Schedule Update

Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com

The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that.

Hello, everyone. I know it’s been a long time since the last review, and that I haven’t put up a new one in four months. I recognize that I had a pretty big schedule planned early on in the year, and it does seem unlikely for me to stick to it now, but I do think it could still be done, as I am currently working on the notes for each of them, which will allow me to do the reviews themselves more quickly and maybe work on several at once.

With that in mind, the planned reviews are still coming, but since we have a particular holiday about to arrive, there are two movies surrounding it that I think would be a perfect way for me to make a comeback. I may not have been able to do it this year for Independence Day, but that doesn’t mean I can’t still work on it, I just need to wait a little bit longer for the opportunity to present itself to release it. Hopefully, these two can make up for it, since they do have the same plan as that one: release the review around or on a particular holiday, and then get back to the ones already in progress.

Speaking of the ones already in progress, I will be sticking to the overall plan. In fact, after some consideration, the planned schedule will actually be adjusted. For example, I had initially intended to do reviews for the Transformers franchise, but upon realizing the next installment, Bumblebee, is a prequel, that meant I didn’t need to have covered the rest prior, so I could just review that.

I had also mentioned the Harry Potter franchise was a possibility because a new Fantastic Beasts movie is coming out, but the same thing applies for that. All I actually need to do is cover the first Fantastic Beasts and then I can cover the new one.

Another possibility I had mentioned was the remaining Predator movies (which likely included the crossovers*). However, while I do intend to cover the crossovers at some point, I have decided to hold off on those for now, but the Predator reviews are coming.

For Anniversary posts, at least the first installments of Die Hard and Blade will be covered.

One that I may not get to this year, despite it being part of the plan, is Star Wars (since Solo came out this year). If it turns out I am not able to do it this year, those movies (including Solo) will be covered next year for Episode IX. I am also considering bumping the X-Men reviews to next year as well for similar reasons, since there are two new X-Men movies, both of which will have been released around this time next year.

I know it’s a lot to take in, but considering how long it’s been, there was a lot I had to address. Now that I have done so, expect the two surprise reviews to arrive very soon. As for what they are, you’ll just have to wait and see.

*Those crossovers being the AVP movies, which involve the Predator and the Alien going from their respective franchises and squaring off against each other. Speaking of Alien, I do have some plans involving that, but that is for another update.

Thoughts on Tomb Raider (2018)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

Next up in the series of catch-up reviews is Tomb Raider, one of two video game adaptations to hit theaters in 2018. This one is particularly based on the 2013 game that rebooted the series, also called Tomb Raider. Not only that, it serves as a reboot of the film franchise that came before, which starred Angelina Jolie as series protagonist Lara Croft*.

For those mostly unfamiliar aside from the name and lead character, Lara Croft (minus gender and age differences, of course) is basically the British Indiana Jones.

The game was awesome, but is the movie at least decent? You'll find out soon enough.

The story follows a younger Lara Croft trying to make ends meet since her father, Lord Richard Croft, disappeared seven years prior. Determined to find the truth, she learns that he had been researching the Japanese island of Yamatai, the final resting place of its Queen: the sorceress Himiko. An organization known as Trinity plans to use his work to locate the tomb and unleash its power upon the world. This leads to an adventure where Lara might not only find the answers she seeks, but also her true calling.

What Worked: The majority of the cast is really good. Alicia Vikander (Ex Machina) proves to be an excellent choice for Lara. She looks the part, commits to it, and conveys the character's dedication very well. Dominic West (300, Punisher: War Zone) as Lord Richard is another good choice. He shows that sense of urgency and genuine sorrow a parent may feel when having to make the hard decision to leave a loved one.

Then there's Daniel Wu (currently known for "Into the Badlands") as Lu Ren, the ship captain Lara hires. He becomes an interesting character because he has a purpose aside from her means of getting there. He can handle himself in a fight, which is shown particularly in the third act, and has some humorous moments.

Nick Frost (Shaun of the Dead) also has a small, but enjoyable, part here. His scenes do have some significance, so it's not necessarily a cameo**.

Now for the technical aspects. This is the first studio project from Norwegian director Roar Uthaug, and for a first effort with such a high-profile film, he does a very solid job. He manages to capture the game's look and tone and make the action feel just as intense, because it does not let up; it's even suspenseful at times.

The action also has an authentic feel to it because Alicia Vikander actually did most of her own stunts. Therefore, you feel as if you're seeing Lara herself risking her life whenever danger comes her way. The movie goes along at a nice pace because of that, especially when the action starts.

There are some references to the game itself, its 2015 follow-up Rise of the Tomb Raider (of which a few aspects are present here as well), and even to the previous movies. However, it uses them either to add to the humor or when it may be necessary for the story.

The humor, for the most part, works and helps give the audience some breathing room in between the action sequences.

The score is really good, especially during the action and some of the more dramatic moments. I also enjoyed the song played in the credits.

What Didn't Work: Although this version does get a fair amount of things right, there are still some that could have been done better.

Some of the dialogue makes it seem like it's trying too much to be both an all-out action movie and self-aware with the clichés commonly found in them. Particular examples are one-liners, and the protagonist surviving so many situations where they otherwise would have died, even acknowledging it on one occasion.

There are several predictable moments, a few of which involve Mathias Vogel, the villain played by Walton Goggins. His performance is good, but he's not that memorable of a villain, let alone a character. The same goes for the rest of the supporting cast, including Derek Jacobi (Murder on the Orient Express): good, but not much of an impact.

The one thing that really did not work for me, though, is some of the sound. It's whenever Lara has to exert herself, is in pain, etc. It does not sound like Alicia Vikander at all, but more like it was dubbed. Every time it happened, it was so jarring that it took me out of the movie.

Overall: Compared to the majority of video game movies before it, Tomb Raider ends up being among the more faithful ones, and probably the best one so far. Both fans and general audiences might enjoy this version quite a bit. Regardless of which group you're in, you get a likable protagonist, entertaining action sequences, and some very intense moments. Even looking at this version just as a movie, it's still a lot of fun.

In summary, to answer the question in the intro, is this at least decent? Yes; in fact, it's actually pretty good, so this may be a sign that the genre of video game adaptations may be heading in the right direction. I also mentioned that this is one of two being released in 2018, so the question now is: can the same be said for the other one? It won't be too long before that one is answered.

For those interested in checking this out, there's one more thing I have to mention: there is a mid-credits scene.

*Those being 2001's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider and 2003's Lara Croft: Tomb Raider - The Cradle of Life, respectively. I'll say this about them for now, because I actually did watch them prior: they have their fun moments even with how dumb and especially dated they are. Because of that, I can see them being in Guilty Pleasure territory.

**That part is not a spoiler, because he is shown at least once in the trailer.

Thoughts on Game Night (2018)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Hello, everyone. I realize it's been at least a month and a half (coming up on two months) since I posted something, as well as since the last review, which was for Annihilation.

The reason why I'm behind is something I mentioned in the previous post, but for those who came in late, I'll mention it here as well, because it started the day after I saw the subject of this review. I had been having some medical issues for almost a month, and it got to where I ended up having surgery. Since coming home, I have needed time to recover from it.

Now, I think I'm in good enough condition to where I can get back to the reviews. As the first of several catch-up ones, this review will be covering Game Night.

The plot follows several couples who have a game night every weekend, among which are hosts Max (Jason Bateman) and Annie (Rachel McAdams). However, on one such occasion, Max's more successful brother Brooks (Kyle Chandler) arrives, and he decides to change things up: this time, the game centers around a murder-mystery, and each couple has to work as a team to solve it.

What Worked: As always, the first thing to talk about is the cast. They all have excellent chemistry with each other, especially Jason Bateman and Rachel McAdams. It's surprising how Rachel McAdams is able to figure out how to retort to Jason Bateman's comedic timing as quickly as she does. There were three standouts for me, and she was one of them. The other two were Lamorne Morris (primarily known for "New Girl") as Kevin, one of their friends, and the best character in the movie: Jesse Plemons as Gary, the neighbor. Although one could argue that Rachel McAdams steals the show here, he ultimately does. He's hilarious in this. Also, Kyle Chandler is really good, too, selling how Brooks may have been more successful than Max, but that doesn't mean he's smarter than him. He does make some very irrational choices, but that aspect of his character has a legitimate purpose and drives the plot along in a way that makes sense.

The plot is actually an interesting idea, even more so for a comedy. How it's executed works very well, because it goes so far as to have transitions (look out for this as you watch the movie) where the camera is panned out, and the setting's appearance is similar to that of a game board, and the people and cars are the pieces. I thought that was a nice touch, as well as very clever. They make the direction, which is already really good, stand out that much more.

The direction comes courtesy of John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein, who, aside from previously directing Vacation, are primarily writers, having contributed to writing Spider-Man: Homecoming. Most notably, however, they wrote Horrible Bosses. This movie has that feel to it at points with the tone, because both are dark comedies; the concept you'd least expect to be really funny actually is.

Speaking of funny, the majority of the humor works here. The directors did not also write this, but as with the tone, it feels like they did. It also applies to the cast's comedic timing because it's similar to how Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis, and Charlie Day were able to play off each other so well in Horrible Bosses. The small amount of humor that didn't work is something that I will get to in a moment.

Now for the biggest positive for me before I do: the music. The score here is great, incorporating synth that makes it feel quite similar to 80s music, like the score for Thor: Ragnarok did. What made the music the biggest positive for me with that movie is overall the same case here: using a song from an iconic rock band at the beginning and at the end. The only differences are which band, and that this one uses two different songs. The one used in the beginning stood out to me because as soon as I heard it, the movie automatically started on a high note* by using one of my all-time favorites**, a song where you can use it for anything and it still works, and that is Queen's "Don't Stop Me Now." If nothing else, the music was my biggest positive because of that song alone.

