Top 5 Worst Movies of 2017

If you follow any reviewing channel, blog, etc; then the idea of a top best and worst list of the year isn’t going to be rocket science for those new to my blog. You know the drill, I list five films and explain why I personally didn’t feel they weren’t worth the ticket price. If you disagree with what I have to say, I hope you can give the courtesy of not leaving a flaming bag of dog shit on my door step. But please keep this in mind: I’m not a professional critic, so I’ve not seen every film released that year in order to pay my rent. Hell, the only reason the films at numbers five and four are on the list, is because the three worst films, as well as two films I wasn’t exactly blown away, doesn’t make a good title. Either way, let’s do this!

Number Five – Alien Covenant:

Image result for alien covenant

You’d think after the art house level of pretentiousness as seen in Prometheus, that Ridley Scott would learn from his mistakes he made whilst trying to write a “deep” and smart story with a script with more holes than a Xenomorph at a NRA rally. Well thankfully while Scott isn’t busy trying to top Lost in the quest of establishing more questions than you can answer, it’s clear that him and his writers have learned little else. Particularly since the characters went from idiocy only present to get the plot running; to full-blown brainless with less personality than the Aliens themselves. One minute a crew member will open a quarantined room with an alien inside, leading to said crew member to slip on the blood of a person already killed by the thing; and then next they open fire on an alien and accidentally shoot the shuttles fuel tanks in the process. And naturally they explode, taking the shuttle in the process because this is a movie. I joked about trigger happy gun owners, at least most of them know which end to point the damn thing! And less we forget about how the story focuses on the ADD afflicted explorers on a foreign planet, as they can’t resist touching everything that isn’t nailed down, and get surprised about how an unknown substance may be toxic to a life that has never been on this planet till that point. You mean I got sick from huffing the fumes of undiscovered plant, how was I supposed to know?” How exactly is this exploring the origins of the original Alien film when the staff of Weyland Yutani spend most their free time playing in traffic? And yet given the excellent cinematography and scenes of Micheal Fasbender as the two robots; I was half tempted to recommend this film as they’re parts that we’re trying to an Alien film and give the attempt of action and atmosphere that we’re decently executed. But don’t get me started on how an already mediocre story with bland protagonists, is rendered more hollow due to scenes of character development and links to the previous film are already up on You Tube. Did nobody learn anything from DCs mishaps last year when it comes to cutting out random scenes and still expect the story to work? Is this the worst Alien film? No. Is it better than Prometheus? Yes, is a good movie on its own? Eh.

Number Four – Ghost in the Shell (2017) :

Image result for ghost in the shell

I’m going to be honest by saying how I wasn’t a fan of the anime this is based on; look I tried dear reader twice I did, but the only thing lower than this movies box office results, were my expectations. In fairness, I was going to be kind to this new adaptation; particularly since, to its credit, the great voice acting and art design in the original managed to sell my on a connection between the lead characters that managed to keep me awake during the run time. This film…..haven’t we learn nothing from Dragonball Evolution? Even someone like me could tell that this film is suffering the major (no pun I swear) symptoms of a bad adaptation. Streamlining the narrative, replicated scenes lifted straight from the source material removed from proper context leading to scenes feeling weightless, redone shots for the trailers and characters featured because the original said they had to be there. And speaking characters, you know something’s wrong with the lead character when the fact that a bunch of PC bullshit artist are accusing the film of “white washing” is the least of the problems with Major. With Scarlett taking the robot aspect of her character way too literally, I was expecting her to say beep bop during multiple scenes. I mean with pacing so dragged out it felt like each scene was put through a taffy puller, why not liven up this performance that was so phoned in the studio might as well replaced Black Widow with an actual robot with tunnel vision, if the multiple action scenes that involved her getting tasered are anything to go by. https://kennyspennyforathought.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/1936b-1h_0ttke350p8k-yje1xb_g.png?w=347&h=195The original is praised for its creative and gorgeous animation, while this film is well rendered but feels lifeless. Blandly shot, cinematography where most of the elements blend together, as when the characters that aren’t in the outdoor parts of Blade Runner city #46853, you have generic grey buildings. Hell say what you will about 2049, at least the scenery could be told a part from each scene to another. Next!

Number Three – The Mummy (2017) :

Image result for the mummy

Ah bless Universal for thinking they compete with Marvel in the cinematic universe Olympics Hollywood is going through right now. Now in theory a film series featuring Dracula, The Mummy and other monsters Universal owns the film rights to would’ve worked, if only Universal listened to the feedback from Dracula Untold, the film they tried to use as a franchise starter before; apparently that was too much to ask for. Instead of getting a modern-day version of the entertaining Bredan Fraisher Mummy film, we get a Tom Cruise vehicle where he basically plays himself without a sense of empathy or intelligence. As he sends his friends on idiotically dangerous plans, meanwhile Cruise is getting thrown dozens of feet in air by an ancient goddess and landing without a raised heartbeat let alone scratch due to him being possessed by a demigod; because the curses in this film are like the stars in Mario Bros, in the sense that you get one and you’re untouchable. Looking at the trailers I was confused about whether if this would return to the classic horror style of the classic monster film, or redo the Steven Summer film. Apparently so we’re the writing team; as we have scenes of horror, action and poorly executed comedy all Frankensteined together; because if none of the six writers are willing to talk to each other to make this shit fit, then someone’s got to do it. And less we forget how one of those writers was tasked to set up the Dark Universe, and by set up I mean dedicate thirty minutes to explain Sheild’s…ah I mean Prodigum’s location, purpose, previous achievements and leaders of the operation, hey look it’s Mr Hyde! All of this in the most nakedly blatant attempt to get audiences to see the next film in the series since Dawn of Justice. Listen Universal after this, Dracula Untold and your Wolf-man remake you’d better hope that The Bride of Frankenstein remake does better and sell like sugar flavoured blunts, in 2019. If Wonder Woman can come out as great as it did in the half a year time it did, after Batman v Superman was burned in effigy, what excuse will you guys have in the two years when this next film goes down like a wooden windmill in an obvious metaphor. Next!

Number Two – The Snowman:

Michael, I now have to take away the praise I gave you for Alien Covenant, because of the performance you did during this bore. There’s a fine, fine line between acting indifferent with those around you due to alcoholism (that being a plot point in this and the book it’s based on) and running out of shits to give by the time you get out of bed; this film shows Michael Fassbender sleep walking over that line, tripping over it and passing out on the floor. So when multiple other Hollywood actors are flown to Norway, and their characters given Norigeon names and are told to develop appropriate accents, the fact that Fassbender is snoring his way through this, to the point that he didn’t even get the name of his character right; well that shows how indifference the production was. Especially when word has since got out about how the film wasn’t even technically finished. And given how stilted and disjointed the story ended up, it shows. You’d think for a movie with the pacing of watching an ice cube melt in the artic, would have the decency to focus on the main character without ballsing it up by spending scene after scene showing how Fassbender’s family relationship is falling apart at the rate of of Harvey Weinstein’s reputation, and having his previous work as a policeman glossed over and explained through side characters. But sadly that’s what we get. No idea why the supporting cast constantly lining up to kiss our lead’s arse, when he ends up missing so many obvious hints from the crime scenes, and has others point them out for him, he makes Inspector Cluso look like Sherlock Holmes; when it comes for waiting for this plot to start, Godot ain’t got shit. And yet that’s despite the fact that our lead still figured out there is indeed a serial killer to catch before any other characters could’ve done, in a lucky logic leaping moment that could send the writers into orbit. I guess the rest of the answers were the 10-15% of missing scenes, which sends the story into a huge mess; the pacing being the main example, due to scenes moving slowly like a drunk turtle, while structurally the story skips over important details and answered of said information before it just kinda ends. This film tries to recreate the book it’s based of, and yet comes across like a book report that was set for Friday morning, and didn’t get start till Thursday evening. Next!

Number One – The Emoji Movie:

Image result for emoji movie

No surprise that a movie based around images you send to your friends when you’re too lazy to type words would fail when put in the hands that aproved and made The Smurf movies. Even knowing how this film “borrows” the story of like seven other animated films, with a concept that paint drinkingly stupid, with the expectations of most carbon based life forms being so low they’re limbo dancing with the germs in satan’s toe nail infections; I still came out mad with the result of several fart huffing sessions at Sony’s Animation studio. Pretty much every film commentator in the multi-verse has said accurately bad things about this film, so I’m just going to list the major things wrong with this film.

