Jessica Jones

So December has not been nearly as productive as far as increasing my posts on here as I would have liked. However, I realize this is the case because I've been watching a lot of TV more than I have watched movies and if you're a fan of the blog, that creates for some problems as TV shows are difficult to write reviews for. However! I thought that since I did a full series review for Daredevil, I would do a full series review for Jessica Jones... and then when Luke Cage comes out, I'll do a series review for that too... and then Iron Fist... until the day I die.

On a seperate note, I have seen Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Twice actually. I'm not totally sure on whether or not I'm going to do a review on it. I've always had a little bit of a difficulty writing objective reviews on Star Wars movies because they are my favorite films of all time. However, The Force Awakens is definitely a different breed of Star Wars, and that's not saying its good or bad, I just feel like its different and I can now possibly review it. I'll keep you updated if I decide to review it or not. But for now, let's get to Jessica Jones.

A little bit of background. The story of Jessica Jones in the comic books started out as any other superhero would. She gets her powers, she faces trials at a young age, but she eventually becomes a superhero.

And then it takes a really... really dark turn.

The comic books took a dark turn, and it really mirrors the events of the TV series so I'll talk about that when I get to my description of the show, but in short, the subject matter is definitely not Marvel's usual MO... at least not in the movie realm.

In the Netflix realm, this makes perfect sense. I probably didn't say this in my Daredevil review, but these Marvel TV shows are gritty shows. They are the R rated Marvel superheroes that probably wouldn't fit alongside Iron Man, Thor and Captain America.

But even when I watched Daredevil, I knew it was gritty, I knew it was a little dark. But that did not prepare me enough for Jessica Jones.

The first episode of Jessica Jones floored me because it gave you a taste of what was to come and said, you had better be prepared because this is some dark shit.

Jessica Jones follows the story of the title character. Jessica is a private investigator in New York city. She also has super human strength.

The cool thing about her powers is that they don't make the center of her character, they're just a tool she uses to get what she wants. Super strength is a pretty dull power to begin with, but the show isn't centered on a superheroine, its centered on a private investigator, who just happens to have superpowers in a world where the Avengers exist.

Again, I liked how they make reference to the events of the movies but those are not pivotal to the plot.

Anyways, Jessica is somewhat of a retired superheroine who is now a private investigator. She has a little bit of a drinking problem and from the very beginning, you can tell she has a dark past.

In the first episode, Jessica is approached by a family looking for their missing daughter. The way this girl is described and her situation, Jessica is immediately haunted by her past, in particular the mention of a smooth talking British man who sounds an awful lot like someone who she thought was dead.

Jessica Jones is played by Krysten Ritter and prior to this show I really only knew Ritter as Jesse from Breaking Bad's girlfriend who OD'd on heroine. I thought she did alright in Breaking Bad, I just hadn't seen her in anything else. I really liked Jessica in this show and I thought that she was a pretty good character.

I mentioned this before but a lot of the show is riding on her as a character. She has superpowers, but they're more a tool. The show would be the same if she was crafty with tools and everything she did with her superpowers she did in a different way. She's not defined by her abilities, they're just tools. And I really like that.

I think in the end I'm not really going to hold Jessica as the best protagonist I've ever seen. I think she grows on you as the show goes on, and she really rides the line of a good person and an absolute asshole. However, I don't think it was an award winning performance, but she is an interesting character and you care about her journey and the evil that she faces in this show.

Enter David Tennant as Kilgrave. If you have read the comics, you know exactly who this character is, but if you haven't, like me, you figure out that Kilgrave has the ability to make you do whatever he wants. And its not just making you do something out of your control, its changing your will, so much that you want to do whatever he says. You don't have to have watched the show to know that this character could be an amazing, but incredibly dark villain. And that's exactly what he is.

I have to hand it to Marvel and their Netflix branch, while they've brought in some good heroes like Daredevil and Jessica Jones, they don't hold a candle to their villains.

I mentioned in my review of Daredevil that Wilson Fisk was the best Marvel villain right now. I haven't watched Daredevil in pretty much a year so I haven't seen Fisk in a while, but I'm debating whether or not Kilgrave is a better villain. David Tennant absolutely kills it as Kilgrave.

I'm a big fan of David Tennant. I actually did a whole post on him as the 10th Doctor from Doctor Who. 

And its perfect because David Tennant can be both the most charming person in the world, and he can also be deadly serious and a little bit scary at times. Its actually a little bit scary how similar this character is to the 10th Doctor and I actually think there were a lot of Doctor Who fans who took issue with that. In essence, he is the 10th Doctor if that Doctor was an absolute psychopath.

And the great part is, they delve into his origins, they delve into why he is the way he is. They don't excuse it, but the same way they explain what makes Wilson Fisk the way he is, there's a reason Kilgrave is as deranged as he is. The great part is how Kilgrave uses that origin to his advantage. At a certain point you're questioning whether or not he can be changed, whether or not he is actually a villain, and whether or not there is some kind of humanity in there.

The point is, David Tennant was by far the best part of this show. Every time he's on screen, he's just electric and you're scared about what he's going to do. And the worst part is, he's creative. He won't just tell you to kill yourself, he'll phrase it in a way that someone will kill themselves in the most brutal way there is. There's a great line in the show where he says that he needs to be cautious of everything he says because it could have disastrous results, so he's definitely a wordsmith and that's scarier than any brute strength.

The rest of the characters in this series are really great and are worth mentioning. Rachael Taylor plays Trish Walker, Jessica's adoptive sister. Carrie Ann Moss plays a ruthless lawyer that assists Jessica and gives her jobs. Eka Darville plays an addict who is Jessica's neighbor. Wil Traval plays a police officer who becomes important to the story. There are just a lot of characters who really make this story great. They all give pretty good performances, but as an ensemble, they really compliment each other very well and you can really see the results of one characters actions on another ones.

I suppose its worth mentioning that one of the supporting characters is Mike Colter who plays Luke Cage.

The reason this is important is because he is next in line to set up the Defenders, the culmination of the Daredevil, Jessica Jones, Luke Cage and Iron Fist TV shows on Netflix.

The unfortunate thing is, Luke Cage is kind of a boring character. There are a few good episodes where I enjoyed his character and what he adds to the story. But I think the main reason I cared about what happened to him was more about Jessica and her relationship with him. I feel like I was more concerned with her losing somebody she cares about, more than the person she could potentially lose.

Mike Colter doesn't do a bad job, I'm just not totally sure that he can carry his own show. He's a great supporting character in this show but I don't know if I'd want to watch an entire season with him.

I'm hoping I'm wrong and looking at Netflix's track record with these properties, I think that I will be. However, it does raise a little bit of a concern in the future.

Like I said before, a lot of the supporting characters give really good performances. It doesn't totally feel right pointing out one character over the other because I don't think there was one of them that really stood out more than the other. I thought Rachael Taylor's portrayal of Trish Walker was a good counter to Jessica Jone's sarcastic attitude, but I thought Carrie Anne Moss gave a better performance overall. Again, its hard and I think they work better as an ensemble than they do individual characters.