What Didn't Work: There were a couple issues I had. The main one is that as much as I love making references, of which there are plenty here (especially movie references), I did feel like the amount they had could have been slightly dialed back. They were still funny, but there were times where it became a bit excessive.

Aside from that, the only real issue is that in the third act, it gets a little too absurd, but then by the end, it balances back out.

Overall: Game Night is a rare example of an R-rated comedy that's actually good, especially considering how the majority of recent ones have not even been sub-par. It's one that takes a similar approach to Horrible Bosses, because it feels as if genuine effort was put into it, like presenting an interesting new concept. It also helps that the cast have perfect comedic timing with each other. It's not groundbreaking or anything, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be more of a fun comedy that'll actually give you more than a few laughs, especially if you're into certain aspects of popular culture like I am. Because of how good it actually is, Game Night is one of the biggest surprises of 2018. It may not end up being the best comedy of the year (we'll just have to wait and see on that one), but it certainly is so far.

One more thing: there is a post-credits scene that ties back to something mentioned earlier in the movie. Since it's a comedy, expect it to be more of an amusing one.

*No pun intended.

**Also used in Shaun of the Dead and Hardcore Henry; while not quite as effectively incorporated as in those two movies, the fact that it was used here I still count as a positive.

Schedule Update

Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com

The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that.

Hello, everyone. I realize it's been almost a month since the last post, but the reason I feel like I can divulge now before I get to the update.

I stated in the previous post that the next few reviews would be delayed due to medical reasons. Specifically, I had surgery the following week, and have needed time to recover from it. For the most part, I think I'm in good enough condition to where I can get back to the reviews.

Now for the update.

The aforementioned next few reviews (or at least most of them) are still coming. The next one will still be for Game Night, and the ones for Tomb Raider and the two Pacific Rim movies can be expected as well. I'll see if I can still cover Red Sparrow. If not, I may postpone it for now.

Since coming home from the surgery, I was able to see A Quiet Place and Ready Player One, so those are also on the list. In addition to those, I will be seeing Rampage next week. Hopefully, I can get a few of these out before I've seen Avengers: Infinity War*.

After the Avengers review, I may do the Star Wars reviews now that I have a copy of The Last Jedi (either that or X-Men; either way, both will be covered soon, considering Solo and Deadpool 2 are about to come out).

I will do my best to get caught up as quickly as possible, so with that in mind, I will be back in the Game Night review.

*Rest assured, when I do get to that, there will be no spoilers. While I usually try to do a review with as few spoilers as possible, with that one, I will try to do it with no spoilers, considering how huge the movie is. It's going to be hard, but I will do my best. I just figured I'd mention that.

Blog Update

Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com

The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that.

Hello, everyone. I'm back with another update. This is an important one, and I wanted to provide it as soon as I could.

I realize that I have not been getting reviews out as often as before (putting the Ex Machina and Annihilation reviews out a couple weeks following the Black Panther one, for example), but there's a reason for that where otherwise they would have been out sooner.

Due to medical reasons, I will likely not be able to see, let alone review, any movies next week (at least not in regards to new releases). This means that unfortunately, I will not be able to see Ready Player One or A Quiet Place right away. At best, I will probably not be able to get back to watching new releases until Rampage comes out, and then hopefully get to those two.

That's not to say I won't be able to watch any movies period during that time; I will, just not in theaters.

Also, because of this, the reviews of Game Night, Red Sparrow, Tomb Raider, Pacific Rim and its sequel will be delayed. Until when, I don't know. I will try my best to at least do the notes for them, though, and get to them as soon as I can when I'm able to cover them.

In addition to that, I haven't had time to figure out how to approach the logo yet.

I apologize for having to delay newer reviews, but I won't have time to do them for a few days at minimum due to what's going on.

However, I do have some good news: I was able to get one more review out earlier today. The Annihilation review is up right now, so feel free to check that out.

I'll likely be back with either an update on when I can get back to newer movies, with the aforementioned reviews, or something else.

Whichever it ends up being, I'll see you there.

If you have any questions, leave them in the comments.

Thoughts on Annihilation (2018)

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com

In the previous review, I covered Ex Machina to prepare for Annihilation, the new film from its director, Alex Garland. Now it's time for me to review it.

The story follows Lena, a biologist and former soldier whose husband Kane (a soldier himself) suddenly reappears from inside The Shimmer, a zone where everything changes and those who go in usually never come out. Since Kane managed to make it back, Lena joins a team of fellow scientists to find the source of The Shimmer (a lighthouse) and what happened to the previous team searching for it.

Before I get into my thoughts on this one, I must address something. This is a very polarizing movie, so in regards to what worked or didn't work for me, you may not share the same sentiments.

With that having been said, on with the review. I realize it's been a month since it came out, but for those who still haven't seen it and are interested in doing so: other than what was in the trailer, there will be no spoilers, or at least no major ones.

What Worked: One of the biggest subjects of debate is something I usually start with: the performances. I actually enjoyed them. Natalie Portman's portrayal of Lena I found believable; a woman trying to find out what happened to her husband is something that I can see an actress like her playing. You can see her determination. She ends up being the most interesting character in the movie, but considering she's the main one, that probably doesn't say much.

Then there's the rest of the team, consisting of Jennifer Jason Leigh as Dr. Ventress (the psychologist who leads them), Gina Rodriguez as Anya Thorensen (the medic), Tessa Thompson as Josie Radek (the physicist), and Tuva Novotny as Cass Sheppard (the anthropologist). Their performances were also really good, but their characters I'll get to later.

In the review for Ex Machina, I mentioned how Oscar Isaac was in this movie as well. Although he's not in it that much, he is good for the time he's in it. Kane ends up being the second most interesting character because in a way you do actually see the events from his perspective. If I go any further into it, it'd be a huge spoiler.

Another supporting character I liked was Benedict Wong (Wong from Doctor Strange) as Lomax, the scientist in the hazmat suit who's questioning Lena that you see in the trailer. Those scenes looked similar to The Signal (a sci-fi movie I really enjoyed), even from the trailers for both movies.

Speaking of looks, the biggest positives for me were the same ones I had with Ex Machina: the technical aspects. The one thing I'm sure everyone will agree on for this movie is that it looks great. The visuals are excellent, particularly the appearance of The Shimmer, the creatures, and basically the entirety of the third act. The creatures are in some of the most intense parts of the movie. There's a scene with a gator that's even creepier in the movie, but it's not the most unsettling one for me. That would be a scene with a bear that does something similar to the Predator.

I also really liked a portion of the score, which, oddly enough, is the same music you hear in the trailer, so I was surprised that carried over into the movie.

What Didn't Work: Although I did enjoy the performances of the supporting cast, I felt their characters could have been written better. They are supposed to be smart, and yet a common cliché returns in this movie that appeared in the first few movies I reviewed. They make stupid decisions. You also don't really have a chance to get to know them, aside from perhaps Ventress, and that's in the second half of the movie.

The problem I had with most of the score is that it felt inconsistent. At least to me, it sounded like it belonged in a different movie, and then when it got to the song from the trailer, it sounded more like something that belonged here.

The main issue for me was the transitions. Ex Machina did have them, but it was more concise there because of the story structure. Here, it goes back and forth between settings when you least expect it, and not only is it jarring at times, but it also affects the pacing, which is another subject of debate. I found it slow on occasion, though the visuals alone held my attention.

There is also a subplot where I get the purpose behind it, but it just felt out of place.

Overall: Annihilation is one of those movies that's not for everyone. As stated prior to my positives, this is very polarizing: people either love or hate this movie. It's also one of those movies where seeing it once may not be enough. It does encourage you to think, especially with the ending, which will stick with you regardless of where you stand on the movie as a whole.

I'm more on the side of those who love it, because I really enjoyed it. However, I can't quite say I loved it outright like I did with Ex Machina. With that movie, you could see the passion Alex Garland had in being able to make it. Here, the ambition is present, but not everything works. With this being his second movie as a director, it may have been too early to take the leap into the territory of bigger budget and scale.

Ex Machina is a stronger movie, but that's not to say Annihilation doesn't have its own share of good qualities. The visuals look fantastic, and there are some tense moments. If nothing else, see it for those, but go into it knowing it's not for everyone.

Thoughts on Ex Machina (2015)

Image courtesy of all4desktop.com

The next new release was Annihilation; however, before I cover that, I decided to review the previous work of its director, Alex Garland: his directorial debut, Ex Machina.

The story follows Caleb, a programmer and employee of a widely popular search engine company. He is selected for what he believes is a week-long visit to the home of the CEO, Nathan. When he arrives, Nathan informs him that he's in a research facility specializing in artificial intelligence. In addition to that, he's built an AI (a female named Ava), and chosen Caleb to be the human component in a Turing test. His objective is to analyze her and see if she has any humanity. What follows may be more than just mere conversations; they might just be a series of mind games.

What Worked: Despite not having much in the way of cast, that limitation actually works here because the plot is built around it. What benefits it further is the fact that the three main characters are all played by good actors. Caleb, the protagonist, is played by Domhnall Gleeson (Bill Weasley from Harry Potter). He's great in this, showing legitimate astonishment at what he learns from Nathan and while interacting with Ava.

Nathan is played by Oscar Isaac (Annihilation, Star Wars*), who is very believable at conveying the Steve Jobs-type qualities of his character, as well as a laid-back personality. He also shows that he can have some fun in one scene.

The one that stands out the most, however, is Ava herself, played by Alicia Vikander (Tomb Raider, Jason Bourne). This movie gave her recognition, and for good reason; she's fantastic in this. Every time she's on screen, especially when interacting with Caleb, it's hard not to be invested. It's not just her performance that gives you that feeling.

This movie looks gorgeous in its cinematography and production design, from the environment around the building to the building itself. If the look of the setting alone doesn't grab your attention, just wait until you see the visuals. They are that good to where they even won Best Visual Effects (and I was actually fine with that). The score is also very solid.

All of that shows in Alex Garland's direction, and in his script to an extent. There are some interesting ideas presented through the dialogue, along with a bit of humor.

