'Avengers: Age of Ultron' review

"Everyone creates the thing they dread"

Avengers: Age of Ultron, the eleventh film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, focuses on what happens when Tony's latest idea to save the world turns against not only him and the Avengers, but all of humanity. The Avengers band together one more time to stop this creation, named Ultron, and to protect the world. I've got to be honest, straight off the bat. I expected to have this review up a few days ago. I traveled to the BFI IMAX in London to see this film, the venue being an absolute spectacle that I'd recommend all film fans check out at least once, and assumed I'd be so excited I'd have the review basically written on the way back. But the film I saw that night wasn't the film I expected, and I decided to wait and give the film a second viewing to collate my opinion before writing a review.

The reason behind this is because I was initially actually very disappointed with Avengers: Age of Ultron. Sure, it was a good movie. But it wasn't as awe-inspiringly spectacular as one would expect from the sequel to one of the biggest films of our generation. In comparison to the first, we get a less polished film here with quite a few examples of sloppy and almost lazy work in some cases. Some of the characters seemed off in this one too, with Ultron sometimes seeming too lighthearted compared to the sinister villain we were shown in the trailer, and a relationship between two avengers developing that seems completely out of character for both of them. The pacing is also a big issue. The film completely slows down at one point when the Avengers visit a safehouse for what felt like fifteen minutes, yet completely breezed by the creation of Ultron and the introduction of another character in the third act. The rushed introduction of the second character (I won't mention who here, but I'm sure a lot of you know who I mean) meant that they came off as a bit confusing for the remainder of the film with not much time before the final confrontation to learn about them. Indeed, after my first viewing of Avengers I was so disappointed and so focused on these flaws and more not mentioned here due to spoilers that I knew I should give it a second chance with lower expectations before I reviewed it.

Luckily, on my second viewing I enjoyed the film a lot more. Without the hype Marvel have created for this film circling in my head and with more in line expectations, Avengers: Age of Ultron is a very solid, good movie, albeit still a step down from the likes of The Avengers, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy. The choreography of the action in this film seemed like a step up from the previous installment, which may be because Ultron gives our heroes a real challenge in a fight whereas in the previous entry Loki remained pretty much on the sidelines for most the movie. Probably the stand out moment from the action that you know everybody will be talking about for weeks is the much teased battle between Hulk and Iron Man's Hulkbuster armour. The fight is a visual spectacle, includes several good comedic moments courtesy of Robert Downey Jr, and is actually a pretty big character moment in the film and not just stuffed in for fan service as I assumed it would be. Along with the action, all the effects seem to be in order for this film too albeit with some minor hiccups along the way (Hulk looks extra fake in an early scene whilst sharing the screen with Scarlet Johansson).

The film has quite a few comedic moments surprisingly compared to the very grim trailers we saw. One particular example of this is with the antagonist, Ultron. Advertised as a very serious villain, he instead in the film has a more lighthearted approach with a sense of humour similar to that of Tony Stark. When the humour works with him, it works extraordinarily well, but when it doesn't it takes away the sinister elements of Ultron and reduces him to a cheap imitation of every other snarky Whedon character that came before him. The acting is pretty much spot on for most the film. There's no need for me to reiterate how good the Avengers are in their roles, since everybody pretty much knows that by now. But I will praise Spader as Ultron, who manages to bring this creepy edge to the character that the film could have easily lost with him being a CG creation.

While Marvel films are renowned for also teasing and hinting towards future events, Age of Ultron does it to an extent we've not seen since the likes of Iron Man 2. Entering the second act, a subplot featuring Thor felt like it was in the movie solely to tease fans for the upcoming third Thor solo movie. The film also manages to tease Black Panther, Avengers: Infinity War and Captain America: Civil War before the credits even roll. And Ultron doesn't just spend a bit too much time looking ahead, but a bit too much stuck in the past as well. The film feels very similar structure wise to the first Avengers film, and not always in a good way. I was looking forward to see how Whedon would change up the climactic fight for the sequel after the first dealt with a long sequence in which the Avengers fought off hundreds of disposable minions to save the Earth from destruction. The short answer to my question without going into spoiler territory is he doesn't. It felt like a bit of a cop out, and one I really hope the Russo brothers fix in Infinity War.

