Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit

Where A Most Wanted Man was a little more subtle and dry of a spy thriller, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, amps up the intensity and makes a very different, yet very similar spy thriller.

I've done a lot of Tom Clancy Jack Ryan Movies, take a look here at that list.
The Hunt For Red October
Patriot Games
The Sum of All Fears

I've done these movies in the strangest order you could imagine. While this movie came out after The Sum of All Fears, its more of an origin story for the character of Jack Ryan and could potentially open the gates for more sequels based on the character. But is it good enough to warrant that?

Shadow Recruit is a total reboot of the character and does a pretty nice job at keeping the origins of the character but updating it and putting him in the modern world.

Jack Ryan (played by Chris Pine) is a doctorate candidate at Oxford when 9/11 happens and he decides to join the Marines. While in Afghanistan, he is in an accident and he breaks his back. While recovering, he is recruit by Tom Harper (played by Kevin Costner) to join the CIA as a financial analyst and investigate Wallstreet to make sure money isn't going to terrorism.

Ten years later, Ryan is engaged to his nurse from the Vets hospital (played by Keira Knightley) and he is noticing a mysterious link between his company and a Russian company. Furthermore, there is tensions between the United States and Russia on the value of the dollar and a lot of financial mumbo jumbo that surprisingly wasn't as boring as I thought it was going to be.

When you think of spy espionage thrillers, you don't think of economic and financial surveillance and yet somehow this movie manages to make that the most fast paced and interesting issue facing the CIA today.

And that's another thing.

This movie has a strange way of kind of overlooking the public opinion of the CIA in the modern day and making it the cool shit it used to be back in the 80s and 90s when all the other Jack Ryan movies were made. Its a strange dynamic because the CIA has such a different look and feel in movies like Patriot Games, this film, it feels like this secret organization that nobody knows about again. Its this strange dynamic that is hard to explain but things feel updated... and yet at the same time feel very old and something that Tom Clancy would write. Again, they really side step the whole, the CIA is not exactly looked that highly on today... especially in light of recent torture reports. I know the movie was made before this report came out, but the way they address is so quick and so rushed that its not really that great of an explanation. Ryan basically says, you guys aren't that popular, with all the word on torture and stuff, why would I want to join you, and Costner just says, that's not my division... and that's the end of the discussion. That... in a weird way makes everything all better and we move on.

But back to the plot. The company that Ryan is looking into in Russia is run by a cold ruthless Russian named Viktor Cherevin (played by Kenneth Branagh). The overall plot is a typical terrorist espionage thriller plot, stop the terrorists from an attack, espionage ensues. What's different about this film is the economic and financial part about it. Strange thing is, there is a lot of action to this film... even though its mainly about corporate and financial espionage... I don't know its kind of hard to explain without giving too much away.

The film is a weird enigma in the fact that it is suppose to be a modern adaptation of the Tom Clancy books but at the same time, Tom Clancy wrote those books near the end of the Cold War. Russia was our biggest enemy and in a lot of media (not just Clancy's) Russia is painted as the most evil thing on the planet.

The strange thing about this film is that it actually paints Russians the same way they used to be painted in films from the 90s. I just think of Airforce One when I think of the Russians in this film. Its such a strange dynamic because the movie feels modern... but at the same time feels very old and uses a lot of tropes and stereotypes from the old espionage thrillers but puts a Jason Bourne feel to them.

On that note, let's talk about the action.

As I've said before, this movie has a lot of action for a film about economic terrorism. And that's a strength about this film. It keeps me interested, the movie is very fast paced, but at the same time the film is well thought out. The set up is good and the movie throughout is executed pretty well overall. The pacing is just something worth mentioning because this movie was zig zagging here and there and making things incredibly interesting, especially for a topic that, in theory, could be pretty dry.

Let's talk about characters.

Honestly, the reason I took so long to see this movie was because I wasn't that interested in Chris Pine as Jack Ryan. I don't have a huge connection to the character of Jack Ryan, but I don't really see Chris Pine as Jack Ryan.

Let's talk about Chris Pine in general.

I think the guy, for the most part, has had a pretty successful and likable career. He's James Kirk, but at the same time he's been in some chick flix. Which isn't a bad thing, but you know from Matthew McConaughey that that can kind of give you a bad rap and not really make you credible.

Overall, I think Chris Pine can act, I just don't think I like him that much. That sounds kind of mean and I can't discredit the guy just because I don't like him, but I just have an interesting response whenever I hear Chris Pine is staring in a film.

For the most part, Pine does a pretty good job in this film. But the thing about Jack Ryan is that he's painted as this boy scout all American hero. And while that's Jack Ryan's character, Jack Ryan is a different kind of protagonist just because he's not Chris Pine. Jack Ryan, to my understanding, is an average guy who displays bravery in extreme circumstances. He's patriotic but not to the level they're trying to sell Pine as. Pine is the guy you put on a poster for the National Guard and I just don't see that as Jack Ryan. Maybe that's exactly how Tom Clancy intended but I look at Harrison Ford, and Alec Baldwin, two interpretations of an analyst, not a super spy, an analyst in the CIA and I like their representations better because they were your run of the mill guys. Sure they acted bravely in the face of an international threat, they had their action moments, but you never felt like they could be Jason Bourne.

I feel like they're trying to make Jack Ryan the new Jason Bourne. Its been done before, its going to be done again, it cannot be done.

That being said, there are some good parts about his performance.

His relationship with Kathy his fiance (played by Keira Knightly) is actually pretty good. I think the two have an interesting chemistry that flushed out a little bit more could work in future films. Its not ground breaking and its a little bit stereotypical and heartless at times, but I liked it for the most part.

Keira Knightly in the film is... alright. She's not great. I'm out on her accent, I feel like there's a British Accent bursting at the seams trying to get out in this film but for the most part she's alright. Not great, alright.

I really liked Kevin Costner. I think some people think he's just the same old Kevin Costner with bland acting, but I like the guy dammit. I think there's an attempt to do with Kevin Costner and Chris Pine what they did with Bruce Greenwood and Chris Pine in Star Trek in creating him as a sort of father figure and I guess its alright. Its not great, its just not horrible.

I think probably the best part of the film was Kenneth Branagh.

Yeah he's not actually Russian. Yeah, his character is your stereotypical intimidating Russian who is bent on American destruction. But damn, Branagh has fun with this role.

I enjoyed it despite it being unoriginal and honestly a little unmemorable. He created a good villain for the film and was pretty run of the mill as far as Tom Clancy villains go. They're always pretty typical and not incredibly interesting but at the same time you kind of like them in a weird way. I would never say Sean Bean in Patriot Games was an incredibly memorable bad guy, but that doesn't mean he didn't do a good job. The same goes for Branagh in this case. He's fun, he's a villain you like to hate, its a good time.

