Netflix And Chill: Army Of Thieves (2021)

I know that some people rushed to see this when it first landed on Netflix, but I don't know why. A prequel spin-off from Army Of The Dead, focusing on one of the supporting characters in that film, and directed by the actor who played/still plays that character, there was nothing here that made me consider this a priority. I'm glad I finally got around to it now though, and I can tell everyone else that this is actually quite a bit better than the film that spawned it.

Matthias Schweighöfer is Ludwig Dieter, a mild-mannered man who maintains very strict order in his life while spending his spare time mastering the art of safe-cracking, in theory. He dreams of breaking in to four legendary safes, a quartet of huge devices that become increasingly difficult to break into when approached in a certain order, and he has the chance to turn his dream into a reality when he's approached by a group of criminals, helmed by Gwendoline Starr (Nathalie Emmanuel). But the chance to make his dream comes true also comes with the chance of everything turning into a nightmare.

Clocking in with a runtime of just over two hours, because of course it does, the most pleasant surprise about Army Of Thieves is how well it moves through the fairly silly plot, helped by a decent mix of characters and a few fun set-pieces. Writer Shay Hatten keeps the growing zombie threat from Army Of The Dead simmering away in the background, but sensibly focuses on this as an amusing crime caper, centred on an entertainingly nervy and ill-prepared main character.

Schweighöfer is great in the main role, making it easy to remember why his character was such a standout in the previous film. As awkward with people as he is comfortable with lock mechanisms, he's allowed to be the kind of criminal that viewers can easily root for, in it more for the challenge than any big payday, and aiming to get things done with a minimum of fuss or casualties. Emmanuel is an enjoyable screen presence, and she does well enough in her main role here, although it's hard to view her as a strong leader when the cracks in the team start to show. Stuart Martin is the mean and moody one, abd both Guz Khan and Ruby O. Fee are there to be placed in difficult positions as things become more strained. Jonathan Cohen is the determined cop who is always just one step behind, as expected, and there is an end scene that presents the expected cameos reminding everyone of where these events have been leading.

Aside from his acting onscreen, Schweighöfer also deserves some credit for his direction. This isn't his first feature, but all of his previous films have been co-directed with Torsten Künstler, which makes this his first solo outing. I'm sure he was given a lot of support and guidance by those who wanted to keep this in line with Zack Snyder's movie (and that support no doubt includes Snyder himself potentially offering some pointers), but Schweighöfer manages to deliver something that feels in line with the previous film in this series without ever being slavishly devoted to it. It's a character piece, it's a comedic crime film, it's a fun adventure. It's not a film that needs to keep reminding you of every detail and overcooked style of what preceded it.

Absolutely disposable stuff, admittedly, but I certainly enjoyed it enough while it was on. And I'd certainly be more keen to watch another film about this character than I would to watch another zombie-filled Snyder movie at this point.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Netflix And Chill: Army Of The Dead (2021)

I went in without any expectations, I assure you I did. Zack Snyder isn't someone I have a very strong opinion on, despite his ability to stir up lots of fans online and get away with much more than most directors would. I like his visual style, he's done a couple of great modern blockbusters, and I'll still try to view anything he directs with an open mind.

Unfortunately, it seems that Snyder, like one or two other big name directors I could mention, has started to believe his own hype. And may be surrounded by people who don't say no often enough. There's no other reason I can think of for the succession of bad decisions made here. And I will roll my eyes and wag my finger at anyone who forgives all other errors because "zombie tiger . . . coooool."

The plot is simple. A nasty accident means that there's a massive outbreak of zombieitis in Las Vegas. There's a lot of carnage, and then Las Vegas is basically quarantined, thanks to a handy complete ring of large containers placed around it. If you're already unable to handle this level of disbelief, it just gets worse from here. Scott Ward (Dave Bautista) is tasked by Mr. Tanaka (Hiroyuki Sanada) to put together a team and head into Las Vegas, with the aim of collecting a massive sum of money from a casino vault before the place is flattened by nuclear rockets that don't cause any other issues for the surrounding area. Yes, this is a film in which a plan to enter a zombie-infested area just to snatch millions of dollars becomes one of the least dumb things in it, certainly by the time you get to that nuclear rocket strike.

It's also a film that features a fleeting cameo by Sean Spicer. At that point I knew that it would have to work bloody hard to win me back around. It never did.

