Alice in Wonderland: Through the Looking Glass

Years after the original Alice in Wonderland, Alice is now the captain of her Father's ship "The Wonder". But when the ship, her Mother's home and basically her whole life is on the verge of being taken away, she finds herself returning to Underland through a mirror. She arrives to find the Hatter's health deteriorating. He believes his family is alive after they are presumed killed by the Jabberwocky. It's up to Alice to travel through time to find them....but Time is against her.

Cast

Johnny Depp as Tarrant Hightopp, the Mad Hatter

Mia Wasikowska as Alice Kingsleigh

Helena Bonham Carter as Iracebeth of Crims, the Red Queen

Anne Hathaway as Mirana of Marmoreal, the White Queen

Sacha Baron Cohen as Time

Rhys Ifans as Zanik Hightopp, the Mad Hatter's father

Matt Lucas as Tweedledum and Tweedledee

Alan Rickman as Absolem, the Caterpillar

Stephen Fry as the Cheshire Cat

Michael Sheen as Nivens McTwisp, the White Rabbit

Timothy Spall as Bayard, the Bloodhound

Who will like this movie

With it's bright colors and wondrous effects and action, young viewers will certainly be entertained. Not too young, however because of it's sometimes dark themes. Fans of the Tim Burton/Johnny Depp collaborations may be disappointed by this, their 9th work together.

Phantom Thoughts

This review didn't exist when the original "Alice in Wonderland" came out in 2010. That's right....it's been 6 years since the last movie. That's kinda significant. But more on that later. And although I am quite the fan of The Depp, I was not really too impressed with that adaptation of the Lewis Carroll classic.

Needless to say, I wasn't overly excited to see the "sequel" this past week. And I put sequel in quotes because Alice in Wonderland was already a mix of the two books: Alice Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. So when they wrote this one, they had to come up with a brand new story to tell with no reference to pull from. Add that to the fact that Tim Burton only produced this one, as opposed to directing it like he did the first, and it spells out failure from the start. Still, I've been pleasantly surprised before, so I gave it a shot. Seems my first thoughts were the correct ones unfortunately.

The story centers around the search for the Mad Hatter's family and looking for them through time. Time is personified as a new character and brought to life by Sacha Baron Cohen. Poor Johnny Depp has almost no lines that doesn't include the word "Family" in it....and it gets annoying really quickly. So rather than suffer through it, I suggest changing it into a drinking game.....everytime the Mad Hatter says "Family" while watching this movie, take a drink. You'll be hammered in 20 minutes and won't care that you're basically watching a colorful passage of two hours of your life.

 

 

 

The Mad Hatter is not as "mad" as he was before.....and Cohen is not as whimsical as most of his characters are. But there is one interesting twist on his portrayal of Time....see, he is first presented as most older people see him... a villain. But as the movie moves forward, you come to realize that Time is not bad or good. It just is.

 

One other small perk that the nerd in me found....the slight Doctor Who theme that rose for just a moment as Alice and the Hatter are racing through the time vortex.

Well played, Sir....well played.

 

I mentioned that they had to write a new story for this one, but they still needed some connection to the first. So references were written in to accomplish just that. Here's the problem...I told you it has been 6 years from that one, so for me at least, the references were lost. Except one. We do see the ironic fate of the Knave of Hearts who was played by Crispen Glover's disembodied head. For half of Alice in Wonderland, I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with that character. Then I realized that his WHOLE BODY except for his head was CGI. I figure it was to make him look more comical and dream-like....but I just found it unnecessary. Oh....and the irony I referenced? The Knave of Hearts dead body is seen sitting in a chair at one point....and then his skull rolls off his body. Haha!

 

The thing that disappoints me most is that THIS was the final movie of the great Alan Rickman, the voice of Absolem, the Caterpillar (the Butterfly in this version). He deserved such a better send off than this. Maybe I'll go watch his other winged role....Metatron, the Angel in Kevin Smith's Dogma. It would be a much better use of my...Time.  

 

Until next Time, see you in the center seat.