The more I think about this movie, the more I kind of poke holes in it. The more I think about it, the more I kind of see it as average. The movie is so high paced and while you're watching it, a lot of fun. But at the end of the day, you're probably not going to have that much of an impact. I think its fun and it has a lot of potential to open up for a franchise, but lets not push it. We've got enough spy franchises, especially with Matt Damon coming back as Bourne, you know people start reaching the bottom of the barrel when they go for Jack Ryan. Its unfortunate, but true.

Overall the film is mediocre. Safe, and mediocre. Fun... but mediocre. I think if you watch the film you'll probably enjoy it, but its not going to leave a mark.

But those are my thoughts on Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit. What do you think? Do you think they should keep making these Jack Ryan films? What do you think of Chris Pine? Comment and Discuss Below!

I'll leave you with this. Here's the clip that was suppose to be in the film with Ellen Degeneres. Enjoy!

A Most Wanted Man

The best way I can describe A Most Wanted Man in a sentence is, Picture Jason Bourne films, but with a lot less action in them, and probably a little bit more realistic... don't quote me on that.

A Most Wanted Man is the last complete film done by Phillip Seymour Hoffman before his untimely and unfortunate death early this year. While I think the Hunger Game films will probably be best known as his last films, this one was his absolute last one. And for last films, I have to say, its a pretty good one to go off on. I don't mean that in a coarse or disrespectful way, I only mean that its a film that really gives Hoffman his acting justice and gives him range to give us one last really good performance.

A Most Wanted Man focuses on a secret Intelligence Organization in the German government which for all purposes does not exist. Hoffman describes it as the organization nobody knows about and those who know about it despise the organization.

Hoffman plays Gunther Bachmann, the head of this secret team. He has particular interest in a young Chechniyan named Issa Karpov (played by Grigoriy Dobrygin) who has known ties with Chechniyan terrorists who entered Germany illegally.

Karpov is assisted by a young human rights lawyer named Annabel Richter (played by Rachel McAdams) who keeps him hidden while they figure out what to do with an inheritance his terrorist and wanted father left him in a bank run by a man named Tommy Brue. (played by Willem Defoe). All the while Gunther is looking into a bigger threat and Karpov could be only a small part to a bigger intelligence operation.

Oh and Robin Wright is a CIA agent... its an awesome part for her. In short, the German government and the CIA are also going after Karpov... its hard to explain without giving too much away.

This movie is a pureblood espionage spy film, made for the modern day. It points out some really interesting aspect about espionage today and some problems with American intelligence and how its a very different approach then the rest of the world.

Now I say take everything you liked about the Bourne films, take away the action, and you have A Most Wanted Man. There is possibly one scene that has the most action, its a very short scene, and its realistic, its not the fast pacedness of the Bourne film, its short, its sweet and you feel just kind of cheated... in a good way after it.

The thing I like about this film is that without much exposition or much background on these characters, this film is mostly about them reacting to the world around them, reacting to this very serious issue of immigration, terrorism, a post 9/11 world, and the world of intelligence. But the movie isn't on a soapbox. I don't think it will win any awards, its honestly not that deep of a film, its a espionage thriller. But the work of each character and actor playing them really makes the film really fascinating and makes you forget that a lot of it is Phillip Seymour Hoffman looking (with all due respect) like shit.

Gunther Bachmann isn't really given that much of a backstory in this film because its not totally necessary. He's given motivations and he has his demons and things that haunt him. He does a really good job. I really haven't seen Hoffman in enough, by himself, to really say if the guy was an actor I hold in high regard, even after his passing. But this movie makes me want to look into other films the man has done and give him a second look instead of basing all my assumptions on his work in Mission Impossible 3... I really didn't like that movie.

The other characters, for the most part, do a really good job. Willem Defoe is entertaining as always. Robin Wright gives as great of a performance as she does in House of Cards and they both have their element of the story that play huge roles that I feel the movie would be incomplete without.

Then there's Rachel McAdams and Grigority Dobrygin and their relationship. Now before I go on, McAdam's accent in this movie is just down right awful. Its kind of funny, but I don't think it detracts from the film... too much.

Put that aside though, I really liked the role each of these characters play. Dobrygin spends a lot of this movie just staring and not really saying much. There's an interesting question of redemption in this film for his character and while he's not the most developed or really that great of a character, you feel for him and his situation. But at the same time you're not sure if you should trust him.

And that's where McAdams character comes in. I love the idea that they were going for in this because there's a great scene where Hoffman just points out her vanity. She's this lawyer who "gives asylum to terrorists" because she wants to feel good about herself. She's so left wing and wants to see the good in people that she overlooks the danger she put herself and others in. While the movie is probably leaning a little left in political views itself, its a great commentary on the reality of terrorism in the world today. There's a great dynamic of the extremes in the issue. Do we go as far as Robin Wright goes to make sure terrorists are locked away to keep the world safe? Or do we open our arms to every person who claims to want a new life? Despite everything we know about them?

And that kind of brings me back to Gunther Bachmann. The guy is a good man. He's a character you like. Yet he's thrown into a world that is not a good world. He knows the rules of the game and he tries to do the right thing but that is not always done in a way that seems right.

I don't know, its an interesting concept and character for me and I really, really enjoyed it.

Is the film perfect? No. But the main reason that is is because I feel like the movie didn't take it all the way. I feel like this is an espionage thriller that has the inklings to do something more with it but doesn't quite go all the way. Its hard to explain but I feel like the main problem with this movie is that it probably would work better as an HBO series. I would've loved to see Hoffman in this role doing something like Spooks or 24...ish in a ten episode mini-series.

Who knows, maybe that might happen... probably not. But I can dream dammit. That's the beautiful thing about narratives today is that there's actually a variety of things you can do with these stories and a variety of mediums to take them in. This works great as a movie and I feel like it could have worked great as a mini series. I don't know, that probably wasn't, and probably never will be part of their plan for this movie but its fun to think about.

Overall, the film is a good time. Its a thinker and I could imagine it could get a little dry at times, but its a realistic spy thriller that is really a good time. Its a great final performance for a man who was taken from this world too early. And the film is really a great spy film without falling to the stereotypes and typical action heavy nuances of modern day spy films.

But those are my thoughts on A Most Wanted Man. What do you think? Comment and Discuss Below!

I'll leave you with this. The trailer for this film is actually a pretty good representation of the film. Take a look, let me know what you think. Enjoy!

Dark City

Honestly, the only reason I was originally interested in this movie was because Kiefer Sutherland was in it. Sutherland, as you know, is in 24 and is one of my favorite actors. (you may not know that but... oh well...) I soon realized that Kiefer is more of a supporting character in this film and suddenly the film became less interesting. But it was also an interesting concept and I'm in a sci-fi mood so I think it was time I finally went and watched this movie. 

Now, the unfortunate thing I think about watching this movie is that I think I saw the end of this movie. There's a big reveal in the end and I believe I saw this ending a long time ago when flipped to the movie while channel surfing. 