There's some good stuff here. The gore isn't tamed down, there's an interesting variety to the zombies, and Bautista is a good leading man. It also helps that they ended up with Tig Notaro in the role of Marianne Peters, the pilot for this exploit. Notaro, from her very first scene to her last, is gold. And I'm not completely oblivious to the coolness of a zombie bloody tiger, which is involved in what is the very best death sequence in the whole film.

That's all I can think of for the positives. The script, co-written by Snyder, Shay Hatten, and Joby Harold, is mostly awful. Everyone is given too much time, no matter how minor their characters should be, the motivations are unbelievable, and the attempt to establish an actual society within the zombie realm is a big mis-step, especially when you get to a reveal in the third act that is properly hilarious when I suspect it was meant to be a serious attempt to surprise people. Surprises are lacking throughout, from the characters who turn out to have other agendas to the inevitable resolution to different relationship issues.

The runtime, just under two and a half hours, is another issue. This is a film that should have been all about forward momentum, especially if that would help to distract from the poor script, but it meanders around instead, with Snyder needing to show off every idea that popped into his head while creating the film.

Although the cast aren't bad, some are better than others. Standouts are Bautista (not great, but feels just right in his role), Notaro, Nora Arnezeder (playing someone who can guide the team into Las Vegas), Matthias Schweighöfer (the safecracker), and Garret Dillahunt. But when is Dillahunt not a standout? Ella Purnell, Omari Hardwick, Ana de la Reguera, Theo Rossi, and Raúl Castillo do what is necessary, but are either hampered by the script or just not as good as some of their co-stars.

It's not that I hated watching every minute of this. I just wished that I'd spent two and a half hours watching something much better. And there's a much better film to be made from this premise. Snyder, however, does what Snyder does. And that includes filling up the soundtrack with some horrendous cover songs, despite starting well with another bit of Richard Cheese (used so memorably in Snyder's Dawn Of The Dead remake).

I've already seen some high praise for this, and it's confounding. Everyone can like whatever they like, and it's always different strokes for different folks, but I can't help thinking that some of the people rating the film so highly are simply looking to continue keeping the pedestal upright that Snyder has managed to get himself placed on. 

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.

It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA

Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Justice League (2017)

Messy is the word to use with most of the major DC movies we have seen in the last few years. Ever since Man Of Steel seemed to sorely misjudge the very essence of Superman, fans have been worried about those in charge making too many mis-steps, which has since been confirmed by, well, numerous mis-steps. Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice actually didn't seem too bad the last time I watched it, redeemed by some impressive action scenes and fun individual moments, Suicide Squad was actually FUN, which I wasn't expecting, albeit very messy fun (has any blockbuster film used clips of music so erratically?), and Wonder Woman almost made up for everything else, despite a climactic battle that felt a bit disappointing.

And now we finally have Justice League, the film that you know DC have been wanting to give fans from the very beginning. The film responsible for the messy, rushed approach to their release timetable. And, whaddyaknow, it's messy. But it's almost entertaining enough to make it an enjoyable mess.

The silly plot sees a big baddie named Steppenwolf (impressive CGI voiced by Ciaran Hinds) coming back to Earth to collect a few cubes that will cause devastation and death if linked together for long enough. It's up to Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck) to put together a team. He knows that he can get help from Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), but also wants to recruit Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller), and Cyborg (Ray Fisher). But will they be enough?

Directed by Zack Snyder (for the most part), Justice League continues in the dark visual style that was set up back in Man Of Steel. Thankfully, that style doesn't mean that the script, by Joss Whedon and Chris Terrio, is too sombre and humourless. A lot of the humour comes from the exuberance and inexperience of The Flash, but there are also some fun exchanges between Aquaman and the other team members.

Starting, suitably enough, with a flashback scene that shows Superman (Henry Cavill) talking to some kids who are filming him on a mobile phone, it's worth mentioning that the DC movies have already tried to give their superhero movies more weight than their Marvel counterparts. Ever since that major moment at the end of Man Of Steel, deaths mean something here, they impact on the characters (which didn't happen in the Marvel Cinematic Universe until the pieces needed to be put in place for Captain America: Civil War).

The performances are all decent enough, with Miller, Fisher, and Momoa feeling very comfortable in their roles and Affleck and Gadot suitable leaders, and everyone from the past few movies seems to get a moment or two: Diane Lane, Amy Adams, Jeremy Irons, Connie Nielsen, J. K. Simmons, and a few others.

