Better Call Saul (Season 1)

So I was hesitant to dive in Better Call Saul, mainly for the reason that Breaking Bad seemed to be just a perfectly concise story, any additions whether they be prequel shows or epilogue movies seem a little gratuitous. I don't remember liking the character of Saul Goodman very much so I wasn't sure I was going to really like it. But after the shows been going for 5 seasons now, I've heard enough people say that not only is this show good, it might be just as good as Breaking Bad. Also, I needed a show to get into because I finished Community for the billionth time.

Better Call Saul is a prequel series to Breaking Bad and follows the story of Saul Goodman before he was Saul Goodman (played by Bob Odenkirk). Jimmy Mcgill is a lawyer struggling to make a name for himself in Albuquerque New Mexico. He is a public defender with a propensity for talking his way out of things. He's not particularly good at his job, but part of the show is his journey to figure out what he's good at, all the while running across different characters of varying repute.

On the side of Jimmy's life that is more legitimate, he has a brother (played by Michael Mckean) with an "allergy to electricity". I think when I first heard this, I thought it was kind of weird and a weird way to distinguish the show, but I think they do a relatively good job with it. And Chuck's part in the show is more centered on being a partner of a large law firm and Jimmy's relationship to the people in that law firm, especially an associate named Kim (played by Rhea Seehorn).

On the other side of things, Jimmy finds himself running in with criminal elements, most namely the infamous Mike Ehrmantraut (played again by Jonathan Banks). Additionally, they run across a drug dealer by the name of Taco (played by Michael Mando).

And this is a good place to talk about performances. I can talk more about Bob Odenkirk, but I did want to mention Jonathan Banks and Michael Mando in particular because they were my personal favorites. I think I started this season thinking that Jonathan Banks can only play one character. I said this both because I needed a refresher on Mike's character, but he also played the same role in Community Season 5. And while it's very similar, this season reminded me that while he plays the same role, its one he's very good at.

And Michael Mando, while he's not too much in the show, I think he might end up being one of my favorite characters if they develop him more. I knew Mando mainly from his role in Far Cry 3, but he keeps popping up here and there and I am glad he's getting more work.

Rhea Seehorn and Michael McKean are great along with the other actors, but Odenkirk makes this entire show happen which I did not expect. I always thought Odenkirk was a very good character actor. I don't remember disliking Saul in Breaking Bad, I just thought it was weird that he got the spinoff.

But watching this now, I can say this was a fantastic choice because the character of Jimmy is so unique and off kilter from what you'd expect from a leading person. While it's kind of similar to the formula of Breaking Bad where it's an unlikely middle aged man who has to use his wit and cunning to survive the criminal world, it makes for really good television and allows for these guys who were previously known as character actors to really shine, and that's what Odenkirk does well.

I think the other thing I liked about this season was the format. Breaking Bad was such a unique plot that it's hard to know what a follow up is going to cover. You obviously can't redo the same thing but then where do you go?

The unexpected turn they took was to make it center on Jimmy in a way that makes it feel like a Boston Legal-type legal drama, except it centers on the underbelly and lower lawyers. In fact, the big law firm Jimmy is competing against looks and feels almost like the kind of law firm that was the focus of shows like Boston Legal.

I will say, the show is a little bit scattered at times. Boston Legal was a procedural. Every week had a different case brought to the firm while Better Call Saul has pretty much two major legal cases that they focus on and the rest is the high drama that you'd expect from Vince Gilligan the show creator.

I of course didn't want a procedural and the variety in all reality is good in this show. I think my thought on it is I can't really say what the main goal of this season was. For example, Jimmy is doing his thing with those major cases, peppered in with small montages of him doing public defender work, but then they throw in an episode all about Mike. And the Mike episodes are great. Again, he's one of my favorite parts of this universe. But I get the feeling they needed to pepper his criminal connections into it to keep us engaged in the criminal underworld while Jimmy is still more on the legitimate side as he slowly "breaks bad".

If I had to make a guess, I would imagine that maybe this season was more of an introductory season to these characters and future seasons will be more focused. And if its not, that's fine.

I like this show enough to know that any expectations I had need to go out the window and I just need to enjoy it for the great writing and interesting characters.

It is far too early to decide how it compares to Breaking Bad. I rewatched some of the first few episodes of Breaking Bad a little while ago and I just recognized that that show was something spectacular and hard to compare. I hope Better Call Saul gets up there with every season, but I'll wait until I get to those later seasons to decide.

I think overall, Better Call Saul was an unexpected joy to watch. I knew it was going to be successful, but I didn't know I was going to like the first season as much as I did. I know the people behind the Breaking Bad universe know what they're doing and they're not going to do something like this unless its a good idea. And Better Call Saul is one of those great ideas. I'm not sure if I'll do a review for every season but I wanted to do a review for this season to get my thoughts on the show out.

But what do you think of Better Call Saul? Have you watched past the first season? Should I continue? Are there other spinoffs that could work for this universe? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for shows I should watch in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie and TV news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for Reading!

His Dark Materials (Season 1)

So a lot of my thoughts on this series and the books (that I have not read) were already covered in my review of The Golden Compass movie that came out in 2007. That being said, I am glad that I took the time to watch this series. While I am worried that I might have been comparing the show to the movie (my only point of reference for the series) I do think it's been a fun comparison and it did give me a better understanding of the story than the book did.

His Dark Materials takes place in a parallel world to ours where people's souls live on the outside of them in the form of animals called daemons.

The story mainly follows an orphan girl by the name of Lyra (played by Dafne Keen). She grew up in this world's equivalent to Oxford College and is periodically visited by her adventuring uncle Lord Asriel (played by James McEvoy).

The start of this story is pretty strange because while Lyra is a strong willed person wanting to go out on adventures with her uncle, she doesn't really start her adventure. She just seems to be swept up in an adventure and her goal for quite a while is kind of muddled up in the fact that there are children being kidnapped for unknown nefarious purposes and that includes her friend Roger.  Her adventure doesn't really start until a powerful woman named Mrs. Coulter (played by Ruth Wilson) takes her to London to be her assistant while she does her work for the Magisterium, the overarching bad government. It should be noted that its not very subtlety an analogy to the Catholic church. 