  1. A shitty script lifting the plot points and story notes as seen in everything from Wreck it Ralph to Toy Story. With a main character that doesn’t fit into his surroundings, only to end the hour and a half of agony realising his fine the way he is. Pretty much the story in half of all the kids films nowadays.
  2. Said story has crow bard so many apps into its script, no matter how little sense it makes, you see the cracks around the edges. Particularly when the movie stops the “plot” just so the characters can play Candy Crash, Just Dance, and watch You Tube videos. And don’t even get me started on the dues ex Twitter bird.
  3. Make the overall experience all the more unpleasant with unfunny jokes from unfunny characters. A lead that can’t even hear his own name without having an emotional breakdown. A talking hand who, plot wise, is about as useful as Stephen Hawkings bowling shoes. And finally Wyldsytle, ah.. Jail Break, a tomboy that wants people to ask her about her feminist agenda, and how she don’t need no man every ten minutes. To the point that she willing ditched her title of a princess emoji….because girl power. It’s clear that Jail-Break went to the Jane Foster’s Thor school of promoting equality between genders by ranting about how the men around her are complete jack assess.
  4. The voice acting: How is it that two characters are called meh, and yet they’re not the only hollow voice actors in this film. Particularly when everyone is waiting for their check to clear. I would say their phoning it in; but that would be an insult to Alexander Graham Bell, and second it would imply effort was made.
  5. The “dialogue” With every joke being a pun relating to emojis or the apps in question, with the punchline predictability of rain full in the british summer. I would make a joke about it trying to be a laugh riot, but i remember seeing more belly laughs during Charlettesvile. And did i forget to mention how there scenes that feel like Black Mirror as written by a tumblurite? Particularly when no human character is seen without a phone in hand or in eye sight, with a supporting character with a short temper and a large ego.

But hey, in the words of Denis Miller, “That’s just my Opinion, I could be Wrong”.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time.

Advertisements

Shut Down Rotten Tomatoes: The Butt Hurt is Strong in This One

Fan boys arguing over the film efforts of studios and their review scores, have been more https://cdn.movieweb.com/img.news.tops/NEAbqpyXtQIKEF_1_b/Star-Wars-Last-Jedi-Fans-Petition-Rotten-Tomatoes.jpgcommon than the rising of the sun. And once again Rotten Tomatoes has been under scrutiny for giving a film a score that people disagreed with. This time being Star Wars The Last Jedi. And I’ll say this about these people, at least some of them waited to see the film before crying for franchise counciling…some being the key word. As seen by the two fan petitions to remove this film from canon in a world where Attack of the Clones almost got a theatrical RE release, and to close Rotten Tomatoes down as a result.

Never the less, like The Dark Knight Rises before; many came to insult the critics that don’t share the same world view as them. And given how The Force Awakens was spit roasted by right-wing anti SJW commentators that regularly criticise ANTIFA for attacking people who they disagree with politically; that’s saying a lot giving their low view of fans of Rogue One and Episode 7.  So where did all this hate and yet constant need of approval from this poor site come from? When it comes to Rotten Tomatoes being used as well a fire starter of back lash from disappointed audiences; the trend usually involves a big budget blockbuster being panned by critics and triggered fanboys lose their shit; despite the opposite happening now to Star Wars; this didn’t start with Suicide Squad, or X-Men: Apocalypse, despite starting the bullshit rumors of the site taking bribes from Disney; it didn’t even start with Batman V Superman, but it started with its predecessor: Man of Steel. Image result for man of steel2013 was a divisive year for cinema geek culture. With multiple big releases such as Star Trek Into Darkness and Iron Man 3 splitting their fan bases down the middle in terms of their responses. Hell at the time Thor’s second solo film was the MCU’s lowest rated project before Inhumans took that title. But Man of Steel was possibly the most divisive movie ever in terms of its quality explained by the reviews at the time. As the film was discussed as either being a cancer to the name of the Superman character, or the cure for said cancer. With the Rotten Tomatoes score reflecting this with a 56% rating. With many people calling Zach Snyder a hack, many of them brought up the film’s Rotten Tomatoes score as proof the film’s failures, and as someone who can say they liked and still keep a straight face, there are some worth mentioning. But whatever positive aspects that can be said about the film didn’t matter to those that were out for Snyder’s blood, because they got slightly more than half of the critics on their side.

http://swf.tubechop.com/tubechop.swf?vurl=s4KMNj76mzg&start=62&end=98&cid=8794200
And mob rule it was. As numerous well-known film reviewers on sites like You Tube became the fuel of many flame wars in the comment sections of their reviews of the film. This brought two faces of both sides debating it. As the discussion devolved into the extreme ends of fanboys and haters both throwing any coherent opinions against them in the dumpster file of those amused by loud noises and fancy special effects; or the dumpster of ‘they’re slamming the film based on bias perceptions of how they personally think a Superman movie should be made and nothing else’, all for ease of dismissal. The problem became less the faults of the film, but the spite often coming of those discussing it. I’m not saying that people like Erod The Blockbuster Buster for example had an axe to grind against Zach Snyder’s vision, but I am saying he (and others) took pride in guessing that Dawn of Justice (a film he admitted that he was planning to review negatively) would be a critical dud, as for the past two years he claimed this film would suck literally since the day it was announced.

But no matter who had the best argument or anyones thoughts on the film good or bad; given how Rotten Tomatoes draws its reviews directly from professional critics, or collect a review else where and sorts them into a nice and tidy pile of user and critic reviews, and a percentage of those who liked the film is presented. The logic went that the critics opinion meant that any mass consensus on a film, as judged via the tomato meter, must be cinefile gospel. Want to convince people that your negative views on the latest blockbuster rings true? boom! “26% on the tomato meter means it sucks”. Except what many of these people didn’t and still don’t realise is that’s not how the site works. People are so interested by the scores of an film’s review, they’ll focus on the numbers than the means to get the result. With none of those people realising that the percentage wasn’t an overall score of the movie, it was the consensus of what a bunch of critics think.

Rotten Tomatoes works like this: let’s say I made a movie and some how secured a wide release for it. Then on opening day I got ten professional critics to review it.rotten tomatoes.jpg If I followed the same judging system as the tomato meter, I would have to take into account that any sum opted review score lower than a six out of ten would count as a negative review; and anything below 59% on the tomato meter, is enough to grade a film as rotten. If seven critics gave my film a five out of ten or lower, the consensus would be that 70% of critics didn’t like my movie, while the other 30% gave my film higher ratings; there for putting at the rotten end of the metre with my movie rated with a 30% approval rating. Now sure the scores of the reviews are counted up, and even displayed underneath, but the big number is the only one that counts, so the only one we should listen to; at least that what everyone from the average person to big time marketing directors seem to think.

Image result for doctor strange rotten tomatoes
The current rating is now 90%

How else did you think that Doctor Strange, on the eve of its release, gained a perfect 100%, despite only have fourteen reviews and an average score of mid sixes to low sevens from individual ratings? And if you say “by being paid by Disney” I’ll beat the knowledge into if I literally have to. As I was saying, since the review scores were above a five, then each of the dozen or so critics recommenced Doctor Strange
under the sites rules. Even that is a common problem with the site as since the tomato Meter accounts for the amount of people who liked a film rather than the reasons for their opinions; you end with often inflated scores when comparing the meter and average scores. Particularly when two different films can get similar scores in one, but different on the other. Critics are to bad films, what heroin is for your teeth; the more you have, the worst the effects are.

Screenshot (169).png
SOURCE: ‘You’re Using Rotten Tomatoes Wrong’

Then came the criticism of how the site operated, and the realisation of it’s a research tool and source, then the simplified rounded number. The difference between Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB; the former presents the average score as a key feature. The discussion came between asking legitimate concerns, about how black or white the tomato Meter is, and bring up its lack of awareness of the concept of middle ground. And then there’s the flying monkeys that start throwing feces soaked petitions to shut the site down out of spite, due to the critics views of a highly anticipated film. Image result for shut down rotten tomatoes change.org With this petition released during the eve of the premiere of Suicide Squad. With it being rightfully laughed at by the masses; whether it’d be from the result of the film or the actions on principle. Regardless no one else since took that petition seriously no matter how many people were excited to see Margot Robbie in red and blue booty shorts.

But the biggest problems of the site, is the way it’s treated, depending on whether the big percentage does or doesn’t say nice thing about any given film. This is why I bring up the nerd war over Man of Steel, specifically the ones who hated it to the point they were calling the DCEU destined to fail before Batman V Superman even had a trailer; let alone meme status.https://ls-digitalfox.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2017/05/batman-superman-martha-meme-Digital-Fox-Media-300x186-1-1-1.jpg Because the fan discord of the new Star Wars films is a similar yet backwards version of Man Of Steel. With the DCEU’s fall from…grace i guess, back in 2016, many people were willing to verbally bitch smack defenders of Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad and then Justice League when they were getting spit roasted by the site; particularly at those lynching the site for giving a film they’d not seen yet a bad review. Now I’ve seen numerous of online content creators who were defending the site and its critics by saying: “yes these aren’t good”; are now some of the many with the pitch forks and torches at Rotten Tomatoes headquarters for giving a film a rating they’re not happy with; throwing the paid shill accusation like an aids cure. Sort of like…exactly like the Suicide Squad petition and other bullshit claims of Disney rigging the game against every other studio, but suddenly a pointless casino scene and Luke Skywalker drinking green seal milk is evidence enough that Disney is the sugar daddy of the movie industry.