The biggest problem with Justice League is how forced it all feels. The plotting often feels as if it was reverse engineered, with everyone involved knowing what the final scenes needed to be but not really knowing how to get there. That may not sound like a major issue, but it is. It allows the whole film to feel as if certain scenes are either completely extraneous or just put together in a slapdash manner to get elements in place.

To sum up then, Justice League does just enough to be a fun time at the cinema. And it's pretty messy.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice (2016)

It's been hard to avoid the hype machine for Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice (forthwith known as BvS for the purposes of this review). Ever since initial announcements were made, to either applause or sneers, or both, there has been an almost steady, grinding inevitability to viewing this superhero battle. A sense that Warner Bros. have placed us all on a conveyor belt that they alone have been operating, with the end drop either leading to a fiery hell or cool oasis, depending on your general view of the DC properties and their plan to rival Marvel on the big screen. And if you don't LOVE this one, well that is okay, because don't forget that Suicide Squad will be along soon enough, as well as a Wonder Woman movie (which, based on the impression made by the character in this movie, could be a very good thing indeed - but that will come later).

This is a movie that apparently garnered such a positive reception at the screening for certain studio execs that new Batman Ben Affleck was immediately signed on for more movies and everyone started to simply look at their about-to-soar stock shares whenever their partners were unable to bring them to orgasm. That last bit is untrue. Of course. But I have to state the untrueness of it . . . . . . . just in case.

And then it was released. Audiences were good. Ticket sales seemed in line with the predictions. And critics unleashed a large selection of reviews that seemed to come perilously close to calling this a big, fat turkey. Articles started to appear in support of the movie. Many articles started to appear that tried picking apart just what it got wrong. And a perceived divide between critics and audiences seemed to widen. But was that really the case? It's far too early to decide whether or not this film will end up proving to be a bit of a financial disappointment, compared simply to what Warner Bros. are obviously expecting from it, but I've heard from very few people who unequivocally loved it. Do we regular cinema-goers invest that little bit more just because we've already invested our money in a ticket? I actually suspect that we do. Pair that up with the growing feeling that many critics have in the internet age, that they're becoming less and less necessary in a world in which quotes can be culled from blogs (I know, I know, I guess I may well be part of the problem) and Twitter alike, and you can start to appreciate why it is probably easier for critics to either lambast a film or heap great praise upon it. They're seeing it for free, and we live in a world that demands more and more hyperbole to grab attention amidst the vast material adrift in cyberspace.

Anyway, let's get to the film itself.

The title really tells you everything you need to know. Henry Cavill is back in the role of Superman, Amy Adams also returns as Lois Lane, and Ben Affleck is a certain Gotham resident. During the events that took place at the climax of Man Of Steel, Bruce Wayne saw many innocent bystanders die. He decides that Superman is a powerful threat. And many others start to agree with him, leading to debates about power and morality. Oh, and Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) plans to pit the two heroes against one another. And Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) is on the scene. And a few other familiar characters, giving fleeting cameos. Which just about covers everything, apart from the inclusion of one more major element, featured in the trailers. Doomsday.

I'd better start by clarifying that I didn't love Man Of Steel (please see the review hyperlinked above). As much as I often like the work of Zack Snyder - and, believe me, I am one of the few who enjoyed Sucker Punch - I think that he fundamentally misunderstood just what makes Superman so super. Henry Cavill was superb in the main role, and he continues to be superb this time around. But there was certainly a lot of room for improvement.

The good news is that BvS DOES hold up as a move in the right direction. There are some interesting themes and ideas in the mix, with one or two moments of dialogue nicely summing up the different views of the main characters. Visually, it's a slightly brighter film than Man Of Steel, certainly when it comes to Superman himself and the scenes that show Metropolis not in any immediate danger. And most of the newcomers do themselves proud. Ben Affleck is fine as Bruce Wayne/Batman but I'd still put him just below both Keaton and Bale. Jeremy Irons is a wonderful Alfred. Gal Gadot doesn't get too much to do, but she does well enough with what she's given.

The action scenes are also pretty well done, with the main event being the unsurprising highlight of the film. It's a shame that the climax goes down the overblown, overly-CGI route (although it's still not as ineffective and ultimately dull as the videogame that made up the grand finale of Avengers: Age Of Ultron). And it's all grounded quite nicely, which is pleasantly unexpected, considering the characters being portrayed.

Now let me get to the bad stuff.