The main focus is on Jessica and Kilgrave and that's where it should be because those two are the strongest of the show.

But how is Jessica Jones a series as a whole? Well again, its dark. Very dark. If you're not a fan of dark controversial topics being the subject matter of TV, you may not like Jessica Jones. Its right in your face and again, its dark.

At the beginning, I wasn't sure where this show was going. I wasn't sure if it was just going to be Jessica Jones wandering about New York doing her private investigations with no continuous storyline. Its not until the 4th or 5th episode that things start to pick up and when I say pick up, they pick up.

This happens to also be the point where David Tennant starts showing up more. But I guess I didn't really understand what this show was about until I heard someone talking about it and it all made sense.

In essence, Jessica Jones is about women. Its about the shit that women have to deal with on a day to day basis and it makes it tangible for the audience. I don't think its in your face about it but the episodes do have a theme and they have to do with some of the troubles of being a woman. There's an episode about stalking. Its not in your face just saying stalking is bad, but it goes into the psychological elements of it. But at the same time, you could just see this episode as an entry in a crime serial. Its not blatant about its messages and the themes aren't contained to one episode, they're really spread over the entire series.

And in the center of it all you have Jessica. Jessica is this tough as nails, sarcastic, and a little bit of an asshole strong woman and she goes through the same things.

But the over arching theme of this show is on the characters and the struggles they go through, whether they are male or female, everyone has their own demons to face and there are different ways to go about doing that.

And man does it pick up. The first few episodes I might say were a little boring, however, once Kilgrave gets into the picture, shit gets dark, and shit gets violent.

Almost too violent.

I did a review for another Netflix original, Bloodline. I mentioned that one of the things I said about that show was the fact that it was a slow burn and there wasn't enough action in it to get you really interested until the end. I get that Jessica Jones is set in the Marvel universe so there's going to be more action and you definitely saw a lot of action in Daredevil, but there was a lot about this show that didn't seem like Marvel and in result, the action sometimes seemed like it was too frequent and happening in every episode. Every episode, Jessica is punching someone, or getting shot at, or injured pretty badly. It almost seemed over the top at times. And again, I need to remind myself that this story is based off a comic book. But a part of me doesn't see this as a comic book show.

There's also an element of unbelievability that they all get pretty injured and the next episode those injuries are totally gone, but that's nothing new in TV shows so I won't harp on it too much. It was just blatant.

Overall, Jessica Jones had a slow start that kind of made me question whether or not Netflix was still on their game when it came to Marvel properties. However, they picked up the ball pretty quickly and I think for the most part, they really make this show one of a kind.

Overall, Jessica Jones is a survivor story. Its not a superhero story. With an awesome protagonist, one of the best super villains on screen today, and a really good cast, Jessica Jones is definitely a show worth checking out.

But those are my thoughts on Jessica Jones. What about you? What did you think of it? Who do you think is better, Fisk or Kilgrave? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send your thoughts via Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as your requests for future movies and TV shows I should review on this page. If you follow me on twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews as well as live tweets sometimes when I'm watching movies I'll be reviewing to get a preview to my thoughts.

I'll leave you with this. Here's David Tennant talking about his portrayal of Kilgrave. Enjoy!

Disney's The Kid

If you haven't figured out from some of the posts on this blog, my parents were suckers for anything Disney when I was a kid. So much, that I remember these random movies that nobody else remembers that were outside the mainstream Disney lineup but still had this distinct impact on me. The Kid is one of those movies. 

The weird thing is, you can't find this movie unless you search Disney's The Kid. Its something that kind of bothers me because when I was growing up and saw this movie, I always knew this movie as The Kid, not Disney's The Kid. That's a stupid title so, for the sake of you guys going out to search this movie, I'm putting Disney's The Kid on the title but for the rest of the review, I will refer to this movie as the name it is suppose to be called, just simply, The Kid. 

The Kid stars Bruce Willis as Russ Duritz. Russ is a no nonsense image consultant and the big part of

the first act is establishing that he is an jerk. Now, when I say jerk, I mean Disney jerk. He's almost a little bit cartoonish on how he's a jerk because its not really prompted by anything, he's just a jerk. Now as a kid, this was very apparent to me, Russ was just a jerk. Now of course because he's the protagonist, he has a good side waiting to get out and you want to see that good side come out so that's why you root for him even though he's a jerk.

But as an adult, maybe its because I've become just as cynical as this character is, but I don't see him as much of a jerk as an antisocial person. Obviously there's the jerk moves that he pulls towards his family and the people he cares about, but in the first 5 minutes of the movie, they have him going around to about 3 or 4 people being a jerk to establish he's a jerk... but most of the incidents where he's a jerk, he's just busy. Again, he's the Disney Jerk, he's not going around kicking puppies, he's just busy.

But anyways, Russ is about to turn 40. He's got a dad he doesn't talk to (played by Daniel Von Bargen) a co-worker/ girlfriend? that he's a jerk to (played by Emily Mortimer) and a secretary who he's a jerk to as well (played by Jane Tomlin)

Then one day, Russ starts seeing a kid around his property and he thinks he's going insane. And there's a theory to suggest that maybe he is... but we'll get to that in a little bit. Eventually he meets this kid and realizes that this kid is him, 30 years younger.

Younger Russ (or Rusty) is played by Spencer Breslin and the amazing thing is, this kid is the same age as me. I remember him being the biggest thing in a lot of movies for a long time. He was kind of the fat pudgy kid in a lot of movies and hell he did a good job. He's kind of one of those child actors that had a really good career at a young age then kind of fell off the map. Apparently he's in an alternative rock band now... Not totally relevant to the review, just funny.

But anyways, these two do not hit it off well as Rusty is not happy with how he turned out as an adult, saying that Russ is a dogless, chickless, loser with a twitch. And Russ doesn't exactly like Rusty because he's a reminder of what a fat tweeb he used to be as a kid... because he is exactly the fat tweeb Russ used to be as a kid.

While the plot of the movie is mainly Russ trying to figure out a way to get Rusty back to his time, the majority of this movie is just these two getting into funny scenarios where they act similar because they are the same person.

 And it is a pretty funny situation. I mean John McClane is just palling around with a younger version of himself. This was a time when Bruce Willis wasn't checked out of all his movies and he actually gave a shit. And it shows because the guy is a talented actor. As silly of a premise this is and it has a couple of problems with the script, Bruce Willis sells it the entire time.

And Spencer Breslin is really hilarious in this movie. If there was anything written perfectly in this movie, it was Rusty. You really fall in love with this kid from the very beginning and he's paired perfectly with Bruce Willis who, while a Disney jerk, is an anti-social jerk who needs to learn to care from this pudgy little kid. Its really a great set up and the pay off is really good.

Now I feel like a little bit of this review is me being a little bit bias because I'm not gonna lie, this movie hit an incredible nostaglic tone with me. So much that I cried at the climax of this film a little bit more than I think I have in a long time. While this movie is a comedy first and foremost, this was really one of the first movies that I ever saw that was a comedy with a lot of heart in it and a little bit of tragedy thrown into the mix.