X-Men Apocalypse

One of the most powerful mutants to ever have lived is trapped for thousands of years, only to awaken in the year 1983. After he does, Apocalypse looks upon the world and is angered by how the weak have taken over the planet and worship "false Gods".  Having lived with immeasurable power for so long, he and his followers viewed him as a God and he intends to take back that title. Apocalypse recruits 4 powerful mutants to help in his quest. World domination is not in the cards with the X-Men, so the young students of Professor Xavier's School for the Gifted led by Hank McCoy, Moira Mac Taggert and Mystique take up the battle for the Earth.

Cast

• James McAvoy as Professor Charles Xavier
• Michael Fassbender as Erik Lehnsherr / Magneto
• Jennifer Lawrence as Raven / Mystique
• Oscar Isaac as En Sabah Nur / Apocalypse
• Nicholas Hoult as Hank McCoy / Beast
• Rose Byrne as Moira MacTaggert
• Tye Sheridan as Scott Summers / Cyclops
• Sophie Turner as Jean Grey
• Alexandra Shipp as Ororo Munroe / Storm
• Olivia Munn as Psylocke
• Lucas Till as Alex Summers / Havok
• Evan Peters as Peter Maximoff / Quicksilver
• Kodi Smit-McPhee as Kurt Wagner / Nightcrawler
• Josh Helman as Colonel William Stryker
• Ben Hardy as Angel
• Lana Condor as Jubilee

Who will like this Movie

  This is certainly not the "Hey, let's go see a movie" type of choice to make this Summer. If you haven't been following along with the prior X-men movies, you may be a little lost. Comic book fans will enjoy seeing this storyline unfold on the big screen. I also think if you were a fan of "Stargate" (the movie....not the TV show) you will find parallels that are interesting.

Phantom Thoughts

I have one word to describe this movie...............blue.

Holy Shit! I think they pulled out every blue character in the Marvel universe for this one! Mystique, Beast, Apocalypse, Nightcrawler.....even Professor X donned his famous blue suit at the end of the film! The only one they passed on (and I have no idea why....at this point, why not?) was Angel. With his metal wings, he was more similar to "Archangel" who had blue skin in the comics. They DID give him a blue light when he got those new wings. Maybe as a nod to the character.

OK. Let's put that aside for a moment. Something else that has made it's way around the internet is how similar Apocalypse looked to Ivan Ooze in the old TMNT movie. I, on the other hand, couldn't help but notice a similarity to a DIFFERENT Marvel villain in a more recent past:

 

 

Ronin from Guardians of the Galaxy was also Hell bent on becoming God-like with power, wanted vengeance on a World that he felt superior to....oh yeah.....he was also blue.

 

This was also the second Marvel movie to reference Star Wars in as many months. But this reference wasn't as appreciated by the Phantom as the one first brought up by Spidey in "Captain America: Civil War".  Here we find some young X-men exiting the movie "Return of the Jedi", where a comment is made that "....the third one is always the worst." In as much as this is a shot at the Holy Trilogy for Star Wars fans, it was actually meant as a reference to "X-Men Last Stand" which was criticized by many of it's fans. But someone should have reminded these youngsters that "Apocalypse" is the third movie for THESE X-men as well.

 

It has to be noted as well, that I have seen ALL the X-men movies (including the Wolverine stand alones and Deadpool) and I have to say that even I got a bit confused on the sequence of events. Between jumping around in time and the new timelines in "Days of Future Past", I don't know what I'm watching anymore. I think Deadpool said it best:

 

 

But was it a total disaster? No. Of course not. I'll tell you what saved it: Quicksilver. Played marvelously by Evan Peters, the scene in which (SPOILERS) Quicksilver saves almost everyone in Charles Xavier's Mansion as it is blowing up was brilliant. And seeing as that whole thing took 4 months to film, using 3-D Phantom cameras (not named after yours truly, but I'll take credit) traveling at near 90 mph, while shooting at 3100 frames per second, the effort paid off immensely.

 

A few good parts in this one was just out weighed by the bad and confusing. It makes me happy that this arc is over. I just hope they don't try and drag it out by making more. I'm kinda done with the X-men.

 

Until next time, see you in the center seat.

