... hey!
Hello?
I'm down here!
So, I was fiddling around with some Pym-particles in preparation for my "Ant-Man" review...
and yada yada yada, I'm a centimeter tall.
But on the bright side I can lift 50x my own body weight, so I've got that going for me.
This is Movie Night!
Welcome to the show, I'm Jonathan Paula.
For the seventh time here on "Movie Night", we'll be reviewing superhero movies.
Click the information icon now if you'd like to visit a full playlist of the previous 30+
pictures I've reviewed in this ever-growing genre, but for now, we'll begin with the appropriately
titled, "Superhero Movie."
Produced by David Zucker, one-half of the brilliant individuals behind parody classics
like, "Airplane!", and "The Naked Gun" - this Craig Mazin comedy picture doubled its $35
million dollar budget when it was released in March of 2008.
Paralleling the plot of Sam Raimi's groundbreaking "Spider-Man" from 2002 - Drake Bell stars
as a high school student who develops super powers after being bitten by a radioactive
bug.
Bell is unfit to carry a film, and mostly just stares blankly or mugs between jokes.
Thankfully, he's surrounded by some serious talent, who honestly don't deserve to be even
here.
In one of his final film roles, comedy legend Leslie Nielsen is featured as the "Uncle Ben"
analog, and brings so much class to the art of spoofs, it's hard not to appreciate his
appearance.
Christopher McDonaland is inspired casting as the villain, who gets annoyed when his
evil scheming is interrupted by "Clippy", the Microsoft paperclip mascot - who asks,
"It looks like you're planning a mass murder.
Would you like help?"
It's a cheap joke, but it got a solid laugh from me.
Not nearly as awful those misogynistic crap-fests from "filmmakers" Aaron Seltzer and Jason
Friedberg...
"Superhero Movie" sticks to established parody formulas with a good dose of slapstick and
sight-gags.
Which works to its benefit, as trying to cram in too many references and cutaways would
just be such a terrible idea!
Indeed, those familiar with the biggest superhero hits of the 2000s will enjoy this picture's
attention to detail, which rather faithfully recreates a number of iconic scenes with humorous
twists.
A
flashback that mimics a pivotal scene in "Batman Begins" works pretty well, thanks to a short,
but effective role from Robert Hays.
Not including the lengthy bloopers and credits that pad the film to feature-length, this
movie is only an hour and eight minutes long!
So, as tame and unfunny as certain sections may be, it's at least it won't take up much
of your time.
The majority of the jokes are tried, juvenile and frequently overstay their welcome.
I caught this PG-13 rated flick on basic cable, and was decently amused leaving it on in the
background, but I doubt it'd hold up under closer scrutiny or repeat viewings.
"Superhero Movie" is a trite spoof with occasional laughs . Now let's read some of your YouTube
reviews.
Our ratings for "Superhero Movie", a TWO and a THREE.
Although no one had anything overly positive to say about this picture, you still thought
it was BAD.
I went in with low expectations, and wasn't bothered much, I'll score it a LAME.
For tonight's poll question, 'What is the worst superhero movie ever?'
Leave your response as a comment below.
Second tonight, "Ant-Man".
After a tumultuous production, that began as early as the late '80s - this action / comedy
film from director Peyton Reed was finally released in July of 2015 - earning a surprising
half-billion at the box-office.
Although the film's original director Edgar Wright left the project due to creative differences,
he's still listed as one of four screenwriters for the PG-13 rated film.
The 117-minute story sees cat burglar Paul Rudd given the opportunity to don a super-shrinking
suit to help save the world.
Mostly known for lighter, comedic roles, the affable 46-year-old was an inspired casting
choice - he nails the dialogue with his charismatic attitude, while still maintaining believability
as an action hero.
Michael Douglas is fantastic as the older mentor, and original "Ant-Man"; his veteran
experience really anchors the movie from becoming too silly or ridiculous.
Evangeline Lilly is the spunky daughter, Michael Peña a hilarious sidekick, and Corey Stoll
is the menacing villain.
Peña is especially memorable, bringing solid laughs to every scene he's in, while Stoll
might be my favorite comic-book bad-guy since Tom Hiddleston's "Loki".
When hearing of dire circumstances ahead, Rudd humorously suggests, "I think our first
move should be calling the Avengers."
- Now that Marvel's Cinematic Universe is a dozen-movies deep, the cross-references
allow for some really fun moments; including an excellent scene later in the film with
Anthony Mackie making a minor appearance as his "Avengers" character.
As expected, "Ant-Man" makes great use of its $130-million dollar budget with tight
editing, and polished visuals.
Seeing the world from ant-scale is pulled off with a faux-tilt-shift perspective with
really inventive and great looking results.
For a prologue set in 1989, de-aging VFX are used to make Douglas look 26-years younger
- and the results are absolutely astonishing.
With no hint of the uncanny valley, his appearance here is so believable, you'd be forgiven for
assuming this scene was filmed during the production of "Wall Street".
Although it's just a quick opening scene, I'm excited to see how writers take advantage
of this technology in the future, as the possibilities for new prequels and sequels are no longer
bound by the physical appearance of their cast.
The score from Christophe Beck has a low-key, heist-vibe too it, which makes it a perfect
fit for the film's small-scale climax.
