Superman/Doomsday (2007) review

My preparation for Man of Steel has been mostly torturing with me hating the last three Superman films with a passion. I wasn’t sure whether or not this film is where I should go next but only decided to watch this simply because I enjoyed the ‘The Dark Knight Returns’ films from 2012 and this year. I can happily say that Superman vs Doomsday is a surprisingly entertaining film that shows us the characters of Kal-El, Lois Lane and Lex Luthor far better than they were shown in Superman Returns and in some ways, brings back old memories.

Superman/Doomsday tells the story of Superman, on a quest to bring peace to Metropolis, realizes that he has found a new enemy called Doomsday, a genetically engineered warrior. During a fight, Superman manages to defeat Doomsday but succumbs to his injuries. Following his death, whilst the residents of Metropolis mourn his death, Lex Luthor has begun an all new and terrifying plot against Metropolis.

Whilst the introduction involving the title was disappointing as it didn’t contain the traditional John Williams score, I was surprised that the theme composed for this film was surprisingly good and showed an extremely emotional side to it. The film begins with a sequence where Lex Luthor talks about god and compares him to Superman and states that even God must die sometimes. I thought that this was a truly fantastic way and intriguing way to open up the film. It immediately brought our attention on the story and made us loathe Lex a bit more than we had done in the past. It was a rather powerful beginning.

The story in this film is generally fantastic, giving us many great sequences and full of surprises. I had always viewed Lex Luthor as a rather bland character but here, he seems a little more energetic and seems clever. His plot in this film is an extremely unique one and though it may sound cheesy, comes off rather well in the film. Lex, after Superman’s supposed death, creates clones of Superman as he makes his army of ‘Supermen’ to rule Metropolis. I thought that this was a completely awesome idea and worked a lot better than the plots to Superman III, IV and Superman Returns.

The action sequences in this film are generally exciting though some action sequences do go on for quite sometime, to the extent where you wonder how it could possibly stuff. The best action scene is quite possibly the scene involving Doomsday and Superman who fight, as Lois and Jimmy are on the plane. This scene had the most surprises and was rather short, quick and extremely effective. The most drawn out scene was the fight scene right at the end with clone Superman and Superman.

The voice acting in the film was done extremely well. Adam Baldwin was fantastic as Superman and his voice for even Dark Superman was good. Anne Heche did a good job as Lois Lane, providing a much stronger and courageous Superman than Kate Bosworth’s terrible performance the year earlier. James Marsters did a great job voicing Lex Luthor, giving a powerful voice.

However, this movie is far from perfect even though it is the best Superman film since Superman II, that I’ve seen. The vision of Metropolis didn’t necessarily meet my expectations and I was disappointed. I’m not sure how loyal this film is to its comic book and I’m not sure how the Daily Planet looks in the comics, but here it seems too spacious and seems like an important place. I wasn’t pleased by this aspect of the film but it makes up by several other great aspects such as voic acting, action scenes and some great character moments such as Superman explaining to Lois that he cannot give away his secret identity because of her own safety which links back to Superman II.

Though I was definitely pleased with the story and Lex’s plot, I was truly disappointed at how quickly Doomsday was finished in this film. He made for a great villain and I thought that if he could’ve returned and still being Lex’s puppet it would’ve been great, considering he is one of the toughest enemies Superman has faced thus far- Hopefully, Michael Shannon’s Zod continues Terrence Stamp’s Zod.

Overall, on my quest to experience different Superman films I was truly happy to stumble upon this one. It gives us a new take on the character of Superman and thus so, in a great and entertaining way. Even if a few action sequences go on a bit too long, an interesting story and some great characters make up for a great comic book film. 

Grade- 7/10

Indiana Jones & The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) review

When a franchise has been dormant for a long period of time, especially a beloved one such as Star Wars or in this case, Indiana Jones, it is usually evident that a remake or a sequel usually results in an unnecessary addition to a franchise which ends up ruining it. This is evident with Star Wars and even Superman. 