I also don't think I totally understood the genre of the film. I thought that it was just a science fiction movie when really it was a neo-noir sci-fi film. With a better understanding of noir from a class I took since the last time I saw the film, I think I can appreciate it a little bit more, but there's a lot to talk about with this film. 

Dark City starts with a man waking up in the bathtub, not able to remember who he is. In the

apartment he lives in he finds the body of a woman and soon is being pursued by the police, and a group of strange men.

The man figures out that his name is actually John Murdoch (played by Rufus Sewell). He finds himself realizing that he has psychic abilities and something is very wrong with the world he lives in. With the help of his apparent wife (played by Jennifer Connolly) Murdoch must avoid the police, a crack detective, (played by William Hurt) and the assassination attempts by the mysterious men in order to figure out who he is, what he can do, and what is the mystery behind the city he lives in that is perpetually in darkness.

The number one thing to mention is that this film was made in the 90's... and you can definitely tell. I'm not saying that good movies can't come out of the 90s, but the 90s were definitely an awkward time, especially for sci fi, especially if you weren't the Matrix or Terminator. Again, there were a lot of good movies, just a lot of bad and awkward ones as well.

The unfortunate thing is that there is a lot of good things with this movie... and at the same time there are a lot of kind of dumb things about this movie.

To me, its an interesting take on the neo-noir genre. But a lot of the times its feels very lazy and makes the character incredibly boring as they try to fit into that dark world that Noir always tried to do. I've seen noir done right, Dark City does not do Noir right.

And furthermore, the atmosphere and mood of the film makes it hard to watch.

The film is set in a city where it is always night. While this is never fully explained exactly how that is suppose to work and how nobody seems to figure it out, its not that bad of a setup. However, the visuals and overall feel of the film is inhibited by how freaking dark it is. There were times where I had a hard time figuring out what the hell I was looking at because the landscape and sets are so dark. When you see the effects, they look good. The film did a good job at utilizing technology at the time and I really enjoyed what I could see.

Rufus Sewell plays John Murdoch in the film. This is quite possibly the only thing I have seen Sewell in, and I'm really not impressed. He was boring and really delivered his lines in a very awkward way.

And to top it all off, Sewell is just strange in this film. I'm not sure if they're trying to make him into a Neo complex or what but his character wasn't exactly likable or interesting.

This movie really doesn't focus as much on character development as it does the plot and the twists. While I have some complaints about the plot itself, its an interesting concept and I think if it was done differently, it could have been a really good movie.

But when story can't hold you up, the best thing to fall back on is the performances of the main characters and they just don't hold water in this film.

Jennifer Connolly looks like she's going to fall asleep in the film and that's when she's actually doing things. Honestly, Connolly really just is a plot device for Sewell's character. She's there to be to move the plot along and there's really no connection between the two.

Then there's William Hurt. Now I think a long time ago I think I enjoyed William Hurt... but honestly I can't remember a single thing he's been in. I've seen a lot of film reviews that point him out to be bland, monotone, and more than likely just give a not so great performance. This movie kind of makes me agree with that. William Hurt isn't bad in the movie, but he also is far from good in this film. Its been a couple days since I've seen the movie and honestly I can't really remember exactly what Hurt did. He kind of is going through the same thing Murdoch is going through and there's something to dow with another cop that has gone crazy trying to figure out the secret behind the city.

This isn't me conceding and saying that William Hurt is a horrible actor... I'm just saying he's not that great in this film. He's just bland.

And then there's Kiefer Sutherland as Doctor Schreber. Now again, I don't wanna sound bias because honestly this was the only reason I wanted to watch this movie back in the day. Kiefer Sutherland to this day is one of my favorite actors. So call it bias or not, but I truly believe that Sutherland was the greatest part, though not a great part to begin with, of the film.

Schreber is a complex character. He is working with the Strangers to fulfill their evil plan and yet throughout the movie there's a sense that he is trying to help. You're not quite sure, until the end, who his allegiances truly lie with and he's very crafty throughout the film because he knows the truth about the city.

Sutherland plays this complexity well because on one hand he wants to free humanity but at the same time he wants to keep his bases covered so in case things don't go according to plan, he'll still be alive. Schreber is very much a coward in this film and Sutherland plays that coward role well, a huge diversion from his gruff and tough role as Jack Bauer.

That being said, the guy has his problems as well. I'm not sure why he had to have some kind of breathing problem and make his speech all weird. His character is not fully developed and even though he probably gives the best performance out of anybody, not even his performance can save this movie.

The whole movie is really glued together by the performance of Sutherland and the Strangers in the film... but its really the Elmer's Glue of a Science Fiction story.

The Strangers in theory are a really cool race of aliens and they are on a list of villains that are one of the most interesting villains I've seen in a sci fi film. They remind me of The Gentlmen from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or the Slenderman. Just manipulative and hidden from the real world. In theory, these guys are really, really cool. But of course in practice, they're just kind of weird.

First off there is their names. They've got these random nouns for names like, Mr. Book, Mr. Hand. Mr. Penguin, Mr. Microwave.

And then there's a demon kid? I don't know there wasn't much explanation as to who these people were, they were just evil aliens bent on manipulation and serving their own purposes. Again, the concept and plot of these guys are really, really interesting, but they're just not that great of villains. They seem weird and not exactly intimidating... except for the demon kid. And they're resolve isn't really that clear. Also their weaknesses are really strange. Like there's a part that Sutherland is like, they don't like Water... or sun... I guess... so you would think they would use that to fight these guys... Nope!

Now I was going to say that these guys basically ripped off Mr. Smith and the Agents from the Matrix... but the weird thing is this movie came out in 1998, The Matrix came out in 1999.

Now I really think/hope that the Matrix, one of the most original Sci Fi films of all time didn't take something as awesome as the Agents and someone as Awesome as Mr. Smith and rip it off from this pile of garbage like Dark City, but maybe there's a part of the Wachowskis that did just that. I don't know. But suddenly my argument of this movie changes a little bit with this knowledge of chronology.

The movie is still god awful, but I think there is a little bit of method and a lot of originality to the film that kind of set the stage for a lot of science fiction to come out in the future. Did it inspire the Matrix? Probably not. But Dark City is a strange film that probably deserves a little more credit than its given, but it has nothing to do with the characters, or the way that original story is executed.

The last thing I'll talk about is the effects... they're bad... it was the 90s, what do you expect? That's all.

So overall, I think Dark City is a complicated movie. The story is original and on paper, sounds really cool. I think I can understand why the film has a cult following. Again, I like the concept of the film and some parts of the story are done pretty well. But overall, the execution of that story was handled horribly, with horrible effects that don't stand up, horrible characters, and a lack luster reveal at the end that doesn't really make that much re-watch value, especially if the film building up that reveal isn't that great. Also the neo-noir style, while different and a step away from your run of the mill science fiction, is not executed properly and doesn't really pay that much omage to the style. I feel like I want to like Dark City, but there are too many elements that make it kind of a mess of a film.