Say what you will about The Last Jedi, but if either of these petitions makes sense in your head, you don’t give one damn about fair critique, particularly how the most negative, leftist bashing reviews of Episodes seven and eight regularly confuse disagreement with refusal to listen due to blindly following the “leftist propaganda within the film” which shows a lot doesn’t it. Not saying all hate for this film is because of the political reasons, there are parts I don’t like either. But I’m now regretting that i put Sargon and The Rageaholic on my favourite You Tubers list given how they’ve made carrers out of saying “the left can’t take critisim” and yet paint fanboys of Episode seven, and ones with legitmate critisim agaisnt their points on the matter with the same broad brush. Anyway, when films like The Dark Knight Rises, Suicide Squad and The Last Jedi are causing the critics of the site to get their inboxes flooded with hate mail and rants about the how broken the site is; If you’re wondering why many studios are pulling a Hilary Clinton in the sense that they blame everyone else first, self reflecting later; there’s your answer folks.

Screenshot (171).png
SOURCE:

Because Hollywood knows that If their expensive blockbuster gets rated poorly on the most popular film review site on the net, well that becomes a headline, which turns audiences away; and the studio executive has to explain why said movie made less money than the leading brand of bottled piss. So in the meantime enforce review embargoes until after the opening day, unless it gets rated Certified Fresh, then that’s easy marketing to get asses in seats.

In closing, i want to think about something: we either live in a world where a mass consensus of people reflect a film’s quality, and protest demanding said people to be silenced is a petty move; or it isn’t. Not saying you have to agree or like The Last Jedi, but saying you don’t agree with a popular opinion is more braver and professional than saying the system is broken that day because you disagree!

Thank you for your time.

Review – Thor: Ragnarok

Image resultI find it fitting that both Thor and The Hulk are teamed up for this film, particularly while their appearances the Avengers had some of the twos best moments in the MCU; their solo efforts have been mixed. Thor one was an excellent and fun fantasy film that effortlessly transitioned into The Avengers with a great cast involved. While The Incredible Hulk was decent but mostly forgettable, but given the 2003 film; the projector bursting into flames during the premiere was the only way the film could’ve screwed up in a worst way since last time. Sadly while both Avengers were excellent, Thor The Dark World, while becoming the jokey action filled template that the rest of the MCU has been following, suffered due to forced side characters and a boring villain; while Hulks solo sequel….I’ll get back to you on that one.

Look the point is that putting the leads of two of the weaker series from Marvel actually worked in this film’s favour; mainly due to the already established connection Thor and Banner have. Even when the Hulk is given the chance to speak, it gives him a chance for actual character development as well as comedic moments. With this being one of Mark Ruffalo’s best performances as Banner, mainly due to how out of the comfort zone he is. With many multiple call backs to previous films that work well in terms of this character dynamic. And while Loki is mainly here to wrap up and explain his reappearance after Thor the Dark World, he is still a relevant character, once again taking the role of an anti-hero who is dragged around by Thor to help him, but naturally has plans of his own. And once again it’s Hemsworth and Hiddleson’s performances that makes the movie worth watching alone; particularly when the family drama is further pushed into the story. Even if Loki does have the preservation skills of a Dodo bird, seriously what did Odin see in him when the final battle is the only time in this film Loki didn’t get his ass kicked so hard there are Nike symbols embeded in his pelvic bone. When it comes to new characters, Valkyrie went from being a ‘replacement Sith’ to a welcome addition; while both being Asardian warrior women, it’s the care free attitude and dark back story with Hela that makes Valkyrie unique to this movie. Also those news stories about her being bisexual….pointless.

But back to Hela, let’s discuss the villains Marvel has given us this year. Ego and god like living planet that wanted to persuade his son to convert all planets into a giant hive mind. The Vulture was a construction worker that stole some alien tech to sell to criminals for profit. Hela? Yeah if you thought that superhero movies were way too reliant on the villain who wants to destroy the world and kill everyone; yeah it’s that character on a totally different world; regardless whether they’re on earth, Asgard or candy land it still counts. She’s basically Enchantress from Suicide Squad but with a personality, a back story and some clothes bought with a two for one Hot Topic voulter. I mean it: she’s an all-powerful woman with magic powers, trapped away due to said evil powers until accidentally released to the world, where she then takes revenge on those who imprison her with an army of zombies. And like Enchantress she spends the rest of the running time waiting for the heroes to show up while her goons do the work for her. Greatly acted, but not original when compared to the writing of the other villains in the franchise that are in their films to wreck shit.

And plenty of shit does get wrecked, as most the special effects are gorgeous, from the varied locations of Ashard and Sicar, with excellent detail and renderings that make the worlds unique. Even the motion capture and CGI characters like Korg stand out great, especially when multiple effects based characters are given more to do and say when they’re not being wiped of our leads shoes like they would in The Avengers. The Hulk v Thor fight being the key standout in terms of action scenes. But again, I said most of the effects. Because as recent trailers show, there have been reshoots done before the release. Image result for thor ragnarok reshootsAnd there cases, such Hela’s introduction in the alley changed to a cliff, where it shows, as there are scenes altered or once appeared in trailers before being removed. With the main problem being how clearly last-minute added changes stand out against the highly rendered scene, or how obvious it is which shots are done on green screen; especially when already rendered actors stand out agaisnt their surroundings due to having their original background changed. You’d think when an MCU features as much shooting on green screen sets as they do would figure this shit out. With many of the scenes on Asgard, and the introduction of Hela looking like a scene from Phase One of this franchise.

Speaking of being poorly implemented, I like to discuss the flaws of the film’s story structure: the main one being, there fucking isn’t one! Oh sure things happen and lead into each other, but each event is often present and followed on with a ‘and then this happened’ moment. Without spoilers the first act goes as follows: Thor finds out about Loki’s return as the two search for Odin, and then Doctor Strange helps them out, and then Hela shows up as she break Thor’s hammer, and then she gets to Asgard and goes full Kratos on the locals, and then Thor lands on a planet that forces him to become a gladiator….I hope you get the picture. Hell even The Hulk’s appearance feels like a ‘and then’ moment, not just because this movie takes elements from the Planet Hulk story; with the first act and the finale feeling kinda rushed when so much of the story takes place on Sicar. But thankfully the comedy more than makes up for it. While The Dark World felt like it was trying to force a joke in a times. This film far more natural as most the humor comes from character banter, and unexpected moments that work effortlessly given the build up involved; with Hemsworth, Hiddleson and Rufflao doing great with the director involved.

 The major downside is that the writers are way to focused on jokes to contrast with DC’s sombre naturally, frankly alot of dramatic moments ended being cut short by character banter and characters injuring themselves; leaving moments having to regain the weight they just lost in the process. There are moments that meant to build upon a character struggles and character development, and plot development; but are wasted fro the sake of a cheap laugh. Kevin Fiege listen up: joke and comedy are great, and the humor of the past MCU films have been great. But when your spending the majority of your time trying to make the audience laugh in the aim of not loosing their attention., you loose focus on the emotional moments. Deadpool was a comedy, and yet it was allowed to take its time to build upon the relationship between Wade and Vanessa; through those scenes you feel the crushing weight of those two loosing each other. Meanwhile this film is regularly stopping a start its momentum because it spent more time buliding the punchline than the dramatic moments that should take focus. I recommend checking out Just Write’s video on the subject. Yes I know the DCEU should be learning tips Marvel about taking breaks the from the down beat tone; but Wonder Woman has now shown that having moments of drama and comedy can work when you have your scene’s priorities in check.

I just want to say that Thor Ragnarok is not a bad movie, in fact if it wasn’t for Spider-Man Homecoming i would’ve have called this the best film Marvel made this year. With an great balence of comedy and action with a talented cast that wear their roles like golves; which makes the film all the more enjoyable given the large stakes involved this one, regardless of the cliches and exposition is involved. As well as jokes that range from laugh out loud to, why is this here now? If you’ve never stayed through the credits of a Marvel film seeing it on the big screen. Firstly, you lazy, attention spanless prick, and secondly stay for it because the end will leaves you wanting Infinity War more than fans like me already do.

7/10

Thank you for your time.