 



Captain America: Civil War

 

After the events all around the World showcased in "The Avengers" movies and "Winter Soldier", there is a rising concern that the "Enhanced" people in this Super Group are not held responsible for the fallout to innocent people who are hurt and killed while they are saving the Earth. The UN initiates a panel to oversee the actions of the Avengers. This causes a rift within the organization as some of the Avengers are opposed to the idea. A fact that is highlighted mostly between Captain America and Iron Man. All the while, a new threat has risen silently that may just destroy the Avengers for good.  

 

 

 

 

Cast

• Chris Evans as Steve Rogers / Captain America
• Robert Downey, Jr. as Tony Stark / Iron Man
• Scarlett Johansson as Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow
• Sebastian Stan as Bucky Barnes / Winter Soldier
• Anthony Mackie as Sam Wilson / Falcon
• Don Cheadle as James "Rhodey" Rhodes / War Machine
• Jeremy Renner as Clint Barton / Hawkeye
• Chadwick Boseman as T'Challa / Black Panther
• Paul Bettany as Vision
• Elizabeth Olsen as Wanda Maximoff / Scarlet Witch
• Paul Rudd as Scott Lang / Ant-Man
• Emily VanCamp as Sharon Carter
• Tom Holland as Peter Parker / Spider-Man
• Frank Grillo as Brock Rumlow / Crossbones
• William Hurt as Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross
• Daniel Brühl as Helmut Zemo

Who will like this


Unlike many of the other Marvel movies which can stand on their own, I believe this to be geared more toward the fan of those movies and have watched at least the last few years releases. Obviously, with the action, explosions and fight scenes, the target is male dominated, starting in the older tweeners. But with strong female leads and just a touch of romance, the female demographic will have a slight interest as well.


Phantom Thoughts



Would it be too cliché to say "Marvel has done it again"? Well if it is, I don't care. They have. And in a big way....and in fact, a few DIFFERENT ways. Here's what I mean:

As the Marvel Cinematic Universe has grown, they have implemented more and more characters in their movies. This may be a Captain America movie, but it could very easily be labeled "Avengers 2.5" due to all the "cameos". And yet, they have not fallen into the most common issue when a movie has so many characters, which is conflicting plot lines, scattered focus and confusing character development. Civil War follows the bar set with the first "Avengers" movie where everyone helps move the plot along, while still being individuals. I can't explain it. I've always been a fan of the less-is-more school of movie casts, but somehow....Marvel makes it work.

And unlike the OTHER comic book movie which pitted Superheroes against each other, this one has a crux that is believable and relatable to it's viewers. How much liberty should one be willing to give up in the name of freedom? Both sides are viable and there is no clear cut right or wrong. Which makes it that much more compelling.

Ok. Let's talk about some secrets....the worst kept secret of Civil War is the appearance of the new Spiderman. Marvel went to not-so-great lengths to keep him out of most of the trailers, but everyone knew he would make an appearance even before the last trailer aired. But that was not always the case. Actually, the Black Panther was slated to have a much smaller role than he ended up having. But when negotiations between Sony and Marvel seemed to be going nowhere, they expanded the Panther's role to fill in if they could not get the rights to use Spiderman. By the time they got those rights, The Black Panther was too intricate to the plot to scale him back again, so they left it in.

Speaking of Spiderman, that is another thing they got right! I have been a long time fan of the comics and all the movies of him thus far have had some lacking in one way or another. But Tom Holland not only nailed the shy, bookworm of Peter Parker, but also the wise-cracking playfulness of Spiderman. And even though the suit was not exactly as I would have liked it to be, it was a GREAT improvement over the first Andrew Garfield incarnation. Oh.....and Spiderman referencing "The Empire Strikes Back"? Can you say NERDGASM?!! The only thing I didn't like about it was the casting of Marisa Tomei. While a great actress (and still a hottie even at the age of  51. A fact that even Tony Stark himself remarks about in the movie) she just doesn't fit the description of frail, old Aunt May.

If I can say one other negative point about the movie, it would be that the fight scenes, although plentiful, had a shaky cam effect that I found distracting. It may have been done to give a more real feeling, cinematic effect and a trick to put the viewer into the middle of the action, but it didn't do that for me. Maybe I'm in the minority on that one.