But those are my thoughts on the film. Is there anybody that thinks this movie is an underrated masterpiece? I would like to hear a defense for this film. I've been trying to give it as much of a defense as I can but its very hard. Let me know. Comment and Discuss below.

I'll leave you with this. This movie doesn't really connect to Dark City... but I like this Cracked video... Its a Crack video, what do you expect? Enjoy!

Suicide Squad

Honestly, when I heard they were making a Suicide Squad, it was probably the movie in the DC line up that I was the least excited for. Check out this link for my post on the DC Line up.

Frankly, the people in the Suicide Squad are not that interesting to me. The only one I'm really looking forward to was finally seeing a version of Harley Quinn. That seems kind of cool to me, although not incredibly important. She could have shown up as the villain, or side villain in a future DC product. They don't need to put her with other villains that I've honestly never heard of like Captain Boomerang, The Enchantress, and Rick Flag, in a villain team up movie that is just trying to draw attention away from The Sinister 6, a film I was never excited about at all.

Even the names that were rumored to be involved with the film didn't excited me that much. And it just didn't seem realistic. Margot Robbie I get, but then there were rumors of Tom Hardy, Will Smith, even Oprah's name got dropped for the team's leader. All these names just seemed too high profile, especially for a movie like this.

And then another rumor dropped. Jared Leto as the Joker...

Again, I was pretty skeptical.

I wasn't quite sure it was time to bring back the Joker, and even if they did, would Jared Leto do it? He doesn't seem like the kind of guy that would do a comic book movie. The guy is more into independent and high caliber film, he picks and chooses what he does and it doesn't seem like its easy to get him into a project.

All that being said, if Jared Leto was to be the Joker, I would be a little bit more interested in the Suicide Squad then I was before. But it still doesn't negate the fact that the film still seems a little too good to be true. I mean Will Smith, Jared Leto, AND Tom Hardy? There's no way.

Well... apparently there is.

It was confirmed today (or yesterday?) that the cast of Suicide Squad is now confirmed and most of the rumors that were going around about people in the film are totally true and confirmed. This is one of the first times this has actually been the case. Usually with superhero films, a lot of rumors come out saying these people are being looked at, these people are in talks. But they always seem false. That's why the cast for this movie seemed so far fetched and would most likely end up in me being disappointed when the rumors ended up being debunked. But for some reason not this one.

The Suicide Squad has been announced. I've been checking almost everything and every source says it is confirmed now. The Squad will make up of...

Jared Leto - The Joker

Margot Robbie - Harley Quinn

Will Smith - Deadshot

Tom Hardy - Rick Flag

Jai Courtney - Captain Boomerang

Cara Delevingne - The Enchantress

There was also talk of Aiden Gillen playing Deathstroke, but there's also talks of Oprah Winfrey in it, so I'm still skeptical. 

But holy shit!

That is a stacked cast! Suddenly a movie that I saw as more of a filler until the Wonder Woman film I'm personally looking forward to probably the most, has become a very, very interesting movie. 

But let's take a step back first and talk about one more thing before we talk about the movie as a whole. 

They're actually bringing back the Joker.

It's been 6 years since The Dark Knight, and in my opinion, the best performance of The Joker by

the late Heath Ledger, a role that won him an Oscar post-humous. By the time the movie comes out it will be 8 years.

This is a bold move.

Its not as though Leto taking the role is going to tarnish the performance of Ledger, if he sucks I can always just go back to The Dark Knight and enjoy that performance, that's not what I'm interested in.

Its just the fact that if it weren't the Joker, 8 years would not be nearly enough time. 8 years isn't nearly enough time to really let the role resinate and jumping so quickly to another person playing it, I feel would be a little disrespectful. Here's my example. Take Ledger out of this situation. Say its the same scenario with Tom Hardy playing Bane. Say he gives a Ledger quality role as Bane, and then tragically dies. It would be in bad taste to have someone play Bane this close to that role. The difference comes with the character of the Joker.

The Joker is the most iconic Batman villain, no probably the most iconic villain in all of the DC comics. If DC is going to create this new cinematic universe, this universe needs to have The Joker, and it needs to have one that defines the new universe and the villains that are coming forth.

And this is actually where things get really, really interesting. Putting the Joker in, to me, means that DC is actually ready to starting playing this game with Marvel.

Are they even close yet? Not at all. But they're ready to make up some ground, and from what it seems, have a set path to make up that ground efficiently and in a great way.

The Joker signifies the one element that DC secretly has over Marvel, at least in the cinematic universe so far, and that is their villains.

Do an exercise with me. Its one I'm sure you've heard before, but go along with me, just for this. Tell me a phenomenal villain from the Marvel franchise so far. One that has had a diabolical plan, one that you found compelling, fascinating, and just well done? First villain that comes to your head when you think of an adversary that has taken on the best of the best of the Avengers?

If you said Loki, you're correct... Loki is a really well done villain. One that has evolved and continues to be a thorn in the side of Thor and the other Avengers. Tom Hiddleston rocked it in Thor, Thor 2, and the Avengers. He deserves the credit people give him.

Who's another?

The Elf guy from Thor 2? The Red Skull? (Maybe?) Jeff Bridges? That guy from Guardians of the Galaxy?

Now if you're thinking Thanos, stop it. Thanos has been in two movies. All we've seen him do is turn his head and sit on a chair. He doesn't count yet.

Now same question but for what could potentially be done in the DC universe?

The Joker, Lex Luthor, Doomsday, Brainiac, Sinestro... done right... A butt load of Batman villains too numerous to count. Zod, in my opinion, was a great way to start this universe out, there's so much more they can do.

And that's just the well known ones.

And that's where Suicide Squad suddenly becomes a very interesting choice for DC to go down. The Justice League has not been established yet. By the time this movie comes out, we'll see Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and Cyborg. And then you introduce a whole mess of villains? THAT SOUNDS AMAZING!

While DC is going to be rolling out an all-star line up to protect the world, they're also lining up an all-star cast of villains to make the need for these heroes even greater than before.

And that gets me to the movie as a whole and the casting news.

Of course Jared Leto being cast as the Joker is fascinating, but mainly in the sense that someone else has taken up the mantle as the Joker. I know Leto more by reputation rather than as an actor. I know he's been in some great movies, I'm going to be watching Dallas Buyer's Club soon as part of my McConaissance experience, a movie Leto won an Oscar for, but honestly, the only thing I know Leto from, well, is that angsty band he's in 30 Seconds to Mar. The guy is talented, but I don't think I've really seen that talent personally, more on what other people have told me.

Margot Robbie interests me in a similar way. She is picking up a role that ahs never been done and is a very beloved character. But she looks good for the role so I'm not complaining at all.

The role that really gets me though, is Will Smith as Deadshot.

Honestly, casting when I first heard it, really made me believe that this casting for Suicide Squad was all rumor and no real facts. This just seems strange to me. I don't know Deadshot that well, I'm not really familiar with his backstory. Its more the fact that Will Smith is in a movie like Suicide Squad.

