more authentic manner given that the actor they chose looks like a young Peter Cushing and could easily pull off his voice that, had they gone that route, I would have though maybe they brought the actor back to life just for this movie. And I know not what they could have done better to re-capture the likeness of young Carrie Fisher (as she was still alive at the time the movie came out -- RIP Carrie Fisher), yet it somehow goes back and forth from looking real to not real in the matter of the only 12 seconds she's on screen. Even so, the scene itself ties in perfectly with the movie's message of "rebellions are built on hope" without completely disregarding Luke's role in the next chronological installment and was a neat way to end the movie.

Of course, it's a Star Wars film so I can't let slip by just how fantastically the environments shown are visually represented. From the out of this world yet somehow real worldly vibe of the Erso's home planet to the sunny, beachy landscape of Scarif, each planet is filled with stunning landscapes that really draw the viewer into another world while somehow also remaining grounded -- the same contrast that's found throughout the film in its world and characters. It's clear that the designers knew what era of Star Wars they were designing after and it shows throughout the movie. The inclusion of Yavin 4 only serves to amplify that and seeing it come back wasn't just mandatory, but also seeing it from different angles as well as the Mon Mothma look-a-like were enough to excite me about seeing the OT era from a different angle. Even in the beginning of the film, the planet we first meet Cassian on has its own contrast, showing at first a bright and shiny city like that of the Prequel Trilogy before panning down into a more rugged, shady city similar to the Original Trilogy. Each locale was immersive in its own way and definitely made for a welcome way to revisit the era.

Naturally, the action scenes are just as mandatory and, my golly, are there many show stealers in this one. Whereas the previous films prominently featured acrobatic swordplay Jedi fights with only a handful of blaster action on the side, Rogue One deviates with a multitude of more realistic action set pieces many of which are very stellar and noteworthy. From Chirrut's blind Force-based hand-to-hand combat to the amazing X-Wing space fights we're given in the third act, the whole film somehow manages to create unique action set pieces without ever featuring on a lightsaber duel, which is saying something for a film of its series. Where in the pacing was a tad off in the first two acts and the action wasn't as engaging, the entire third act battle at Scarif is undeniably the highlight of the story; between the multiple perspectives shown from the ground to the sprawling aerial combat between the X-Wings and TIE Fighters, I was once again a young boy watching the exciting Battle of Hoth yet again, only this time better! And if that wasn't enough to keep me on the edge of my seat, the immediate follow up to that scene with Darth Vader slaughtering Rebels in a darkened hallway absolutely did not disappoint. Aside from Vader barely appearing hardly in the film up to that point, him breathing in the shadows, igniting his lightsaber, deflecting the Rebels' blaster bolts, and slashing/choking them in all sorts of dynamic ways has forever cemented that scene in my mind as the best scene in the movie as well as the best portrayal of the character of Darth Vader on film to date! I could literally nerd out on it for days at a time if I wanted!

Lest we not forget to mention the acting; it was fairly good. Not exactly the most masterful acting of all time, but it definitely wasn't prequel levels of terrible. Felicity Jones, though she played the part of Jyn Erso well, sort of maintained a bit of an angry expression throughout the movie even after her emotional moment where her character discovers the truth about her father, which I guess signals further the need for viewers to not get too attached to her. Ben Mendelssohn's Krennic, on the other hand, though I can't say he was the best antagonist in all of Star Wars, really nails the persona of a man who isn't recognized for his achievement as a result of ignoring simple oversights. He's just trying too hard to be the best and doesn't succeed and Mendelssohn did a good job pulling that off. The other actors all did a fine job of playing their parts even though they hardly ever got emotional, but then again that was the point. James Earl Jones, of course, returns to voice Darth Vader, and though his voice isn't given much of a presence in the two scenes where Vader's present, he actually cracks a joke that's guaranteed to make any fan of the Force choke crack up with ease. However, the real show stealers would have to be Alan Tudyk's K-2SO and Donnie Yen's Chirrut. K's snarky personality gives him the most funny lines of them all (i.e.: "Congratulations. You are being rescued. Try not to resist.") and even Chirrut's one liners (i.e.: "Are you kidding me? I am blind!") make him a fun presence to have throughout the film. And that's what the film was to me: gritty, dramatic Star Wars fun.

Overall, the film was great despite its flaws and really offers us a taste of what the additional Star Wars spin-offs may be like in years to come. Despite complaints involving the use of CG-plastered faces to recreate old familiar faces, the story answered our questions and took us into new, but familiar territory, the characters were developed enough to not distract from the main premise, the environments beautifully constructed and rendered, the action managed to stay fresh while also providing edge-of-your-seat enjoyment, and the acting was fairly well done. If anything, I'd rank this somewhere between The Force Awakens and Return of the Jedi in terms of my favorite Star Wars overall. That said the film gets a solid B and a worth watching recommendation from me to any Star Wars fan and beyond!

Thanks y'all for reading and, as always, I will see you in the next review!