As far as performances go, Dafne Keen and Ruth Wilson are very good. I'm not sure I really like how the character of Lyra is written because she's just kind of a typical "chosen one" character, though its never really explained why and it seems like she more stumbles upon other people's problems rather than having an overarching quest. This show does a good job at building up the relationship she has with her friend Roger and having that be a guiding purpose, but she seems to be more of a blank slate rather than a strong character.

Ruth Wilsoin does a really good job. I couldn't help but unfairly compare her performance with Nicole Kidman from the movie because Kidman was really kind of perfect for that role. But Wilson does a really good job and was probably one of the best parts of the show.

There are a couple of actors from Game of Thrones like James Cosmo and Lucian Msamati that did a really good job. They along with Anne-Marie Duff play Gyptians that were really interesting but get dropped from the show pretty unceremoniously.

So Lin Manuel Miranda is in this, and like Wilson, he's going up against a performance from the movie that despite its flaws, had some really good performances. So to go from Sam Elliot who just seemed like a perfect fit for a cowboy balloon pilot to Lin Manuel Miranda just felt weird. Also, they really tried to beef up his part when the story seemed to be unceremoniously leaving him behind as well for no real good reason.

Also Miranda, while not a bad actor, just felt out of place in this show. Maybe I'm too unfairly comparing him to Sam Elliot, but his accent isn't very good and he looks more like Inspector Jacque Clouseau from The Pink Panther, which seems weird.

But on a more positive note, James McEvoy did a pretty good job in this.

I remember when I watched the movie, having not read the book and knowing Lord Asriel's role in everything, I thought it was a waste to have Daniel Craig play that role to have him really be in one or two scenes and then never be seen again.

I don't know where the first book ends, if its closer to the series ending or the movie's, but this show introduced McEvoy in the beginning and I thought it was going to be a similar outcome to Craig's role, but the last two episodes feature him more and I get where he plays into the film more than before.

I think what I appreciate about this show is observing how a show that was made in 2019 telling the same story as a movie that was made in 2007 can be very different based on context. The 2007 movie is trying to be the next Harry Potter while this show is wanting to be the next Game of Thrones.

And the big benefit is that this show is able to expand on elements of the story over 8 hour long episodes where the movie could not even get close to exploring in the less than 2 hour run time it had.

I think a lot of the questions that I had after watching the movie were answered by this series that takes the same story and expands on it a lot better.

That being said, I do take issue with the claim that these books should only be made into series. I'm hearing more people who wish that Harry Potter was a TV show that divided the books up into seasons. While I would watch that, it really diminishes the work the Harry Potter directors were able to accomplish by making really good movies based on those books. I think a lot of the time its an excuse to say this book couldn't be a movie because I think it could, it just has to be done well. (He says having never made a movie himself).

I think the reason I say that is because I think some episodes of this show were much better than others. The first half of the season takes quite a bit to get going and I don't really feel like some of it was carried out the way it was being built up to. Characters like Scoresby and the Gyptians, like I said, seemed to be unceremoniously exited from the show to maybe come back in season 2, and the stuff that I did enjoy, especially when they illustrate the connections between the different worlds, seems to only be hinted at for future seasons.

Also, to me, its not totally clear who this show is for. I think that might have been a problem with the book too because while it does have balloon piloting cowboys, talking polar bears, and witches, the story also does a pretty deep dive into theology, philosophy, and critiques of religion. The subject matter is also pretty dark and if the sales pitch is to make this the new fantasy series to replace Game of Thrones, I doubt parents are going to let their kids watch this. On the other hand, it's always got a PG-13 rating so some people might not take it as seriously. It's hard to tell who the audience is.

I think the other thing that I found interesting was how this story is actually closer to Stephen King's The Dark Tower series than it is something like Harry Potter or The Chronicles of Narnia.

I think that's what continues to make me somewhat interested in it, is that there is a chance for some kind of story to be told here, but it's nothing mind blowing in my opinion. I could be wrong as this show is up for a second season and it will start delving into territory of the books that I have never seen any kind of interpretation of.

Last couple thoughts. The opening credits song is amazing. The music is very well done in this show.

Visually this show is fantastic too. I think that's been the main draw of this story is how unique this fantasy world is and a desire to see how it's used, especially because the story is so uniquely counter cultural.

I will say, in an attempt to be different than the typical heroes journey, the pacing of this show feels very odd. I mentioned before that Lyra is largely swept up in the journeys and adventures of others and doesn't take her own initiative until well into the series, but there are also some reveals that seemed to come at very weird times and the show kind of meandered with them because there wasn't really anything the characters could do about it until later episodes.

Overall, His Dark Materials was an interesting experience because it gave me more insight into a book I just need to sit down and read. But despite having a longer form, the same problems with story, pacing, and characters from the movie do carry over to the show, and I don't think that's anything on the show creators or the performers, I just think the characters are uniquely written. That's both good and bad because it makes His Dark Materials intriguing, but a little uneven. It's a beautiful show with an awesome soundtrack and a mostly good cast. I would say if you're looking for a unique off kilter fantasy adventure, His Dark Materials is not a bad choice, it's just not going to be super memorable, at least not during this season.

But those are my thoughts on His Dark Materials. What did you think? Have you read the book? Have you seen the movie and the TV show? How does the show compare? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films and TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for Reading!

MCU Phase 5: The Greatest Hypothetical Phase (Part 2)

So some of the films I'll be talking about in this post are not officially in phase 5. I imagine that Marvel is really only worried about Phase 4 at the moment so Phase 5 is really only hypothetical with only a few speculative release dates that are bound to change, especially with how fluid the release dates of Phase 4 are already.

I like to imagine Fiege sitting in his basement with a corkboard, just beautiful mind-ing all the new properties like X-men, Fantastic Four, Deadpool, while also incorporating the classic sequels that people are looking forward to like Guardians of the Galaxy and Black Panther, as well as refining story pitches for Captain Marvel 2 to make sure its better than the first one, all while looking for gaps and opportunities to introduce vampires into all of it... because Blade.

I'll talk about some of the projects that are classified as "in development" on Wikipedia, namely Black Panther 2 and Captain Marvel 2. Then I'll dive into the meat of the MCU's future which is almost entirely hypothetical at the moment but will no doubt become clearer as I would hope they will be built up to in Phase 4.