Inhumans IMAX Premiere Review

Despite Marvel dominating the big screen while the current iteration of the comics said films are based on, are going down in a flaming nose dive under the egos, heavy political agendas and incompetence of their writing staff;

Want proof?

their works on TV has ranged from great like Daredevil and Agent Carter, to a complete time waste such as Iron Fist and Luke Cage as Marvel pushes the fans patience and time schedules given how much is produced nowadays. So does Inhumans become the now only great Network show on air for Marvel to justify the IMAX screening of its two-part pilot? ……kinda…not really.

For all the potential that adaptation of a series that amounts to Game of Thrones in space Marvel have surprising took the safe route to compensate for the fact that this production didn’t get the truck loads of Disney money it was supposed to get when featured as part of MCU Phase Four.

Not any more!

But the clearly scaled down scope that a project like this would’ve given you steams beyond setting large chunks of the story on earth. But to advertise a team of super powered aliens, and set up these powers as part of the shows status quo; just so you could cripple half the team and shove these guys far away from each other so the villain actually stands a chance. Well naturally, every Marvel show has always featured the characters in a constant schedule of running around the main city looking for shit and twiddling their thumbs figuring out how to save the day together.

What’s that? Our main lead can control her hair like additional arms? Have you seen how much we’ll have to pay the guy to animate that, after Tangled drain our backers wallet. Hey script guy! Let’s shave the bitch and save the call to the wig store. That’ll save us money, and like six pages of script done without the super powered hair. So what about the giant teleporting dog? “Ah just have him sedated and locked away somewhere, what? Infinity War needs another grand to animate Thanos’ left Ass cheek; why else do you think the main costumes look like something bought of cosplay Etsy page? I joke because the money clearly went into the varied locations and the IMAX cameras used to film these two episodes. Particularly when the outer space shots look better designed than the main city itself. Oh its cinematography is excellent, so is the CGI. But when the buildings of this intergalactic moon city looks like the graphic designer was given a tub of Lego and was told to go crazy with the several dozen brick pieces, and then spray painted the result grey; well its no wonder no one has ever found the damn space city when it blends on with the rest of the moon crater its hiding in.

But when the Inhumans do get to use their powers, they look great, particularly Karnak’s ability to reassess, change and calculate his way out of a fight like an episode of Sherlock staring Jackie Chan. Medusas actor was a good choice for the role and when there’s enough budget to use her tentacle hentai hair, the effects manages to capture the details. And while Lockjaws full body shots sends him into the uncanny valley due to being detailed and yet stick out from the live action sets in ideal lighting conditions. But hey, at least the animation more than made up for it. But even the better performances feel like they’re on auto pilot, especially when the mute Blackbolt’s facial acting amounts to expressing stubbornness and confused stubbornness. And yet given his body language, mannerisms and sign language without speaking; his probably the best character in these two epsiodes….no that is a joke about the dialogue.

https://pmctvline2.files.wordpress.com/2017/09/marvels-inhumans-review-abc.jpg?w=321&h=217And don’t even get me started on how under developed Loki…uh Maximus is. Oh sure his a human in a society where not having super powers puts you in working class mines, but outside of becoming Enjoras by preaching about how great things would be if I were in charge; in both scenes we see of said human under class. Was there really that little story in the pre-production notes from the now defunct Inhumans film, that the writers had to go full-blown Killing in the Name Of in terms starting an uprising scene in the first episode, just after establishing a status quo to break it in a time span so short it could be given the chance to direct The Flash movie; and to do so before the writers get bored with writing scenes in the moon palace?!

If these guys were any more desperate to get rid of the man in charge to focus extensibility on the aftermath, they would be reporting for CNN. This story feels like they skipped to the build up for the finale, and are just killing time until Blackbolt takes the throne back in the final episode. Look, I know that TV budget can’t exactly pay for Guardians of the Galaxy level effects every week, let alone for eight episodes in total. But I can’t say I’m surprised that the guy who botched Iron Fist to the point that the fighting was downgraded from Daredevils second season, and the usage of the particular Iron Fist could be counted on one glowing hand. I’ll say this much, at least I could remember the villains name this time. But you’ve established a group of heroes; and decided that the first plan of action was to separate them each on their own separate part of the continent, as they wander around and gripping about how much of a dipshit the guy currently on the throne is, until the plot paths connect at some point. Wow this is turning into an episode of Game of Thrones.

Related image

And despite that, the problem isn’t the path taken by the writers, but rather the way it’s handled. The story is cliché and under development for something that’s meant to kick-start an ongoing story, with actors trying to work with their direction; and how they’re dealing with a cast of characters with little to do since the script is rushing to key plot points and keeping the characters somewhat occupied in the meantime; or is trying to work around moments that would actually need the super powers, that don’t involve the guy who can lever the building with a single belch. Either way you slice it, it’s sad to see that Agents of Shield found more use for the Inhumans as characters, and their abilities, than this show seems to be doing. I admit this could improve and last past the story’s current direction, but then I remembered I watched Iron Fist being made by the same guy who did this and the finale to Dexter……

5/10

Thank you for your time.

Doctor Who: They Made A Woman Out of Him

Well it appears that the insanity of online reactions waits for no man, as this post is kinda late due to the fact that I sat on today’s topic to gather my thoughts; as well as the fact that I was on holiday.

But yes, as you most likely would’ve heard, Jodie Whittaker (from the excellent Attack the Block and Boradchurch) is announced as the 13th Doctor in a rather underwhelming way. BBC, you made me watch ten minutes of tennis, a sport no one likes, to watch a woman stroll in the woods! Much like Sony’s Ghostbusters reboot, the fact that a typical male character is replaced by a woman has split the fandom harder than Steven Moffat’s last few seasons. Some more over reactionary than others.

With many already proclaiming Whittaker to be the new Tom Baker despite only being the character for twenty seconds, with cosplays, fan art and custom figures already being made and hitting the web. And of course there would be some not so keen on this decision, and regardless of whether it’s people in satisfied with the particular woman chosen, or any other reason involved; but it doesn’t matter as they’re all dumped into the dumpster of negative views considered sexist because there’s a woman being criticised; I mean attacked.

In short, whether you love or hate the new cast choice, the reactions have been insane. This has become Ghostbusters (2016) again, in the sense that any disapproval is lumped with the actual sexism, while everyone showering praise for Jodie’s name being attached to the show is criticising others for being “reactionary” without a shred of irony.  To the point that any comment disagreeing is labelled as sexist, and attempts to remove, mock and block said views are celebrated. Tolerance. But let’s talk about said negative reactions, particularly as I’ve said in my ‘Doctor Who: I Can Make A Woman Out of You‘ blog my thoughts on the possibility of such an occasion. And since I said I wasn’t fussed about the matter; when it comes to the anti-SJW commenters who’ve already hopped on this story. Let’s go.

Many people on the political right and critics of SJWs have been throwing around the “diversity is killing entertainment industry, no one wants these characters to pander to the politically correct” line using Marvel Comics as an example of this. img_0999Specifically due to the recast of multiple heroes, scenes and dialogue made to reflect bs SJW talking points, all at the hands of writers who lash out against their critics and the fans they turned away due to their lack of skills and subtlety. I’ll let appabend explain. However, can all that really be blamed on the sole fact the Thor is now a woman, the Hulk is an Asian dude bro, and Iron Man is replaced by a black teenage girl; no of course not. They’re just examples of characters who suck due to poor writing.

So yes the obsession with identity politics is clearly there, due to the writers in charge of the sinking ship. And even if we excuse the unsubtle ‘social commentary’ the fact of the matter is the stories characters like Ri Ri Williams, Lady Thor and the like are headlining are not only bad, but are also WAY too numerous, with event comics crossing into every comic series currently out being announced and released every other weekend, and how multiple series get cancelled and relaunched under new titles for the same characters time after time. Just take Captian Marvel, X-Men and Rocket Raccoon for example. And yet it keeps failing for Marvel Comics because the stories they produce suck; despite the hollow lead characters made to replace the characters gaining Marvel money in cinemas. Just look a Captian America’s Hail Hydra moment as an example of fans forming lynch mobs over unpopular creative decisions.

At the time when DC’s New 52 was actually new in 2012, Marvel decided that ‘dark’ was a something to strive against as a response to negative feedback some of the stories DC were getting .  So Marvel decided to be light and humours as a response; and by light, I mean turn every character into Deadpool; with every story being a world saving adventure one issue, and a cheesy sitcom the next issue.

As Professor Thorgi says in his admittedly bias video on the matter, Marvel’s comic side of the company has become frustrating for life long readers without a weekly pay check in the triple digits, especially when big events shake the status quo every other month. It was the people in charge of story’s who are turning away readers, writers definitely involved under this bus.