See Russ spends the entire movie refusing to acknowledge a lot of his past. For one reason or another, he can't remember his past and he wants to keep it buried. But Rusty is definitely a sign that he needs to accept something in his past and its done well. Now, trying to be as objective as I can be, I think the big reveal at the end probably could have been developed a little bit more, but the reason it works is because it means something to Russ and Rusty, who you really do come to love by the end of the movie.

Yeah its a little bit of that Disney schmaltz and maybe I was just in a very vulnerable mood, but this movie really hit a chord with me.

And the funny part was, I went into this movie thinking I was going to be disappointed. I hadn't seen this movie for about ten years and I thought it wasn't going to live up to what I remember...

But it really does.

Again, this is probably a lot of the nostalgia talking, but The Kid manages to pull a great performance out of Bruce Willis, even in a cheesy script. Its a great performance by a child actor in Spencer Breslin and the rest of the movie is either pretty silly and fun, or incredibly heartfelt.

Now watching this movie in 2015 is kind of funny because this is just the first of two outings Bruce Willis has had where he's actually fought a younger version of himself.

I guess Looper closed all the questions we had about Bruce Willis from childhood all the way to the way he is now so its definitely worth mentioning the funny situation this movie provides 15 years later.

Again, not really related to the review of the movie, just something funny and worth noticing. These movies aren't connected, but it would be funny if they were.

Speaking of time travel though. Its made pretty clear that Rusty is not a figment of Russ's imagination. While I could argue that is the case in Rocky Balboa when it comes to Pauley, there's no way to argue that in this movie as everyone can see this kid that Bruce Willis is just hanging out with. (It was 2000, it wasn't weird yet).

But if you thought Looper really breezed past any explanation of how people are able to time travel, this movie doesn't even have any explanation. I mean I know its for Bruce Willis to come to terms with his past and who he is as a person, but there is not explanation as to how Rusty gets to the future... or how (spoilers) they get back to the 60s near the end of the movie... or how Russ gets back.

But anyways, the other things worth talking about when it comes to this movie is Emily Mortimer.

Can we just say out right that not only is Emily Mortimer just down right gorgeous, she also is a pretty talented actress. Even if she's involved in a cheesy Disney throw away like this movie, she still gives it her all. I've watched a lot of The Newsroom and she just continues to nail it in that and she brings it in this movie as well.

The problem is, Mortimer's character Amy doesn't really do a lot for the plot. She's just kind of the stand in love interest for Bruce Willis.

And the throw away conflict they create between those two is really overly complicated and something that I don't think a lot of kids would get (hell I didn't really get it as a kid), and as an adult, I noticed its blown through very quickly just to get her out of the way for the third act.

The point is, a lot of this movie is focused more on Willis and Breslin and once Mortimer served her purpose, they needed to give her an exit.

Overall, I think The Kid is an incredibly underrated movie. You've got a great performance from Bruce Willis where he actually gives a damn. You have a good performance by a child actor in Spencer Breslin. You have Emily Mortimer... well being Emily Mortimer even though her character isn't exactly written well, and you have a story that while I think might go over some kids heads, its cheesy and schmaltzy enough that you might have a good time with it.

I love this movie because of the amount of nostalgia that rests within it. I grew up with this movie and I'll admit it, I cried at the end.

If you're looking for a cheesy fun Disney movie, The Kid is one that I don't think a lot of people have heard of but it really will give you a fun ride.

There is a theory I want to write about but it gives away a lot of the movie and I thought I'd leave that for a mini post after this main review.

But that's what I think of the movie. What do you think? Comment and Discuss below. You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmaugen24 as well as send me your requests for future movies I should review. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews as well as live tweets sometimes from movies I'm watching and just want to comment on before the actual review.

I'll leave you with this. I know this movie came out in 2000 but it definitely has a trailer that was made in the 90s. If you thought the movie was cheesy, check this out. Enjoy!

X-Men: Apocalypse trailer

There are a couple issues to watching a trailer at work. First off, you’re probably watching it on a phone because you don’t want to abuse the privileges of having a computer that has access to YouTube at work. Secondly, you can watch it a couple times but you have to be pretty subtle about it because you don’t want someone thinking that all you’re doing at work all day is watching YouTube videos. So whereas I watched the Batman v Superman trailer about a hundred times the first time it came out, I have only watched the X-men Apocalypse trailer about 50 times.

Now I know the X-men have never really been an overly happy franchise, but the first thing I’ll mention about this trailer is that it is just a downer. This trailer is dark as hell. I swear if they replaced all the superhero shots in this trailer (and there are a lot of them) with more ambiance and a little bit scarier imagery, this probably could pass for a horror film.

From what I know of the movie and what I’ve gathered from this trailer, X-men Apocalypse takes place in the 80s as Charles Xavier has begun building up his school for gifted youngsters. And there are a lot of them in this one. You see Jean Grey (played by Sansa Stark, Sophie Turner). You see a quick shot of Cyclops (played by Tye Sheridan), you see Nightcrawler, you see Jubillee, you see Storm (although I don’t think she’s with Xavier quite yet). And then you see all the characters that you’ve come to know in past movies. Nicholas Hoult comes back as Hank McCoy (Or Beast). JLaw returns as Mystique. They also brought back Lucas Till or Havok, as a partner of Xavier. This works perfectly because I think in the comics, Havok is related to Scott Summers/Cyclops and I think they’re going to capitalize on that in this movie. And of course, Quicksilver (played by Evan Peters) returns. This is just a down right packed crowd for this movie. All the while, the X-men discover the presence of an ancient mutant many have believed to be the first mutant.

Enter Apocalypse. We saw a glimpse of Apocalypse at the end of Days of Future Past and if you were like me and didn’t read the comics, you have no idea who or what Apocalypse is. It wasn’t until after that I researched and figured out who Apocalypse is and my god, this movie is going to be crazy!

If you still don’t know, the trailer does a good job at describing a mutant who has existed for centuries and is probably the most powerful mutant there is. He also travels with four mutants who are his four horsemen, the allegory being from the Bible and they of course reference that. It seems like the X-men are delving into a territory that I never thought they would delve into but now that they are it makes total sense.

In the past, the X-men have always been outcasts, symbols of disenfranchised groups the same way Professor X and Magneto were the mutant versions of Martin Luther King Jr and Malcolm X. And as great as that storyline is, it’s been done in almost all the X-men movies we’ve seen so far. But what I think Apocalypse is doing is focusing on the portion of the population that would look at people like the X-men and see them as gods. And it kind of seems like that is what is happening with Apocalypse. He doesn’t seem so much like a supervillain as he does a cult leader.

And the four horsemen are the interesting part mainly because of that shout out to the great imagery of the Apocalypse from the Bible. I think it was revealed a while ago that the four horsemen were going to be Psylocke (played by Olivia Munn) Arch Angel (played by Ben Hardy), Storm (played by Alexandra Shipp), and Magneto (played once again by Michael Fassbender).