The Knowns

These two sequels could not be any more different. Despite some odd backlash to Black Panther recently, Black Panther was a wild success in 2018 and even earned a Best Picture nom.

Captain Marvel on the other hand could be described at best as a generic Marvel film and at worst is pretty low on a lot of people's lists ranking the MCU films.

Thinking about it now, I really haven't revisited either of these movies since 2018 and maybe that's in the cards soon since they're both on Disney Plus. But I think the thing that makes these movies interesting from a story perspective is that they both have the prospects of leading a future team up movie whenever the conversation of the next Avengers movie shows up on Fiege's cork board.

Needless to say, I don't envy that man.

Black Panther 2 already has Ryan Coogler back and Captain Marvel is looking for a female director which I'm all for as long as she's good. I don't have a whole lot of nuanced thoughts on this besides the prospect of these characters leading the Avengers one day. Who knows if they'll go that route, but it's interesting to me. 

The Hypotheticals

I'm referring to the formerly Fox properties as hypotheticals, not because I don't think they'll show up, but because it's totally speculative on how or when they'll show up. Have mutants always been there? Are they from a separate universe that were able to cross over after the snap or the time travel shenanigans from Endgame? How is Rated-R Deadpool going to appear in a PG-13 MCU films? All questions we don't know.

I'm going to break this down into the different elements that Kevin Fiege gets the fun job of incorporating into the existing universe. Starting with the Fantastic Four.

Fantastic Four

Both X-men and Fantastic Four have their own challenges. Where were these characters during the events of the previous movies? Is the Multiverse involved. And more succinctly to the Fantastic Four,

how do you make a movie for a team that has had notoriously bad movies. Like I know Fox wasn't always great at their movies, but it says something that they took 4 varying levels of efforted swings at this team and failed pretty much every time.

And the thing that kind of sucks is that I doubt we're really going to get anything really special with the Fantastic Four. I think with any other studio taking on a challenge like this, they'd try to do something really unique, especially since both the comical and dark versions failed. But the reality is, they're just going to Marvel-ize it and it's going to feel like every other movie to come out of the MCU. It might be entertaining, but if I'm exec, the safest choice with such a tricky property is to give it to someone like Peyton Reed, who while not a bad director at all, knows the Marvel formula and can knock out a pretty generic Marvel film while tricking us into thinking its ground breaking.

The other aspect is the casting and I don't really know what to think about this because a lot of it is fan casting that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

A lot of people are speculating that they're going to cast John Krasinski and Emily Blunt as Mr. Fantastic and Sue Storm.

Look, I want these two to be in the MCU just like everyone else. I really thought they were going to go with Emily Blunt for Captain Marvel and honestly I'm a little disappointed they didn't. Not because Brie Larson is bad (cause she's not everyone!) but because Blunt is so good. And while Marvel is totally happy with Chris Evans as Captain America, I think apart of them is kicking themselves that they couldn't lay claim to Krasinski early because now his offer price is a lot higher than it would have been originally.

But I just don't see those two in those particular roles. Do I think they're talented and they could change my mind? Yes. But I akin it to the people in 2014 who were hoping for Bryan Cranston to play Lex Luthor, not because he was a good actor, but because he had played a bald cunning bad guy in Breaking Bad. Just because Krasinski and Blunt are married in real life and have played a married couple in A Quiet Place (well I might add), does not mean that they should be these characters.

I have no authority or backing to say that Marvel is going with this casting and I actually think they won't. However, I would not be surprised at all if they did for the sole fact of its a popular choice with actors who are hot right now. It's also worth mentioning that if A Quiet Place 2 is good, they might consider Krasinski for director but that also seems odd because while I love A Quiet Place, its nowhere near a Marvel movie.

So again, good luck Kevin Fiege with that.

Deadpool

Just getting it out of the way now. Adding Deadpool to the MCU is going to be VERY VERY easy.

I'm of the belief that Endgame's only failure was that it didn't have the end credit scene be Deadpool sitting in an empty theater clapping like Shia Labeouf. He didn't need to say anything just a 15 second clip of Deadpool doing this...

If I recall correctly, the deal had already gone through at that point and it would have been very easy to add (he says with no real experience in how movies are distributed).

But all Marvel needs to do is include Deadpool in an end credit scene somewhere in Phase 4. I can't say what movie it should be but again, it doesn't have to be anything big. He could be in the background of the real end credit scene just waving and putting up a sign saying, "Hey I'm here".

 The important thing is that I don't want Deadpool teaming up with anybody other than possibly Spider-man and not even a full movie. I want Deadpool to exist in his own little pocket universe of the MCU where his movies are Rated R and the times that he's incorporated, he's very aware that he's in a PG-13 MCU film.

I have a lot of faith in Ryan Reynolds and I really hope the higher ups at Marvel and Disney do as well to let him do his own thing. The scenes (and I emphasize scenes) that he does a cross over in Marvel films should be totally directed by Reynolds and his team to get the most impact.

In short, Deadpool should be very easy as long as his crossover stuff is limited and his solo films are rated R.

X-men is a little bit of a different beast.

X-men

I'm on record as saying that the Fox X-men movies are better than people are giving them credit for. Yes, Dark Phoenix and Apocalypse were bad films, but even up until the end, there were still talented people on that team putting out movies like Deadpool 2 and Logan. Put on top of that that the good X-men movies had a feel that I think people might start feeling nostalgia for as eventually they start re-watching them and get nervous about how Marvel is going to incorporate a team that is so expansive it's impossible to give them the time and effort that even Fox struggled with. If you thought Fox never gave justice to your favorite X-men like Bishop or Gambit, what makes you think that adding them to a slate that includes giving Ant-man another solo film eventually is going to give them justice?

I'm not sad that I'll eventually get to see Wolverine with the Avengers. I am sad that at least at Fox we had the chance of a Gambit movie, for better or worse. I was never looking forward to the Channing Tatum Gambit movie but I liked the possibility of it. Say what you will about Sony right now, at least they have the opportunity to make crappy Morbius movies in the hope they can learn from their mistakes and make good Craven movies. Maybe I'm too hopeful, but Logan would never have happened if the X-men had been apart of the MCU from the get go.