Sourced 2014

The key example being Daredevil under the creative control of Mark Waid, who embraced everything that Marvel Comics was looking to do with their writing: pop culture references and poor attempts to be funny and edgy, etc. With fans being driven away by Waids creative direction that can basiclly be descrbied as everything the Netflix series is not.

And any of my readers who are Doctor Who fans would’ve had one name come into their head at the mention of a fans turned away from their favourite franchise’s change, due to its new creative direction; that name being Steven Moffat. A reoccurring writer during the first four seasons of the revived Doctor Who, to which after being loved for writing some of the beloved episodes of those seasons, he was then promoted to show runner for season five onwards in 2010; “genius choice, this will be best season ever!” And while admittedly he did start with a strong first series; things then took a deep decline when everyone noticed the serious flaws in his writing when left to his own devices. Overly complicated stories trying to show how much of a clever writer he is, underwhelming story arc reveals, cringey dialogue that either explains motivations or bad jokes, giving non stop attention to characters that fans don’t care about (cough, Ashildar) etc. While not all of his writing past five series was bad, these actions have slowly turned a lot of fans against Moffat, turning him from golden boy to a meme.

Series nine being a straw that broke the camels back with its season finale, Hell Bent, being one of the most detested episodes in the shows history; with it followed by a Christmas that also split the fandom upon release. You mean to tell that fans had to put up with this five years of inconsistency of talent, ending up with the as for mentioned Hell Bent; but it’s the fact that Moffat paid a black woman to kiss another woman was the reason his last season has reached a new low in terms of declined viewers?
Yeah when a popular, openly bisexual character like Captain Jack Harkness (played by the opening gay John Barrowman) gets his spin-off show revived by Big Finish; seems legit. As I’ve previously stated in the past: the Ghostbusters reboot (“oh god not again!”) didn’t flop due to the presence of the female cast; but as i explained, it was due to the fact Sony threw out their plans for Ghostbusters III just to please Paul Fieg and get him on board, because to hell with what fans wanted. And then once Sony released trailers for said reboot, and it was panned with every criticism and news from behind the scenes labelled as either sexist ramblings or a conspiracy theory.

Look I get the argument of how studios and creators recast popular/ well-known characters with different races/genders to give this new character a head start in the news by leaching of the originals success. But while celebrating a characters recasted gender solely because it’s a new gender is just as pointless as saying the show is dead for that same reason. Again check out Appabends excellent video on the matter. But until Chris Chibnall’s first episode as new show runner is released, then we can actually judge this new Doctor.

In short while changing a characters race and gender is an obvious marketing attempt for press coverage, no matter the result, but given what the audiences have put up with; the fact The Doctor or Thor now have boobs is the least of the fans problems if and when the inmates are running the asylum.

Thank you for your time.

The Impacts of Conglomerates within the Media Industries:

Image result for conglomeratesThe media industry is a large one, filled with many people and organisations running the business and project output. A large bulk of our media is released by conglomerate companies. Basically conglomerates are when groups of other smaller companies are bought, managed, and do business with one, or more, larger companies. An Avengers team of businesses if you will.

Image result for fourth estateSome examples include 20th Century Fox as they run Fox News; along with National Geographic and Sky. Or other examples being Sony. In the sense that they have a film division, (Sony Pictures) with an animation studio (Sony Animation) and parts of the company that work on their Play Station consoles.  As a result, many other well-known companies have been known to be bought by conglomerates. Such as Lucas Films and Marvel Studios being brought by Disney; with many of their properties being now owned by Disney, i.e. the Star Wars franchise, and the numerous characters from Marvel comics. Which has benefited both companies greatly, after those properties were bought, tons of money was then poured into projects such The Avengers and Star Wars the Force Awakens; which had tremendous returns from the box office as a result; with both of them reaching the billion dollar mark. So of course, the point of becoming part of a conglomerate is the profit returns; while being given plenty of exposure through adverting, and even merchandise. Case and point being Sony and the Play Station 4 console. As Sony markets a game that’ll be published on their console, alongside the studio that the game developer is working alongside with. Some developers like Naughty Dog Studios have been known to be backed by Sony for the development of games such as The Last of Us.Image result for sale As for merchandise, this would include DVDs, T-shirts and anything sold under the brand name; such the Harry Potter World attraction, which is owned by Warner Brothers. So the exposure, resources and money given to support does benefit the creators involved, guaranteeing larger returns in profit, usually. But does this make things better for the audiences?

media-owned-six-corporationsThat’s debatable for a few reasons. For one thing, they are limited in terms of choices they have in terms of entertainment. To the point that over 90% of the US media is controlled by six different conglomerates; after being controlled by 50 companies in the 80s. General Electric, News Corp, Disney, Viacom, Time Warner and CBS. All of them produce forms of media such as movies, TV shows etc; as well as license other companies to produce merchandise of said brand. This being done through the smaller companies that they own/ partnered with. The reason why big budget block busters like Batman, Harry Potter and Marvel’s Cinematic Universe get the most advertisement on film news sites and cinema screens, is because the studios pump loads of money into the production, while pumping more money into the advertisement in order to get more people in cinema seats; increasing the box office result. While the idea of producing a million dollar earning blockbuster and spitting the enormous profit with the third parties assisting, it creates problems for the rest of the industry. Image result for media business menWhy? Because it’s leading small budget productions and their creators having to find lesser known companies to distribute or create a project, because if they can’t get work with the big leagues, then they’re on their own; just ask some no name band starting in their mum’s basement, to maybe getting heard by some big name music executive. That is until they get turned down because to conglomerates, niche audiences are aren’t worth the smaller returns.

In an age where anyone could afford an advanced guitar app or Adobe After Effects, it’s still hard to get hard noticed when you’re a nobody drowned out by the adverts of the brands people know and trust. Thankfully platforms like Netflix and even You Tube have produced many breakout hits on their streaming services. Image result for crowd fundingAnd many film directors, performers and video game developers have used crowd funding sites such as Kick Starter to catapult those creators to success using donations from the public. With games like Mighty No 9 using Kick Starter to fund the game, earning 3 million dollars from online donors; before becoming an example of why crowd funding is looked down by some. But that’s a whole other can of worms for another time. An example of a project crowd funding to then gain success, would be Kung Fury. A parody of 80s action films that started as a crowd funded project meant for You Tube; until gain such a positive response it’s now being hosted on Netflix. Either way, in a world where someone like Justin Bieber can go from a teenager recorded on a crappy camcorder, to a teenager selling out stadium size concerts; many of those creators can get to eventually play with the big leagues after getting more notice and praise through word of mouth. Marc Webb went from directing indie romantic comedies such as 500 Days of Summer, to then direct The Amazing Spider-Man and its sequel with Sony Pictures.

Image result for media news

From the fictional side of the media, to what is meant to be the factual real world events side. When it comes to the news, the main stream news shows and channels end up getting the wider attention; and given the conglomerates they’re partnered with, more resources. With majority of news coming from channels and sites like ABC, NBC, BBC etc. And News Corp owns some of the top newspapers in the UK, North America and Australia. The Sun, The Times and the Wall Street Times being examples. While many outlets have criticized for producing biased news reports, due to reflecting the believes of the higher-ups in the attempt of gaining the attention of those who share similar world views. Sky and Fox news have been accused of having a pro conservative agenda, like the company’s owner Rupert Murdoch. And in the past two years, other left-wing outlets have recently been accused of being biased against the Trump campaign. The reason for any agenda is that it comes back to money, as Anup Shah explains:

“Often, many media institutions survive on advertising fees, which can lead to the media outlet being influenced by various corporate interests. Other times, the ownership interests may affect what is and is not covered. Stories can end up being biased or omitted so as not to offend advertisers or owners.” Shah. A, Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership, Global Issues, 2009.

Image result for left wing right wingWith limited options often promoting left-wing articles to appeal to younger audiences repeating back what the government wants the world to know; this has opened the door to the fifth estate. Which is defined as news and opinions outside the main stream news sources. This lead to multiple sites like AMC news, Breitbate.com, Wiki Leaks and many others gaining traction in online hits from updates on the latest Hollywood block buster or news on the politics and world events for example. Not only did this produce more voices in the discussion, but more viewpoints. In a media landscape filled with a majority of left-wing new sources, right-wing publications such as Info Wars have gained millions of views during the 2016 present election alone. Hence why said publications are blamed and shamed for the election of president Donald Trump.

So do conglomerates mean a good thing or a bad thing for the viewers of the world media? At this point it’s hard to tell. On the one hand it gives exposure and resources to multiple talents with in the industry, while also being a struggle to the smaller names and new comers in all form of the media industry. Not to mention how getting your name out involves: either the struggle with the tough, but limited choices. Or find the smaller but unknown people to help get your feet of the ground.  In other words, for consumers who receive products, as well as the ones hoping to contribute in the industry, it’s a double edge sword.