What Didn't Work: A minor issue I had is that while the pacing is overall very good, there were times where it felt slightly uneven when going from one session to another.

Overall: Ex Machina is a great example of both an original and clever sci-fi story and an excellent directorial debut. It shows that Alex Garland can be a solid director in addition to a solid writer who has experience in the genre itself. While not as thought-provoking, it's similar to The Matrix in that it poses intriguing questions and opens the door for the audience to interpret its themes, particularly through a very unsettling ending. It also allows them to view how we interact with our technology from both perspectives and what could happen if we underestimate it.

Ex Machina is proof that even on a smaller scale and with a smaller budget, a sci-fi story can work if it justifies them enough to still be interesting.

*He and Domhnall Gleeson would go on to be in Star Wars following this movie.

Thoughts on Black Panther (2018)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

The newest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is finally out. The "Marvel-thon" posts have been building up to this. Now I can give my thoughts... on Black Panther.

Following the events of Captain America: Civil War, T'Challa has come home to Wakanda, a nation in Africa that's isolated from the rest of the world. However, his status as King is challenged when old enemies resurface. As both the new King and the Black Panther, he must not only protect his people, but also the outside world.

What Worked: There are many positives here. First of all, the performances are very good. After being introduced in Civil War, Black Panther has his time to shine. The performance by Chadwick Boseman there was more about setting the character up. In this, you see how the events of that movie affected him and Wakanda itself. He makes the character his own, and he's only shown up in two movies so far.

There are two other characters to talk about that return from previous movies. The first one is Everett K. Ross, played by Martin Freeman, who also returns from Civil War. You get to learn more about him in this as well, and Freeman does get some funny lines. The other one is Ulysses Klaue, played by Andy Serkis, who returns from Age of Ultron. He had a small role there, which I thought was to set up a larger role in this. Oddly enough, he's not in this movie that much, either. However, some of the events from Age of Ultron are addressed (including one involving him), and like that movie, Andy Serkis is good for the time he's in it.

Now for the new characters. There's Lupita Nyong'o (The Jungle Book, the Star Wars sequel trilogy) as Nakia, who has past history with T'Challa. There's also Daniel Kaluuya (Get Out) as W'Kabi, T'Challa's best friend. In supporting roles are Angela Bassett as Ramonda, the Queen of Wakanda, and Forest Whitaker as Zuri, one of the elders. They all get some interesting development.

There are three standouts in the supporting cast, and either of them could be considered the best character in the movie. One of them is Danai Gurira as Okoye, leader of the Dora Milaje (an all-female group of warriors who are fiercely loyal to the nation and its protector). The second one is Letitia Wright (The Commuter) as T'Challa's younger sister Shuri, who was probably my favorite. If T'Challa is Marvel's James Bond, Shuri is their Q; she is responsible for designing tech not only for Wakanda itself, but also for her brother. The other standout is Winston Duke as M'Baku, who leads a tribe distant from those in support of T'Challa being King. Although Shuri has some of the funniest lines in the movie, M'Baku gets one as well.

Last but not least is the villain, Erik Killmonger, played by Michael B. Jordan. He's a great actor (for evidence of that, go watch Creed), and he ends up being a great villain. Similar to Vulture in Spider-Man: Homecoming, you see where he's coming from, perhaps even more so than with Vulture. Is he the best villain since Loki as some have been saying? For me, no... he's the best villain since Zemo in Civil War.

As if the villain's motivations were not brutal enough, at least a couple of the fights in this get pretty visceral, too. The best way to describe them is if you take the fight scenes in Creed and the Bane fight from The Dark Knight Rises and put them together.

Speaking of Creed, Michael B. Jordan's collaborator from that movie, Ryan Coogler, directs this movie. He proves to be an excellent choice not only because he knows how to film fight scenes and hold nothing back, but also because he's known for using certain cultural aspects that do not get much attention as a key part of the story, particularly the Black culture. I will get more into that in the outro.

As for how he films fight scenes, it was very impressive in Creed, and this manages to top it. A great example is a casino fight that looks like it's all one take.

The biggest positives are the production design and the music. The costumes, sets, and especially the cinematography are amazing here. With the music, I'm not just talking about the score. There is a soundtrack in this, produced by Kendrick Lamar. In hearing that, you might be concerned that the songs may distract from the movie. If it were any other movie, maybe, considering those try to incorporate as many as they can for the duration of the runtime. Here, having a soundtrack by a popular artist actually works because they're used sparingly. I only noticed three used throughout the movie (counting the credits). The soundtrack for this is very good, and so is the score. There's also a reference to an old favorite of mine during a scene with Andy Serkis.

There is humor, but it's spread out, like with some references and particularly the dialogue.

What Didn't Work: While a vast majority of the visuals are excellent, there are some that you can tell are CGI, especially in the third act.

The beginning is a little slow, but it's not long before it picks up.

Overall: Black Panther is not only among the very best installments of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (might be high up for me; I'll have to think about that), but also will likely be among the very best movies of the year. Like with Thor: Ragnarok, it has another great villain. However, whereas that was the best MCU movie since Civil War, this has the best action since Civil War.

What makes this stand out that much more, though, is its cultural relevance. It's like a mix between Wonder Woman and Get Out. This and Wonder Woman give a particular demographic a hero of their own. This leads to the similarities with Get Out. They both bring to light issues faced by Black culture, except Get Out was a social commentary on that culture, while this takes that culture and embraces it. For those reasons, both also feel like a movie they needed, while being one everyone else can enjoy with them.

Expect a Stan Lee cameo (the best one since Spider-Man: Homecoming), as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene.

2018 Review Schedule

Image courtesy of hipwallpaper.com

The preceding image is for use until I have a proper logo for non-review posts on the site, upon which it will be adjusted to that.

Hello, everyone. I just wanted to provide an update regarding the schedule.

I have been trying to do some catch-up reviews, like Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, The Commuter, 12 Strong, The Shape of Water, and most recently Winchester. I know I said I would do Star Wars, but I have decided to hold off on that for now. Unless I can do maybe 1-2 of those prior, the next review will definitely be for Black Panther, so at least look forward to that.

For the schedule itself, a lot of franchises receive new installments every year, and this year is no exception.

In 2018, reviews can be expected for...

Pacific Rim, X-Men, Star Wars, The Incredibles, Jurassic Park, Mission: Impossible (I absolutely plan to do those two franchises), Spider-Man, the DC Extended Universe, and Transformers.

Possibilities are Cloverfield, the remaining Predator movies (which likely includes the crossovers), and Harry Potter/Fantastic Beasts.

That's not to say these will be the only franchises I plan to cover; if an opportunity presents itself with a certain one I didn't mention, I can cover that even if it doesn't have a new movie this year. For example, another one that can be expected, but for a different reason, is Die Hard; since the first one celebrates its 30th Anniversary this year, I thought why not incorporate that. A similar case can be made for the 20th Anniversary of Blade.

I would also like to announce new segments. There's "Trash Tuesday"* where I cover bad movies ("so bad they're good" or otherwise; Guilty Pleasures are debatable), "Thriller Thursday" where I cover different types of thrillers (be they sci-fi, action, horror, etc.), and "Favorite Friday" where I cover some of my personal favorite movies. As for when I intend to start them, I do not know yet, although I do have some ideas.

One more thing: I don't have a proper logo for the site, so the image you see above will serve as a temporary one. I may also use that (and eventually the logo) if I can't quite find a good enough quality image of the poster for the corresponding movie while preparing a review. I figured I'd forewarn you if you happen to see a logo instead.

That pretty much sums it up for the plans for 2018. I will also be gladly taking requests for future reviews, and I'll see what I can do. One rule for doing so: it has to be something I'd even remotely be interested in, so nothing like Twilight or Fifty Shades. It has to be something I'd enjoy watching willingly.

With all of that in mind, if I'm not back in a catch-up review, I definitely will be with my thoughts on Black Panther, so either way, you'll be seeing another post very soon on something.

If you have any questions or suggestions, leave them in the comments.

*I may need a better name for that, as well as names for the other days, although that could vary depending on the genre or even a franchise.

Thoughts on Maze Runner: The Death Cure (2018)

Image courtesy of hdqwalls.com

This is the second of two posts focusing on the sequels to the first movie I ever reviewed, The Maze Runner. In the previous one, I covered The Scorch Trials, and in this one, I will be covering the finale, The Death Cure.

After surviving the Scorch, Thomas and his group must now conquer their biggest obstacle yet. One city still stands, but it is under the control of WCKD. They must find a way in, rescue their friends, and find a way out. While in the Last City, they may also find the answers they have sought from the very beginning.

What Worked: While I will start off with the acting (as I often do), there is something I noticed in regards to the characters here: there is only one new character in the entire movie. The rest of them are either in the main cast or returning from the second one.

The main cast themselves are still very good here, especially with Dylan O'Brien as Thomas. This is his best performance in the franchise, showing his determination and some genuine emotion in a couple scenes.

Returning from the second one are Giancarlo Esposito as Jorge, Aidan Gillen as Janson, Barry Pepper as Vince, and Rosa Salazar as Brenda. With Giancarlo Esposito and Barry Pepper, they continue to be awesome. Although Jorge is involved in the action, Vince is given more to do here.

Brenda is definitely given more to do compared to last time, even having a significant part in the third act. Rosa Salazar's performance is pretty good, particularly in her scenes with Esposito. The second movie established that their characters were close, and that relationship continues to an extent here.

Another character worth mentioning is Dr. Ava Paige, played by Patricia Clarkson. She did show up in the previous two movies, but it was more of a cameo. Why I mention it now is because she has a bigger part in this one. With all of that setup, it seems like she's the villain, and yet Janson is more of a villain than she is. If you thought Aidan Gillen made Janson appear evil in the second movie, wait until you see him in this.