The fun thing about X-men not coming out is that we have probably years to speculate on who they're going to cast and I find that immensely fun even when I'm incredibly wrong.

I've lost the enthusiasm to do fan casting because it ultimately seems pointless to me when I'm almost always wrong, but I would never crap on the entertainment it brings other people and in turn brings me to see cool speculative fan posters like this. It also brings up the fact that nobody has outright said that the old cast isn't coming back. I think it's highly unlikely, but if I'm Marvel and I know that some people did like James McEvoy as Professor X, there is at least a conversation to be had on whether or not you bring him back, if not for a minor role while you focus on new mutants to distinguish the new franchise.

It's also fun to think about how and when to expect the X-men to appear in the MCU. I think they'll start sprinkling in mentions of mutants in Phase 4 with potential cameos by mutants. Spider-man 3, Doctor Strange, and Thor Love and Thunder are all in pre-production so it wouldn't be outlandish for Marvel to come to those directors and say, I need you to incorporate this character to set up for the X-men. Maybe Bolivar Trask shows up in Spider-man 3, or Mister Sinister has a small role in Thor Love and Thunder, or someone else that only fans of the property would get but that confirms on screen that this is the same universe now.

Eventually once you get really deep into the hypotheticals, you start thinking of crossovers and versus movies once those come back into fashion. There was a really good Screen Junkies video when X-men was acquired by Fox on the possible ideological differences between a group like the Avengers and the X-men and why a versus movie could be really interesting.

The video (link right here) talks about the thematic differences between the franchises. The theme I find more intriguing is that the Marvel films have mainly held the theme of limiting power to a select few individuals and the fear of power falling into the wrong hands through power given to the right hands. On the other hand, not only is that power in the hands of a many individuals like the mutants, the whole theme of the X-men has been to peacefully combat institutions that discriminate against mutants. The very institutions that the Avengers have spent the majority of their films working to uphold.

The Screenjunkies video does a much better job at describing that philosophical and thematic conflict, but I think their analysis is a stepping stone to a really interesting conflict. Do I have a lot of confidence that MCU movies will go that deep? I'm not sure.

I think the addition of the X-men has to be done with care. While Fantastic Four will likely be Marvel-ized just due to the fact that it's not as popular of a property, X-men is a property that is too big not to address these very interesting questions with. I don't think it's going to be addressed with the thoughtful analysis that Screenjunkies did, but it'd be a wasted opportunity to just say, Mutants have been here all along and the Avengers are just cool with it.

The individual characters they bring in are also important. While I think Professor X and Magneto have been used to death, they really do represent the ideological and interesting overarching ideas of the X-men. I could see them being seen as too powerful to start off with, but again, it just seems like an opportunity too good to waste.

I think it's a good idea that Fiege isn't rushing into incorporating the X-men. It's even questionable that when/if New Mutants ever comes out if it will even connect to the MCU. That's why I didn't include it in my Phase 4 rant, because it is not even clear if its going to happen at this point.

Overall, I'm excited for the X-men but want Fiege to take as much time as he needs, even if it means doing a filler phase.

I should note that I'm excited for a lot of the movies in Phase 4 and I like the prospect of things in the MCU being wildly different by the end of Phase 4. But I am looking at it realistically that the movies coming out are largely going to be transition films, introducing new heroes, ferrying out old ones, and setting up for this hypothetical phase with all the properties that we're really waiting for.

The Others and In Betweens

This rant is going quite long and making me think it was a good idea to split this up in the first place. But I put this as the Others and in betweeners because there is for sure going to be a Guardians of the Galaxy 3. We just have no idea when it's going to happen.

Blade is probably going to happen, we just have no idea when its going to happen.

But its also the in betweeners because its not totally clear where these movies are going to fit in the grand scheme of things.

The silver lining for fans of Guardians of the Galaxy is that there is speculation that the Guardians will likely have a role in Thor Love and Thunder (seriously that movie is going to be the powerhouse of Phase 4 to make you forget that it's a filler phase) and we're going to get our Guardians fix while not having an actual sequel for the foreseeable future. It's kind of what happens when Disney decides to play games with a director for silly reasons and he ends up getting a new girlfriend in DC while you stage a break up. He'll be back, there's no doubt of that, but Marvel will have some egg on their face if The Suicide Squad ends up being really good and Marvel is still waiting on their plucky gang of rogues tentpole movie.

And then there's Blade.

Look, I get why you announce Blade. If you look back at the news that came out of that Phase 4 Comic-con announcement, it was a lot of fluff to disguise the fact that you're still working on how to incorporate the X-men along with a real direction after Endgame. I mentioned in the last post that I don't blame Fiege for not having a super clear path for the next big Thanos-like conflict. Thanos was the culmination of 10 years and if you think Fiege can do in a year what took 10 years, I'd invite you to watch Phase 1 and 2 and tell me that they knew exactly where they were going.

The Blade announcement was like an Easter Egg. It's not totally related but it got people excited. And if you have the chance to grab Mahershala Ali for anything, you grab him early because his price tag is only going up.

But looking at the slate moving forward, can you honestly say where Blade is going to fit in this universe?

The only inkling I have is that he could show up in a post-credit scene in Morbius. But that's a pretty weak connection considering that its a Sony property that nobody is excited for. I mean it's Jared freaking Leto! Even if Blade shows up in the post-credit scene of Morbius, if Morbius is bad, I don't think that fares very well to get people pumped about Blade. The introduction of Vampires just seems weird. Not impossible. I will always point back to Guardians of the Galaxy and a time when we thought that was weird too. But Blade to me is just a huge question mark right now. While I know people are excited about it, Vampires just seem like a step back from intergalactic cosmic multiversing that the MCU is headed down.

Also Ant-man 3...

I don't know one single person who is excited for Ant-man 3. I like those movies in the moment and I bet if I put Ant-man 1 or 2 on right now, I'd probably have a fun time with it. But honestly the only thing that is going to be appeal with an Ant-man 3 is if they introduce the Fantastic 4 in that film.