However, as bad as some films may be considered, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is considered the most disappointing film next to The Phantom Menace. I disagree

Based around the crystal skull, this film tells the story of a much older Indiana Jones who is once more on a search for a crystal skull as he must ensure it doesn’t fall into the wrong hands of the Nazis….oh wait, the Soviets. This is my biggest concern of the film right here, not the story in general but the idea of using Russians as the main villains. Each previous Indiana Jones film had a memorable villain, with the first and third using Nazis and the second using terrifying Indian people. The villains in this film are so stereotypical and bland that they immediately pass off as forgettable. Whilst Harrison Ford is as brilliant in the role as he always is, bringing in the same endearing characteristics that made him one of the most loved heroes, Cate Blanchett is horribly miscast as the main villain. When you take into consideration how great an actor she is from various films, to the point where she has won an Oscar, you’d expect her to deliver a truly great performance in such a film. Absolutely not in this case. She comes off as an irritating and very unintimidating villain who comes off as a rather laughable person never providing tension when it is needed. This is partly due to some of the poor writing and some of the poor story involved with her character but Blanchett herself is at fault in this particularly case. When you realize every other villain has cast an image in this franchise and she doesn’t, there is definitely something wrong

One of my favourite scenes of the film is the fantastic sequence early in the film in the warehouse where a fantastic and old school looking action sequence takes place as John Williams’ legendary musical score starts bombastically dancing to its own! This scene, despite the obvious CGI backgrounds, had a lot of great action and some great humor and was an overall fun sequence. Ford immediately ensured that we wouldn’t view this film the same as the Star Wars prequels as he is able to bring in an endearing personality towards Indy once more. Then the film certainly slows down and whilst some hate Shia LaBeouf, I certainly didn’t mind him. I thought it was rather clever having him be Indy’s son which goes well with Sean Connery being the father. Both Indy and Henry Jones Sr are wreckless fathers who try to love their children but are too busy getting caught up in their own world and life.

The story itself is presented rather well even though it doesn’t follow the same Indiana Jones structure. Most of the story is intriguing unlike the prequels to Star Wars and come off feeling like an adventure that Indy could go on some day. The script in this film is generally fantastic with some great moments and lines but at the same time, does have some bad dialogue. This is George Lucas’ involvement.

Karen Allen returns as Marion Ravenwood from Raiders of the Lost Ark and whilst her character is present to bring back the feeling of the previous films, comes off rather irritating and doesn’t do too much to help move the story. Whilst her character was great in the first film, this is where it should’ve left with her final known fate being having started a relationship with Indy as shown at the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark. When she meets Indy once more after a long time, it felt forced and rather awkward despite the two having been in a film of the same franchise, a further 25 years earlier.

Steven Speilberg is a legendary writer and whilst this is critically claimed as one of his least successful films, I personally found it a joy to view the first time. Surely it is full of flaws, more so than the previous films and doesn’t contain the same magical and nostalgic factor, but Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is able to overlook these issues thanks to a fantastic performance by Harrison Ford and some great action sequences early on, as well as an overall good and engaging storyline with a relatively good script.  However, it is truly evident that this instalment never needed to be there for this franchise. 

Grade- 8/10

Mean Streets (1973) review

Director Martin Scorsese, a newcomer at the time of its release, must be credited for his direction taken with this crime film considering the year earlier brought to us the greatest crime film ever created, which is portrayed as a big and epic mafia film. However, Mean Streets is the complete opposite of Mean Streets. It has a low budget, has a small scoped story and takes crime films back a few years. Even with all the changes, Mean Streets is a rather enjoyable film by master filmmaker Martin Scorsese, who would later go on to make far greater films.

This is where Mean Streets is separated from other crime masterpieces such as The Godfather Parts I & II, Pulp Fiction, Goodfellas and even other crime films such as the absurd Scarface. The story is such a shorter part of the story that the essential focus isn’t always around the story but more so the characters. Here is where I have one of my issues. Whilst the story is told early on about Johnny Boy (Robert de Niro) owing money to many people in the streets and how he is basically a con, the story come to a point in the middle of the film with Harvey Keitel’s Charlie and Teresa, Johnny’s cousin which is all about romance which completely threw me away from the story. Not that romance is a bad thing, in fact it works perfectly in The Godfather but here, it felt as if the entire focus suddenly shifted which made my attention shift. From here, the story becomes less relevant until towards which is a rather pity considering that by the end of the film, the story folds up beautifully. It is truly a pity that a little more focus wasn’t spent on the basic story.