With the action, its purpose has at least been consistent, even if the style hasn't. The purpose has been to build up to the bigger picture by escalating the conflict the heroes face. They went from isolation to the outside world and now to the source.

There are huge improvements from the previous film. In that movie, there was a small amount of shaky cam during tense moments and action scenes. This might still have some, but it's minimal and not noticeable. Therefore, the action in this looks more like it was in the first movie. The same can be said for the effects. The moments of tension work very well because of these improvements.

My two biggest positives are the third act and the ending. Everything that has led to this more than pays off in the third act. The heroes' last stand feels like it should in an action movie: it goes all-out, sometimes beyond that. With the ending, it's actually very satisfying in the ways you'd think. It also wraps everything up quite nicely.

What Didn't Work: There are some predictable moments throughout this movie, although not as much as last time. My main issue here is that the third act is a little long, so it could have been paced better.

Overall: Maze Runner: The Death Cure is a solid and satisfying conclusion to what is ultimately an enjoyable young-adult sci-fi action franchise. This might be even better than The Hunger Games, and not just because this didn't stretch one book into two movies (although that helps). It's also been more consistent throughout the series, showing that not every franchise has to go darker in tone with each installment and that sometimes it's okay to keep the same tone while adding darker elements along the way.

This movie answers any remaining questions from the previous installments, and ends the series on a bittersweet yet hopeful note, and in a brilliant way.

Thoughts on Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

The focus of the next two posts will be on the sequels to the first movie I ever reviewed, The Maze Runner. In this one, I will be covering The Scorch Trials.

Having escaped the Maze, Thomas and his fellow surviving Gladers now find themselves in a facility that will protect them from the deadly Flare virus. It turns out this is a test facility to see who is immune to it, as it was previously thought incurable. Thomas thinks the staff is up to something, and that they may in fact have been captured by WCKD (the World Catastrophe Killzone Department). However, after Thomas manages to gather his friends and escape, they have to deal with something worse: Cranks (the Infected) and the environment they inhabit. What was once our world is now a desolate wasteland known as "The Scorch."

What Worked: The acting is still really good. The returning cast continue to have great chemistry with each other. I especially enjoyed most of the new characters. The ones that stood out to me were Jorge, Vince, and Janson. They are played respectively by Giancarlo Esposito, Barry Pepper, and Aidan Gillen. Jorge gets in on the action quite a bit here, and he's awesome whenever he does. Vince, although he doesn't come in until basically the entire third act, is an interesting character because he has leader-like qualities to him, similar to Jorge, but even more so. It's also nice to see Barry Pepper in a good sci-fi movie.

As for Janson, this is one of those times where if you see Aidan Gillen in something, you know he's bad news the moment he first shows up. He's very good here, and he is a better villain than he was in 12 Rounds where he went up against a certain wrestler who isn't The Rock or Dave Bautista*.

The action works here because it's amped up from the first movie, which also helps the story of the bigger picture progress. In the first one, there was action, but it was more about the group trying to find a way out of the Maze; the action provided the conflict throughout the movie. Here, it's in a larger setting, so you don't know what could be out there.

In addition to helping with story progression, the action sets up several moments of tension. A good example is one scene (part of which was in the trailer) where Thomas and another character are being chased by a Crank in a building, and one of them lands on glass, which slowly starts cracking.

For those who have read my review of the first one, my main issue with it was that some of the characters' decisions might not make sense. Thankfully, the amount of questionable decisions has been dialed back this time.

What Didn't Work: Something that seems to have also been dialed back is a fair amount of the effects. In the first one, they looked practical. Here, some of them look like they were done with CGI. My problem with that is not the fact that they might have used it, but rather that at times, it looks obvious if they did.

The amount of questionable decisions may have been reduced, but this one has something similar: predictable actions and lines. If you've seen any post-apocalyptic zombie movie (which you could argue this is to an extent) or any sci-fi action movie, chances are you know what I'm referring to.

While there is tension, and the action is still good, for some reason it's accompanied with a little bit of shaky cam. It didn't bother me too much, but it's there. I understand that there had to be a way to convey a sense of urgency with the group trying to find someone to protect them, but there had to have been a better way of doing it.

My main issue this time is with some pacing in the middle. It's after the building scene I mentioned. The problem is that it had been going at such a consistently fast pace prior to that, and then that scene happens, and it takes some time to get going again. It just felt very jarring.

Overall: Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials still has a lot of good parts, even with its problems. It does answer some questions posed in the first movie while building towards the answers for others. It also continues to build upon the world established there. It's still fun to watch because it's interesting to see how the story picks up and progresses. Then when all is said and done for the events of this movie, you want to see how it will be for the events of the franchise.

*I know the joke is coming.

Thoughts on Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

Image courtesy of wallpapersden.com

The conclusion of the "Marvel-thon" is the latest installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe leading up to Black Panther, and that is Thor: Ragnarok.

Thor has been searching for the Infinity Stones since the Battle of Sokovia, to no avail. This leads to him being captured and brought before Surtur, a fire demon destined to cause Ragnarok, the end of Asgard. After defeating him, Thor thinks he has prevented it, but it had already begun. The Goddess of Death, Hela, emerges while Thor finds himself on Sakaar, a planet ruled by The Grandmaster. If he has a chance of making it back to Asgard in time to stop Hela, he has to fight the reigning champion: the Hulk.

What Worked: I will start with the approach to the movie this time as well. It's much different from the previous two movies. The serious tone is now more comedic. Unlike Iron Man 3, which at times felt like it was trying to be more of a comedy than a superhero movie, the comedic tone actually works here because the two genres have more of a balance. With that tonal shift, it feels more fun. This is something that director Taika Waititi intended to convey to the audience, and it shows while watching the movie.

He's also known for having a lot of humor. This has more subtle humor than quirky, though; the quirkiness shows more in the look of the movie. The humor is still very clever, as evidenced by a couple moments that involve monologuing, and especially the scenes with a certain character.

Now for the cast. This is Chris Hemsworth's best portrayal of Thor, and you can tell he's having fun. It also shows that he can be hilarious. The same goes for two other returning characters. The first one is Tom Hiddleston as Loki, who has one of the funniest lines. The second one is Mark Ruffalo, returning as Bruce Banner / Hulk. Some of the best scenes in the movie involve Hulk, and Banner has a relationship with Thor that might be better than that of Tony Stark and James Rhodes.

Then there are the new characters, starting with the villain. Hela, played by Cate Blanchett, is easily the best villain in the Thor trilogy, as well as another example of a great MCU villain. Loki was able to make his mark across two movies; Hela does so over the course of one. Plus, Blanchett's performance makes her even more menacing.

Someone else who can be both menacing and funny is Skurge, Hela's executioner. He is played by Karl Urban, who's no stranger to appearing in franchises like The Lord of the Rings and Star Trek. He's not in the movie that much, but he does get a couple good moments. The same goes for Heimdall, but there's a reason for it with him, which helps develop him.

With the characters on Sakaar, the first one to mention is The Grandmaster, played by Jeff Goldblum. He's like The Collector from Guardians of the Galaxy, except he's more of a villain. The Collector was somewhat quirky, whereas The Grandmaster definitely is. He's great in this, and it feels like he's playing himself in a way with how eccentric the character is.

Before I get to the best character in the movie, there is one more to mention. This movie brings in another strong female character with Tessa Thompson (Creed*) as Valkyrie. She's independent and can handle herself in a fight. As great as she was in that movie, I might have enjoyed her even more here.

The best character in the movie is actually played by Taika Waititi himself. It's a fellow gladiator Thor meets, a Kronan (rock creature) named Korg. What's hilarious about him is that you hear "rock creature" and you'd think he has a tough voice to accompany that, and then he ends up being so casually soft-spoken. Every scene he's in, he's awesome. Some of the funniest dialogue comes from him. Waititi even references one of his previous movies as the character; all I'll say is that it involves a pitchfork.

For the technical aspects, this has the best action of the three Thor films. I can actually mention the "Rule of Threes" again, because this absolutely follows it. First is the fight with Surtur, then the fight between Thor and Hulk, and then the finale.

Those two bookending fights in particular stand out because of the soundtrack. Let me put it this way: within the first five minutes, I knew I'd love this movie. When the finale came, I knew I'd love it even more. This has the best use of a classic song since Hardcore Henry and/or Shaun of the Dead; in fact, this might have actually topped both of them, and those two used the same song. I always love it when a movie takes the song from the trailer and still manages to incorporate it.

In addition to that one song, the score is also great, with Mark Mothersbaugh of Devo and Rugrats fame composing it. It has a very "synth" feel to it, like something that came out of the 80s.

When it comes to the visual effects and the look of the movie, this has the best since Doctor Strange on both counts.

What Didn't Work: There are times where Jeff Goldblum does play up the eccentricity a little too much. That's more of a nitpick for me, though.

Overall: Thor: Ragnarok is hands-down the best Thor movie. It's also the funniest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie to date, showing that Marvel can actually balance compelling and comedic while still keeping to a consistent tone. With another great villain and exciting action (with a little help from an iconic rock band), among other things, it ends up being the most fun installment of the trilogy. This is the best MCU movie since Captain America: Civil War, in that it escalates the conflict to even greater heights.

There are quite a few cameos here, including the Stan Lee one, as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene.

*Obviously, not the band. Excellent movie, though.

Thoughts on Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Image courtesy of wall.alphacoders.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the first solo movie for a character introduced in Captain America: Civil War, and that is Spider-Man: Homecoming.

After aiding Tony Stark in the fight against Captain America, Peter Parker returns to Queens. He's trying to balance being a high school student and a crime fighter. Under Tony's guidance, he wants to prove that he is worthy of becoming an Avenger. Tony suggests he stay close to the ground and be a friendly neighborhood Spider-Man. Meanwhile, a cleanup crew has been using Chitauri scraps from the Battle of New York to build and sell weapons so they can provide for their families. As Peter tries to prepare for Homecoming, this new threat escalates to where he will be pushed to his limits.