Snyder seems to continue misunderstanding the main character, with the additional damage caused by him also now misunderstanding Batman. Perhaps it's best to blame the writers (Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer) but Snyder has always seemed to be a director able to put his vision directly on to the screen, and this time around his vision jars when set against the long history of these characters in comic book form. It's easier to forgive this time, however, as viewers should be able to accept a little bit of "fudging of the details" to line things up for the battle and the cinematic growth of this universe. There's certainly nothing here as bad as the major mis-step that many people criticised in Man Of Steel, and the fact that it uses the end of that movie as a developmental stepping stone almost makes me re-evaluate my opinion of it. Almost.

The bigger problem comes from some of the casting. I like Jesse Eisenberg. I've often REALLY liked him onscreen. And I think he's the absolutely worst Lex Luthor in the history of onscreen Lex Luthors. There's no way around it. His motives are murky, at best. His mannerisms are ridiculously over-emphatic. And a weak villain unbalances any standard "good vs evil" tale. Ezra Miller may only be seen for less than a minute, but that's some casting that I can't get behind (see the movie to see who he is portraying). And then you have Kevin Costner and Diane Lane. They're not bad here, but their presence feels unnecessary, as if they've been shoehorned in just to keep the cast prestigious enough. Which isn't necessary when you have a couple of scenes featuring Holly Hunter reminding people how great Holly Hunter can be.

Last, but by no means least, we have the editing. Despite the runtime, the pacing isn't really a problem here, but there are some unnecessary sequences that I couldn't help thinking would have been better left on the cutting-room floor. One dream sequence too many is mildly irritating, but using one dream as a potential prophecy/warning is downright lazy.

Despite the flaws here, I decided to be generous to BvS. It actually does everything that it sets out to do. Comparing it to other movies isn't always going to leave it in the best light, but that isn't always going to be fair either (particularly when comparing it to any of the now-well-established Marvel outings). This is an impressive blockbuster. It's got some great imagery, with a sequence set during a Day Of The Dead celebration standing out as a personal favourite, it's got one or two ingredients too many being stirred into a big pot, and it's got a handful of small delights in pretty much every sequence. Considering what Snyder was tasked with, it's hard to think of a final product ticking as many boxes as this one does.

And it's got plenty of people excited for the upcoming Wonder Woman movie. Which can't be a bad thing.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

300 (2006)

This is review number one, for those wanting to read a decent, standard review. Review number two can be found by scrolling to nearer the bottom of the page.

Based on the source material by Frank Miller and Lynn Varley, 300 is a sword & sandals epic for the MTV generation. It's full of inaccuracies, can be interpreted in a number of different ways by people looking to drag the film down a notch or two, and almost every line of dialogue borders on the snigger-inducingly ridiculous (due to either the wording or the sombre delivery). It's also a rollicking good time, visually lush and rarely dull.

Gerard Butler plays King Leonidas, a fearsome Spartan leader who stirs up some trouble when he decides to stand up to the Persian army. He's not authorised to take the army into battle so just goes for a wander instead. With 300 men (hence the title). One fight leads on to another, and that's pretty much the entire movie.

Directed by Zack Snyder, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Kurt Johnstad, 300 is the usual stylish product that you'd expect from him. Many are quick to accuse him of making movies that are nothing but style over substance, but I think that he often blends the two very well. Oh, his emphasis is very much on the style, undoubtedly, but his movies often warrant further exploration beyond whatever lies on the surface.

300 remains one of his best movies, although his very best is still his feature debut (that fantastic remake of Dawn Of The Dead), and this is due to the enjoyable source material and to the solid cast.

Butler is all that is man in the main role, with a six-pack to make even healthier specimens than myself feel slightly inferior. He is, as all the actors are, believably tough and fearless in his role. Standing by his side in battle are the likes of David Wenham, Michael Fassbender and Tom Wisdom. Lena Headey is the strong and beautiful Queen who does her best to gain support for her husband while he's at war, Stephen McHattie tries to offer her some sound advice, and Dominic West plays a character who is clearly more of a conniving politician than warrior. And then there's Rodrigo Santoro, making quite the impression as the towering Xerxes, a man who believes himself to be a god, even in the face of such strong opposition from the Spartans.

You could say that this entire movie is just a small group of men fighting a much larger group of men and you'd be right. But there's also a bit more to it. It has enough content to encourage some interesting thoughts and conversations, even if all of those thoughts and conversations call into question a number of decisions made in the creative process.

Review number two: "This . . . . . . IS . . . . . . . . . SPARTA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

8/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Blu-ray-Region-Free-Gerard-Butler/dp/B000VE2NQ4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1380229438&sr=8-2&keywords=300