All in all, while Age of Ultron does have some inexcusable flaws, it is still a good film and a fun ride. The chemistry among the cast is stronger than ever and scenes that just let them interact are definitely a highlight. The action is still exhilarating. The visual effects are still a spectacle. The comedy for the most part actually works. While the film's biggest crime is just giving us more of the same, that's not so much of a bad thing when this franchise is concerned. If you go into Avengers: Age of Ultron expecting a revolutionary step, the Empire Strikes Back of the Avengers franchise, then you'll probably leave disappointed as I initially did. But for a film to just go to for the sheer enjoyment of an additional visit to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Age of Ultron should provide enough thrills to make it worth your time.

Avengers: Age of Ultron  -  7 / 10

'Daredevil' review

"Be careful of the Murdock boys. They got the devil in 'em."

Marvel and Netflix recently entered a partnership to create four superhero television drama shows that would culminate Avengers-style into a fifth: The Defenders, The four individual shows would be Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage and Iron Fist. I can honestly say now I'm extremely excited to see the latter three, because Daredevil knocked it out of the fucking park. Starring Charlie Cox as Matt Murdock, Daredevil follows the character's origins as he uses his skills as a lawyer by day and his secret crime fighting alter ago by night to battle the seedy criminal empire that have taken claim upon Hell's Kitchen.

The chemistry between Cox and Henson is a highlight.

Of course he's not alone in the Battle for Hell's Kitchen. By day, Murdock works together with his friend and colleague Foggy Nelson (Elden Henson) as they try to establish their law firm together whilst trying to make a genuine difference in the city. Early on the pair tell a client that they've only been lawyers for seven hours, and it shows as they try to iron out the kinks and figure out how to deal with the mysterious crimes they come across. They're joined by secretary Karen Page (Deborah Ann Wolf), who does considerably more than just act a s secretary while she works with Murdock and Nelson. Instead the three form a strong trio together, and their chemistry becomes the main heart of the show.

D'Onofrio humanizes the iconic villain.

On the other side of things, Vincent D'Onofrio provides an excellent antagonist as the Kingpin of crime: Wilson Fisk. D'Onofrio gives a surprisingly three dimensional performance for the show's antagonist, and the show doesn't shy away from delving deep into his psyche. The show spends a surprisingly decent amount of time developing the relationship between Fisk and his sweetheart Vanessa (portrayed adequately by Ayelet Zurer). Seeing the romantic storyline actually belong to the antagonist is an interesting spin on the superhero formula, and one that definitely pays off with the development it gives to Fisk. I can't praise enough how the showrunners tackled Wilson Fisk as a character first and an antagonist second. It gives you a really refreshing character in the end. I'd be willing to say right now (keeping in mind I'm writing this before seeing Ultron) that Fisk belongs in the top three villains of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, if not the best that we've seen, and he's not even from the movies!

Daredevil prepares to strike. 

On a more technical level, the show continues to impress. The cinematography of the show is wonderful, with the show never shying away from using new and unique camera shots. It's also hard not to praise the incredible choreography. Whenever Daredevil (or any character) goes into battle, it's a spectacle to behold. Some of the moves that you see the character perform truly feels like the comic book has come to life, all of which are captured beautifully ensuring you feel every punch the protagonist dishes out and receives. Also on a technical level, I loved the work on Daredevil's costume. I'm referring of course to the black costume pictured to the left. I'll admit that initially I wasn't in love with it. I thought it looked rather dull and worried Marvel were trying to avoid Daredevil's comic roots. The costume really does grow on you though. And most importantly, it is a realistic reasoning. After all, as spectacular as Matt Murdock may be as an attorney and at fighting crime, he's not a tailor. Plus, he's kinda blind. How could you expect him to put together this iconic suit? The answer is he doesn't. He just pieces together whatever he can to aid him. And it fits the theme of the show. The show is an origin story through and through. While the first episode starts with Murdock already as a vigilante, make no mistake that this is his origin and he's learning the ropes and developing into the iconic character. The same goes for everyone in the show. Comparing their first appearance to their last, everyone has made huge footsteps towards becoming more like their comic book roles. And I really hope this is something we get to see continue. And how could I get through this review without mentioning the fantastic intro sequence? It's such a fantastically subtle little introduction to the show with a really nice underlying score to it, that really highlights what a wonderful production Daredevil truly is. Check it out for yourself!