What’s even more exciting about this movie is that everything is fresh and new due to the events of X-men Days of Future Past. Essentially the events of the previous X-men trilogy are null and void and they can do whatever they want with this franchise again and this is the first outing that we actually get to see that rebooted/repurposed world that I think a lot of people are excited to see.
Now during comic-con a trailer for this movie dropped and it was leaked on the internet. It was a pretty fuzzy version so I didn’t make a post on it because I only deal with the actual stuff that I can see. But I remember that a lot of people were complaining about the look of Apocalypse after that trailer and the release of his image in a magazine a while back.

Now Apocalypse is played by Oscar Issacs who I found might be one of my favorite up and coming actors, especially if I enjoy his performance in Star Wars (ONE WEEK). From this trailer, I really looking forward to his performance because the way that they positioned him and gave him voice overs in this trailer, it really gave it a kind of creepy and ambianced feel to the movie. However… I did notice that they didn’t have any direct shots of Apocalypse. There were scenes where you saw him in the shot but he wasn’t the focus of the shot so the average viewer wouldn’t exactly know what they were looking at. And I think that was a little bit intentional mainly due to the reaction that people had to Apocalypse when they first saw him. Now I’ve heard a couple of criticisms on the look of Apocalypse in this movie, how he looks like a power rangers villain, how he just looks a little bit silly, and how he doesn’t exactly look like the character from the comics.

My opinion: I’m not really excited nor am I disappointed with the look of Apocalypse in this trailer at least. I’ve had any exposure to Apocalypse before this movie so I have no real ties to the look he had in the comics. I don’t know which Power Ranger villain people are referring to when they say he looks like one because I didn’t watch Power Rangers so there is no negative connection I have with the look. I think its just a look they decided for the character and I think, for now, it works. I’m not jumping up and down for it, but at the same time I’m not hating on it.

Again, the big draw of this trailer was the ambiance of it. They’re going for a much darker tone than past movies and I think that’s surprising, especially since X-men was never really light to begin with.
Now… the one problem with this film is mainly in the fact that Days of Future Past kind of shot this movie in the foot. At the end of Days of Future Past, Logan wakes up from his journey back in the

future in the time he’s supposed to be in. Because of what he did however, the future has changed. Cyclops is still alive, Jean Grey didn’t go all cardboard cut-out Phoenix on us, everyone is alive. And yeah, Charles says to Logan, there’s a lot you need to be caught up on, but the movie basically states that all the characters we knew and loved in the original trilogy survive this encounter with Apocalypse. We saw Beast in this trailer, he survives because Kelsey Grammer is walking around being all blue Kelsey Grammer. Storm is gonna switch sides halfway through this movie and stop being a slave to Apocalypse and she’s going to survive.

Now, that ending scene could be just interpreted as a final send off for the original cast and it doesn’t mean that they’re going to live through this movie, but there’s so much going against that idea that I just don’t see much of the stakes in this movie. I mean I know it is Apocalypse and he can change the course of the future if he wanted to I suppose, but it kind of seems like things could get confusing that way.

Maybe that won’t be a huge deal, I'm sure it will still have enough suspense to keep me interested and I'm sure this movie is going to be good, but for one reason or another, I'm not overly excited for this movie.

Let's go back a little bit. When X-men Days of Future Past came out, I thought the trailer was awesome. I was just overly excited for that movie because I was waiting for the mash up of old and new X-men.

While I was expecting a good comic book movie, not only were my expectations blown and I got a great comic book movie, I got a great movie. X-men: Days of Future Past goes back and forth with Captain America: The Winter Soldier, as the best comic book movie of 2014 but out of all the movies in general, I just thought Days of Future Past was an amazing movie.

I might have to do a recap review of it to see if it still holds up now, or if it was just an awesome first viewing, but I think this movie maybe didn't take comic book movies to a new level, but was in a larger level of its own that its hard to imagine a sequel to it.

And if I was going to imagine a sequel, I don't think I imagined this.

The trailer is good, I just don't think it blew me away as some of the other trailers this year have like Batman V Superman, Civil War or even in comparison to the trailer for Days of Future Past.

I think if it had come out at a different time when I wasn't comparing it to those other trailers, maybe I'd be more excited about it, but I had my initial freak out, then the more I watched it, I didn't get more excited about it, I just kind of accepted it for what it was.

Now, knowing Bryan Singer and how he has handled the X-men Franchise, I know that this movie is probably going to be amazing. But I'm not blown away from this trailer.

Couple footnotes to go along before I wrap up.

 Jennifer Lawrence... can I marry you?

She looks absolutely stunning. The character of Mystique is probably going to be pushed to the absolute level of development that any character has ever been brought. And she commits to this franchise even though most likely there's just a contract keeping her from bolting out of this movie and doing something more dramatic.

I'm excited just to see Mystique in this movie and its all because of JLaw, I'm not even a big fan of the character, but she just looks absolutely stunning and her character sounds interesting in this trailer. If this trailer did anything right, its showing the average movie going audience that JLaw is back and she's still awesome.

The other thing worth mentioning is James McEvoy as Charles Xavier. He still continues to be an amazing Professor X and like Lawrence, I'm incredibly excited to see him in this movie again. And while I love how this movie is definitely a period piece like the last two have been, there is something that I am excited for and I think the rest of the comic book community is too. And its this...

  

McEvoy is bald Xavier finally!

And he looks amazing. There are a couple people who would look silly trying to recreate the absolute perfect baldness of Patrick Stewart, but McEvoy pulls it off very well and I'm really looking forward to this character, who has already become my favorite X-men character become even more developed.

Finally, there is no Wolverine to be seen in this trailer. Its not surprising, I think if Wolverine does show up its only going to be a cameo or an end credit scene to tease The Wolverine 3 or as I like to call it, Old Man Logan. But maybe that's what made it strange. I think X-men maybe held onto Wolverine for so long that its odd seeing an X-men movie without him. I mean we saw it with First Class but who knows, it could get a little bit weird.

Let me be clear, there is nothing wrong with this trailer. Its not like they gave anything away like Batman v Superman, or it looked stupid (or stupidly awesome) like the new Independence Day trailer does (Oh we will get to that in a second).

I just didn't care for it. It looks awesome, I'm pumped for this movie, but I think it didn't excite me the way other trailers have this year. Maybe it was because I watched it at work, but maybe it just wasn't as exciting as it could have been.

What do you think? Did you like the X-men Apocalypse trailer? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as requests for future movie reviews or something you want to hear my opinion on. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews as well as live tweets from certain movies that I watch.

I'll leave you with this. I'm not totally sure if I'm going to do a whole rant on the new Independence Day trailer as I have never really been a huge fan of the first movie to begin with, however, it is a really funny and silly trailer and it is no doubt going to be a popcorn action flick. However, if we're giving the sparknotes edition of my thoughts on it, I thought it looked a little too cheesy. Less Independence Day, more like Sharknado. I don't know, let me know what you think of the trailer as well. Enjoy!

The Force Unleashed

I really haven’t done a video game review in quite a while for the simple reason that while there are really good stories that happen in video games, the focus is more on the gameplay and not the story. The goal first and foremost is to create an experience for the gamer to enjoy him or herself and entertain themselves with more than just watching a movie, actually interacting with the world of a video game.