In one of his earliest films, Robert de Niro truly delivers a great performance as a semi psychotic teenaged man with a tendency to go off towards others and a tendency towards violence. De Niro completely embodies the character of Johnny Boy and is a rather pity that he didn’t receive the role of Sonny in The Godfather in the previous year. The following year, De Niro keeps up his fantastic acting as Vito in The Godfather Part II and then as Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver. From Mean Streets, De Niro became an acting legend. Twenty years before Reservoir Dogs, Harvey Keitel starred in Scorsese’s Mean Streets as an uncertain and much more friendly and thought provoking man by the name of Charlie, who throughout the film sticks up for Johnny and for others. Keitel too, delivers a fantastic performance. The rest of the cast all give good performances each being able to act to Scorsese’s writing. De Niro shows strength, power, greed, violence and even corruption from an innocent boy to a thief. Keitel perfectly brings to the table what crime life can do to people and is used to separate others from him being able to illustrate what life is like for those who are involved in everyday crime.

By now, Martin Scorsese is a masterful director but back then, he wasn’t a name. In Mean Streets, whilst definitely providing a good premise and some fantastic actors, as well as an engaging script (just like all his other films), Mean Streets is easily his weakest film I’ve seen (I have not seen Hugo and his more recent work) Whilst a very interesting first act, the second act of this film falls underwater with the third act having to rise from the water which it eventually does. However, when viewed as one piece, Mean Streets can be a little tiring, a little messy and a little tough to relate to, especially when a love story is rather suddenly introduced and is eventually one of the central focuses. Whilst a definite good film with great performances, Mean Streets didn’t meet my expectations but is nevertheless, a film that I enjoyed even though it can be a little messy as one film.

Grade- 7.5/10

#4- Pulp Fiction (1994) review

Just before the release of Pulp Fiction, Quentin Tarantino wasn’t a big name in the movie industry at that time, like directors such as Martin Scorsese. However, following the release of Pulp Fiction, Tarantino emerged as one of cinema’s greatest writers/directors, all thanks to Pulp Fiction even if Reservoir Dogs was his very first film

Pulp Fiction collectively tells the story of two hitmen, a mob boss, a boxer and the mob bosses’ wife living out their lives and naturally being involved with crime. The great thing about Pulp Fiction is the perfect tying in of every single thing that happened in the film whether it be one of Tarantino’s extremely engaging conversations or just a murder, or a simple joke. 

Unlike other crime films such as The Godfather which is so full of heart, Pulp Fiction is an illustration of what life would be like under crime never showing any hints of emotion even when main characters are tortured as is Butch, in one specific scene. Tarantino was aware that his style and approach towards this now crime masterpiece was unique at the time for various reasons, especially the storytelling which is utter Tarantino brilliance.

When a film does not have heart but more so violence and heavy crime, there needs to be endearing characters spread throughout one of these films for us to really engage and immerse ourselves in such a world where crime is life. Thankfully, Tarantino by this stage had completely mastered how to write not only dialogue but his characters who are some of my all time favorites. Samuel L Jackson plays Jules Winnfield, a foul mouthed hit man and a friend of Vincent Vega, played by John Travolta. The two share incredible chemistry and are an absolute joy whenever they share a moment of screen time. Thankfully, there’s more than a moment! There’s a whole story and a half with the two, which is how Pulp Fiction is told. It is told throughout various stories taking place in different characters’ lives all of which share some necessity to the end of the film, whether it be Jules executing an innocent Brett or whether it be about Butch receiving advice from Marsellus Wallace. Even though ‘The Bonnie Situation’ is my favourite story, I love all three stories equally which is what Tarantino intended and which is what he succeeds at thankfully. However, ‘The Gold Watch’ segment is more engaging than I remember the last time I viewed this film. It is full of humor and is probably the only story that features any emotion depth in any way, yet the film in every way turns out a piece of legend! 

Every single actor does their part perfectly. Jackson and Travolta are the true stars of this film, figuratively and literally. However, the supporting cast consisting of Bruce Willis, Uma Thurman, Harvey Keitel, Tim Roth, Amanda Plummer and Christopher Walken all do a fantastic job. Even Tarantino himself has a role in the film and whilst this is one of the weaker performances in the film, it still has some great moments. This is where the film truly dominates most of cinema’s films. Not in the story or the acting, or even the direction. But in the dialogue. I am not someone who gets engaged to dialogue to the extent I have in Pulp Fiction, which is quite possibly the most quotable film I’ve ever had the pleasure of viewing. Tarantino is able to perfectly place everyday conversations into a unique crime film in a way that not only is it entertaining but it develops characters and a story. Most of the characters are completely understood from the dialogue they say. Some of my favourite dialogue ever came from Jackson and some other fantastic lines from Travolta and Willis.