In conclusion, Daredevil is not only one of the best comic book television adaptations we've ever had, but just one of the best comic adaptations in general and also some of the best TV I've seen in recent memory. There's an intricate attention to detail, the characters all get the attention and dedication they deserve, the acting is phenomenal and the show just looks beautiful. If this is any indication of the quality we'll get from Jessica Jones, Luke Cage and Iron Fist, then I absolutely cannot wait for them! And more importantly, I cannot wait to see Daredevil return in The Defenders, and I hope somewhere further down the line we can get a second season of Daredevil and revisit all these fantastic characters and story lines.

Daredevil  -  10 / 10

The Problem with Ratings

It's no secret that I've been trying to figure out this blog ever since I started. The style and format of my reviews have changed here and there as I've gone along and dropped certain elements and added others. But the one thing I've tried to keep consistent since very early on is to include an overall rating of the film (or video game when I eventually review one) to summarize how I feel. I put a reasonable amount of thought into what rating I give a movie, but I never really think when I give one that this is my definitive response to that movie. After all, it's just a number. If when we saw films and entered these new universes to see these incredible stories and the only response we had to that was a number out of ten, it would be a much sadder world. However, I've come to notice while writing my own reviews, and while seeing people feedback on others reviews, that the audience really pays mind only to the numerical rating more often than not. In fact it's not uncommon when checking user ratings for a film to see a very high number of ratings for the maximum or minimum number. This is part of the common misconception that anything below a 5 star rating, or 10 / 10 or whatever, is unworthy. And likewise, anything that doesn't completely engage us deserves the lowest rating it can receive.

Pretty much every reviewer uses a rating system, but what does it mean?

"Kingsman is a fucking 10/10 masterpiece you god damned heretic!"

This year I saw Kingsman: The Secret Service in cinemas. And while I failed to post a review to this blog, I thoroughly enjoyed it. So much so that when entering my rating onto a site (specifically Letterboxd, which I highly recommend to all film fans), I gave it 8 out of 10 on there. What I thought at the time to be a pretty good rating. Only two marks off of perfection, in fact. But still, I encountered one of my friends challenging me on this, telling me how much they enjoyed it and that they thought I did too. But I don't understand. I gave it a high mark, so how were our opinions any different? The reason is that ratings have become devalued in our society. So much so that many people actually mock it (popular YouTube user MrSundayMovies uses only the rankings Best Movie Ever or Worst Movie Ever in his reviews). But I don't want to simply leave it off with either this movie is great or this movie sucks. The reason I use a ten point scale in my reviews instead of a five point scale is to give me more variety when reviewing a film. The entire scale becomes pointless if you don't use the entire thing. Kingsman may have recieved only an 8 out of 10, but that's because in my opinion there were various areas of improvement it could have made that would have escalated it to a 9, or even a 10. And that's not a bad thing! In fact, I'd argue that whenever I'm rating a movie I have the mindset that anything above a 5 is a positive review. That means it's an above average, and ergo good movie. But this isn't how the majority of people view it anymore. When I told somebody that I enjoyed Furious 7 but they saw I gave it a 7 out of 10, they challenged me, asking "I thought you said you enjoyed it? How did it only get a 7?". And the answer to their question is truly the key to it all. 

"6/10?! I'm going to find this 'Oateyboat'. And I'm gonna make him bleed."