I'm actually surprised that Smith hasn't been in his own comic book movie yet. I saw Hancock. While I'm not wild about it, I found it entertaining at the very least, and it got me excited for Will Smith in some kind of superhero role. I just didn't expect it to be someone like Deadshot.

I really hope he makes the role awesome and I commend DC for getting Smith before Marvel had the chance to. But again, I just don't really know if Deadshot is the role Smith was meant to play when it comes to superhero films. I really hope I'm wrong, I just don't see it.

The other role worth mentioning is Tom Hardy as Rick Flag...

I don't know who Rick Flag is... I looked him up on Wikipedia and I still don't know who Rick Flag is. His name sounds boring, he looks boring... God I hope he isn't boring.

Tom Hardy is an actor who I've seen do great things, but I just don't feel like I've seen him in anything at all. People say he's a great actor, I see him as the guy who did a decent job playing Bane, played a forgettable character in Inception, and a person I thought was going to play Apocalypse in the new X-men movies for a long time. However, I do think tom Hardy could do something a little bigger than a guy who looks and sounds as boring as Rick Flag...

And that's the part that makes me interested and incredibly cautious of the Suicide Squad.

On one hand, you've got the opportunity to create some of the most in depth and well thought out villains to set up for future movies. We can watch this film being hopefully with the feeling of, I can't wait till I see the Joker in future movies creating havoc for the Justice League. Or for Harley Quinn to return and do some damage.

But then you have people like Rick Flag and Captain Boomerang... what the hell?

Now I'm sure they wouldn't case these big name actors in parts like this if they didn't think they could rock the part, and if they wouldn't be marketable in the future. Does Rick Flag seem boring? Yes. Could he end up being awesome the way Bradley Cooper made Rocket Raccoon awesome? Absolutely. And that's why I'm so very excited for Suicide Squad.

The film has a real opportunity to capitalize on the villains of DC, really flesh them out, and make them all the more sinister and awesome in future films.

Suddenly Suicide Squad jumps into a movie that could be a game changer for DC, and I am more than excited.

I still can't believe we have to wait till 2016 to see this cinematic universe come to life. The only thing I can say is that if I am waiting this long to see Batman v Superman, and then even longer to really see this universe actually come to life (an approach I have always vouched for), it had better damn well pay off. Audiences had better come into Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad, down the road Wonder Woman, and be satisfied as hell when they come out. Something I have high hopes for. But I'm going to say something I've said multiple times. Zack Snyder and everyone at Warner Brothers, you have gotten me excited. You're supposedly going to keep me excited for another year before I see movies I am really, really excited for... All I have to say is...

And those are my thoughts on the new casting news for Suicide Squad. What do you think? Do you think Jared Leto is a good choice for the Joker? Do you think Deadshot is a good role for Will Smith? Comment and Discuss below!

I'll leave you with this. Since the only thing I know Leto from is his band 30 Seconds to Mars, I'm going to show the first music video I saw from them. This shit is old, its angsty, but it is good. Enjoy!

STAR WARS 7 TRAILER!!!!!

Okay. I told myself I wasn't going to watch this trailer. I said I was only going to stop at the casting news and that's it... but the minute I saw a thumbnail on someone else's wall of the trailer, I couldn't resist. My friend said it didn't give anything away, it was just awesome. I took his word for it... and what did I get?

Actual mind blown!

I just sat there in awe for a good thirty seconds before I watched it again... and again... and again... even while I'm writing this post, I'm watching it again and again, and again.

Though the more I watch it, the more I realize, nothing happens in this trailer... at all...

Literally, they show some stormtroopers, you see John Boyega. You see who I think is Daisy Ridley riding a speeder biker, all on Tattooine. You also see a cool ass soccer ball droid. Then you see who I believe is Oscar Issacs in an X-Wing, flying much faster then we've ever seen X-Wings fly...

Then we see a hooded figure walking in the woods, he stops and he draws a lightsaber... but not just any lightsaber, a cross-saber, a light saber with little blades sticking out of the side perpendicular to the main blade. All of this with a voice over saying, "There Has Been an Awakening... Have you felt it? The Dark Side... and the Light...

Then you see possibly one of the greatest flying shots of the Millenium Falcon flying over Tattooine. They get shot at by tie-Fighters. All to the glorious chorus that make me pee myself just a little.

All finished up by the classic Title with The Force Awakens. I never did a post on the new title for the 7th Star Wars film but its called The Force Awakens. For me its not that big of a deal when a movie has a title announced because frankly I've thought all the titles have been cool. Even the Phantom Menace, while it didn't make sense was a sweet title. A title doesn't tell me anything about the movie so why get worked up over it?

So nothing at all happens in this trailer. We are just about as in the dark as we were yesterday except this time, we know there is actually a Star Wars movie going to happen.

Its no longer an obscure cast sitting around a table for the first time, this is John Boyega in a Stormtrooper costume, Oscar Issacs in a Rogue Leader costume. Daisy Ridley... there.

And that's the brilliant thing of this trailer. It doesn't answer any questions I wanted answers to. Answers to questions like, What does Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher look like in this new movie, where is Luke? There is almost no connection to the older films in this movie, even the Stormtroopers look a little foreign...

And then you see those X-Wings, but its a very quick shot... then you see a lightsaber and you think, ehhh... maybe... AND THEN YOU SEE THE MILLENIUM FALCON and you start to cry.

They did a really good job with this trailer. Its showing, Disney has something new coming your way. This isn't going to be your old Star Wars... but at the same time, it is.

I don't know, maybe I'm reading into it too much. All I know is I have thirty more questions about this movie then before I came in. Why are there Stormtroopers? Why is John Boyega dressed as one? Why is there an astromech droid on a soccer ball? What's happening on Tattooine? What are those X-Wings flying towards? WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANYBODY NEED SMALL TINY BLADES ON THE SIDE OF THEIR LIGHTSABER? WHAT THE FUCK IS A CROSS-SABER?!?!?!

As you can see I'm so excited about this trailer. Is it the best trailer ever made? The nostalgic child in me screams yes. The critic in me says no. Again, its a teaser trailer. It wasn't suppose to give any answers. The point of it was to say, THERE'S A NEW STAR WARS MOVIE COMING OUT IN A LITTLE OVER A YEAR! GET EXCITED! COME SEE IT! That's all. And they got me.

Any doubts I had about bringing back a franchise that honestly, probably doesn't need to be brought back, any doubts I had about old Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, and Mark Hamill coming back to fight the dark side, any doubts I had about Star Wars being helmed by Disney, All of that OUT THE FUCKING WINDOW!

There is no doubt in my mind I will go into this movie excited, and with very high expectations. You bring back my childhood, you had better damn well bring it back the best way it can be brought back.

I have no idea what to expect, I have no idea what is to come, All I know is it had better be damn good.

If you're interested in the earlier posts I've done on the Castings, Cannon and other rumors, here you go.
Cast
More Cast!
Canon
Standalone Films

Needless to say I am so excited for this film, I am already on my fifth post talking about it.