It’s awesome because while that is the central purpose of video games, there have been a lot of games out there that have not only provided a great gaming experience, but also a great story to go along with it. These games include Bioshock, Grand Theft Auto 5, Skyrim, and to a certain extent, the Halo games.

Now while I won’t consider The Force Unleashed a game that mastered both their story and their gameplay, it still is a good story and the gameplay itself makes you feel like the most powerful Jedi in the Star Wars Galaxy. I do think there are better Star wars games out there, but there are a couple reasons why I want to talk about The Force Unleashed, where it could have gone, and where it could go in the future.

I’ll start with the first game. The first installment of The Force Unleashed came out in 2008. The game takes place between Episode 3 and Episode 4 and you play as Starkiller, the secret apprentice of Darth Vader. As Starkiller is trained to be the ultimate Sith death machine, he is dispatched by Vader to hunt down the remaining Jedi who escaped the purge of Order 66.

I thought it was a fresh take on Star Wars, combining the immense power of the Force alluded to in the prequel films, yet blending it with the iconicness of the original trilogy and the menace of Darth Vader. On top of that, you introduce a new character in Starkiller, who though a little bit bland, could be molded into an interesting character, especially with his struggle with the light or the dark side of the force. In the long run, Starkiller is bland because you’re supposed to insert yourself into his character and make this your journey as opposed to his.

The original Force Unleashed is a great game. If both games in this franchise were like the first one, it probably would be my favorite Star Wars game just based on the interactiveness with the Force you are able to tap into with Starkiller and the absolute adventure the first game is.

The game has gotten criticism on how linear it is and how one path it really is, I think that is something that could have been developed even further and I even read something about an open world game for the 3rd game to move away from the linear containment that was in the first and second game.

Again, you really have to keep in mind that the main point of the game is to entertain the gamer. Its more focused on you being able to unleash the force, then it is on the story. However, I thought the story for this game, though linear made for a good mini narrative to the Star Wars universe. On top of that, it provided an interesting origin to the Rebel Alliance that we’ve seen but it developed it more and made it relate to the story. The first game is a story that could conceivably fit into the lore of Star Wars and not really take away from the movies at all.

On top of that, the characters for The Force Unleashed were really great. Starkiller (voiced and modeled after Sam Witwer) was a little bit more chill in this installment than he is in the second game and he makes for a good protagonist. Again, it allows for the player to insert themselves into his journey but it also makes for a protagonist to lead a new narrative in the Star Wars universe.
I really like Rahm Kota. While he’s probably the biggest threat to the movie cannon, the idea of a blind Jedi master leading the Rebellion for a little bit makes for a really interesting story. There are a lot of good cameos in The Force Unleashed like Bail Organa, Princess Leia and Mon Mothma, but the obvious mention is that of Darth Vader.

Vader is a quintessential part of the story and in a way, I think this movie tried to bring back the menacing persona that Vader had in the original trilogy and look away from the sob story that came out of the prequels. And the great thing is, Vader is evil in this franchise. There’s no good that Starkiller is going to pull out of him the way Luke Skywalker did in the original trilogy so there’s no way that that will intervene. It was just a great iteration of the character.

Is the story incredibly compelling? No. I can’t say it enough though, that wasn’t the point. While video game developers I think are figuring out that good stories will help them in the long run, their main purpose is gameplay and making sure that their game is fun.

My point is that The Force unleashed started something really great. I think gamers were intrigued by the gameplay and seeing where that could go. I think they were also intrigued by the story and they wanted to see where that could go. Overall, The Force Unleashed was a great starting point and it promised a lot of potential in the future.

And then the Force Unleased 2 came out.

Now I will talk about the alternate endings of both games in a little bit, but regardless of how much potential the Force unleashed had, either endings don’t really make a lot of room for a sequel that makes a lot of sense, and if they did open up for a sequel, it’s not a sequel that could have fit into the cannon at the time (before Disney bought Lucasfilm).

The Force Unleashed 2 opens up on Kamino where a clone of Starkiller is being trained by Darth Vader again to be the ultimate weapon. Vader wants to create a perfect clone of Starkiller who is just as powerful but is more obedient and won’t betray him.

Of course, the clone escapes and does his own thing. Now, this clone is full of the memories of Starkiller, looks and sounds like Starkiller, but he’s a clone. Definitely a more powerful clone, but a clone nonetheless.

Now this could be fine, just because he’s a clone doesn’t mean that he can’t have a personality or the ability to be a different character… but no instead he’s the same character just a little bit more shouty at times…. Oh, and he has two lightsabers this time.

The story from there is a little bit hazy. He basically meets up with Rahm Kota again, struggles with the idea of joining this infant Rebellion that the OG Starkiller inspired… and yeah. Like they try to make it so it’s this clones journey to find himself and decide what kind of man he’s going to be, and while that might work for a movie… maybe, it doesn’t work for a video game focused on being the galaxy’s most deadliest force user.

There of course is a choice at the end of the Dark Side or the Light Side and that decides which ending you get in the end but while the game is kind of fun because it’s the same gameplay you had from the first Force Unleashed. It pales in comparison to the original in every way.

The original characters are shells of the previous game and the writing makes it so they’re basically floating in this world until some kind of story about the Rebellion needing a victory comes along. But in the end, its really an incomplete mess that I think they just gave up on because they knew that Lucasfilms were being bought by Disney and this story wouldn’t make the new cannon anyway.
But with that, they just go right off the rails and give us some kind of bullshit cliffhanger ending that makes no sense and doesn’t fit into the cannon at all.

While the first game was a little bit ridiculous, you could see it happening in between the movies and its consistent with the lore. This game ends with the Rebel Alliance capturing Darth Vader and going off to interrogate him while Boba Fett is hot on their trail.

I almost feel like the alternate ending where Starkiller and all his friends die when Deus Ex Machina evil clone comes in a saves Vader from death is a little bit more probable because it kills off all the loose ends and leaves the Rebellion in a desperate state where they need to go after the Death Star.
If the evil ending of the second game would have been cannon and the secret evil clone apprentice had eventually been defeated by Obi-Wan in retirement, I would have been okay with it, but overall,  it doesn’t matter because the game is a mess, and there aren’t any plans to make a third installment because its no longer cannon.

While I enjoy The Force Unleashed 2, its only because you do feel a little bit more powerful with the two lightsabers, and it is a visually appealing game for its time.

So why bring up these games. Well aside from the fact that December has essentially become Star Wars month for me, I recently played the alternate endings for both The Force Unleashed, and The Force Unleashed 2.

In both alternate endings, Starkiller has fully converted to the dark side and he is an agent of Vader and the Dark side. Whether he’s in his own Darth Vader like armor, or he’s just an evil jedi Hunter, he goes to iconic battles of the original trilogy and brutally murders the original cast, including Ben Kenobi,  Han, Chewy, Princess Leia. He evil turns Luke to the Dark side at Hoth.