But these are minor flaws in a 2.5 hour extravaganza. It gave a powerful message, while delivering some of it's famous comedic one liners. Truly entertaining on so many levels. Even including the iconic scene of Iron Man blasting Captain America against his shield from the cover art of the original Civil War Comic Book. As the start of Phase 3 to the MCU, I'm hopeful that this is an indication of great things to come. While many believe the comic book movie genre may be slowing down and the bubble could burst, Marvel looks to be just getting started. And that is exciting to anticipate.

Until next time, see you in the center seat! 

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

 

Taking up where "Man of Steel" left off, the events of which hang heavy in the hearts of those affected by the final battle between Superman and General Zod. Including Gotham's Bruce Wayne AKA Batman. He is among the growing number of people that think that one man with that much power, could be dangerous. Their paths start to speed toward each other with an inevitable cataclysmic conclusion, spurred on by the maniacal plans of Lex Luthor. Lex is obsessed with finding out all about Kryptonians and what he calls "metahumans" in his quest for power. This is a foreshadowing of a possible league.....of justice!

 

 

Cast

• Ben Affleck as Bruce Wayne / Batman
• Henry Cavill as Kal-El / Clark Kent / Superman
• Amy Adams as Lois Lane
• Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor
• Diane Lane as Martha Kent
• Laurence Fishburne as Perry White
• Jeremy Irons as Alfred Pennyworth
• Holly Hunter as June Finch
• Gal Gadot as Diana Prince / Wonder Woman

Who will like this

Naturally following the chain of events of "Man of Steel", this movie picks up where it left off. It also is loosely based of the graphic novels "The Dark Knight Returns" and "The Death of Superman". It has very dark undertones and heavy subject matter for your average Superhero movie, kinda in the same way that "Watchmen" did back in 2009. (not surprising as both films were directed by Zack Snyder)  It's not for the casual fan of these characters, and needs to be viewed by those who are fully invested.


Phantom Thoughts





There has been a lot of talk and fuss about this movie. A LOT of opinions. So here's mine:

This movie was.....ok. Not fantastic, not great. Just ok. And here's some of the reasons for making that statement.

Ben Affleck received TONS of flak when it was announced he would be playing Batman. I was on the fence and wanted to see what he could do. And you know what? He did GREAT. I think his Bruce Wayne was a perfect example of a billionaire, ex-playboy businessman. Not that I know any personally to refer to, but it's what I imagine one would be like. ("Daily Planet...is that one that I own?") And on the other end of the spectrum, his Batman was the older crime-fighter who has seen his share of shit and has no time to put up with any more. I especially like the voice changer built into the suit. (BTW- Fun Fact: This was an idea that had been suggested by Affleck's friend 'Kevin Smith', as he felt Affleck's natural speaking voice was too high-pitched for Batman.)


I don't know whose idea it was to have Lex Luthor played the way he is portrayed in this movie, but I didn't like it. Not one bit. Jesse Eisenberg came across more Joker-ish than powerful, smart, super-businessman and super villain Luthor. His mannerisms were chaotic and his ideas were half-assed. Hell, the man couldn't even get through a speech at the party he was throwing. It made no sense and was distracting at the very least.

SPOILERS:

Here's a point on Superman....OK...you're telling me that he was unable to save his Mother from being captured by Luthor's men, but saves Lois Lane at least 3 times in this movie alone? C'mon. And while we are on the subject, the whole point of this movie was SUPPOSED to be about the fight between Batman and Superman. But I just didn't see enough evidence to push these two into an altercation of that magnitude. Yes, Batman saw him as a possible threat to humanity, but he never showed signs of being evil in any way.  I saw where the filmmakers wanted to go,  but don't feel like they GOT there. And Superman was blackmailed into fighting Batman. Really? You mean to tell me that Lex Luthor, with no access to Kryptonite himself, could threaten Superman to do this? As soon as he found out his Mother was being held hostage, he would have saved her. What could they do to stop him? He's faster than they can react and more powerful than anything they could come up with to stop him. That didn't wash at all for me.

Gal Gadot as Diana Prince / Wonder Woman was pretty good for the little time she was on screen. Even though her Diana Prince character came off as a little more Catwoman than Wonder Woman.