What Worked: The majority of the cast is really good. Tom Holland continues to be the best Spider-Man to date, showing that he feels the conflict of having a double life. He looks like a kid who still has a lot to learn.

The conflict not only takes a toll on him, but also on his Aunt May, who is often concerned for him. This version of her is portrayed by Marisa Tomei. Although she is younger than previous actresses who have played Aunt May, considering Peter is 15 this time and in high school, casting someone her age makes sense. She ends up being an excellent choice because she is able to show that concern on a fair, but firm, level with Peter. She also gets one of the funniest lines in the movie.

Tony Stark, being the mentor-type character here, has that same amount of concern, but on a stricter level. He realizes Peter has a lot to learn, and sometimes, that means he has to intervene. He's in the movie enough to where he comes in when necessary. Making him that type of character actually works, and Robert Downey Jr. by this point is Tony Stark.

This movie also has one of the better MCU villains: Adrian Toomes / Vulture, played by Michael Keaton. You can actually connect with him because he's not trying to destroy the city or take over the world, but rather trying to help his family however he can. He makes for a pretty awesome villain.

There are more villains aside from him, but they do not try to overshadow him. They are part of his crew, with the same motivation, and that's it.

Now for some of the supporting cast. Jon Favreau returns as Happy Hogan, and he has some funny moments. Then there's Laura Harrier as the love interest Liz, who has good chemistry with Tom Holland.

There is one character that people may find annoying, and that is Jacob Batalon as Ned, Peter's best friend. He's a better comic relief character than Darcy Lewis from the first two Thor movies. However, I can understand if some find him annoying more than funny. He at least has a purpose, though.

For the technical aspects, one of the biggest positives is the approach to the movie. Since this focuses more on Peter's time in high school, the best way to make it believable was to have it feel like a high school movie, particularly those John Hughes would do. There's even a reference to one of his films in here.

The humor works very well. It's not rapid-fire where you might be laughing so hard you miss a line of dialogue; it's more spread out.

The effects are great here, especially with Vulture's look and some of the new implementations into Spider-Man's suit.

This also has some of the best action in the MCU, like the ferry scene that's reminiscent of the iconic train scene from Spider-Man 2.

Aside from those, the standout is the score, like it was with Doctor Strange. Coincidentally, both were scored by Michael Giacchino. As if the references to Spider-Man lore weren't fan service enough, the score manages to have a certain Spider-Man theme in it. Listen closely as the Marvel Studios logo is coming up at the beginning of the movie.

What Didn't Work: I really only have two major issues, both of which involve characters. One is Zendaya's character, Michelle. Her performance is fine, but the character does not have much significance.

The other is one where I can see why the changes were made, but they just do not work at all. That character is Flash Thompson, played by Tony Revolori. Rather than being the jock that Flash is typically depicted as (which is how bullies were often portrayed in older media), this Flash is based more on how bullies are depicted now. That change I can understand, but it is not executed well, and his dialogue just makes it worse to where it's cringeworthy at times.

They don't impact the story too much to where it hurts the movie, but they could have been developed better.

Aside from that, I don't have any problems.

Overall: Spider-Man: Homecoming shows that re-introducing a superhero that has been on the big screen before can work with just mentioning the origin story and focusing on something else. It has a fresh feel to it with a lighthearted tone (and humor to match), a hero and a villain that are both relatable, and great action. This is easily the best Spider-Man movie since Spider-Man 2.

Spider-Man: Homecoming may not be a perfect movie, but it does live up to its title. Spider-Man has been done justice, and he's back where he belongs: within the greater Marvel Cinematic Universe.

There is a Stan Lee cameo (probably the funniest one in the MCU since Ant-Man), as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene.

Thoughts on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017)

Image courtesy of hdwallpapers.in

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the sequel that goes bigger and better in some ways while also playing it safe in other ways, and that is Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.

Not long after the events of the previous film, the Guardians have become heroes. This time, they have been tasked by the Sovereign with protecting batteries. When they succeed, they exchange the batteries for Nebula so her bounty can be collected. After it's discovered that Rocket took a few of them for himself, the Sovereign go after them and cause them to crash onto another planet. While all of this is going on, Peter Quill / Star-Lord is trying to find out who his father really is. The Guardians encounter a being known as Ego who might have the answers.

What Worked: The Guardians themselves continue to have excellent chemistry. They feel even more like a dysfunctional family in this one. Each member gets their own progression in character development, particularly Star-Lord and Gamora. The latter still has a sibling rivalry with Nebula. Rocket also has some development, and Groot does to an extent.

Before I get to the new characters, the best returning character (and the best character in the movie) is Yondu, played by Michael Rooker. He has four standout moments, three of which I can mention: one is basically a Cliffhanger reunion*, one involves his arrow, and one involves the best line in the movie, which references a Disney classic. For the one I can't get into, it stands out not so much because of what happens, but because of how it's done.

Now for the new characters. There are two really good ones. The first one is Mantis, who upon touching someone, can sense what they're feeling. She's very naive, which leads to some good moments, especially with Drax.

The most interesting one is Ego, played by Kurt Russell. He's great in this, and the dynamic he has with Peter feels genuinely touching at times.

It's nice that this had a personal story on the side, with Peter Quill wanting to learn more about himself. The question of who his father is was implied in the first movie, and it does get answered here, but not in the way you think.

The soundtrack is also very good, as are the visuals and a majority of the humor.

Aside from the moments with Yondu, the best parts of the movie are the first 10 minutes and the last 20 minutes, especially the ending. It is bigger and better than the first one in that regard, which results in it being paced better.

What Didn't Work: With the development of the characters, I said Groot had it to an extent. You get to see at least one different version of him here, but that's really it; aside from that, he has pretty much the same arc as he did in the first one.

Two supporting characters stand out (and not in a good way), both of whom are villains. The first one is a character named (and I'm not making this up) Taserface. The majority of his scenes involve his name being exploited for the sake of a joke.

The other one is Ayesha, the High Priestess of the Sovereign. She ends up being a forgettable antagonist because she doesn't have much of a motivation; she really wants to just get the batteries back.

There isn't as tight a balance between drama and humor as the first one. Some of the humor falls flat here, an example being the name jokes with Taserface. Drax also is used more for humor this time rather than fighting other than the opening action scene. The humor in this feels more like they were playing it safe.

My biggest issue is with the soundtrack. While the song choices are really good, a fair amount of them are not as memorable as those in the first one were.

Overall: Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 is a decent sequel, but one of the weaker films within the Marvel Cinematic Universe at the same time. It does answer some questions posed in the first one, as well as set up interesting new characters. Though not entirely as good as the first one, it still has its moments that feel like this tops it. This manages to have a strong antagonist (as to who that is, it might be a spoiler) and a weak one within the same movie, so there's that. It also has a surprising ending and clever buildup for Vol. 3.

There is a Stan Lee cameo, and this movie does something different in regards to additional scenes. There are scenes throughout the credits. Also, near the end of the credits, look out for a brief appearance of a character that has a significant part in the latest movie (at the time of this writing, anyway).

*It's with an iconic action star. All I'll say is this: it's not Arnold, but close.

Thoughts on Doctor Strange (2016)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the installment that has the best visuals in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and that is Doctor Strange.

Following a car accident that badly injured his hands, neurosurgeon Dr. Stephen Strange is incapable of doing his job. Desperately seeking to restore them and failing to find any surgeries that would, he is informed of Kamar-Taj, a sanctuary that specializes in the mystic arts under a sorceress known as The Ancient One. He is skeptical and arrogant, but with no other options, he has to learn their ways to protect the world and time itself.

What Worked: The MCU brings in another excellent casting choice, with Benedict Cumberbatch as Doctor Strange himself. He's the medic equivalent of Tony Stark; he has an ego problem, but then something happens to him where he wants to make things right. This is his best performance in regards to movies based on a work of fiction. He actually works better as a hero than as a villain, although he's awesome at it (for evidence of that, go watch The Hobbit or Star Trek Into Darkness).

Someone else who works better as a good character than an evil one is Tilda Swinton, who plays The Ancient One herself. Her performance is really good, because casting her as the mentor-type character is more believable. She also gets some good moments.

Then there's Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mordo, a fellow sorcerer. The character is normally known for being a villain, but I really liked how they made him more sympathetic rather than jump right into that. He needed development that could potentially lead up to it. He's a more interesting character as a result, and it shows.

The best character in the movie is Wong, played by Benedict Wong. It may seem odd that his name is just Wong, but the movie acknowledges it in a pretty hilarious way (on one occasion, it's even referenced; all I'll say is it involves music). He's so deadpan about everything that most of the humor comes from that.

There is another character to mention before delving into the villain, and that is Christine Palmer, played by Rachel McAdams. She's one of the better female characters in the MCU because she's an example of the "audience avatar" character, where she feels what the audience probably does. Her performance is really good, too. She's also not technically a love interest; it's used as part of Strange's backstory, and that's it.

The villain here is Kaecilius, a former student of the Ancient One who leads a group of zealots trying to bring the Dark Dimension and its ruler Dormammu to our world. He's played by Mads Mikkelsen (Rogue One, Casino Royale). My main issue is with this character, but I'll get to that later.

The supporting cast is also really good; here it has Michael Stuhlbarg (The Shape of Water, which I hope to review soon) as Strange's rival Dr. Nicodemus West, Benjamin Bratt (who makes up for Catwoman here*) as a fellow sorcerer, and Scott Adkins as one of the zealots.

Now for the technical aspects.

When it comes to directors, this is another example where Marvel knows who to pick for a project, as evidenced by James Gunn with Guardians of the Galaxy. In this case, they chose Scott Derrickson, known primarily for horror films like Sinister. Since this does have some supernatural elements, it makes sense, and it works very well.