Now all these alternate storylines are Downloadable Content and not part of the actual story but I almost feel like The Force Unleashed missed out on an opportunity. At a certain point, the story of games were proclaimed not cannon, meaning they don’t fit within the actual story of the movies.
I think that instead of giving up, The Force Unleashed should have capitalized on that status and made The Force Unleashed the alternate Star Wars timeline, the one we never expected to get, but I am incredibly interested in seeing.

In this alternate timeline with an evil Starkiller who isn’t killed by the Emperor, Ben Kenobi is killed by Starkiller, Luke Skywalker is turned to the darkside on Hoth and Leia becomes a Jedi Knight, sporting an awesome white outfit and a yellow lightsaber.

There’s a story there! What happens when Luke is evil? How does Leia pick up his destiny when he fails? What happens when the Rebellion fails and the Empire continues to rule? And finally, what happens when the Emperor realizes that Vader has been using this ultimate evil to undermine him and eventually overthrow him?

Instead of being constrained by cannon which the original story is, The Force Unleashed should have been the alternate reality Star Wars that you can really only explore in a video game.

I bought that DLC of me brutally murdering Chewy and Han on Endor for a dollar. I know it was more when it first came out but could you imagine a full 60 dollar video game, full production on this wacky alternate reality that probably could have happened. I’ve recently been playing Star Wars Battlefront and I love it. I think that Lucasfilms needs to get back into the Star Wars video game world because it is something that has an audience.

C’mon Disney, get on that!

But what do you think? Are you a fan of the Force Unleashed franchise? Are you a fan of the DLC that came out of it? What do you think of that alternate reality I was talking about? Comment and Discuss below!

You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as sending me your thoughts for future reviews I should do on my blog in the future. If you subscribe, you can also get updates on future movie news and reviews as well as live tweets sometimes when I’m watching movies and much more.
 
I'll leave you with this. Star Wars The Force Awakens is coming out in five days, I'll be seeing it in four, here's the last trailer I saw. I'm pumped! Enjoy!

In the Heart of the Sea

I got incredibly lucky to get a pre-screening of In the Heart of the Sea a few days before the movie was actually released in theaters. I’ll be honest, while I saw the trailers for this movie and it looked exciting, its honestly not the kind of movie that I would go out of my way to go and see, much less pay money for it. However, when it comes to seeing a movie before everyone else, it does make me feel a little bit special and I wanted to get a review out on this movie before everyone had a chance to see it so you could tell whether or not this is a movie you’d like to see before you have the opportunity to see it.

In the Heart of the Sea is a movie that I think a lot of people get confused when it comes to the premise. A lot of people think that this is a film adaptation of Moby Dick. Others think that this movie is just about a Whale attacking a ship of whalers. While both those assumptions and probably a lot of other assumptions have elements of truth about them, this movie is about a lot more than Moby Dick or a giant whale. This is mainly a story of survival. But it also has a lot of themes and arcs that are really interesting that make it more than just a White Whale movie.

I’ll talk more about the themes of this movie but first I’ll talk about the plot.

In the Heart of the Sea is mainly a flashback as being told by an former sailor (played by Brendan Gleeson) to Herman Melville (played by Ben Whisaw) who wants to record his story to inspire his new novel, Moby Dick. The flashbacks mainly follow the story of Owen Chase (played by Chris Hemsworth) the first Mate on a Whaling ship in Nantucket Massachusetts in the 1800s. The main story is about him, the Captain of their ship, the Essex (played by Benjamin Walker), and the crew of the Essex and their whaling journey as they run into a whale that acts with a sense of vengeance against the whaling ship, starting this story of survival that force the crew to do anything they can to survive.

That’s the short summary, but there are a lot of themes and subplots that I really liked in this movie. The main one that I liked the most but felt like they didn’t develop fully is the relationship between Owen Chase and the Captain, George Pollard Jr. As a member of the military, I recognized a story about leadership and respect in this movie. Chase is a veteran whaler who has earned his status, whereas Pollard is new and only has this job because of his family name. From the very beginning, these two butt heads and there is a difficult relationship that I was waiting to be resolved… but it kind of formed into a totally different theme halfway through.

Halfway through, the movie’s theme changes suddenly to the roles of man on the Earth and the human ego and where will that pride lead you in the end.

Listen, I loved both themes and I think in a way they could have done both, but it just got very confusing when they were so focused on the leadership dynamic between Chase and Pollard in the beginning and then they shift gears and focus more on man’s pride and his relationship with nature and the whole theme on leadership just went away.

This was probably the biggest problem I had with the movie but I do think that that is a big issue, especially if you have such an interesting and quite inspiring plot as In The Heart of the Sea. Like I said before, I like either themes, either the leadership or the man vs nature story, but I think you have to choose one.

I personally liked the theme of leadership more than the man vs nature for the reason of I liked the scenes where it was the men surviving and how Chase and Pollard help their men survive more than the scenes with the whale. Don’t get me wrong, the whale was a great visual and everytime he showed up and did his whole crazy jumping out of the water thing, I got excited, but with how much of a pivot it was to bring in this man vs nature theme, I don’t think there was much of an argument and it became preachy pretty quickly.

Now, while I had an issue with the flow of this movie and its ideas, I did really like the performances in this movie.

The most notable scenes were oddly enough the scenes between Brendan Gleeson and Ben Whisaw. Both of these actors are incredibly underrated and incredibly talented, especially Brendan Gleeson. And they just kill it because while the flashbacks had a couple of themes that didn’t exactly work, the exchanges between Whisaw and Gleeson were more personal and more about courage and dealing with the things one has done in the past. So I loved these two in the movie and they were probably the best part.

That’s not to say the performances of everyone else in the movie wasn’t good, I just think that the writing perhaps wasn’t as good and that might have hurt their performance in the end.

I think a lot was riding on this movie, especially for Chris Hemsworth.

Hemsworth up until this point has only really been known for his performance as Thor. I haven’t seen Rush, but while I’ve heard good things about it, I don’t know how much capital Hemsworth has to just go and do whatever project he wants to do. I think that this movie was a testing ground for a lot of people to decide whether or not Hemsworth could be a leading man outside of his Thor movies.
And the result is mixed, at least for me.

The biggest issue I think I had with Hemsworth was his accent. I know it’s the 1820s and people aren’t going to have the American accent that they have now, but the result was confusing for me. Either Hemsworth was trying to do an American accent and it just wasn’t melding and some of his actual accent bled through, or he had some kind of muddled British/ Australian/ American accent that just overall was confusing. Now the accent could be a big deal for some and small deal for others. For me, it really didn’t bother me that much. I was more focused on his performance and I thought that it was very good. It was a little bit like Thor and I’m wondering if that works against him, but I thoughts Chris Hemsworth gave a good performance. Not the best, but I think he’s building towards something bigger and I think he could be a better actor down the road, but he still has some work to do.
A fun surprise of the movie was Benjamin Walker. I had never heard of Walker prior to this movie so it’s always good to see new actors and see how they fare in big budget movies like this. Again, unfortunately, I don’t think his character was written that well, but I thought that he worked with what he had and I’m actually interested in seeing more of Walker’s filmography.