And that's possible. Like I said, they're probably going to Marvel-ize that team and Peyton Reed seems like a competent enough person to make a silly concept like The Fantastic Four accessible for the average audience. This of course is all off unconfirmed speculation, but it seems likely because I don't see Ant-man 3 being appealing without some kind of draw, like the introduction of a new property into the MCU bloodstream.

The theme among these three films is that they just feel out of place right now. There are certain avenues that could make them logical, but I imagine they're pretty low on Fiege's conspiracy cork board because there are bigger and better things to do.

To recap, Captain Marvel and Black Panther are near the top of the list because they're already in production and have the potential to be some of the centerfolds for the MCU going forward. The Fox properties are the 300 meter targets because I know they want to get them right. And the rest is ancillary due to a multitude of circumstances, whether it be an unavailable story head (James Gunn), a question mark of a story aspect like Blade, or a low turnout hero like Ant-man that at the end of the day is more likely a vehicle for more important things.

I have no idea how the future of the MCU is going to be, but I think Phase 5 (and beyond) is going to be the more formative phase of the MCU whereas Phase 4 will be more transitional. And like I mentioned in my Phase 4 rant, it's all together possible that the Phase 5 they have in mind could be totally different at the end of the phase 4. It might be counting our eggs before they hatch to do a post like this, but let's be real, what else is there to do right now?

The fun part about this is that I get to hear some of your thoughts. How will the X-men be incorporated into the MCU? Is there any other way that Blade can be incorporated other than Morbius? Who do you want to play the Fantastic four? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films and topics I should discuss in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!

Onward

So I knew this movie was going to break me. I watched the trailers, I knew what the plot was, and I've seen other Pixar/Disney movies about family. I knew this movie was going to make me cry. I had a short period of time where I was worried the movie wouldn't follow through with the fantastic set up but not only was I proven wrong, but I got a really entertaining movie in the process.

Onward takes place in a fantasy setting where magic has essentially been forgotten and focuses on two elf brothers. Ian (voiced by Tom Holland) and his older brother Barley (voiced by Chris Pratt) are polar opposites. Ian is afraid of everything while Barley is afraid of nothing. Ian is looking to the future to change the way he is, Barley is stuck in the past playing fantasy role playing games, which in this world are essentially historical role playing games, which as someone with an amateur interest in DND, I thought that was hilarious.

But on Ian's 16th birthday, their mother (voiced by Julia Louis-Dreyfus) gifts Ian and Barley a magic staff from their diseased father. The staff comes with a magical spell that allows the brothers to bring their dad back to life for one day. However, the spell goes half wrong and the brothers only bring back the bottom half of their dad.

So in order to finish the spell, they must go on a quest to find a mcguffin with the bottom half of their dad, and in the process discover the importance of family, and brotherhood, and yada yada, you kind of know how this is going to go the minute you hear the plot. I guess you could call it predictable and honestly that might be the worst criticism I can think of this film because the film is just a lot of fun.

There's kind of a weekend at Bernie's flare to the movie as the dad can't hear, see, or say anything... he's only legs. But that actually adds to what I thought was probably the best part of the movie, the sense of adventure it has.

You immediately connect with the characters, and their connection with this pair of legs, so when the pair of legs almost falls off the edge of an endless cliff, even though I had seen that in the trailer, I gasped because I knew how important that character was to them despite the majority of the time its just a comedic element.

And then there's the mom.

The mom is trailing behind them with a manticore (voiced by Octavia Spencer) trying to prevent them from falling into a curse at the end of their quest. Even though I definitely preferred Ian and Barley's side of the movie, these two were definitely down played and I still had a chuckle or two when they were on screen. Furthermore it added to the adventure.

You'd think after watching 4 seasons of Veep I'd immediately recognize the voice acting of Julia Louis-Dreyfus but she was probably the best vocal performance because I never associated the voice with her. Holland and Pratt are pretty obvious because you can pick out their voice pretty easily. But Dreyfus becomes the character. Octavia Spencer also blends in pretty well too.

The fantasy elements combined with the spirit of adventure, and of course the heart warming family messaging, I could easily see this becoming one of my favorite Pixar films. Maybe I just have a bias towards fantasy settings, but everything about this movie just felt super sincere and new. For as predictable as the plot might be, and it's pretty predictable, I thoroughly enjoyed going down this familiar adventure with these characters because of the establishment of characters and execution of the adventure.

Onward might be a film that slips under people's radar because it has kind of a short theatrical run and was released straight to Disney Plus at the start of the coronavirus outbreak and start of social distancing. But I would highly recommend not to wait on this one like I did.

Pixar continues its reign of very good storytelling and heart warming themes and it's the kind of movie that will make you want to text your dad immediately after. So overall, I really enjoyed it. It might be a little predictable and the voice acting of Holland and Pratt is a little too obviously them, but you're going to have a lot of fun enjoying an adventure and having some heart warming moments in this unique fantasy setting.

But what did you think of Onward? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!

MCU Phase 4: The Filler Phase (Part 1)

So I was planning on writing something like this quite a long time ago after Endgame. But I wanted to wait and see what the line up would be because it was still changing regardless of some of the major announcements that were made at San Diego Comic-con last year. For example, Jeremy Renner went weird and now I believe Hawkeye is postponed until they can figure out something there. The Doctor Strange movie no longer is being directed by Scott Derickson and instead by Sam Raimi and nobody really knows what that totally means. There were already changes and uncertainty prior to the most recent madness. Also now, with the COVID-19 pandemic there has been massive shifts in the schedule with a lot of it subject to move depending on how/when theatrical releases become a thing again and movies actually start getting made again. And then there's the cluster of Disney plus series.

It is worth mentioning that I am going no holds bar on any spoilers. I know everyone and their mom saw Endgame, but in case you haven't, here's your warning. Go watch Endgame.

But instead of talking about all the properties individually, I want to try and speak a little more broadly about the direction the MCU and how Marvel might continue considering that the world of the MCU is vastly different than when it began. I talked a lot about this in theory in the past, but it's worth talking about now because we have at least a skeleton of what Phase 4 is gonna look like and the promise of what phase 5 could look like, which is probably the phase that everyone is really looking forward to because right now, Phase 4 looks like the filler phase.

The Potential Filler Phase

And that's not to knock any of the films coming out. There are some films coming out even this year that I'm at least interested in checking out out of loyalty to the Marvel brand that has earned its infamy.