That's not to say it's entirely dark; there is some humor, and it's among Marvel's best, which includes the Stan Lee cameo. There are two great examples aside from that and the singular name jokes. The first is with the Cloak of Levitation, one of many relics on display in the Sanctum here. It's like the Magic Carpet from Aladdin; it has a mind of its own, and it's actually hilarious. The funniest one is when Doctor Strange and Kaecilius first meet.

The thing that stands out most aside from the visuals is the score by Michael Giacchino. This is one of his best scores in recent memory, another example being Star Trek; in fact, if you listen closely, you'll hear similarities to that score here.

As for the visuals themselves, they are so excellent they might be better than those in Inception. They are accompanied by gorgeous cinematography as well, which makes them stand out that much more.

The finale is also very clever; it's a rather unconventional fight.

What Didn't Work: My main issue is basically the same as my main issue with Ant-Man: the villain. Mads Mikkelsen's performance is good, but the character does not leave much of an impact.

Overall: Doctor Strange is not just a prime example of Marvel presenting other territories of the franchise... it is the prime example. I previously said Ant-Man was because of its incorporation; it's done the same way, and yet actually even better here. It may have another weak villain, but the focus is more about developing the hero and world building anyway.

It has the best effects in the Marvel Cinematic Universe to date, with some of the most inventive action sequences as a result.

It also makes you think to an extent: What if our reality is one of many? The best way to do that, as stated in the movie, is "Forget everything you think you know." The movie itself might surprise you even more if you go into it with that approach.

As stated earlier, there is a Stan Lee cameo. There is also a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene.

*And yes, I've seen Catwoman. The only way to watch that is as a comedy, as will be explained when I get to cover it.

Thoughts on Captain America: Civil War (2016)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the start of Phase Three of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and the franchise's turning point, and that is Captain America: Civil War.

After a mission in Lagos results in civilian casualties, the Avengers receive news that the UN intends to pass the Sokovia Accords, which will allow a group of UN officials to control what they do. This fractures the team, where Tony Stark is in favor of it due to what happened with Ultron and Steve Rogers is against it because he believes they work best independently. To make matters worse, the ratification conference is bombed, and Steve's best friend Bucky Barnes (AKA The Winter Soldier*) is framed, further dividing them as to what to do with him. Cap and his group go on the run in order to find the real culprit, while Tony gets his group together to apprehend them. Neither side realizes that their division was a means to an end.

What Worked: Similar to the Ant-Man review, I will delve into the plot first, but for a different reason this time. The plot here takes the structure of the "Civil War" story, but applies aspects from The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier to it. As a result, it not only feels like a proper way to conclude a trilogy, but at the same time, it feels like a sequel to both The Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron in one. With how it's put together, that combination actually works.

Now for the cast. Chris Evans gives his best performance as Captain America, showing that he feels his burden. He does what he thinks is right, even if that means breaking the law to protect his friend. He has excellent chemistry with Sebastian Stan, who also gives his best performance as Bucky. It's a similar case with him: he shows Bucky's pain and vulnerability, wanting to be free of his past yet having no choice but to submit when it comes back to haunt him. He also has moments where he genuinely feels like Cap's friend, recalling some memories from their time.

The best performance in the movie is Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. He receives a reality check early on in the movie: the team's actions do have consequences. Cap believes continuing to operate on their own is the best way of preventing collateral damage, but Tony believes regulation is the only real option where they can. He may have been responsible for what happened, but now he feels it. His development as a character only gets darker from there in this.

The first supporting cast member to talk about is Anthony Mackie as Falcon. In addition to being very charismatic, he continues to have hilarious dialogue here, including some banter with Paul Rudd, who returns as Scott Lang / Ant-Man. Paul Rudd is actually better in this, showing that he is excited to be working with the Avengers, especially Cap. He also gets a fair amount of great lines and especially moments.

Another character who is better here is Wanda Maximoff / Scarlet Witch, played by Elizabeth Olsen. In this, something happens that affects her more than a particular event from Age of Ultron. While that was personal, she only felt it; here, she actually sees the result and feels like people are afraid of her. There is one character trying to show that she shouldn't be feared: Vision, played by Paul Bettany. They have started a relationship where he's trying to protect her, and she's trying to help him learn how to blend in. They, too, have very good chemistry.

Then there is Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow. The best way to describe her here is this: the further developed the character is, the better the performance. She's actually conflicted within herself in this one. She feels closer to Cap, but sides with Iron Man because he has the better reasoning.

Don Cheadle returns as James Rhodes / War Machine. This is the franchise's best use of the character because aside from being Tony Stark's best friend, he sides with him because he shares the same sentiment, even going so far as having dialogue that Tony would likely have. His best scene is where he shows that during a debate with some of the other characters.

There are two new characters introduced here. The first one will soon have the latest movie in the MCU, and that is Chadwick Boseman as T'Challa / Black Panther. Simply put, to say he's awesome in this is an understatement. He gets some of the best moments in the movie, and upon seeing him here, you'll want to see more and learn more about him. It won't be much longer until we get to.

The other character is someone who nobody thought would get to appear within the MCU, and that is Tom Holland as Spider-Man. This is easily the best Spider-Man period, and that's coming from someone who grew up with the Tobey Maguire version. He looks like he does in the comics to where the eyes in his mask are finally capable of moving to show his expressions. As awesome as Black Panther is, Spider-Man is the best character in the movie. Tom Holland doesn't just nail the character; he embodies him.

One more before I get to the villain (this isn't a spoiler because he is shown in the trailer): Hawkeye does show up in the movie, but pretty much not until the third act. Jeremy Renner still gives a good performance despite that, and he gets some one-liners in there.

Daniel Brühl plays Helmut Zemo, the villain of the movie. He's one of the reasons why this feels like a sequel to Age of Ultron; he has a connection to what happened in Sokovia. His plan makes him stand out as one of the best villains in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. He's better than Loki, but I won't say he's the best since Loki because at least one of the villains in the two newest installments is right up there with him. Even though the conflict is between two heroes, it's his plan that doesn't make it go the way you think.

Now for the technical aspects. The visuals, like Black Panther and Spider-Man's suits, look excellent. Some of the other heroes have received upgrades as well, like Falcon now having a drone.

The action is the biggest positive here, particularly the fight near the end. Some of the highlights are from that scene alone. One of the reasons why the action looks as great as it does here is the fact that the duo behind John Wick (Chad Stahelski and David Leitch) helped with the stunts.

The Russo Brothers return to direct following The Winter Soldier, and they have managed to top it. As if the cast of characters here wasn't large enough, they are doing Avengers: Infinity War and its sequel next. If The Winter Soldier and this are any indication, those movies are in good hands.

What Didn't Work: This is another occasion where I have a minor nitpick. There are times throughout the movie where location names are on the screen, and they are blown up to where you're looking more at them than the location itself for the few seconds they're on. Using location names on the corners is fine, but the technique here makes it feel less like a transition in a movie and more like the start of a commercial.

Overall: Much like War for the Planet of the Apes, Captain America: Civil War is another example of the third movie in a trilogy being the best when each installment gets better. As mentioned in the reviews for The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier, not only would these movies get better, but also the villains. It held true last time, but does it continue this time? Yes.

The movie stands out as one of the best in the Marvel Cinematic Universe because it breaks convention in regards to how the conflict is resolved, and it has the best action sequence of the entire franchise. It brings in two characters that audiences have been waiting to see, and uses them to where said audiences want to see more of them. After this, it isn't long before they do.

There is a Stan Lee cameo here, as well as a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. Also, a supporting character from The Incredible Hulk has a significant role, as does a character last seen in The Winter Soldier.

*At this point, it's probably fine I mention that.

Thoughts on Ant-Man (2015)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the conclusion to Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and another movie that approaches a different genre while still sharing that connection, and that is Ant-Man.

After being released from prison, small-time thief Scott Lang wants to change his ways. He can't find a job or support his daughter Cassie due to his record. Despite wanting to go straight, he reluctantly agrees to help in a burglary, where he finds a peculiar looking suit inside the safe. Upon discovering it has shrinking capabilities and trying to return it, he ends up in custody again, only to be visited by the suit's creator, Dr. Hank Pym. Pym understands his good intentions, informing Scott he wanted him to take the suit he once used under the name "Ant-Man." Now, he wants Scott to succeed him because only he has the skills to prevent a former associate from recreating his technology and selling it.

What Worked: I will actually start with the approach to the movie first, similar to the Baby Driver review. This is not only to change things up, but also because this movie has a few things in common with Baby Driver, despite this coming out first and being part of a franchise.

This is similar to Captain America: The Winter Soldier in that it approaches a different genre in addition to being a superhero movie. Whereas that had the look and feel of a spy movie, this has the look and feel of a heist movie. This makes it one of the more unique entries in the MCU because it's on a smaller scale. I'll delve further into this in a little bit when I get to the technical aspects.

Now for the cast. This is one of those cases where the last person you'd think could pull off being a superhero actually does, especially when it's a character who's probably lesser known than most. With this, it's Paul Rudd as Scott Lang. The charm he's known for having in comedies like Anchorman (one of my favorites) works surprisingly well here, even when he's playing it straight in some scenes.

This is also a case where Marvel manages to bring in an iconic actor and it still works, an example being Robert Redford in Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Here, it's Michael Douglas as Dr. Hank Pym. He's believable as a mentor-type character who's had a rough past.

Then there is Evangeline Lilly (The Hobbit, Real Steel) as Hank's daughter, Hope, who has somewhat of a strained relationship with him. Part of that is Hope thinks she should do the job instead of Scott, but Hank thinks it's too risky. Because of her relationship issues, you may think she's hard to latch onto, but they help develop her and come across quite well in Lilly's performance. There are reasons the two characters don't see eye to eye, and they make sense.

One of those reasons is why she works with Hank's former associate Darren Cross, played by Corey Stoll (Non-Stop). He's basically the opposite of Hank. Hank knew when enough was enough with using the tech he had designed. Darren is focused on progression, but is going about it the wrong way. Hank knows it, but Darren doesn't care. Stoll's performance is good, but as for the character, I'll get to him later.