But the real highlight (besides Gleeson and Whisaw) was Tom Holland as a young sailor on the ship who Chase takes under his wing. Again, its unfortunate that his character isn’t written as well as I would have liked him to be but I did really enjoy the performance by Holland nonetheless.

This is a totally unrelated rant to In the Heart of the Sea and I have tried to stop bringing in Comic book movies into every movie that I watch, but I do think this is worth mentioning because this is the first performance I’ve seen of Tom Holland and that is interesting as he is playing Spider-man in Captain America: Civil War and the future new Spider-man movies.

Now I have been a skeptic of Marvel going right back to Spider-man in high school again. I personally wanted them to go with an older Peter Parker, but I also was skeptical that a Tom Holland aged Spider-man would be able to run with the likes of Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr. This movie shuts down all those doubts.

Holland is surrounded by really good actors like Hemsworth, Cillian Murphy, Walker (and a crap load of Game of Thrones actors oddly enough) and he holds his own in this story. Again, while I don’t think the flashback story is written as well as the exchanges between Gleeson and Whisaw, I do think that Holland, and the other actors really work well with what they have.

I don’t think this is a horribly written movie. I think it’s a lot better than a lot of movies I’ve seen recently and I think there’s hints of something really great within this movie, but I thought, especially with the themes of the movie, there were a lot of rough patches within this movie and the movie suffered in my mind.

I still think that if you’re interested in this movie, you should definitely go check it out. It is a good movie and I think if the biggest complaint is the themes in the movie, I think that’s a more high caliber critique. I think if the issues that I mentioned were fixed, In The Heart of the Sea could have been a really great movie. I don’t usually give letter grades, or rank movies on this blog, but I think the issues in this movie are keeping it from receiving an A or a 8 or 9 out of 10. As it is, I see this movie as deserving more of a B or a 6 or 7.

Now I realize that you probably can’t discuss this movie (at least not yet) But if you have any questions about the movie, or have your own thoughts on any aspect of this movie, you can share your thoughts below.

You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as sending me your requests for future reviews I should do on the blog. If you follow me on Twitter, you will get updates on future movie news and reviews as well as live-tweets of certain movies I end up watching so you can see how my ideas on movies form.

I’ll leave you with this. I really do like Chris Hemsworth and oddly enough he's incredibly hilarious when he usually does serious and comic book stuff. Here's a bit that he did on SNL. Enjoy!

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2

I'll say it right off the bat, this and Mockingjay Part 1 probably could have been one movie.

Now I saw this movie on Thanksgiving Day. Unfortunately it became a victim of my recent backlog that I am just now getting back on track with. I think the official order of me viewing these movies was Spectre, Rocky Balboa, Creed, Mockingjay Part 2, and The Man from UNCLE. (Nice plugs). That isn't counting the fact that I still need to do a review for Zoolander and possibly a review for Happy Gilmore (maybe). But I feel bad for not doing this review because this movie just seems to be too late for whatever reason in general and I don't think that it's totally warranted.

If you'll recall, I actually liked Part 1 despite it not feeling like a complete film. I was really looking forward to the second part because I wanted to see a complete movie. Well that was a year ago...

Part 2 picks up where Part 1 left off. Katniss Everdeen (played one last time by Jennifer Lawrence) is still the symbol for the revolution against the evil President Snow (played by Donald Sutherland). She's the symbol for the rebellion led by President Coin (played by Julianne Moore). At the end of the first part (spoilers I guess?) they had just finished a daring rescue to retrieve Peeta (played by Josh Hutcherson) from the captivity of President Snow. However, when they found him, he attacks Katniss claiming that she is evil and the reason for all his troubles. It is discovered that Peeta has in fact been indoctrinated by President Snow to kill Katniss.

This of course causes drama for Katniss but honestly, I didn't feel too much of the love triangle in this film. Maybe it was because I didn't re-watch the first part or the previous films, but the love triangle was increasingly missing despite being the culminating event that Katniss must choose between Gale (played by Liam Hemsworth) or Peeta. I mean don't get me wrong, the less of a love triangle you get the more interesting it gets, I just didn't feel Twilighted by this film and I was expecting to. This is a good comment.

But whereas Part 1 was focused on propaganda videos and Katniss having to be the public figure for the rebellion, this movie she is actually fighting in this revolution... sort of.

After seeing what Snow did to Peeta, Katniss makes it her mission to seek out President Snow and kill him once and for all.

However, as she makes her way to the Capital, she finds herself in a city full of traps and terrors that make her push to Snow, one last torturous Hunger Games as she and her friends must fight to stay alive and bring peace to Panem.

When I speak of the traps and terrors, I'm talking about the number of death machines and monsters scattered throughout the Capital City that stand in between Katniss and President Snow and THEY ARE AWESOME!

And maybe I just didn't understand it while I was reading the book but this is actually a really cool set up. They're actually doing this street to street fighting and they have to avoid these traps that were set up by all the past game makers. They utilize the same skills they used to make the Hunger Games into these death traps that are bent on killing Katniss and her friends. It was awesome.

And what was great about this film was that I didn't feel like it was just a fight the entire time. They focus on characters, they focus on the arcs we've seen throughout all three previous films. Its not like the Battle for the Five Armies that it was just one 2 hour long fight, it was a lot of good action but it was also a lot of good character development and story.

I do have to mention it though, there is a point in the middle of this movie where I think the director got confused and instead of filming a Hunger Games movie he started filming a scene from I Am Legend.

Like I don't want to give too much away and if you're watching the movie you should know where it is, but it is a legitimately creepy scene where zombies are trying to kill Katniss and her friends and you legitimately feel like you're in the middle of a zombie horror film. I felt the same way about that scene than I did when I watched I Am Legend and that movie terrified me the first time I saw it. Just be warned.

I guess I should mention that the visuals in this movie are really good. That was something I did notice while watching the movie and I don't think its something that the movie will get a whole lot of recognition for but it should. The creatures and traps are really well done and I was impressed.

In case you didn't figure, the action in the movie was also a lot of fun. Katniss has obviously gone into Legolas mode but we like Legolas mode so it doesn't matter.

What was really good was the acting of Josh Hutcherson.

Now I've never really thought that Hutcherson was that great of an actor, and unfortunately he has a really dumb haircut that is just bleach blonde in this movie that I can't really take seriously, however, I knew it was going to happen because of the arc this character had, but he's no longer the bland loving puppy dog he was in the past two movies.

He's a character you question and you wonder if he's actually going to end up good or bad. It was something I really enjoyed in the books and I do think Hutcherson did a good job developing that character.

And that's why I've always like Peeta more than Gale. While he's obviously not the better looking, I always thought Peeta was a little bit more of a complex character than Gale and I liked him more.

Now, Hutcherson still does have his white bread moments and once his issues go away he kind of goes back to how he was before. However, I think that he did well with the source material and I enjoyed his performance.

The majority of the cast from the first part return, Natalie Dormer as Cressida, Mahershala Ali (the guy from House of Cards) as Boggs. Michelle Forbes has a role in this. She did work in 24 and other good TV shows I've watched so I like her and I like her role in this movie.