Unlike most MCU entries, this one keep the story reasonably contained to only a half-dozen
players and a couple key locations.
This isn't some globe-trotting world-saving mission, but a small job with big consequences.
It's a nice change of pace for the prolific franchise.
One of the funniest comic-book pictures yet, and certainly one of the more unique heroes
- "Ant-Man" is a fabulously fun and amusing adventure for all ages.
Now, let's see what you had to say.
Many praised the visual effects and humor, scoring this an EIGHT.
I completely agree, it didn't break any new ground, but really delivered an entertaining
time, I'll score it an EIGHT as well.
If you already follow-me on Letterboxd, you probably already saw my review for our next
film... but if you don't, now's the time to sign-up.
Letterboxd is an awesome IMDb-social networking hybrid that lets you log your viewing history,
make lists of your favorite films, or just discuss theories with fellow fans.
And for two lucky people who answer tonight's poll question in the comments below - I'll
be gifting an entire year's subscription to their Pro-service free of charge!
Finally, my thoughts on "Fan4stic".
Released nationwide on August 7, 2015 - this superhero / action film is a reboot of the
Marvel Comics franchise of the same name, and the third theatrical release in that series
overall.
Despite stealing a profit of nearly $50 million from oversees markets, this picture vastly
underperformed domestically - and is the lowest grossing film shown in more than 4,000 theaters;
earning less than half of any other movie on that list.
A commercial and critical disappointment, an ill-advised sequel is still foolishly in
production for 2017.
The all-too-brief 100 minute feature follows a group of teenage scientists who unlock a
portal to another dimension, where they accidentally gain superpowers.
The cast of characters (who all have alliteration-heavy names) are led by Miles Teller as an ambitious
nerd who gains stretching flexibility; Michael B. Jordan as a thrill-seeker who can summon
the power of fire; Kate Mara is a soft-spoken friend who becomes 'The Invisible Woman';
and Jamie Bell is re-rendered into giant rocks as "The Thing".
Toby Kebbell, Reg E. Cathey, and 'The Simpsons'' Dan Castellaneta also play pivotal roles.
The usually talented group are downright terrible from a performance standpoint - unable to
deliver the clunky dialogue with any sincerity.
The piss-poor writing also prevents any believable relationships between these characters - who
interact with one another like frosty acquaintances at a high school reunion... instead of world-saving
allies.
Bell complains to Teller post-transformation, "I'm not your friend.
You turned me into something else."
- this is a decently powerful line, that sadly never sees a payoff.
And if that's not bad enough, we're meant to root for them to succeed when its their
selfish, reprehensible impatience that leads to their accident in the first place.
In what is the most baffling and terrible decision in the entire superhero-genre, "Fant-Four-Stic"
completely omits the middle of its story.
The movie literally has only two-acts.
The most crucial aspect of an origin story is exploring the characters' beginnings; and
how they became the famous comic book hero we all know and love.
Far too much time is spent on how they build their 'Quantum Gate' device - leaving no room
in the cramped story for the explanation or exploration of their new powers.
One minute the titular group are caught in a transdimensional explosion, and two scenes
later the narrative has jumped forward an entire year to when everyone has already mastered
their abilities, and acquired fancy costumes.
If you want the recipe for an engaging and interesting origin story - look no further
than Sam Raimi's original "Spider-Man" - an awesome picture with clearly defined characters,
and a well structured progression of the hero's transformation.
If you're looking for a step-by-step guide on how to make shit-stew, then watch this
crap.
So what went wrong?
Director Josh Trank's previous effort, 2012's "Chronicle" was a wonderful execution of very
similar ideas: hot-headed adolescents coming to terms with their new powers - and the result
was a surprisingly excellent production.
Trank and his team are so far off the mark with this picture though, I wonder if they
were abducted by rival DC Comics and forced to create "Fant4stic" against their will.
Indeed, 20th Century Fox's requests and unsupervised changes created widespread dissatisfaction,
with Trank complaining on the eve of the film's premiere, "A year ago I had a fantastic version
of this.
And it would've received great reviews.
You'll probably never see it.
That's reality though."
And I haven't even gotten to the technical side of things!
The editing is a rushed hatchet-job, with large sequences clearly left on the cutting-room
floor.
Trank's original cut was reportedly 40-minutes longer - which explains a great deal of the
aforementioned story and pacing issues.
The music from Marco Beltrami is reasonably suitable for the darker theme, but is entirely
forgettable.
The visuals are a lazy, unfinished mess - cobbled together by no less than five separate effects
companies - resulting in a cartoony, CGI-fakeness to picture's most important moments.
Marvel fans may want to watch this, if only to fill-out their scorecard, but all others
should stay far away.
The PG-13-rated disaster offers few redeeming qualities outside of its fascinating premise.
This is an unimaginative, cheap-looking picture with awful performances and lazy execution.
"Fant4stic" is an unfortunate cinematic abortion.
Now that I'm done bashing on it, let's give you a turn.
Despite some neat ideas, and a couple fleeting moments of entertainment - everyone agreed
this picture was a massive disappointment and a very BAD film.
Unfortunately, that does it for tonight's episode -- and if you click information-icon
in the corner some related content will slide out for you to watch.
Once again, my Jonathan Paula, thanks for watching and listening.
Until next time, have a good Movie Night!