Thank you for your time.

The New Laci Green

I’ve made it clear that I follow the SJW vs anti SJW conflict happening online, and have been vocally against feminism and the politically correct dogma involved. As feminism’s credibility went down the drain as it crumbles under the arrogance. Mainly due to the refusal to accept any decent or criticism when it comes to subjects like: rape culture, the gender wage gap, the influence of the patriarchy and the legitimacy of the dictionary definition of feminism. As the stereotype of a feminist being an ugly, fat bitch with an axe to grind at men slowly becomes the standard image of the movement.

I bring this up as Laci Green is making waves within the anti-SJW community for saying something smart. In her recent video ‘Taking The Red Pill’  (referring to The Matrix, the phrase meaning that finally see the world as flawed or not as perfect as you thought) expressing how many within the social justice movement need to exchange dialogue with detractors; as she has expressed the desire to speak with those does and doesn’t agree with. And after speaking with people like Blaire White and Jeff Holiday, she’s realised that many of the people she has spent years labelling as bigots and misogynist may actually have valid arguments; the unwillingness of feminism to listen to critics by ordering their shut down as a response being one of them.

Seriously, last week if you were to type her name into YouTube, you would find video after video by people like Sargon, Tl;DR and Undooomed calling her an idiot. But now the search results are about her recent video.

I’ll admit I’ve taken jabs at Laci in the past, but I must say I’m actually proud of her, and not just because people like me get to have our ” I bloody told you so” moment. While she hasn’t out right disregarded her beliefs about feminism as a whole while wearing a MAGA hat; but to have someone build bridges after years of name calling is at least worth a thumbs up on her video. And this is coming from a jaded former subscriber of her’s. Granted a debate between and SJW and someone they’ve labelled a bigot….ugh, I mean criticised is not a new thing; Sargon has done that multiple times. But given how it was Laci that threw her gauntlet to Chat with Blaire, and has offered the chance to interact with more people with open arms; that is so good to hear.

You see while this community on YouTube is united against feminism and social justice, it’s very diverse interns of what the people actually believe. You have conservatives like Computing Forever, liberals like The Amazing Atheist, Trump supporters like Naked Ape while Thunderfoot is openly against him and the alt-right. Content creators diverse in world views, but are more than willing to speak and are not afraid of saying: “I think your wrong” and reflect upon the public actions of an individual; type Atheism is Unstoppable onto YouTube to see what i mean. Either way many are cheering for Laci’s somewhat of a departure from the community that openly practices the opposite.

Naturally this video was going to have responses from both sides. Despite skepticism coming from years of her throwing the race and sex card, it has gained an overwhelming positive response from the anti-sjws; with many like Sargon of Akkad wanting to take Laci’s offer to debate her. And then you have soon to be former allies loosing their shit in the most ridiculously self-awareness lacking display of rage since the EDL response to Lee Rigby’s death. “What’s that? We should open conversations with those who mock our words on a hourly basis? “No! We need to block them out entirely. #Triggered! Traitor!”

Seriously, that’s been her Twitter for the past couple of days or so. While there are numerous channels and Tweets going into melt down; I would like to comment upon the most cited example of this. That being the reactions of Steve Shives. For this who don’t know, Steve is a You Tuber that became well-known back when the skeptic community was the atheist community nearly a decade ago. And everyone loved him, I even subscribed to him at one point. So what happened? Well he went down the same path Laci did back in the early twenty tens. Both were popular You Tubers loved for their smart and entertaining videos. However both downed the feminism kool aid and preaching the gospel of Social Justice; and much like a religious leader, anyone with objections would be thrown out due to being unworthy in the eyes of the course.Image result for laci green meme

Laci produced nonsense about gender spectrums, the oppression of women in the first world and actively spoke for the removal of due process for rape accusations. While Steve bought every feminist taking point that was already rendered bull crap with a quick google search: such as rape culture and the wage gap. With his response constantly being to block those with a pin that are standing next to his bubble. I’m serious, go to his Twitter right now and see if you’re blocked….I know right! His openly done so many times to the point that not only is he a meme; and there is even a hashtag. #blockedbysteve.Image result for steve shives memes

Steve, since Laci’s video has been ranting and roaring like a true british sailor, as he has been proving Laci right; in the sense that people who share similar world views are more likely to call for the banning of someone, because speaking to them is far too difficult. If your interested Bearing shows the entire Twitter conversation if your interested, as Steve claims that blocking people and silencing ideas isn’t censorship, but rather a stren showing how someone and their ideas is not exceptable within the wide You Tube community that I agree with.

So yes, i am happy over the Laci’s decision to publish the red pill video, and I do hope she keeps to her promise of further talking with anti-SJWs and anti feminist. Not just to finally show her how flawed her statements were, not just to trigger people like Steve by having her buddy up with the people they rant about on a minutely basis. But because discussions have kept this part of You Tube active, how else did you think the term triggered become a meme? Hell the fact that many of the most popular people started making videos during the earliest years of You Tube prove it.

Especially when many have been predicting 2017 to be the year of the death of social justice. Honestly in a time where most the world still believes the Russia gate scandal with Trump despite the found evidence being amounted in the minus digits; and half of my Facebook friends list is planning to vote for a communist Jedi as prime minister on the promise of free shit; that day won’t come in my life time. That said I do agree with some who have claimed Laci’s turn was due to social justice as a financial path on You Tube, is laughable when not on mainstream television. The logic going that, if she can get a big named skeptic You Tuber on a live stream, that user’s subscribers would come to watch her, purely to see what she says next. I don’t personally buy that, however I do see the logic. As sites like Everyday Feminism are shutting down, and social justice propaganda sites such as Buzzfeed, MTV and Jezebel are funded by big companies, who clearly don’t give a fourth of a damn of whether it’s well received. Mind you, You Tube is a site where the most views means you’re the most popular in the sense that a lot of people know your name. How else did you think The Annoying Orange got his own god damn TV show?!

In closing: Laci, as a former subscriber who abandoned you due to your absurd comments, and your refusal to listen back to us; as you blindly believe your own nonsense. I’m glad your finally starting to turn a new leaf, and any direction change from where you were last year, yeah this will do.

Thank you for your time.

Rebooting Hollywood Or The Effects of Hollywood’s Obsession with Remakes:

Image result for hollywood out of ideasAnyone that has been keeping track with mainstream movie news, will know that there is a new version of an already existing franchise or film being released every other month. I even surveyed multiple people, and 84% were aware of this.

Screenshot (11).png
See it here

This brings up discussions of whether Hollywood are out of ideas, and are relying on the safe path of familiarity to fill the producer’s wallets. At the same time, it brings up interest in the relaunch of said popular brand, whether it’d be from the already existing fan base, or the newcomers who have only just heard about the brand. Regardless the modern movie industry has fallen into the habit of relaunching an already popular film or brand; with numerous remakes of popular films already in the works. In March this year, cinema goers had the choice of Kong: Skull Island (the third King Kong reboot) a remake of Beauty and the Beast by Disney, or the live action version of Ghost in the Shell. So what’s the harm? Well before we ask that, we need to know the other important question, what’s the reason for this?

Image result for movie franchisesWell firstly there’s the obvious reason of money. And said money being made through different means, mainly franchises. With a lot of projects being made to set up multiple sequels to be produced, after said film is released and hopefully makes a splash at the box office. Due to the success of Marvel Cinematic Universe by Disney – with the Avengers sealing that franchise’s success back in 2012 – many studios from Warner Brothers, Fox Studios and Sony Pictures have been trying to launch their own attempts of cinematic universe like franchises with multiple sequels and giving multiple characters’ spin offs and cross overs; with properties such Spider-man, X-Men, DC Comics and Ghostbusters being planned and already put in action, all of which are released with further projects in the pipe line. Hence why many of the remakes/ reboots released are of well-known properties that are loved by their fans, and have already been financially successful in the past. Because as the old saying goes: if works once, it’ll work again and again. Image result for spidermanSpider-Man is a good example of this, as Peter Parker is on this second reboot at Marvel Studios. Since 2002 Sony Pictures had made millions on the Spider-Man trilogy with Toby Maguire as the star, with his final putting earning a worldwide gross of $890 million. However due to numerous disagreements with director Sam Rami, the studio and Maguire himself; the franchise had ended, with Sony starting the franchise again with a new crew and cast in The Amazing Spider-Man in 2012 which earned around $262 million. You can see why Disney was keen to make deals with Sony for the character rights, the sequel under performed; making Disney’s version (as seen in Captain America Civil War) the third big screen version of Spider-Man. With Sony planning to produce a spin-off for Venom, a popular characters from the comics.