Doomsday was just ridiculous. He looked like a generic CGI monster more than anything else. This blend of Orc/Cave Troll/Abomination/Ninja Turtle was a huge let down as the main baddie the Superheroes teamed up to fight.

This movie was 2 and a half hours long. If they cut out all the dream sequences, it would probably be about 6 minutes long. Ok.....I'm exaggerating, but there were more dreams in this than a Nightmare on Elm Street movie. Maybe Bruce Wayne should lay off the Ambien for a while, it's not doing him any good.

I've heard from more than a few people that this was just a set-up movie for the upcoming Justice League movie(s). Even if that was the case, the movie needed to stand on it's own. And while we did get introduced to other members of that group in brief glimpses, I don't think the focus was merely to set up the following films. (BTW- Ezra Miller who plays a young Barry Allen/The Flash looks a bit Asian, even though that character is not. Ezra is not either.....but he DOES have that look)

Alrighty then....I've cut into this quite a bit. Here are some more Fun Facts that I noticed/found out about Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice:

1) Star Wars in-joke: note the number on Lex's prison uniform, part of it reads TK-421, the same as the Stormtrooper with the 'faulty transmitter' in the original movie.

2) There is a boat yard in the scene where Batman first meets Superman and is named Nicholsons Boat Yard. A reference to Jack Nicholson playing the Joker in the 1989 Batman Movie.

3) Ben Affleck asked Christian Bale for any advice he could give about playing Batman. Bale told him to "make sure you can piss in that suit." The two men met quite by accident in a costume shop. They were each buying a Batman costume for their kids.

4) Perry White says, "It's not 1938 anymore," while talking to Clark Kent about people not reading newspapers anymore. Superman was created in 1938.

5) Lauren Cohan and Jeffrey Dean Morgan play Bruce Wayne's parents in the film. They also both appear in the television series The Walking Dead as Maggie Greene and Negan, respectively. They were both in Supernatural as well. (While watching in the theater, I did make a "Where's your Bat?" joke referring to Morgan's TWD character and his barbed wire baseball bat "Lucille" and his son in this film becoming Batman)

Let's hope the NEXT film about Superheroes fighting each other that comes out next month is better than this one.

Until next time, see you in the center seat.

10 Cloverfield Lane

 

A young woman (Michelle) has a car accident after having a fight with her fiancé. She wakes up in a survival bunker built by a conspiracy theorist named Howard Stambler. He and a young man who helped him build the shelter ( Emmett) believe that the end of the World has happened and everyone on the surface is dead. Michelle is unclear if she has been kidnapped or saved by her host, and every clue she comes across only leads to more questions. Her journey to find the truth is filled with incredible suspense and unusual turns that pushes her emotional sanity to the breaking point.

 

 

Cast:

 

 

Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Michelle

John Goodman as Howard Stambler

John Gallagher, Jr. as Emmett DeWitt

Bradley Cooper as Ben (voice)

Who will like this Movie

If you are looking for this to be a sequel to the 2008 movie "Cloverfield", you will be disappointed. If you go in looking for an intense, suspenseful thriller, then you will be incredibly satisfied. It has some elements of  "After.Life" with Liam Neeson and Christina Ricci. And most of the movie takes place with minimal characters in an enclosed space, which is reminiscent of the very first "Saw".  It also had an element of "Signs" to it as well. It's definitely a thinking movie for more mature audiences.

Phantom Thoughts


So here's the thing....J.J. Abrams went to a lot of trouble keeping this movie a secret. So much so, that no one even knew it was being made until about 2 months before it's release. There is a reason for that. And I am not about to ruin that, even after it's been out in the theaters. I WILL being giving my opinion on the spoilers, but not until the very end of this review....and with many warnings before I do. So feel free to read on.....for now.

The one question everyone was asking was "Is this a sequel to the 2008 movie 'Cloverfield' ?". The answer is not a spoiler. The answer is no. Even though they have similar titles, the two films are not connected (at least, not on the surface). But there is a tie-in that I will get into later. And the other reason would be that the two are about a different way of viewing these types of movies.