Which means its unfortunate because I'm predicting this will be my last post on this movie for a little over a year until it comes out.

I told myself I was going to go into the new Star Wars films with no pretense. No spoilers, no hints at anything that is going to happen. I'm just going to go and see the movie for what it is.

I've already bent that rule by watching this trailer, but I'm lucky that this wasn't anything, again, nothing happened in this trailer.

I am going to stick to that from now on. As much as it will be painful, I will not watch, read, hear, anything more about Star Wars until I am sitting in the theater ready to watch the 7th installment. Now if I'm bored and want to start theorizing, I might, but it will be total conjecture, and not based off anything... which I don't usually do... so don't expect much of those.

But this way the movie will be even more the experience when I finally see it. So this is it. This had better hold me over till December. I'm going to be busting at the seems come that time.

So have you seen the new Star Wars Trailer? If not, scroll to the top and watch it! Let me know what you think. Comment and Discuss Below!

Pan and Jurassic World trailers

So before I go on, I should mention that it might be a little bit until my next review. I am in the middle of one of the last weeks of my time here in South Africa and part of that time here is writing a 40-60 page paper. I feel guilty writing anything other than that paper so there is a good chance you won't get another review until December...

Good thing December is 4 days away...

But, since I cannot seem to write a proper review of Die Hard (a review that may or may not be coming soon), I thought I would do a quick reaction post to the two new trailers that have come out in the past two days.

The first one I want to talk about is Jurassic World.

In all honesty, I don't have the emotional connection to the original Jurassic Park that a lot of people do. I've seen people react to it saying, OH MY CHILDHOOD IS COMING BACK! And I just don't feel the same way. I'm figuring out I had a very different childhood experience than a lot of kids my age, even kids I grew up with. While everyone else read Harry Potter and watched Jurassic Park I read Lord of the Rings and watched Star Wars... and when I say I watched Star Wars... that's ALL I watched.

Now of course, I have seen Jurassic Park since and I really enjoy the film. I think the music is great, the story is phenomenal, and the visual effects today are still pretty great. But when its 4th sequel is announced, ten years after a really shitty sequel, honestly I'm wasn't anymore excited that I would guess someone was who hadn't seen the film at all. Then I watched the trailer...

Honestly, I have mixed feelings on it. I think it looks gorgeous and I will no doubt see it. It just kind of fell a little bit flat for me. Here's the best analogy I can come up with (partly because I'm awful at analogies). Imagine you are really craving a Coke. You have been waiting for this Coke for a long time and its finally time to have this coke... And then you get it, and its flat, its not exactly cold. Its still good, it still fulfills that desire to have the Coke and yet its not quite what you wanted... that's kind of what the Jurassic World trailer was like for me. To me it felt as though I had to be a die hard fan of Jurassic Park to really feel this trailer and yet, I didn't quite feel like this was an adventure movie.

Look at the original Jurassic Park trailer

Now I know that trailers have changed since the 90's, but this movie made you feel like you were about to experience an adventure film. Sure there was a lot of effort shown on showing a little bit of the dinosaurs but just enough to get you to come. With this new trailer, we've seen the dinosaurs before, showing us dinosaurs is still going to look cool but its not going to be the visual experience Spielberg brought us on in 1993.

Therefore something new has to be added... and we don't quite know what that is yet.

The trailer does a really good job at building the suspense and not showing us the new hybrid dinosaur they created. However, I'm worried that instead of an adventure movie, this is just going to be a monster movie.

Honestly, I'm not one for monster movies. I never saw Godzilla, not that I heard bad things about it, I just wasn't interested. Frankly, after you've seen one monster movie, you've really seen them all. So I don't want Jurassic Park to be a monster movie. I want it to be a Jurassic Park movie. A movie that is an adventure... with Dinosaurs.

There are some pretty great things in this trailer. The dinosaur emerging from the water like Shamoo at Seaworld, and the look of the fully functional Jurassic World theme park looks phenomenal.

Another thing I'm looking forward to is Chris Pratt.

I love it when actors go through a change and start doing movies and TV shows you never would have thought they would do in the past.

You can tell I'm fascinated by the transformation of Matthew McConaughey, and my excitement for Chris Pratt's career is growing more and more. The guy was already kind of a Han Solo, goof ball character in Guardians of the Galaxy, if he can do this movie in the way that I think he's going to do it, I think the guy might be on the track to being the next Harrison Ford. That's a big statement and I don't want to bite my words later, but the guy looks badass in this movie. He's not Starlord, he's not a goofball lovable guy in this film, he's very serious, or at least he seems like he is.

The first thing that I thought of was that Pratt was channeling his inner Sam Neil and I love the idea of that.

There are kids in the film going to the park, there's Gwen Stacey from the 3rd Sam Raimi Spider-Man Film, all of that is really irrelevant. The trailer looks really good.

As long as it stays in the adventure category, I will be satisfied.

I'm excited for Jurassic World, I feel as thought if the film is done correctly and Pratt brings his new side out and develops it well, the film will be, at the very least, a medium success.

And that's really all I can say about it. I liked the trailer, it didn't blow my mind, but it got me excited for a movie I recognize and enjoy. Not as much as other franchises, but still, it should be a good film.

But the real kicker was the new trailer for the origin story of Peter Pan, simply called Pan.

I think that I had heard a little bit about this film but really not that much. All I heard was it was a movie about Peter Pan. I know there was a big deal about Rooney Mara, a white woman, playing Tiger Lily, an Indian, but that doesn't really seem to be a problem, at least from what I've seen in this trailer.

So this is suppose to be the origin story of Peter Pan and you can obviously tell they are taking a lot of liberties with this film. This does not follow the mythology that was laid down in the Peter Pan universe, but frankly, this trailer looks so cool, I don't really care.

If we're talking about an adventure film, this is the one I want to watch. Everything I've seen in this trailer just looks fantastic.

The obvious thing to talk about is Hugh Jackman as Blackbeard. He's not Captain Hook, he's Black Beard.

The guy just looks bomb as hell. I already love Hugh Jackman. The guy has proven himself to hell and back that he is a quality actor. I didn't even need to see a trailer to know that he's just going to be fun in this movie.

Again, he's Blackbeard, not Captain Hook. Hook is instead played by Garrett Hedlund...

Now the only thing I really know Garrett Hedlund from is Eragon... I don't really speak of that movie at all. However, Hedlund was not the bad part of that movie. He was in 4 Brothers but honestly he wasn't the good part of that movie either. Here he's taking on the role of Captain James Hook... I really hope its a good part. I saw a video earlier today kind of cautious about the fact that Peter and Hook are friends in this film. Obviously something will happen and Hook will loath Peter because of it. Because isn't that a novel idea, have the good guy and bad guy be pals before they become mortal enemies and that'll make it even better when the bad guy bites it in the original film...

Okay so the more I think about it, the more I'm realizing that that is becoming an overused trope. It happened in Oz The Great and Powerful, which I didn't hate... I also didn't love it.