Hell this works for sequels as well, if there are two things Hollywood loves most, is money and familiarity. Hence why a lot of films that make bank at the box office earn sequels, whether they need/ require them or not. Why? Because the predecessor established an audience that gave the their money to see it in theatres, and buy the DVDs. So the logic goes: is that said audience will spend more money on a continuation of something they enjoyed once before. Anyone who knows about the workings of studios, will know that they’ll not put anything in production, unless they know it’ll get asses in seats. But with sequels, BOOM! Audience already established, so put this shit on our release schedule and give the team all our money!

Image result for merchandising spaceballsHowever, there is one other source of money from a big budget reboot of an established brand, merchandising. With the studios making deals with manufactures to make products to generate hype for said rebooted brand. If someone loves a film to the point that they have a shelf solely for the merchandise, then a new version will get said person to by the new products. Whether it’d be: t-shirts, special edition DVDs with hours of bonus features, dress up items, and action figures with almost perfect likenesses to the character they’re meant to portray. Companies such as Hasbro, Mattel, Neca, Lego and Side Show Collectibles have profited heavily on this. As Mark Litwak said on the matter of movie merchandising, it’s a second form of advertisement:

If McDonalds agrees to distribute millions of Roger Rabbit cups to its customers, and spend additional millions of dollars to advertise the promotion, the movie benefits from increased audience awareness. For distributors, promotional campaigns are often the most alluring aspect of a product placement deal”. Litwak M, 2013 ‘Movie Merchandising’.

And his not wrong about the allure of merchandising, especially when aiming to audiences of families, children included; with it also aiming towards adult collectors. With successful franchises such as Star Wars –with products by Kenner and Hasbro – making over $37 billion over the last 40 years before the release of The Force Awakens, the push for merchandising in shops and geek events such as Comic Con makes more sense. Especially when a CNBC article by Javier E. David says that the Comic Con event in San Diego brings in $700 million during the three days of the events.

So while yes, the established geek market is the key market to hit, as many of them will be aware of the relaunched franchise; there is still more demographics to reach. The first is young people, mainly because they would be having the most disposable income, and would be more keen to see a big popcorn blockbuster than a slower drama piece. Image result for remakesI say this as films such as Total Recall, Robocop and Poltergeist were well-respected films with hard R ratings (or 15 in the UK) only to be rebooted as PG-13 (12A in the UK) that meaning anyone around that age range could pay to see the film. The second audience to aim for, being everyone else. Because if a franchise is going to be re-established to the worldwide public, the more audiences viewing the better. It draws attention to something they might not have been aware of beforehand, and if they’re a fan of something in a similar genre; then they may like this. And I do mean the world wide public, going back to Robocop and Total Recall, by the US box office both of them under performed. As both of them struggled to make more than $60 million in the US. When it comes to the world wide audiences: Robocop (2014) made $139 million, while Total recall made $184 million. And these are only two examples in a recurring trend, as Robert Schovo says in his video ‘Too Many Hollywood Reboots? Here’s why’; countries like China only take a small amount of English-speaking films to put them in wide release across the country, and as Robert says:

“They’re (cinema distributors) going to go with something that doesn’t get lost in translation. If you ever wondered why the Fast and the Furious movies are so huge – it’s because: men drive car fast, works in any language.” Schovo R, 2016. ‘Too Many Hollywood Reboots? Here’s why’!

Hence why so many examples like this are big expensive action films with explosion filled, exciting, money shots for the trailers; instead of some deep heart-felt rom-com. While (insert franchise here) maybe new to someone else, even if they’ve heard good things about the original from a guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy’s cousin whose seen it. Which also explains the remakes of multiple foreign films such as Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Ring.

Now, we need to ask the important question; what is the effect of Hollywood and the movie industry? Well for one thing the is that there are loads of remakes of well-known films still being produced, with sources stating that between 107 and 116 remakes are in various stages of production by various studios. Screenshot (12).pngWhich shocked the participants in my survey, as 80% were unaware of this. But also Hollywood has fallen into the habit of making films in order to kick starter a franchise using popular characters, in the attempts of building a cinematic universe with sequels, spin offs and crossovers in the vain of making the same money Marvel did with the Avengers. Regardless of the quality of the output, studios will pour money into blockbusters with massive special effects, using recognizable characters. Which will be seen all other the place in terms advertisement: i.e. movie screens, movie news and the internet etc.

But does it work for the studios? Yes, and no. Image result for box officeI mean it has worked for Marvel’s Cinematic Universe due positive word of mouth, and even Warner Brothers’ DC franchise has managed to turn a profit due to successful marketing campaigns. But for the rest of the market, I can be a hit or miss venture. Because all the money in the world being spent on trailers and action figures can’t prevent a film sinking due to one crucial element that can grantee a film success in the world of fandoms and the internet, positive word of mouth. Whether it’d be from the critics on sites such as Rotten Tomatoes, and the responses from audiences. The 2016 reboot of Ghostbusters is a good example, while the film rated well in terms of critical reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, when it came the audience scores, it was rated the lowest rated film within the franchise. I bring this up as the film failed at the box-office only making $128 million at the US box office on a budget of $145 million, with the film failing to break even. And what’s not helping is that smaller productions are given less attention due to being released days or so after a highly anticipated/ advertised film has hit theatres.

Screenshot (13).png
Source: Box Office Mojo

For example, a Will Smith drama from 2015 called: Concussion; only made a total amount of $48 million, in a world where movies are expected to make double their profits, that’s bad enough. But do you know what has released a week before: Star Wars the Force Awakens. That being said, the Indie/ Independent side of the film industry has gained large amounts of attention and influence. With events such as the Sun Dance film festival giving multiple indie productions more attention. Films like Drive and Troll Hunter being good examples of films starting at similar events and earning cult followings in the process. Even directors such as Quentin Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson being directors that started on their own and working their way to fame with their own ideas or ones that haven’t been tried yet. With the former having two of his films (Inglorious Bastards and J’Dango Unchained) being nominated for best pictures at the Oscars. This brings a balance between what is being released in cinemas; especially when films like Room and Whiplash end up topping the box office charts when given the attention.

Image result for indie movies

So is this good or bad? Honestly it’s both, as despite it being 50/50 on the quality of the output on the Hollywood reboot craze; it will get new people into franchises they probably wouldn’t have known/ cared about. And of course, actors, writers, producers, manufactures, etc. will have money to put food on the table. Even if we the audiences, will have to put up with the repetition.

Thank you for your time.

Trump V Clinton: The Shinest of Two Turds

Yes, I'm finally talking about the US election, a subject I have never given any thought about, until this blog post. For many reasons, as I mainly wanted this to be a more light-hearted page, and I honestly never really had much new shit to bring to a dinner table so crowed not even the after dinner mind can find big enough gap. But the result of the votes is in early November, and I'm writing this in late October, so until more jokes about Trump's actions as president are mad, I only have this small amount of time to hope on the mess of a band wagon. Now, before I begin I must state that I do not support either candidate, the title makes it clear enough, I'm just here to strike the iron of the campaigns while they're still above room temperature. So let us begin, by beating a dead horse.

Image result for trumpTrump:

Ah Donald Trump, what can be said about the man who hasn't been said by every other news commentator, political figure, celebrity and every loud mouth millennial online. At this point his been given every insult imaginable: an idiot, racist, despite gaining votes from celebrities such as Denis Rodman and Azelia Banks, sexist, and there's even the "Trump is literally Hitler" meme. Yeah great use of literally by the way. And given how the man has switched positions more times than a quick fire porn shoot, insulted and bashed women such as Rosie O'Donnell for her weight, with the attitude of a college frat boy; some of these claims are at least rooted in reality. So for those who already calling the man's potential ascend to The White House the end times, his leaked " grab her the pussy" tape was their "I told you so" moment. As were the allegations of multiple female contestants, who coincidentally have gone public in support for Hilary Clinton by the way, from The Appearance saying they were sexual harassed by Trump.

Which was kinda refreshing, as a lot of news coverage around the man was centred around his infamous border wall, since he made his policy's clear to the public. I'm not kidding, ask any old bum of the street to list a policy of Donald's, the first answer will definitely be about the Mexicans. Which given his lack of information about the building materials and time to do so, that aren't vague estimates that won't cost several arms and a leg for the average tax payer; and yet some how expects Mexico to split the bill.Suddenly everything make sense. Except for why people would support the man after that point, when members of the Republican Party (his party) have been sceptical for the man. He's lucky that his cuts on taxes, and increases of payments from richer tax payers are keeping the supporters. However, whatever your thoughts on his policies are, it's the man's presence that's attaching the voters and keeping them there.
I'm mean the man is bold and confident speaker, whose pretty much a middle finger to political correctness; which would be welcome in the age of SJW cry bullies. But that's it; his giving his supporters what they want to hear, with enough stage presence to keep the attention of the media. It's not secret a lot of the right-wing supports of America consider issues such as immigration and many other issues as what's wrong with the country. And a man who tells those people who he'll do what they want would seem appealing. Screenshot (146).pngParticularly when said person is a rich businessman with a net worth larger than Boris Johnson's belt length, that is financing his own campaign, so no issues with him selling out to corporate interest; all the while bluntly bashing the competition, in his usual proud of himself big shot persona. Using plain, emotive language to appeal to with the frustrated supporters.  Like a politician, his telling his supporters what they want to hear. I could say more, but I'm running low on time, so here's an interesting post on the subject if you're interested.