The members of Scott's crew also have great chemistry with each other. The one that may stand out most aside from Luis is Dave, played by T.I. He's actually really good in this. Similar to the Guardians of the Galaxy review where I said that wrestlers like Dave Bautista can be good actors if given the right material, that point also applies to musicians.

Then there is the best character in the movie: Michael Peña as Luis, Scott's cellmate. He has several moments where he tells stories that are some of the funniest parts of the movie. He's always so cheerful when he does it, too.

Besides Michael Peña, there are three things that stand out most here: the humor, the score, and the effects.

Not only does this movie have the look and feel of a heist movie like Baby Driver, but it also has the style of humor that comes with it. This is because Edgar Wright was involved here, but only as a writer. Regardless, even with someone else behind the camera (Peyton Reed, who does a solid job), it feels like Edgar Wright.

The score further contributes to that, especially the theme, part of which is played at least once in the movie, and then in the credits. It starts gently before hitting hard, similar to the Mission: Impossible theme*. It's among the more memorable MCU themes because of that. It also sums up the movie perfectly: the sense of scale doesn't matter when the threat has the same level of consequence.

The effects are the biggest standout. Similar to Thor and Guardians of the Galaxy, they introduce another aspect of the Marvel Universe to the big screen. This is the best example of it so far, because they're incorporated into the action sequences very well, and used for some pretty hilarious gags.

What Didn't Work: The main problem is, once again, the villain. Corey Stoll gives a good performance, but Darren Cross as a character does not leave much of an impact on the bigger picture the franchise has been building towards. He's really just a threat for this movie and that's it.

For comparison purposes, look at Ultron in the previous movie. As a result of his plan, the Avengers' actions end up having repercussions that will be addressed following this movie; in fact, the events are even mentioned at one point here.

Overall: Ant-Man shows that superhero movies don't always need an epic feel to them in order to make them stand out. They can be dialed back and still succeed at that. Either way, what's more important is that they need to be at least fun, and Ant-Man excels there. It once again presents variety for the superhero genre itself by expanding into others, with this becoming a solid heist movie.

It has likable characters, including the funniest side character in the Marvel Cinematic Universe by far. It may have a weak villain, but there is room for improvement. Plus, the movie is so much fun, having great action and humor, as well as probably the best effects in Phase Two and the best pace.

Ant-Man proves to be another risk that pays off, because Marvel has done it again. First they manage to make audiences care about a gun-wielding raccoon and a walking tree, and now they do the same for ants.

Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe has gone out with a bang... not a big bang, but a bang nonetheless.

Despite Avengers: Age of Ultron breaking away from the formula of having at least a post-credits scene, this one goes back to it. There is both a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. It's actually done the other way around this time, with the post-credits scene tying into a future movie, and the mid-credits scene tying back to this movie.

This also has what is easily Phase Two's best Stan Lee cameo.

*That is one of the franchises I plan to cover later this year. In addition to starting a new editorial, I may do a bonus post focusing more on that.

Thoughts on Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the second best sequel in Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and that is Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Following a mission in Eastern Europe where the Avengers retrieve Loki's scepter from an enemy lab, Tony Stark and Bruce Banner examine the stone powering it. They find that it contains artificial intelligence, which they use to create Ultron, an intended worldwide peacekeeping program. Ultron gains sentience and steals the scepter, believing his purpose can only be achieved through destroying humanity. The Avengers must reassemble in order to stop him.

What Worked: The returning cast continue to play off each other very well. One thing that is done better than the first movie is the development of Hawkeye. He even addresses something that involved him in the first movie in one of several great quotes.

As for the new characters, the first ones to mention are Pietro and Wanda Maximoff, twins subjected to experiments using the scepter that the Avengers discover in the opening. Pietro has super speed, and Wanda is a telekinetic who can also use mind control. They are played respectively by Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Kick-Ass) and Elizabeth Olsen. They feel like siblings because they look after and help each other.

Then there is Andy Serkis in a small role as Ulysses Klaue, an arms dealer who has history with Tony Stark back when he was making weapons. Even though he's not in the movie that much, he's really good here. The reason for his small role in this: setting up a larger part in the MCU's soon-to-be-latest movie.

Before I get to Ultron himself, this movie has a grey area, like Captain America: The Winter Soldier did. There's a character here that is familiar, but gains a new identity. The only difference is that here, it takes place over the course of one movie, rather than having happened in between two.

As for Ultron, he may actually be a better villain than Loki. They both have an army, but with Ultron and his army of robots, he can just copy himself into the body of a drone, so he presents more of a challenge. No matter how many drones the Avengers take out, as long as he's around to control them, there's no chance of stopping him. Plus, James Spader's performance makes Ultron one of the highlights here*.

Outside of the cast, another positive for me is the visuals, an example being the new tech some of the Avengers have. Iron Man uses a specialized suit in what's possibly the best action scene in the movie. Captain America's shield is now magnetically linked to his gauntlets, so he can throw it and summon it back to him. Black Widow has upgrades to her suit, and Hawkeye has a new cartridge that loads multiple arrows.

The action is also very good here, with even the new characters having some satisfying moments. The sequences here show that the villain's plan is not the only thing they have to prevent.

The next positive is the tone. The movie may have some lighthearted scenes, but there are a fair amount where it gets dark, like with Ultron's introduction; it feels somewhat creepy. Other examples include some characters' backstories being addressed, as well as potential foreshadowing of bigger things to come.

I also liked how Ultron was chosen to be the villain in this movie. He's a good example of what I call a "second-movie villain." Loki didn't seem too overpowering, so he was a threat the heroes could easily handle. With Ultron, his plan will really test the heroes' ability to overcome him. Then the stakes will get even higher with a villain where the heroes may have just met their match, and with that the tone gets even darker.

What Didn't Work: There is a subplot that comes out of nowhere, having not been hinted at in any previous movie at all. I understand what its purpose is, but there were probably more effective ways of approaching it.

The writing and direction by Joss Whedon aren't as strong as in the first movie. Sometimes the humor, while it does work, can distract from the tone.

The score by Brian Tyler (this time accompanied by Danny Elfman) is good, but doesn't feel as impactful as the score by Alan Silvestri in the first one.

Overall: In spite of its flaws, Avengers: Age of Ultron is still a very good movie. It's not as good as the first one, but that's a tough act to follow, considering how much of a landmark in the superhero genre it was. However, it does have a better villain and better character development. It also sets up some interesting new characters and foreshadows a turning point for the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

While there is still a Stan Lee cameo in this movie, there is only a mid-credits scene this time. All I'll say is this: it continues to build towards something big.

*The same can be said for another movie I hope to talk about soon as part of a new editorial, so look out for that.

Thoughts on Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

Image courtesy of theartmad.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the first movie to show that Marvel truly can take risks, and that is Guardians of the Galaxy.

While on the planet Morag, scavenger Peter Quill takes a mysterious Orb, but upon learning of its discovery, a bounty is placed on him by Yondu Udonta, leader of a band of space pirates called the Ravagers, and a radical member of the Kree named Ronan sends an assassin named Gamora after it. That's the least of Quill's problems, because while trying to sell it, he's spotted by two bounty hunters, an enhanced raccoon named Rocket and his partner: a tree-like creature named Groot. After the four of them are sent to the Kyln and encounter Drax (one of the more powerful prisoners), they realize they have to work together to stop Ronan, despite their differences... and their motives.

What Worked: One of the first highlights to talk about is the cast, as usual, but for an ensemble piece such as this (especially centering on a more obscure group), the chemistry definitely works between the main five.

There's Chris Pratt as Peter Quill, who insists everyone call him Star-Lord. He's basically Marvel's version of Han Solo, with hints of Indiana Jones in there. This movie proves that Chris Pratt can be capable of more than comedy, and that he could be a legitimate action star for our generation*. He has the charisma you'd expect from both Han Solo and a character like Iron Man.

Then there's Zoe Saldana as Gamora. It shows here that she has probably become accustomed to being in sci-fi movies at this point, having been in the reboot of Star Trek as Uhura, and Avatar as the love interest Neytiri. With this, she brings a bit of both to Gamora, having a "take no nonsense" attitude like Uhura, and the aspect of Neytiri where she doesn't quite understand certain parts of human culture, like figures of speech. With Gamora, she's kind of a slow learner and a bit naive about it. That is, when compared to someone like Drax the Destroyer, at least.

Professional wrestler Dave Bautista plays Drax, and this movie is proof that if given the right material, wrestlers can be good actors. I remember watching one review of this when it first came out, and he was described as the best wrestler-turned-actor since The Rock. Since I saw the movie, I've believed that to be true. He's awesome in this. Drax is the comic relief at points, because he gets some of the funniest lines. Whereas Gamora is somewhat naive to how parts of our language work, Drax is so stoic and deadpan he takes them literally, and it's hilarious.

Then there are two voice performances with Rocket and Groot. Rocket is voiced by Bradley Cooper, and Groot is voiced by Vin Diesel. The best way to describe them is that while Star-Lord has the personality of Han Solo, they have a relationship similar to Han and Chewbacca. Groot has his own version of Chewbacca's speech where all he says is, "I am Groot." Despite his limitations in vocabulary, Rocket is still able to understand him. Bradley Cooper is really good at showing Rocket's personality: he can be full of himself, but is also skilled with planning and weapons. With Groot, Vin Diesel may have another iconic role. Even though he has the same line, his voice makes him intimidating in addition to his height.

In regards to the chemistry they all have, it works because they feel like a dysfunctional family. They bicker occasionally, but find a way to compromise. They also have a connection to either the Orb or anyone else who wants it.

For the supporting cast, this movie has Michael Rooker as Yondu, Karen Gillan as Nebula, Djimon Hounsou (King Arthur: Legend of the Sword) as Korath (one of Ronan's allies), Benicio del Toro as The Collector, and the last one I can really talk about, Lee Pace as Ronan himself. With Korath and Ronan, I'll get to them later.