But when your first movie out the gate is a Black Widow prequel, it's not exactly sending a huge message that you know the direction of your franchise quite yet.

I think Black Widow looks like it might be fun, but even if it hadn't been delayed by the Coronavirus, I was already kind of thinking that this was going to have a lower box office return because its a movie that seems like one you could skip and not miss much. We know Black Widow is going to get out of it okay because she's still gotta die in Endgame.

And Black Widow isn't the only movie that was kind of questionable this year. The Eternals is still a big question mark because nobody knows what it is still. I think my self at the start of this blog back in 2014 would have been able to spout off what The Eternals are the same way I did with Guardians of the Galaxy, but now I just don't have the time or desire to do that. On the other side, we can point to things like Guardians of the Galaxy as proof that Marvel for sure can do this, but it seems like when Fiege said this year would see the MCU take a little break, he wasn't kidding. I don't know anybody who says their most anticipated film of the year is Black Widow or Eternals. To beat a dead horse, I know its possible that these movies could surprise us, and it might be advantageous for these films to come out after all the COVID-19 stuff is done because we might just be hungry for any kind of movie at that point, but the plan movie forward is very unclear.

And look, I don't blame Kevin Fiege for not having much of a plan post-Endgame. He and Marvel pulled off a miracle by having Endgame be a solid conclusion to a decade long story and then he's asked not only to follow it up, but add new properties like X-men, Fantastic Four, and shape it all with a shaky deal with Sony on incorporating Spider-man.

The best strategic direction that Marvel seems to be heading down is the one involving the multi-verse.

The Multiverse

By far my favorite trailer from the Superbowl was the Disney plus Marvel TV show spot for shows that won't come out for at least another year, especially at this point. The reason I liked this spot was mainly for the reason that it highlighted the new WandaVision TV show that I've heard will be connected to Doctor Strange's Multiverse of Madness which happens to be my most anticipated film of Phase 4, perhaps tied with Thor Love and Thunder, which I'll talk about in a little bit.

But the reason this show is so interesting to me is that is starts the MCU down the road of the multiverse and opens up the playing field for different realities. Realities like the one where Loki escaped from New York after the events of the first Avengers that was clearly set up in Endgame. The multiverse that could help write Tom Holland's Spider-man out of the franchise if Sony decides they want to put a cap on that business relationship. Hell, the multiverse could be utilized in Black Widow and we could keep on going with Black Widow movies if that movie is successful.

Not only is Scarlet Witch a really interesting character excellently played by Elizabeth Olson, but the show allows for Marvel to do spin offs that they can easily write off as being apart of the multiverse and not part of the main cannon.

This is fake btw

Now I've learned to manage expectations of interesting concepts being utilized in the MCU for a couple reasons. First, my theories are usually wrong. I remember being very wrong leading up to Age of Ultron. But I've also learned that as good as Marvel is about doing the balancing act of stories with business contracts, it is still a business and that limits the great lengths they could go if it wasn't about business. I also know that execs are usually cautious about creating too many timelines because they're worried that people might get confused.

So yeah, as much as I would love to see Sam Raimi's Spider-man swing into the Multiverse of Madness, it's not going to happen and we'd know if it was going to.

But there are fun possibilities and one-offs that Marvel can play with while they're trying to figure out the next big through line.

The Standalone Exploratory Phase

Last year, I also wanted to do another rant on franchises in general after Endgame. I think a really interesting phenomena happening, especially in DC is that people are moving away from franchises and instead focusing on individual stories. What a novel idea. The success of Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Joker when tentpoles like Batman v Superman and Justice League don't do well have given DC the direction of, let's make fun stories first and if we'll think about shared universes later. An approach they should have taken a long time ago, but 2015, 16, and 17 were all about the shared universe, starting to play as well as trying to beat Marvel at their own game when Marvel was lapping them already.

But the strange thing about it is that Marvel now seems to be dipping their toes in DC's new playbook especially with Phase 4. Film-wise, whenever these films actually happen, the docket is pretty light. Yeah, I know that Black Widow, Doctor Strange, and Thor (and Spider-man(?)) are all core Avengers by now, but Thor (and Spider-man) is the only one with other standalone films. It's a nuanced distinction, but Strange and Black Widow are still either new or relatively new to the standalone realm, and the rest is new properties and TV shows.

Quick note: I don't really count TV shows right now. I know that there is a more concise connection with the TV shows than in the past, and I'm definitely going to enjoy them, but while I have a Disney plus subscription, it should not be vital to follow the MCU storyline. It should just be supplementary.

And I like that Marvel is trying out new things like The Eternals. Even the Black Widow and Doctor Strange movies are relatively new territory.

I have no idea who Shang Chi is or what that movie is going to be about but I'll still see it because I trust Marvel still.

I could play contrarian and say that if Black Widow and Shang Chi don't perform, Doctor Strange fumbles, and Spider-man 3 gets delayed that Phase 4 could hurt the momentum going into Phase 5 which are more movies that people are probably expecting and looking forward to. But I've been contrarian with Marvel before and been wrong. I don't think that'll happen. I think care is going to be put into these movies and while they're not my most anticipated films, I'm excited to see where things go.

Okay, couple more thoughts before I wrap up.

Spider-man. 

The sequel to Far From Home is a question mark for me because I think they're going to try and nail the landing and gracefully write Spider-man out of the MCU using the multiverse. I don't know if it'll happen in the third movie but who knows.

They're also talking about re-introducing Daredevil which I hope is played again by Charlie Cox and if it's anything like the previous films, I think it could be a lot of fun.

The problem is, like a lot of Marvel movies (and movies in general) I have no idea how COVID-19 is going to affect filming schedules. Right now Spider-man 3 is slotted for July 2021 but that's assuming that filming can start this year still and wrap up in a year. I also assume they have a story written already, but it's just a film that I wouldn't want Sony and Marvel to rush just for the sake of having 2021 be a catch up year.

Thor: Love and Thunder

Where Doctor Strange has the potential to be the coolest. Thor Love and Thunder is just probably going to be the banger that closes out Phase 4 strong. Even if the worst case scenario I mentioned before occurs (which is unlikely), Thor will still close out Phase 4 with a bang and its still the movie that people are getting excited for.