This film is one of the most perfectly paced 150 minute films. To think that by the end of this film, I truly wonder what has happened to time completely tells that when one is able to forget about the duration of a film, they are immersed and that is what I was. I was taken into a world full of crime and violence, so empty of peace and happiness which is simply not where I want to ever be but was able to take myself and accept myself into such a world. Everything about Pulp Fiction is utterly perfect and when you add the incredible entertainment factor and the high re-watchability factor that Pulp Fiction has, then you basically find yourself having a timeless masterpiece that is not only Tarantino’s best but one of the all time greats. 

Grade- 10/10 

Most deserved!!!!  

On The Waterfront (1954) review

In some ways, it is a shame to think exactly how long it took the legendary Marlon Brando before he won his first Oscar, but realizing that he won it in ‘On The Waterfront’ deeply warms and satisfies anyone’s heart with his legendary performance being praised to death. The film itself, is one of incredible style, showing plenty of talent and skill and leaves an undying message that will live forever, much like this legendary picture has.

Marlon Brando stars as an ex-boxer named Terry Malloy, whose life has turned to misery and misfortune since been conned out of boxing. This is highlighted in his iconic line, “I coulda been a contender…” which has been parodied everywhere since then. It has become such a Hollywood classic that it cements a spot in the top 5 movie quotes of all time, according to the infamous AFI. Terry Malloy blindly takes part in the death of Joey Doyle and is willing to play D & D (deaf and dumb) for his boss, Johnny Friendly, portrayed by the legendary Lee J. Cobb. At this same time, a series of murders and crime ensues as Terry meets and begins a relationship with Joey’s sister, Edie portrayed by Eva Saint Marie in her debut.

Every single performance in this film is incredible whether the obvious Marlon Brando, Lee J. Cobb, Karl Malden, Eva Saint Marie or even smaller roles such as Rod Steiger. Brando’s performance is quite possibly, the greatest cinema has ever seen rivalled only by his performance 18 years later, in The Godfather. He brings a certain energetic feel to the film, boosting the brilliance of his performance by his speciality, method acting. Had anyone else been cast, no matter how legendary, I fear that they couldn’t bring the certain endearing aspect that Brando does, the confusion, the anger, the disappointment and most importantly, portray the innocence of his character. Brando excels at each aspects of this film. He is not alone in terms of fantastic performances.

Lee J Cobb plays Terry’s boss, Johnny Friendly and portrays him with brilliance. He brings yet again, a rather endearing personality to it and later unleashes with an intense, dirty and evil performance. The scene towards the end of the film, where he begins pounding Terry is vicious and completely believable not only from Brando’s side but from Cobb’s side. He certainly has a way with playing bad guys!

Karl Malden is terrific as the priest in this film and it is his second film with Brando, the other being ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’ He is once more, fantastic as a supporting character knocking some sense into the kid inside Terry. The scene where he objects to Terry’s desperate need for murder was just brilliant. Malden brings a certain frustration towards Brando’s character, some heart and most importantly, is evident that he brings some sense into Terry.

Not only do we have the brilliance of Brando, Cobb and Malden but it is mindblowing to think that Eva Saint Marie won herself an Oscar in her film debut as she plays Terry’s love interest, Edie. Whilst her performance may not be up to scrap with the others, it is nevertheless an absolutely fantastic performance especially considering it be her debut. The brilliant thing about ‘On The Waterfront’ is that it becomes so easy to get lost with the fact that there are actors acting out parts of this film due to how realistic and how grabbing the performances are.

The story is an extremely touching one, full of emotion and a realistic take on crime. The film itself is an extremely inspiring and positive one sending the undying message that even the average “bum” like Terry can do good like he does by the end of the film. It realistically presents what life can be like and the addition of the two kids who are often shown present with Terry are just brilliant, resembling the innocence of the kid within Terry.

At 100 minutes, the film is flawlessly written, directed and paced and keeps a certain intensity all throughout. The cinematography in this film is gorgeous and all themes tackled in this film provide us with hope in life, especially for those who are often discriminated due to various reasons. ‘On the Waterfront’ is simply a movie that can knock some sense and hope into anyone and it does after all, feature one of the all time greatest performances! 

Grade- 10/10