Yondu has kind of a "love/hate" relationship with Peter Quill; he leads a group of pirates, yet he has a father figure quality to him, hence why he wants him taken alive. Through Michael Rooker's performance, he feels like that type of father figure where they do something that's not quite right, but it's done out of love. He's probably the best supporting character in the movie for both his performance and one scene in particular where it's him against an army of bad guys.

With Nebula, she has an interesting relationship with Gamora; she goes after her out of loyalty for Ronan, but more because it feels personal. Karen Gillan channels that aggression really well, making Nebula seem more threatening than Ronan. For a supporting villain, she's very good.

The Collector is not necessarily a villain here, but rather more of a somewhat quirky character. Benicio del Toro embraces that, and plays it up to where his personality makes sense without detracting from what is a very important scene. The Guardians go to him so they (and the audience) can find out why the Orb is so valuable to everyone. All I'll say is this: it ties back to the mid-credits scene of Thor: The Dark World.

Now for the positives aside from the cast. Much like Captain America: The Winter Soldier and so many previous MCU installments, this movie proves once again that Marvel knows what they're doing when it comes to picking directors for their projects. Here, they picked James Gunn, who's known for doing B-movie-style work: the material won't win any awards or anything, but it's made more for the purpose of being fun to watch anyway. This is like that, except with the effects and makeup, it's more likely to be nominated there. His direction shows that the material here blends perfectly, as does the script, which he also contributed to. The script makes this one of the funniest installments in the MCU.

Where this movie really shines, though, comes with the effects, the cinematography, and the music. I'll also mention the action here.

The effects are some of the best the MCU has to offer. They make this feel like the franchise equivalent of Star Wars even more than the story and tone already do. It has the tone of a space opera like that, and you can even see parallels to Star Wars. Of course, a lot of the effects had to be CGI, like the ships, locations, or even characters like Groot and Rocket that would also use motion-capture. However, anything that did not require it would use practical effects and makeup, like Gamora and Drax, for example.

The cinematography is excellent because it visually conveys the tone. This is one of the best-looking movies in the franchise.

The biggest positive here aside from the effects is the music. Similar to Baby Driver, the soundtrack is a character to where it has a certain significance. It features music from the 60s and 70s, and also like Baby Driver, it's set to specific scenes, rather than the other way around. The same can be said for the score, because that's how James Gunn chose to direct it.

All of these contribute to the action sequences, which feel fresh and fun as a result. Some of them have become franchise highlights, like the prison scene and the aforementioned scene with Yondu.

What Didn't Work: There's one major issue here. I mentioned that Nebula feels like more of a threat than Ronan, which is an issue because she's not the main villain. Developing the main characters may be more important since it focuses on them, but a compelling villain helps. Ronan doesn't have much of a motivation other than he wants to get the Orb and be all-powerful. Lee Pace does make a good villain, but he could have had stronger material to work with. Also, Korath is an interesting character, and Djimon Hounsou is great at playing villains, yet he's not really impactful either because he's not in the movie that much. This means the movie goes back to the villain problem.

Aside from that, there is a slight, but very minor, pacing issue. That can be overlooked.

Overall: Guardians of the Galaxy does what the original Thor did: show that Marvel is capable of going into territories within their universe that could not possibly translate well to the big screen, even more so here. With Thor it was mythological, but here the intention was to introduce the audience to the cosmic perspective with a property that they had likely never heard of prior to seeing it. Plus, Thor was in the middle of the setup for The Avengers, whereas this is placed front and center.

However, it somehow manages to get the audience invested in the characters much sooner than in The Avengers, as they are each developed enough by the halfway point. This movie feels like its own story even with some minor connections to previous installments in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It takes an obscure property that shouldn't have worked, and makes it work. It's lighthearted, fun, hilarious, and full of great action and music with a cast to suit the material.

Not only does Marvel know who to choose to adapt one of their properties, they know when the right time would be to do so and how to approach it. Guardians of the Galaxy is evidence that some risks are well worth taking.

As with the previous two movies, there is both a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene. This also has Phase Two's second-best Stan Lee cameo so far.

*A few movies from now, you might just see an action star that will bring both a sense of nostalgia and a smile on your face.

Thoughts on Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Image courtesy of wallpapercave.com

Next up in the "Marvel-thon" is the second installment in perhaps the only trilogy so far in the Marvel Cinematic Universe where it gets better with each one, and that is Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

It has been two years since the Battle of New York, and Steve Rogers is working in D.C. under Nick Fury for S.H.I.E.L.D. At the same time, he has continued to adjust to present-day by making a list of what he's missed through the decades, with his new friend Sam Wilson helping him catch up. After a mission to rescue fellow Agents from pirates where he is accompanied by Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow, Cap goes to the Triskelion (S.H.I.E.L.D. HQ) to speak with Fury. He is simply told not to trust anyone. Not long after that, he discovers that S.H.I.E.L.D. has been compromised, and figures from his past have begun to emerge, with himself on the run and at the center of a conspiracy.

What Worked: While I do usually talk about the cast first, I have to make a couple exceptions this time in doing so. There are at least three returning characters from The First Avenger I cannot talk about because of spoilers, as well as one from The Avengers who shows up for basically the entire third act. Also, like the Iron Man 3 review where I could vaguely get into Ben Kingsley's character, I kind of have to do the same with who portrays the Winter Soldier in this movie.

For the cast members I can talk about, the one to start with is of course Chris Evans as Cap himself. This is his best portrayal of the character so far, and he has been developed even further as well. He still symbolizes freedom, but he has come to realize that freedom means something different now. It shows when he is told by Fury not to trust anyone; Fury not only tells him that, but how S.H.I.E.L.D. has chosen to react to the Battle of New York. He responds with, "This isn't freedom, this is fear." I'll get more into that later.

Those statements can also be applied to Scarlett Johansson as the Black Widow. She contrasts with Cap, because she can have an agenda of her own, whereas Cap sticks solely to the one given to him. Nick Fury, played once again by Samuel L. Jackson, has a similar characterization in that he actually does have his own agenda, but his comes with consequences. The two of them thus morally conflict with Cap: they both think he should accept how S.H.I.E.L.D. operates now, while Cap thinks keeping it that way is wrong.

Having gotten the only returning characters I can really describe out of the way, on to the new characters. The first one to talk about is the first one introduced in the movie: Anthony Mackie as Sam Wilson (AKA The Falcon). He's very likable, actually very funny when he needs to be, and also proves to be quite a useful partner for Cap.

Then there is Frank Grillo (The Grey) as Agent Brock Rumlow, who leads the rescue mission at the beginning of the movie. He's great in this, even though he's not in it that much. Regardless, the time he's in it does allow for some good moments, and yes, he comes into play later.

There is also Emily VanCamp, whose character is tasked with protecting Cap. She has two different names, similar to Natasha, but going into either of them might be a spoiler. One she reveals to him, and the other is revealed by Natasha and connecting to one of the other three characters from the first movie. Even so, she gives a good performance and introduces the audience to an interesting new female character, and a strong one at that.

The last new one to talk about is Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce, an older member of S.H.I.E.L.D. and a friend of Nick Fury. He is excellent in this, and he brings about a side you perhaps never thought you'd see from him.

Then there is the Winter Soldier himself, the character who's a bit of a grey area; considering his ties to the first movie, he's an older character but reintroduced under a new identity. He is a fantastic villain, with a shroud of mystery surrounding him, and you never know when or where he'll show up. There are two great examples: one takes place on the highway, and the other is a scene similar to one in The Accountant (they're both in the dark). When I closed out the review for The First Avenger, I said that each Captain America movie would prove to be better than the previous one, and so would the villains. It holds true here. Will it continue with the third movie? You'll find out soon enough.

Now let’s get into the technical aspects. This movie is directed by Joe and Anthony Russo, whose work includes shows like Community and Arrested Development, as well as films like You, Me and Dupree. You wouldn't know that from watching this movie; you'd think someone with more experience in the superhero genre (or at the very least the action genre) directed it. With this being their first superhero movie, they knocked it out of the park.

Then there is the tone. Whereas The First Avenger was more of a war film, this is absolutely a spy film. It feels like an older James Bond film mixed with the conspiracy aspects of the Bourne franchise. Even the closing credits look like something you'd see in the opening credits of a Bond movie.

The action is some of the best in the MCU. Whenever the Winter Soldier comes in, he is just relentless. He will not let anything stand in his way. The most intense sequences are his first fight with Cap, the highway fight, and a chase scene with Nick Fury.

The visuals are very impressive. There may be some CGI, but it's not really noticeable for the most part, as the more realistic tone meant leaning towards practical effects and stunts.

What Didn't Work: I did have a couple minor nitpicks. The main one is that sometimes, the pace slows down a little bit. For me, it actually wasn't because of a certain moment in the middle. It was just in general. The other one is that the score, while really good, doesn't stand out as much as it did in the first movie. However, this is like The Avengers where it has some minor flaws that I would be more than willing to overlook.

Overall: Captain America: The Winter Soldier is the best movie in the MCU since The Avengers, the best sequel so far, and the best solo movie since the original Iron Man. It's right in between those two for me. In addition to breaking away from the villain problem, it serves as a commentary on whether or not people can trust their own government, and if not, who can they trust.

If there is one thing this movie proves, it's that by this point, you can tell that Marvel knows what they're doing: continue to surprise their audiences by choosing directors you would not consider pulling off a superhero movie, and yet somehow, they manage to do it. This applies to the weaker installments to an extent because while some aspects of them don't quite work, it's still interesting to see what the director can bring to the table.

Like with Thor: The Dark World, there is a mid-credits scene and a post-credits scene, even done the same way as they were there. The former gains further significance two movies from now, while the latter ties back to this movie. This one also has the best Stan Lee cameo in Phase Two so far.