Overall the acting in this movie is done pretty well. People have either been in this franchise long enough to be comfortable enough with it and act organically, or they have a small enough part that it doesn't really matter.

Julianne Moore is good in the role like she was in the first part. She's developed a little bit more in this movie and she's a little bit more sinister. I liked her character in this and I liked how she contributes to the story.

I guess I found a lot of interest in this movie because of the role of Plutarch Heavensbee, played by the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman. I remember that Hoffman passed away half way through the filming of this part and while it didn't have much of an effect on the first part, it definitely had an effect on this part.

If you recall my review of Furious 7, I commended the movie on the rewrites and edits they made to make Paul Walker remain a lead character but make up for the shots that were incomplete. I have to give this movie credit for doing that as well. Its not the same as Heavensbee was not as big of a character as Paul Walker's character was, but I thought it was done tastefully and if you weren't looking for it, you probably couldn't tell. I went with my parents and I mentioned that he had passed away after the film and they hadn't realized anything different.

And then there was Jennifer Lawrence.

One of the issues that I think this movie had was that I think it lost steam in popularity and also in the production. While that's not the whole narrative on this film, and I will get into that in a second, I do think it had a little bit of wind taken out of its sails and it hurt the film.

However, if there was any kind of loss of motivation in this film, it did not affect JLaw.

I have to give the woman a round of applause because while this movie is not as good as its predecessors, Jennifer Lawrence continues to commit to this role. Even when she has bigger and better things going on for her, even though she is considered a world class actor right now and probably is above this, she continues to commit to this character.

Jennifer Lawrence only amazed me on how committed she is to a franchise that I will go into more detail later on, but peaked too early. She continues to be the best part of this franchise and she's really grown since the first movie. There is nothing more I can say except that JLaw makes me love the character of Katniss, even though in the books, she is not exactly a likable character. She kills it. While this franchise may have peaked last year, Jennifer Lawrence's career is far from peaking.

But what do I mean by this franchise peaking?

Maybe this is just my opinion, but I didn't see the pomp and circumstance of this series coming to a close the same way I saw it for Harry Potter or hell, even the Twilight films.

Now that could be because I am in the real world now and I'm not surrounded by people who read the book or if they did, not in an environment for people to get overly excited about this.

But I went to see this movie because I wanted closure on the franchise. I didn't feel like this franchise closing was an event of any kind, it was just an end.

Maybe it was the lackluster response to the last film, maybe it was the marketing, but for whatever reason, I didn't feel like this ending was anything special. I didn't hear about my friends going to the Midnight show, I didn't hear about people being overly excited to see the final chapter.

And it kind of goes into how this movie was executed. Now I get it, every epic book is getting its last book split into 2 (hell even 3) movies now. But I think this was probably a movie that didn't need that same treatment. While I think they did a better job than people give this movie credit for, I think people just got tired of the Hunger Games prematurely and it wasn't a profitable wave of excitement for this movie.

But what's more, is that I feel the Hunger Games had a little bit of a legitimacy complex that hurt it in the end.

Hear me out on this.

Harry Potter. Its clearly a beloved book series with both a devoted fan base and a creative idea to appeal to both the fans and the everyday movie going audience, as well as the fantasy community. It was huge because it had such a huge base.

Now look at a franchise like Twilight or the Maze Runner. These are clearly centered on the fans. Sure they have "creative" ideas but they're really building off of what had come before. The Maze Runner, though better than I thought it was going to be, is pretty much riding off the wave of Young Adult Novels that was really started by Twilight and The Hunger Games.

Now Hunger Games is a little bit of a red haired step child because while it is a movie based off of a young adult book with a devoted fanbase, its also a very well done movie. Its also headed by an actress who is the biggest thing since sliced bread right now. Whereas Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson grew with the franchise and were able to grow past it, and Kirsten Stewart and Robert Pattison are still trying to grow past their franchise in Twilight, Jennifer Lawrence really outgrew her franchise by movie two.

This is a pretty half baked theory, but I feel like the hype over this movie wasn't so much about the story of The Hunger Games, while there were a lot of people who wanted to see a conclusion to that story, I think it was more on the hype that this was another performance by Jennifer Lawrence who we just can't seem to get enough of.

I feel like a lot of people may have watched this movie and saw Jennifer Lawrence as far and above this movie and therefore saw it as not as good of a movie. Does this theory make a lot of sense? I don't know, you'll have to let me know. But the point is, I think as this movie was a second part of a movie that probably should have been just one longer movie, their star had out grown the franchise, as well as the Young Adult crowd growing up and not being as interested in this as much as we used to, this movie suffered.

Now, I will come out and say, I think this movie got a lot more shit than it deserved. It served its purpose and I think it did a good job closing out the franchise. I love the performances and I think they did a good job providing a Part 2 with more of a story than I've seen in the past. It had good action, good acting, and it was a pretty fun movie all around.

The one big complaint I've heard that I totally agree with is the ending.

Now I think I was a little bit more forgiving with the ending of this film because it finally made me understand what the hell was going on in the end of this film, something I had trouble with when I was reading the book, because I'll admit it, there is a point where I think Suzanne Collins stopped trying, or at least didn't give it as much as she could have. While I didn't like the ending of the book, I did like it in the movie and seeing it in action made it a lot more understandable why she made some of the decisions she did.

However, that clarifying ending, is just the first ending. There are about 5 more endings to this movie and I think some people were just surprised that this movie didn't end at say the 3rd or the 4th ending.

And I was pretty forgiving, until they got to the last ending. It wasn't that I felt the movie went on too long (although it did have sometimes where it dragged where it should have been exciting) I felt like they had a good ending in the 3rd or 4th ending but they saw what they did in the last Harry Potter movie and decided they needed a 10 years later epilogue, something that was not in the book.

I think they could have gotten rid of that epilogue, especially since they didn't even try to make them look older which they hilariously failed at in the last Harry Potter movie, and they should have just ended the same way the book ended.

Overall, I liked Mockingjay Part 2 more than I was told I was going to. I think this franchise lost its steam in between this movie and the first part, whether it was the growing fame of Jennifer Lawrence, lazy writing, or just poor source material. But either way, I thought it did as best of a job as it could adapting what is universally known as the worst of the three books.

I thought it did a good job adapting it and keeping me engaged even though I knew what was going to happen and the first time reading it, did not like what I knew was going to happen.

Eventually I'll have to go back and watch the entire franchise from front to back to see how the movies progress and where this movie really stands in comparison with the other 3, but for now, I really did enjoy The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2 and I think you should check it out, especially if your a fan of the franchise and need some closure for your characters like Katniss, Peeta and Gale.

Also, not enough Woody Harrellson... Didn't really know where to fit that in but this movie needed more Woody!

But what did you think? Comment and Discuss below. You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your thoughts for future movies I should review. If you subscribe to me on Twitter, you'll get updates on future movie news and reviews, as well as live tweets from movies I'm watching and much more!

I'll leave you with this. Here's JLaw just being JLaw. Enjoy!