As happy as I would be to have world leader brave enough to tell the politically correct morons of the world to go suck a fat one; specially when Clinton is known for wanting to decreasethe wage gap, and giving her support to Black Lives Matter.A move for equality so backwards, it's one step away from letting Chris Brown and Bill Cosby run a women's abuse shelter. The point still stands that Trump is way over his head, and is driven solely on his ego, in order to win the election. Now his unprofessional nature is bad enough, especially with the more recent things said about him. And yet there are still people who disagree with the guy, but are planning to vote for him, solely out of spite due to the competition. And given said other candidate, you can't blame them.

Image result for hillary clintonClinton: 

If Trump is seen as the American version of Jay from The Inbertweeners…I mean the adult, American version of Jay from The Inbertweeners; then let me present the female Frank Underwood. Even if she acts like more of a professional than Trump, that won't stop her policy's being one of the numerous reasons people are against her. Putting aside the shady private shit of the deleted emails, there's the no fly zone she's planning to set up, while her campaign is funded by defence industries; coincidence? So yes, she plans to make Syria a no fly zone, which would at an estimate take around a thousand US troops, setting of conflicts with both Syria and Russia, the latter being a country with way more man power and nuclear weapons than the US, without adding to the country's trillion-dollar debt as it would start a war in the process….somehow. And people say Trumps border wall is going to be a waste of cash. But given how she voted for the war in Iraq…and then said she didn't, not surprising in hindsight.

What's worse is that she plans to do this despite every political figure attached to the debate from Obama, to Bernie Saunders and Trump himself saying that this was a bad idea. To the never Trump people, you now have something to think about. And we get the two true reasons she's disliked by many voters: she flips positions, and is a crook. I've already mentioned her two positions on Iraq, and the no fly zone that, by her admission, would lead to many deaths. But there are other agendas she's changed for her means. Such as: abortion, and gay marriage. With any criticism being deflected by saying "due to new information, I now know this". Say what you want about Trump, but at least his policy's stayed somewhat consistent. This coming from a woman who said every politician needs a public image, as well as a private one, in a meeting with Goldman Sachs.

And now we get into the Wiki Leaks shit. Not just the deleted emails she accidentally deleted, after accidentally sending classified information on an unregistered account…thirty thousand times. There's the child rapist she helped in court, clearing his charges despite knowing he was guilty. And how she blackmailed and bullied the women her husband had sex with during his time at The White House. Nice one miss feminist president. Her corporate interest falls somewhere between The Sheriff of Nottingham and Mr Krabs from Spongebob Square Pants. Till the point that Wiki Leaks have exposed her campaign of rigging her way to winning the Democrat Nomination. If you're confused about how Bernie Saunders, the Democrat with the larger supporter numbers than Clinton, got turned down due to lack of votes from Democrat supporters. Well that was mostly due to the reduced number of polling stations in states that over overwhelmingly supported Bernie Saunders.

Yeah. Hillary Clinton, got away with rigging the system in her favour, while the main stream media aids her in her goal to able the people calling her out as conspiracy theorist. And of course she did this to Trump. She was the woman who labelled his supporters as hateful and violet after all. With the cases of Trump enforced violent outburst, has now been revealed to be caused by members of the democrats. She's taking the creationist approach to research; if you can't find any proof of your claims, make your own.  Am i watching real life politics or an episode of House Cards?

So these are the candidates America has to choose from. A blow hard egotist that knows what his audience wants; or a candidate so unpopular she has bend reality to suit her needs, and hope the main stream media is too high on the anit-Trump wagon to even notice. Good luck America you're going to need it.

Thank you for your time.

 

Review: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014)

Image resultOut of a combination of interest and “why the hell not?” I decided to watch the 2014 version on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. And yes to my regular readers….both of you. I know this isn’t a newly released film, and the sequel is already out on DVD, “so why are you reviewing it then?” Firstly, don’t tell me how to run my blog, and the second reason is that if I can think of something worth typing, I’d do it; and boy is this worth talking about I assure you. Now for starters, I’m only a causal fan of the Ninja Turtles. I’ve watched and enjoyed the 2003 cartoon, I adore the 2012 series, and I’ve seen and liked the films, well the first two live action films I like, and the 2007 animated film is still pretty damn good. The third live action film; OH MY GOD, KILL AND BURN IT! And this film can go join the bomb fire.

So where to start, the plot? Ha! For a Ninja Turtles film, this film’s script is on creative auto pilot. It’s basically the four Turtles fighting the Foot Clan as they stop Shredder’s big plan, with some dashes of the Turtles established backstory, and the third act of The Amazing Spider-man. Image result for teenage mutant ninja turtles 2014 aprilOh and April O’Neil is in it. OK to the film’s credit we do learn said back story through her, and we do learn about William Fichtner’s character, or as I like to call him: not Shredder given the back lash to the film’s original casting. So April isn’t the most unless character in the film; that title goes to Will Arentt’s character. That said she is as forced into the script’s situation, the same way a brick is forced into a light socket. The actual plot itself has less depth than a pen cap, and it’s structurally linear as the pen itself. The back story almost gets the source material right, but in order to have Splinter and the Turtles know martial arts, the writers end up reaching so far; their arms must be the length of their entire body.

Moving onto the performances And what’s not helping Megan Fox is that her performance has the range of a shot from an asthmatic pea shooter. Image result for teenage mutant ninja turtles 2014 shredderAs for Shredder, his just a big brute for shake of having the chrome tar beaten out him by the end of the film. With the CGI Silver Samuri suit having more personality than the actor himself. Which again, isn’t helped by Fitchner’s recast; with him being the only villain with some sort of personality, even if his motivation comes down to: we wouldn’t have a movie if he didn’t. The only some what interesting characters in this, are the Turtles themselves. And even then Raphael is the only one with a character growth, Michelangelo is just there for comedic relief, which is neither comedic nor a relief or any kind; especially when he can’t seem to keep it in his pants, when around April. I’m serious; his behaviour is so odd, you’d feel guilty for leaving him alone with a vacuum cleaner, let alone a human woman. As for Leo,  he’s just the leader to get every one of their asses, while Donatello is just the exposition guy. But I will say that the voice actors were well picked, and do work decently with each other. Even if it’s just standard by comparison against the other media with their green faces on it.

Speaking of the Turtles’ green faces, the CGI is good, when it comes to the movements. While some cases they do look decent, other times they fail to blend with the live action sets; and the faces some how look worst than the puppet heads that used in the live action films. And given little of a crap the studio gave at film three, that’s saying a lot. Speaking of the looks, yet again it’s the action is the only saving grace that Micheal Bay decided to create for this franchise, wait he wasn’t the director? Well the action is the only saving grace that Micheal Bay let someone else decided to create for this franchise. With the chase down the snowy mountains being the highlight, as it was fast paced, and the only interesting set piece that isn’t just: just people fighting in the dark. The combat itself is basically any martial arts film, but not as fun or inventive. The ending fight is done well, but it’s mostly just ripping of The Amazing Spider-man, to the point were it’s the heroes vs the big bad guy, on the top of skyscraper, trying to prevent a toxic fart cloud from being unleashed onto the nearby city, and infecting/ killing the people below.

And now for the lighting round of complaints. The costume designs are basic. The pacing is sperattic with some scenes being the duration of a melting candle, to then switch into quick dashes, like The Flash on buretto Thursday. No seriously, there is a point where characters make it back to the sewers of New York, from some snowy mountains, with the span of a couple of hours. And while we’re bashing the plot. It’s revealed that Splinter learned his skills in martial arts, from a Japanese book about martial arts. Let me repeat that. A mutated rat, that has gained Intelligence and human speech, despite living in the sewers throughout the later half of his life. Becomes a master in ninjitsu, by reading a Japanese bloom about the subject. I’ll gladly give all of the money in my bank account to the animal scientist who can explain, how the hell that works?!

In closing the film kind of unfocused and kinda dull. Mainly due to flat characters, dialogue so forced you see the scene crack around it. Overall while the action is fun in an over the top way, and the four leads do well; this isn’t really worth the attention if I’m too honest.

And as for the sequal…i’ll get back to you on that.

Thank you for your time.