The good thing is that if this movie is a success and Hedlund rocks it, it could be a breakout role for him. Maybe that's wishful thinking, but this movie looks really freaking good.

Its going to be hard to shine as Hook, especially if you're competing with this...

God, Hugh Jackman is going to be phenomenal...

Other parts of the trailer worth mentioning.

Visually, this movie looks spectacular.

I hate to compare this again to Oz: The Great and Powerful but that movie seemed very trippy and very Alice and Wonderland. In short, it was a Disney Film through and through. Again, not a horrible one, just very CGI and didn't feel like a real place.

Something about the tone of this film gives it that family adventure feeling to it but just isn't quite the same cartoony feeling. There's some great scene in this trailer where people are pulling off some Cirque du Soleil shit that could be a little terrifying but at the same time, it just has that perfect Peter Pan feeling that I got from the original novel. Its not exactly as bright and colorful as the Disney cartoon you grew up with but if done well, I could see this being a really, really fun movie that I feel like I'm going to enjoy the hell out of.

I love the Peter Pan world, from the cartoon, to the play, to one of my favorite Robin Williams movies ever, Hook.

The 90's created a lot of things... not all of them good. But Hook has to be one of my favorite movies of all time. And its because it delved into the world of Peter Pan so much and I feel like this new film has the opportunity to take me to Neverland again, and I am very excited.

The other things worth mentioning are Rooney Mara as Tiger Lily... I actually don't think I've seen Rooney Mara in anything... yeah... I haven't. I know she's in some movies I intend on seeing like Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and the Social Network, but I actually have never seen her in anything.

I'm sure she'll do fine. Hopefully the Indians in this movie are done with taste so people don't get too pissed off about it.

The kid who plays Peter looks like he could actually be really entertaining. I don't usually like kid actors and if the movie centers around them, its hard for me to really watch. But then again, its freakin Peter Pan. They gotta get a good kid to play such an iconic role. The guy who is playing Peter is named Levy Miller, he's a new comer. I'm really looking forward to see if this kid wows me.

Now all of this is just conjecture. Trailers do not mean that the movie is going to be good. There have been many a movie that the trailer said the movie was going to be one thing and then movie turned out to be something totally different.

All I'm saying is that these two movies are two movies that are not Star Wars, and not a comic book movie that I am actually really looking forward to. I think out of the two I'm actually looking forward to Pan a little bit more but both are coming out around the same time so maybe I'll do a post around summer of next year coming back to these films and letting you know which one was better and if any of them were good.

But those are my thoughts on the new trailers that came out this week. Let me know what you think of either of them. Comment and Discuss below!

I'll leave you with this. Because I think in this "contest" Pan was the trailer I was actually looking forward to the most, here's a cracked video talking about Peter Pan... Enjoy!

Hunger Games: MockingJay: Part 1

I think the thing that was different about this film was that I had read the book about a month ago. The story was very fresh in my memory, as opposed to the other two films where I remembered what happened but I was still with the story of the film and where it went.

The other problem with this is that since it is a two parter, they have the ability to get pretty in depth with the material they're working with.

This review is going to be sort of a comparison since that was very much how I viewed the film and I want to say a few words about the Mockingjay book. But in the end its going to be a film review.

Before I begin, here are my two reviews of the films prior, in case you need context.
Hunger Games
Catching Fire

Mockingjay Part 1 starts off almost right after the last movie. Katniss (played by Jennifer Lawerence) has been extracted from the 75th Hunger Games and she is now free and protected by District 13, the District everyone thought was destroyed. Instead they are moving forward with their resistance movement against the Capital with the uproar started by Katniss's actions in the last film. The uprising is lead by District 13's President Alma Coin (played by Julianne Moore)

There still really isn't an explanation about what happened to District 13. I'm realizing now that if you haven't read the book you're probably wondering... where are they? Where's District 13 and why does it look like Zion from the Matrix? It probably is the best its explained in all three movies that have come out but its still iffy.

Coin and the double agent game maker, Plutarch Heavensbee (played by the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman) want Katniss to take on the role of the Mockingjay, the face of the revolution.

Meanwhile, Peeta Mellark (played by Josh Hutcherson) is a captive of the Capital and being used as a figurehead for influencing a ceasefire. Katniss is unsure whether or not he's being forced to do so or not. Finally she agrees to be the Mockingjay if they rescue Peeta.

So the entire film is Katniss riling support for the resistance and doing PR for District 13. At first she's not very good at it but when they put her in the field and actually film what she does, they make these videos and paint her as the Mockingjay.

Its really fun to see the unintended pitting of Peeta and Katniss against each other. He's being used as the mouthpiece of the Capital. She's being used as the mouthpiece of District 13. Having read the book, its fun to see where that goes.

Now the one problem I have with the book is that Katniss is never really in battle. This resistance is going on, there's a civil war happening and Katniss is underground, shooting propaganda films, or having her love triangle drama. (I'll get to that in a second). You don't really get the feeling that there is actually a war going on. And I think that's a part that the movie had more freedom to do more with.

The book is restrained to Katniss's perspective, its told in the first person so she's not going to see the revolution happening. But with the movie, they're able to show this war going on. You're able to actually see President Snow be the evil dictator.

That was the part I was so happy to see that they improved on. Donald Sutherland actually brings it in this movie. Maybe its just he's doing more instead of talking blankly with a rose but he's actually intimidating in this movie. Sure he's still evil just for being evil and for me that makes him kind of bland as a villain, especially if he looks like Santa Claus. But at least in this film he was menacing. At least in this film you saw him order the bombing of a hospital. At least in this film you had the stereotypical dystopian future where the masses are in the rain looking up at a screen with their dictators face in front of them. I actually believed that President Snow was an asshole that needed to be eliminated. In the other films he was just an old man. Sure, I knew he was putting pressure on Katniss and is only power hungry but I never actually saw him be menacing, or evil. I was just told he was.

Which is a shame because as far as the book goes, he's barely in this story. And again, that's where the movie was able to take some liberties and improve the source material.

Talking from a reader's perspective, that's what the movie really does, improve on the source material.

The third Hunger Games book is really, really not that great. Like I said before, for a change of pace and setting the book within the revolution, there's a lot of sitting around and talking. The action scenes are few and far in between, and Suzanne Collins really isn't that great at writing action scenes.

Now the first half of the book, I really didn't mind that much. Its more the ending but we'll get to that when the next movie comes out. But I think that this movie really did some work on the story and kind of improved it, or at least adapted something boring and made it interesting. The book is better at foreshadowing tensions between Katniss and District 13, how she's being used by President Coin the same way President Snow used her.

But at the same time, the movie does a really good job at flushing out great parts of the book and expediting parts that were not as good. Katniss is suppose to be pretty fucked up from all the Hunger Games and experiences she's been through. Now this was really flushed out in the book but there's really only one scene where she's off her rocker. There are parts where she breaks down that are really good and really show Lawrence's acting ability, but they're not overplayed and she's still a very capable character in this film.