Taika Waiti is returning and he made it clear with Thor Ragnorak that he knows what he's doing when he's making Thor films. Chris Hemsworth is the most comfortable with the character he's ever been and I don't see him hanging up the hammer and cape any time soon. The casting is also really fun. There are the knowns with Hemsworth and Tessa Thompson coming back. But Christian Bale is in talks to be the villain, probably Beta Ray Bill, and I am all for it.

My one reservation with Thor is actually bringing back Natalie Portman. I'm always on board for a Natalie Portman vehicle and I think the idea of bringing in Lady Thor is an interesting idea, especially if you incorporate it with what I'm guessing will be an established multiverse. But Portman's past with the MCU is not great and she's an actress who seemed to have lost interest in the MCU. But suddenly she has a renewed interest when they probably gave her a huge paycheck. I know Portman is a solid actress and if she believe sin the project she'll give it best, but I just wouldn't want them to sign Portman especially if she's not gonna have a great attitude towards it.

But Thor is the surest bet. Doctor Strange has the chance at being the best film of the Phase, but if its not, Thor has the best shot at being the most fun film of the phase.

This rant has gone on a little bit longer than I initially thought it would and I still have some thoughts. I'll go into a second part when I talk about Phase 5 and the potential properties that Marvel could be geting into as the franchise goes along.

But what do you think of the Phase 4 slate. How do you think COVID-19 may affect this phase, and do you think this is a filler phase like I do? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for topics I should discuss in the future, or movies to review. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!

Lethal Weapon

Once again, I am down the list of movies that I fully intended to see a long time ago but got lazy and never actually checked out and now I don't have an excuse not to.

Lethal Weapon is a movie that is iconic because its referenced in pop culture as a great buddy cop movie, but I don't think I've ever really known the story outside of the names of the cops and Murtaugh's iconic catchphrase, "I'm getting too old for this shit". You don't have to have seen Die Hard to know its a movie about Bruce Willis fighting terrorists in a skyscraper on Christmas. But I have never had anyone mention the plot of Lethal Weapon.

Lethal Weapon follows the story of Martin Riggs (played by Mel Gibson) and Roger Murtaugh (played by Danny Glover), two detectives for the LAPD. Murtagh is a veteran cop who is "too old for this shit". He fought in Vietnam, has a family, and while it's never explicitly said that he plays by the books, he's pretty straight laced, especially in comparison with his new partner.

Martin Riggs is a loose canon former special forces, martial arts master (?), renegade cop with a death wish. The movie establishes very quickly that he's self destructive after the death of his wife and seems to be placed as Murtaugh's partner as a quiet position while the LAPD figures out what to do with him.

The first thing I think this movie does well is that it takes a good amount of time, possibly too long of time (but we'll get to that), establishing a relationship with these characters. They really do a good job setting these characters up and having the plot orbit them rather than the other way around. We see their relationship grow and they go from despising each other to genuine friendship in a good amount of time that didn't seem forced or rushed.

With that being said, it takes a little bit for the plot to actually start up in any meaningful way. Much of the first half of this movie is almost a romance between these two. There is a case that is the overarching plot and that case doesn't really get addressed until about half way through the film and by that point, they reach the twist and almost turning point. It almost feels like its missing a second act because they spend the first half getting to know one another and it feels like the half way point brings them into the third act that feels very long.

But another really interesting and intriguing thing about this movie is how it really rides the line of being a genuinely funny movie without being  a full out comedy and being a gritty police drama without being too serious. There are a lot of scenes where I was laughing pretty hard and there were moments that get very serious. In the same movie where Riggs is contemplating suicide, there is also a scene where Murtaugh's daughter is giving Riggs the "do me" eyes.

We probably should have seen some red flags from Mel Gibson in this movie because he really does do a pretty good unhinged cop. And Danny Glover juxtaposes him really well as the cop with the family who is "too old for this shit".

The funny thing about watching this movie in 2020 is that the film has a lot of buddy cop tropes that have become really tired and overused since. But since Lethal Weapon came out in the hayday of 80's action films and did those tropes in such an over the top way, it probably either made some of those tropes famous, or just did it in a way that didn't feel tired in 1987. I was having some trouble deciding whether or not it holds up thirty years later and I came up with these thoughts.

While it is not totally fair to compare this movie to Die Hard, if you're looking at violent 80's action cop movies, Die Hard probably took some of the elements of Lethal Weapon and applied it to make it better. Furthermore, Lethal Weapon is so over the top that it almost feels like satire. And while that was a lot of 80's action films, I think some of it holds up because its just a time capsule of the movies that came out during that time.

It's worth mentioning that Gary Busey is in this movie and I was somewhat-disappointingly underwhelmed by his role in this movie. I think I just expected more from Gary Busey. Like you hear that Gary Busey is in an 80's action film you think it's going to be something over the top, but he's just a bad dude who ends up having a weird fight club style fist to cuffs fight with Mel Gibson at the end of the film for like no reason.

He also immediately reminded me of this underrated video.

He works for the main bad guy (played by Mitchell Ryan) but I think Busey really overshadows him for some reason and the truth is, they're not really the focus of the movie. Instead the focus is on Riggs and Murtaugh in a friendship that is clearly the draw of this film and spawned the entire franchise and a television show that I don't know a single person who has watched it.

I'm still not totally sure how this movie got 3 sequels but they're all on Netflix and I don't have a lot to do right now so I guess we'll figure out.

Overall, Lethal Weapon is an interesting little glimpse into a very interesting time in film making. Over the top acting, over the top action, catchphrases, and a pretty thin plot about drug dealers (or something) carried by great actors. It is a little uneven and the villains overall are pretty bland. While its not a fair comparison, Die Hard did it better a year later. The real question will be seeing who had a better franchise overall and I'm really not sure based on my pop culture knowledge of the two franchises. I can't say definitively that the movie holds up 30+ years later but it was still entertaining finally getting up to speed on a franchise that people know but nobody is really wild about. (Besides the guys on It's Always Sunny).

But those were my thoughts on Lethal Weapon. Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!