Now to the essentials of the matter: John Goodman was BRILLIANT as the role of the conspiracy theorist: Howard Stambler. When you work on a big movie, it's easy to hide sub-par acting (Hello, Kristen Stewart in 'Twilight'). But in a small movie, taking place in a small, confined area, the acting better be fucking brilliant. Both Goodman and Mary Elizabeth Winstead nailed it to the wall. No knock on John Gallager Jr., but his role was not as important. See, John Goodman keeps you guessing throughout his whole performance as to whether he an over protective pessimist whose worse fears have come true, or a broken kidnapper who has cracked. Same goes with Winstead. She is not the "damsel in distress" of your normal horror movie. You don't question her actions, in fact, you hope that you would be smart enough to make the same ones. And you are as confused as she is on what is the truth.

These things are what made the original "Saw" so good. Both were not dependent on big special effects or major gore. But the suspense and great story were what made them riveting. Same as the before mentioned (and much smaller in popularity) "After.Life". Liam Neeson plays a mortician and Christina Ricci plays a car crash victim. Liam's character says he can "speak" to the dead which is why he can communicate with Ricci, who refuses to believe she's dead. And the whole movie is the journey to find out which is correct.


OK.....here's where I talk about the big reveal and plot twist of the movie. So if you haven't seen it, stop reading now.





SPOILERS AHEAD!!!







I MEAN IT......STOP SCOLLING UNLESS YOU'VE SEEN THE MOVIE





You've been warned!














I'm not kidding.......














Fine. I think I have been more than fair. If you are still reading, then I will take it that you have already seen the movie. I take no responsibility for revealing any secrets from this point forward.

So this is a space alien movie that has different creatures than the one in the original "Cloverfield". Which right away lends you to believe that it's not connected in any way. Ehhhhh......not so fast. One thing that Howard says is that he worked for a satellite company. Bold Futura is seen on letterhead in the bunker, and we already know that a satellite from Bold Futura is seen crashing into the ocean at the end (or actually beginning) of "Cloverfield". So this COULD be a tie-in.

So why do I mention "Signs" in the Who will like this  section? Because there is a connection. Yeah, yeah, I know....there was a HUGE gapping hole in the plot of "Signs". But aside from that, they both had a very unique way of looking at an alien attack. See, most movies follow a character or chain of events that explains EVERYTHING to the viewer. They set a story and guide the viewer through it. But in both "Signs" and "10 Cloverfield Lane" it's more like you really were in the middle of an alien attack. I mean, especially out in the rural parts of the country....how would you know what was going on? You wouldn't. That's the point. These movies put you in the middle of it....with very little information and even less knowledge of what to do. It also helps to put your doubt on whether it's actually really happening or not. I love that aspect of these movies.



Until next time, see you in the center seat!


Deadpool

Wade Wilson is an ex-special forces operative who spends his time now as a for-hire mercenary. But after being diagnosed with an incurable disease, he agrees to be the subject of experimental tests that leave him with super human healing abilities, but also horribly disfigured all over his body. The one man who intentionally tortured Wilson during these experiments is also the man who can cure him, and so Wade Wilson assumes the alas of Deadpool, to hunt him down. Through it all, Deadpool maintains his sick and twisted sense of humor and continually breaks down the 4th wall with the audience.

Cast

Ryan Reynolds as Wade Wilson / Deadpool
Morena Baccarin as Vanessa
Ed Skrein as Ajax
T.J. Miller as Weasel
Gina Carano as Angel Dust
Brianna Hildebrand as Negasonic Teenage Warhead
Stefan Kapičić as Colossus
Leslie Uggams as Blind Al


Who will like this movie

Deadpool stays true to it's comic book inspiration with very little changes. And it is a Superhero movie even though Deadpool is not your typical superhero. But even anyone who has never read a comic book can find pleasure in it. It has a LOT of pop culture references and is very funny in many ways similar to Hangover or Ferris Bueller's Day Off (with a great nod to the latter in a spoiler moment)

Phantom Thoughts

I will go on record first by saying I'm not a Deadpool the Comic Book fan. That's not to say I don't like it, just that I've never read it. So that being said, I had to get the advice of those who have for the comparison. Those sources have told me that this movie draws most of it's inspiration more from when Deadpool got it's own title and not so much from when he was introduced in The New Mutants storyline. And as I mentioned before, there are just a few changes that were made.