The reason I gave Furious 7 a 7 out of 10 can be seen in my review. I wrote my feelings on that movie, explained what I found to be positive and negative and published it online. Pretty much all of my thoughts on it can be found on this very blog, right above the numerical rating. Yet the majority of people don't really pay much heed to the actual review anymore with anyone's reviews. The rating is what's important to them above everything. Which means the majority of movie review readers are pretty much getting the system backwards. A review isn't supposed to be a long winded prelude into the rating. The rating is supposed to be a rough guide to summarize the review and make it easier for comparison. The comparison part is key, because this is also another reason I try to aim for variation with my ratings. There's no point in comparing the ratings if everything is either a 10 out of 10 or a 0 out of 10. By making full use of the entire rating scale in front of you, you make it much easier to compare your own and other's opinions on movies. Again, this isn't supposed to be an exact science that will flawlessly show you the answers; just because I gave both Batman vs Robin and X-Men: Days of Future Past an 8 out of 10, that doesn't mean they're evenly matched films.

"CALL AN AMBULANCE, HELEN! SOMEBODY JUST
GAVE X-MEN AN 8 OUT OF 10 INSTEAD OF A 10!" 

The truth is, there is no perfect, universal way to rank films. Heck, sometimes you may find you disagree with somebody's rating of a product only to actual read the full review and discover your opinions are more alike than you think, and that the reviewer is just a harsher or more generous marker. The only real way we can accurately get our opinions of a movie across is if we actually say them. I know that sounds like bog standard common sense, but it's a lapse in common sense people regularly have when they wonder why the rating system isn't perfect. The entire thing is subjective. And not even just our opinions of the film itself, but how to try to convey that in a numerical form is equally as subjective. Somebody could have the exact same opinion on a film as me, yet I could give it 8 out of 10 and they could give it a 7 out of 10, because it's just so damn opinionated. So next time you see a rating you find to be a bit unfair or maybe too generous, just remember that it's not all about some worthless number slapped onto the end of a review to summarize, but about our actual opinions. Oh yeah, and don't forget that sometimes people have different opinions to you and there's literally not a thing wrong with that. Apologies for the basic common sense editorial, but I felt I needed to get it out there.

I know, Deadpool. I know. 

'Batman vs Robin' review

"Welcome to the Court of Owls!"

Saying this is the best DC Universe Animated Film since Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox (which released only two years ago) or The Dark Knight Returns (which was three years ago) might not be saying a lot, but trust me when I say I mean it as a compliment. I'm a big fan of what DC are trying to do with their animated movies now, with three releasing a year: two part of a bigger universe and one as a stand-alone film. The only problem I had with this was that I found Son of Batman to be rather bland and boring with the whiny character of Damien being a specific point of annoyance for me. To say I was disinterested in this sequel is an understatement.

Batman and Robin clash in this animated sequel

The story basically follows the son of Batman, Damien Wayne, who comes from the League of Shadows, and how he's struggling to fit in with his stubborn father and his strict moral code. When a mysterious order appears, the already rocky relationship between Damien and Bruce is threatened when they offer Damien a place among them, provided he turns on his father. The result, however, is much better than I ever expected. The character of Damien improves quite a bit from the last one with there being room to sympathise with him and a very clear character arc throughout the film. The animation and voice acting are what you've come to expect from the previous installment and the Justice League: War & Throne of Atlantis movies. But this one just seemed to flow that teensy bit better than the two JL films, and leagues better than Son of Batman. Maybe part of the reason was due to the choice of antagonists. The Court of Owls are the villains who rival Batman in this film, and they offer plenty of chances to delve into Batman and Robin's psyche, their moral code and their history. I'm yet to read the Scott Snyder comic series that the film loosely adapts, but after seeing the Court in action here I've put the series at the top of my priorities.

Robin is "courted" (if you pardon the pun) by 'Talon'

I would probably say that for me, this ranks perhaps in the top ten of DC's animated movies if not the top five. It's probably the best Robin movie we've ever seen, although there's not exactly a stellar selection, and it gives us a better look into the relationship between Bruce and Damien Wayne as well as treating us to interesting and fresh antagonists. If you've yet to delve into the animated DC films, you're definitely missing out. And with just under a year until DC's next live action film, now is the perfect time to get your fix by instead getting stuck in with the animations. 