Veep (Seasons 1-4)

So Veep is kind of a hard show to review because I feel like the individual seasons are too short to really give a great review without getting redundant. I feel like I'd be saying the same thing for 7 seasons. Also, I blasted through the first 4 seasons that its hard for me to really speak individually on the first season now since they've kind of blended together. However, I also felt like commenting on 7 seasons of television would cover way too much ground, especially since over the course of 4 seasons, this show and its characters drastically change. So I figured it would be best to do a half way review, give my initial impressions of the show after 4 seasons and then compare it with where it ended it up after the 7th season.

The first season of Veep starts with Vice President Selina Meyer (played by Julia Louis-Dreyfus). I think the first really great aspect of the show is that you ascertain Selina's story in the first 15 seconds if you're paying attention to the opening credits. She ran for President, fell in the polls and conceded, taking the position of Vice President to a President that we never actually see in the show.

The first season mainly follows her day to day as she tries to make the most out of her position as Vice President and the daily shenanigans of her staff who are either ruthlessly mean spirited people, or relatively good people who just get ruthlessly stepped on by the mean spirited people.

The staff includes her Chief of Staff Amy (played by Anna Chlumsky), Dan, her Deputy Communications Director (played by Reid Scott),  Her director of communications Mike (played by Matt Walsh). Her bag man Gary (played by Tony Hale), and her secretary Sue (played by Sufe Bradshaw). Additionally, they are consistently irritated by an annoying White House Liaison named Jonah (played by Timothy Simons).

As the show goes on, there are more characters introduced like the President's Chief of Staff Ben Cafferty (played by Kevin Dunn), White House Senior Strategist Kent Davidson (played by Gary Cole, Selina's daughter Catherine (played by Sarah Sutherland) and A LOT of guest roles from very funny actors and actresses, almost too many to count.

If you take anything away from this review, its that this show's main appeal is its insult humor. This show is mainly the characters just shitting on one another as they slog through a very pessimistic view of government in today's political world.

One of my best friends watched this show as it was coming out and he mentioned that the creators really tried to avoid making the show just a recreation of current events, but it's amazing how some elements of the show seemed to be almost prolific in the way they occurred when they aired well before some of the shenanigans you may see on the news.

Julia Louis-Dreyfus really carries the show. It is worth noting that the first season (like a lot of sitcoms like The Office or Parks and Rec) is not as strong as the following seasons. It's clear they didn't have as big of a budget and they were still finding their voice and that might be why I watched the first season a while ago and never continued. Dreyfus for me falls into that category with the first season in that I wasn't sure I was going to like her as the main character for 7 seasons. But as I went back, the first season, while the weakest in the first four, is still pretty good and Dreyfus is still pretty great.

I think her performance is colored in by those around her and they really start to grow on you despite the majority of them just being horrible people. As mentioned before, they all are caricatures of a very pessimistic view of politics where everyone is trying to get ahead and one bad move can have you on the out.

The best part about the show is how much goes wrong and how prevalent the concept of failing upwards is present in the show.

While the supporting cast is all phenomenal, I think one of the most hilarious parts of the show and a great example of both that failing upwards and insult humor comes in the form of Timothy Simon's character Jonah. He is easily the most hated character in the show and yet he continues to have a consistent presence in the show that never feels forced or unnecessary. And he's honestly become one of my favorite characters just on how he is consistently there in one form or another and consistently getting shit on the entire show.

The show obviously takes Selina from a relegated position as the Vice President to higher status and positions (I.E. Spoiler: She does become President eventually). But the show continues to maintain a very simple premise while infusing new plot points that can easily be identified in the first episode.

For example: in the second season Tony Hale's character introduces a girlfriend that he started a relationship with in between seasons. In the third season Matt Walsh gets married to a character we never met before. It's pretty well done in setting up really funny circumstances to keep the characters engaging and keep them from getting stale or just doing the same thing every season.

At the same time they maintain a lot of the same traits in order to continue jokes from previous episodes. Gary is a nervous submissive to Selina. Dan is an ambitious asshole willing to do whatever to get ahead. Amy is a hard working ambitious asshole who has a sense of loyalty towards Selina that makes her a punching bag. Mike is an incompetent but lovable loser. Jonah is a punching bag who you consistently are reminded that he deserves it. And the same goes for new characters that are introduced and guest stars. They're not insanely deep characters, but they are complex enough to make the day to day interesting.

One thing I both like and dislike about the show is how it never really gets too in-depth with the characters on an emotional level where we're supposed to like them. Long running comedies like The Office or Parks and Rec eventually hit a moment where no matter how much Michael Scott is annoying, he's still good deep down and you love him. It almost seems like Veep characters are deep down evil and you only grow a connection with them to see them fail. Like you want Selina to succeed, but at the same time you're totally content watching her fail because the end result really isn't that different.

It's been really funny juxtaposing this show with Community while I've been watching both (#Socialdistancing). I've watched Community a lot and I know that you come to love those characters because you did a deep dive with them over 6 seasons (minus one for the gas leak season).

While you do the same deep dive with Veep, it's both a very satisfying and kind of gross feeling deep dive where you keep digging and never really get the character satisfaction you'd expect from a comedy like this. It's good because its something different and its had the popularity to continue on for so long to do it in a way that works beyond the first season, but it doesn't really make it a show I could see myself casually re-watching like Community.

But now that I'm thinking about it, Community and Veep are very different shows and a more apt comparison is if House of Cards and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia had a baby, you'd get Veep. And in the same way you connect with the characters of It's Always Sunny because they're bad people. Veep has that same feeling.

I'm obviously going to continue to watch Veep and I'll try and give a Seasons 5-8 review sometime here in the near future. But my overall thoughts is that its a unique comedy in the vein of It's Always Sunny where the characters are all horrible (give or take one or two), and its a lot of insult humor.

I would say it does take a little bit to get going with the first season, but that's any comedy. Julia Louis-Dreyfus does a fantastic job and the show is oddly prolific in the situations it made prior to 2016 in an attempt to poke fun at a sometimes ridiculous system of government we have. You're not gonna feel particularly good after watching Veep, but that's kind of the point. Instead of seeing these characters rise, you only see them fail upwards and its immensely entertaining.

But those are my thoughts on Veep (seasons 1-4). What did you think? Comment and Discuss! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your requests for films and TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

Thanks for reading!