First off, Wade Wilson had a few failed relationships before meeting his missing jigsaw piece of Vanessa. And in the comics, Vanessa was a shape shifting mutant similar to Mystique. But just because this was not explored in this movie, doesn't leave out the possibility of introducing this aspect of her in a sequel.

Then there is the character of Negasonic Teenage Warhead. This X-Men character was chosen for the movie simply based on the fact that they thought the name was cool. But they changed her abilities from telepath and precognitive mutant to one that has explosive powers to more accurately go with the name and to fit in better with the movie itself.

But other than that....damn! What a fun movie! I mean, from the opening title sequence to the inevitable Marvel end credit scene. (SPOILER: the end credit scene is a recreation of the Ferris Bueller after credit scene almost exactly)  It was filled, and I mean FILLED with pop culture, comic book and movie references. I will have to see it more than once for sure in order to get all the ones I missed from laughing so hard. (ANOTHER SPOILER: one I DIDN'T miss was the fact that the final fight scene was done on an abandoned S.H.E.I.LD Heli-Carrier.)

Almost everyone knows the story of how this movie almost didn't get made. In May 2000, Artisan Entertainment announced a deal with Marvel Entertainment to coproduce, finance and distribute a film based on Deadpool. In February 2004, development for the film began with New Line Cinema. However, in March 2005, New Line Cinema put the film in turnaround and 20th Century Fox became interested. In May 2009, 20th Century Fox lent the film to writers and a 3 minute reel was shot in 2012 to convince producers to go ahead with making it. In 2014, that footage was leaked to the internet and there was such a wave of positive response from it that the studio was all but forced to begin production.

Part of what makes Deadpool so good is that it doesn't take itself too seriously. And it makes fun of Ryan Reynolds, his Green Lantern movie role and his previous Deadpool role in X-Men Origins just to name a few. All the while he breaks down the fourth wall by talking to the audience. Yes, he mentions the fact that he's doing this too, which makes it even funnier.

There was lots of swearing, blood, violence and nudity (other than Ryan Reynolds ass, there were plenty of boobies!) to give it the R-rating. But in this Phantom's opinion, you couldn't do this movie any other way.

Until next time, see you in the center seat!

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

30 Years after the fall of the Galactic Empire, a new threat in The First Order has risen from it's ashes. The Republic is failing, so a Resistance has formed with General Leia Organa as one of it's  leaders. The First Order has new Clone-Free Stormtroopers who are raised to be fighters. But one has second thoughts about which side he's on. FN-2187 and Resistance Pilot Poe Dameron escape from the Command Ship of Kylo Ren, a new villain determined on finding the last Jedi....Luke Skywalker.  
    FN-2187, who is dubbed "Finn" by Dameron, stumbles across a scavenger named Rey and a droid named BB-8 who is carrying important information on Luke's whereabouts. They team up with Han Solo and Chewbacca and go on an adventure to get the information in the little BB-8 unit back to the Resistance before Kylo Ren and the First Order can get their hands on it.

Cast:

• Harrison Ford as Han Solo
• Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker
• Carrie Fisher as General Leia Organa
• Adam Driver as Kylo Ren
• Daisy Ridley as Rey
• John Boyega as Finn
• Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron
• Lupita Nyong'o as Maz Kanata
• Andy Serkis as Supreme Leader Snoke
• Domhnall Gleeson as General Hux
• Anthony Daniels as C-3PO
• Peter Mayhew as Chewbacca
• Max von Sydow as Lor San Tekka

Who will like this:

If you are one of the very few who have never seen a Star Wars movie, picking this one to see is not recommended. However, it does hold it's own as a stand alone movie, but just barely, as you won't get the whole story or be as invested in the characters if you haven't seen the others. Star Wars fans who prefer the Original Trilogy better than the entire filmography will be greater fans of Episode VII.

Phantom Thoughts

I think it goes without saying, but I will give you the warning just in case....*MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD* Please do not read on unless you have seen the movie.