For a film based on the first half of a book where not much happens, a lot happens in this film. That was really great to see.

As far as individual performances go, there's a lot to talk about.

 Let's talk about J Law. This is her role. The woman can act, she returns to the role of Katniss like riding a bike. If you would have told me that Jennifer Lawrence, that chick from the first Hunger Games film was going to be this great of an actress. I would have laughed in your face.

It is now difficult to distinguish Katniss from Jennifer Lawrence, but the great part is, Jennifer Lawrence will not always been glued to Katniss. With her Oscar in Silver Linings Playbook, her great work in American Hustle and a shit load of other films, J Law has a very, very bright future ahead of her. Its really amazing how big she's gotten in such a short time.

I remember when she played Mystique in X-men: First Class... she wasn't that great. But she's worked at it. She's gotten a lot better since and its just fun watching her now.

So that's pretty much all I have to say about her. She does a really, really good job. Plain and simple.

Now similar to the first half of this book, Peeta isn't in this movie very much.

So... I can't really say that much about Josh Hutcherson in this film. I'm excited to see where he goes in the next film because shit goes down and he has a very, very big development.

I'm excited to see where that goes.

Now one that I will mention, and this really isn't Hutcherson's fault, but he's suppose to be in the Capital's captivity, and he's suppose to be malnourished and lose a lot of weight... now I'm not sure if they photoshopped him looking all sickly and stuff, and its serious stuff... but I couldn't stop but smile and think that Josh Hutcherson just looked like a bobble head. Again, not his fault the computer's aren't good enough and you have to be insane to actually lose that much weight and look that malnourished... Although its been done before.

In short, it just looked a little bit funny. Hutcherson did a good job for what he was given. Nothing spectacular but nothing horrible.

But then you have this motherfucker...

What a complete waste of space.

If you've read my Hunger Games reviews, I've mainly said that J Law and Hutcherson really got comfortable with their roles and really made the second movie their own. They developed their characters and really did a good job.

Liam... I mean was the guy even in the movie?

I've done a lot of reviews with movies with Liam Hemsworth and I give him a lot of shit because he's the brother of Thor and Chris Hemsworth is just so much better of an actor, but its fucking true.

The guy is just something pretty to look at. I refer back to The Onion's Review of Catching Fire but even in the parts that are suppose to be touching and moving as Gale looks over his destroyed District 12, its just kind of boring. In the book there is a lot of tension with Katniss and Gale as Gale is becoming more and more enthusiastic with the revolution. But in the movie, he's just a soldier. He picks up a crossbow at one point and shoots a target. He shoots a plane. He joins SEAL Team 6, I frankly just don't care what happens to him, he's just a piece of eye candy.

Woody Harrelson returns as Haymitch... he's fun in this film. I think the movie is probably lacking in scenes with him... in fact a lot of scenes just go on without him even in mind... Hmmm, never thought about that. But Woody Harrelson is so good it doesn't matter. When he's on screen its fun.

Julianne Moore as President Coin is an interesting case because she's not quite revealed yet. I read that Moore is looking forward to taking the character to a new territory, territory that again was limited by the book's first person narrative. I see the seeds of her becoming a really fun character in the next movie. I'll talk about that in a little bit.

Phillip Seymour Hoffman returns as Plutarch Heavensbee. Its kind of weird seeing him on screen since he has passed but it makes me really appreciate the guys work. Is Plutarch Heavensbee the role of the century? No. But Hoffman plays it well. Nothing spectacular but it doesn't necessarily have to be.

There are a couple other roles worth mentioning. Commander Boggs is played by that guy from House of Cards. Sam Claflin returns as Finnick Odair, although his part is very small in this film, good but small. Elizabeth Banks comes back for a change in the story from the book that makes a ton of sense. That guy from James Bond is back to play that one guy from the second film.

And then there's Natalie Dormer

Sure she's not the biggest role in the film. She's the director of the propaganda films. And while Dormer won't be the thing that everyone talks about with this film, this film does show promise for this Game of Thrones star.

I've seen up to the third season of Game of Thrones and I really like Dormer. I'll reserve judgment on her until I see her start getting into more and more movies, but for now she's on my radar of actresses to watch. She should have a pretty good career in front of her.

Now as far as the love triangle goes, the movie actually takes a step back from that. While the triangle was stressed in this film because Katniss is able to be with Gale but wants desperately to save Peeta, its incredibly underplayed. Katniss already seems to have made her choice and it really doesn't seem like its Gale in this film.

Needless to say, it underplayed and thank god for that. I think the popularity of the Twilight Series has finally been shed off of the Hunger Games and its not become something a lot better than that. While the books play off that love triangle, I think the movie knows there's more to the books than that and there's no need to overplay it.

Something I liked but would want to see more of is a development of the world around them. Sure we know the land is divided into districts, we know the Capital is evil, District 13, for the most part is good. But when they go to District 8, they just go to an interchangeable bombed out city.

It is fun seeing different parts of the revolution done in different districts. And honestly, I want to see more of this revolution happen, something I think will hopefully be flushed out in the next film...

But thats the difficulty I have with this movie. Its that it is the first part of a larger movie.

Since its all the rage now to split the last film in a series into two parts, of course this movie was split into two parts.

Now, like I said, this has its benefits. The movie is able to elaborate and really flush out the intricacies of the book. And I think this movie does that and it does it well.

I suppose the movie did what it was suppose to do. It's suppose to get your excited for the final conclusion coming out a year from now.

But the downfall to that is that since the movie was good and I want to see the rest of the film, I don't feel like I watched an entire movie. I feel like I watched half a movie. That's why this movie is hard to review for me. Its really just building up to the conclusion but I have to wait an entire year for that. I don't know, something about it just seems incomplete. And again, this both a compliment and a detriment to the film. It does a really good job setting up what will happen with President Coin, it does a good job at pointing where the film is headed. And yet I feel like I missed something.

Which is strange because the movie ends in a pretty concise way. It sets up for the next film, but as far as conflict and plot goes, it wraps up pretty well. And that's the confusing part. This movie stands on its own and yet it doesn't feel like I watched a full movie... its hard to explain.

Without belaboring it, Mockingjay Part 1 is a good film. I enjoyed it but felt a little bit incomplete, and for good reason, its part 1. Maybe its a little bit of a tease being that I have to wait a year to get closure on this film, but its good and definitely worth watching.

But have you seen Mockingjay Part 1? What did you think? Did you feel it was its own movie or just half of one? Comment and Discuss below!

I'll leave you with this. Sorry if its not the greatest video but apparently Woody Harrelson didn't know Liam and Chris Hemsworth were brothers... Woody Harrelson is the best. Enjoy!

I'm having some trouble getting videos on the blog right now... my wifi isn't that great. But I can get a link which is almost better. Here's SNL on the Hunger Games, Enjoy!

SNL Hunger Games!