Batman vs Robin  -  8 / 10

'Furious 7' review

"Dominic Toretto. You don't know me, but you're about to."

'Furious 7', or 'Fast & Furious 7' as it's known here in the UK, follows on directly from the previous installment in the franchise. Deckard Shaw, played by Jason Statham, is out for revenge against the gang for taking down his baby brother Owen Shaw (Luke Evans) in the previous film, This installment also finally ties into what has so far been a very separate spin-off, The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift, and by tying up so many story-lines together, Furious 7 really feels like one that's attempting to honour the loyal fans of the series and could potentially pose as a fantastic finale to the franchise, had star Vin Diesel not already confirmed Fast & Furious 8 was in the works.

Being the seventh installment in the franchise, you pretty much know what to expect here. The film follows in the same footsteps as 5 and 6 by taking itself less seriously and focusing on being a fun action film. James Wan has stepped into direct his first entry into the series and does a magnificent job of handling his first big budget blockbuster. He's managed to stay true to the flashy, almost music video style aesthetics of the earlier installments whilst also bringing something fresh into the franchise, particularly with his work on the action sequences. The big set pieces of the film are adequate, with a big memorable moment being the much advertised skydive using vehicles. However, they don't quite trump the setpieces of the last two films. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it started to give me the feeling that the franchise was running out of steam to top itself every picture and makes me somewhat concerned for the next film. I can't deny I was enthralled by the final action sequence though, particularly the brawl between Vin Diesel's Dominic Toretto and Statham's Shaw.

Everyone in the film performs well too. This franchise was never exactly a vehicle (if you pardon the pun) for actors to turn in the performance of a lifetime, and nor would I expect them to. I'm just happy that nobody turned in a distractingly poor performance that detracted from the awesome action sequences. A brief cameo from a previous entry (which I won't spoil here) was rather poorly acted, but thankfully it was very brief. The key thing with the cast members on this film is that I have no doubt anymore that they have truly become a family. Vin Diesel and Paul Walker's chemistry have grown on screen because in real life they became truly close friends, and this becomes true for the other supporting members too. One minor quibble I had with the film was that Dwayne Johnson's character played a rather minor role compared to what he's used to, and especially to what the trailers would have you believe. I'm not sure if there was a behind the scenes reason for this, but after a while his absence becomes noticeable when the film is robbed of the charisma he brings to the role that helped escalate the fifth and sixth films above the rest. Statham is a good addition to the cast, but his antagonist is given less to do than Luke Evans' in the previous film, so unfortunately he doesn't come off nearly as memorable as he did.

Speaking of the cast, however, this film came with a remarkable burden when during production Paul Walker tragically died. I'm pleased to say that his absence in whatever sequences remained for him to film are almost seamless. James Wan has done an excellent job of managing to finish this film without a key cast member without making the film seem strange or choppy. And on the topic of Walker's untimely demise, I need to bring up the way the film decided to send off his character. I'm not going to spoil it here, but it's such an utterly fantastic and beautiful ending to the film that I can't deny I was fighting back tears in the screening. The family element that the cast seem to have in this film really played out as the franchise said it's final goodbyes to Paul Walker, and it was such a genuine moment I think it's going to be a sequence that affects near enough everybody who sees it.

Furious 7 is a good action movie on it's own merits, but we've seen nearly everything it offers done better in the franchise already. Statham's antagonist pales compared to Evans' and the action setpieces for the most part fail to top what we've already seen (with the exception of an uncharacteristically huge final action scene which both ramps up the ridiculousness of the film but provides the most entertaining part). Nevertheless, this becomes a must see for the fans as the story includes many elements of previous films and, unfortunately, we're forced to say goodbye to Paul Walker. I recommend fans check out his "one last ride".

Furious 7 - 7/ 10