....OK, still here? Good. Then either you've already seen it or don't care. Either way, here we go:

To put some perspective on this, I will tell you that I saw the first Star Wars in the theater in 1977. And I have been a major Star Wars fan ever since. You may already have figured that out by my other blog entry: 4 Reasons Star Wars: The Phantom Menace was a good movie .  That being said, JJ Abrams did a great job in bringing this new chapter to life. To be honest, I was a little nervous when I heard that he came on to direct. I watched the Star Trek movies and was not impressed. His annoying use of lens flare and the direction it was taken was disappointing to me, and I'm not even a Star Trek fan! But he redeemed himself in my eyes with "The Force Awakens".

Now I'm going to nit pick at some things that bothered me. First of all, this movie marks the third time a massive planet like weapon was used by the bad guys and destroyed using a weak spot by the good guys. Think they've learned their lesson by now? Perhaps the Sith would be better off figuring out a way to be the ultimate power in the universe without such a massive target for the Resistance to concentrate upon? I hope they have for the sake of the upcoming sequels.

Kylo Ren. Here is the new mysterious masked villain who wants to pick up where Darth Vader left off. But does he really? His use of the Force is very powerful as we see in one of the first scenes by him stopping a blaster shot in mid-air. Impressive. What's not impressive is him taking the mask off to interrogate Rey. Once he does that, the mystique is gone. He seems more human and less threatening even after he puts it back on. However, if they had let him keep it on until the SECOND time he takes it off (when Han Solo, his Father, asks him to do so) it would have made for a much more powerful scene. If he had to take the mask off, THAT should have been the first time to do it.

And just how evil IS Kylo Ren? He mentions a few times of the struggle within him between the Light and Dark sides of the Force. He is the offspring of Han and Leia. He trained under Luke when he was young. And here's the kicker....he blatantly ignores the orders of Supreme Leader Snoke in trying to get the map to Skywalker's location.  It will be interesting to see his role unfold.

Chewbacca, Han and Leia have had years of history together. They have a closeness that only decades of friendship can accomplish. So I'm a bit confused as to why there was no moment between Chewie and Leia when he gets back to her after Han's death. That emotional moment was given to Rey, who she hardly knew.

Here's something I never thought I would say....I was unimpressed with the new score by John Williams. It was no where near the epic music he added to the prequels. This one was of the most unmemorable and un inspiring pieces he's written for any Star Wars movies. So disappointing.

Getting back to that massive weapon...Starkiller Base. There were a TON of references, nods and Easter Eggs in this movie. Way too many to get into here, however,  Starkiller is one of them, being the original name of Luke before it was changed to Skywalker. Anyway, my question is this, it looks like they created the weapon out of an actual planet. it then used the Sun that was close to it as it's power source for the weapon. So then, how does it move to the next sun for another shot? And wouldn't the planet "die" in the meantime?

Again, these are just a little nit picking. But another complaint that I've been hearing is that it is pretty much a carbon copy of "A New Hope". And there is no denying the obvious plot similarities. In fact, you can use the same general description to narrate both films. "But Phantom" you say, "Isn't this the exact same gripe you had against Jurassic World ? " Yes it is. But let me tell you why it's different. See, in Jurassic World, they just re-hashed the same scenes and stories of the previous films. For no reason other than they had no new ideas to discover. In The Force Awakens, it's used as a reflection of the past to start a new story. If I am right, this will unveil itself in the following sequels. Am I just being biased because I am a fan? I don't believe so. But you draw your own conclusions after the next films.

But after all is said and done, it was a magnificent movie to watch. They got back to using real sets and a lot of practical effects that were lacking in the prequels. The BB-8 droid that was an ACTUAL remote controlled robot was a technical masterpiece! The inclusion of the original members of the Trilogy were a continuation of the story and not forced cameos. New characters were introduced and were relatable and people we cared about. There was a good flow to the movie with a lot of action and decent story development (although we do need some gaps filled in. Hopefully this will be addressed in future movies) .

Most importantly, I walked out feeling 7 years old again, seeing Star Wars for the first time and  completely hooked for life. And seeing young viewers exiting the theater with that same wonder in their eyes, I know I wasn't the only one.

Until next time, see you in the center seat!

....and May the Force be with you.