Star Wars The Force Awakens Trailer Reaction

So... I broke my rule again.

I had kind of forgotten that I told myself after the last trailer that I wasn't going to watch any more trailers, will not read anything more into the story or anything for Star Wars: The Force Awakens...

But then I saw Han and Chewy in the thumbnail and I couldn't resist.

So the new Star Wars: The Force Awakens Trailer dropped yesterday and after I saw it, there was nothing to make my day bad. I was in a good mood for the rest of the day.

Its freaking Star Wars!

So this is another teaser trailer which I was happy about. I think the less they share about this movie, the more I will be amazed in December when I'm in the theaters watching it, the more enjoyment I will get out of this film.

The truth is, there's just too many great shots in this trailer. I think I loved almost every moment of it.

I mean... god damn that's just pretty. 

And then you have a voice over of Luke from Jedi saying, "The Force is strong in my family. My father had it, I have it, my sister has it, You have it too."

All while a shit load of images that are just too awesome go by. 

You've got Darth Vader's burned up helmet. You've got what I can assume is Luke putting his awesome robotic hand on R2-D2. You've got him handing a woman a lightsaber that is or looks a helluva lot like Anakin's lightsaber which Obi-Wan gave to Luke, but he also lost.

After that voiceover, you have X-wings flying up and Oscar Isaacs doing the classic Star Wars WOO HOO! with the swell of John Williams in the background. It was that moment that the trailer had me. Something about John Williams just gets me every time.

But then you just have shit load of awesome images from this crazy Sith dude.

To images of John Boyega and Daisy Riddley running and the new Storm Troopers

Something worth mentioning in this trailer is that, along with the Storm Troopers looking different

than in the past, a look I'm still kind of getting used to, the Empire symbol in the background is not the traditional symbol of the Empire we've seen in the past. Which makes me believe that the Empire is not what it used to be.

Its very possible that, in order to survive, they are messing with crazy Sith dude from above and the Empire is going to be more evil than we could possibly imagine.

Lots of other cool images. more Daisy Riddley, more John Boyega. Some shots of Tie fighters, Chrome troopers, all that good awesome shit. And then of course... There's the money shot.

Again, everything in this trailer is amazing that I am convinced that they could have had a 5 second shot of anything. The crazy Sith dude doing his force push thing, The storm troopers doing their turning bit, even the shot of the little soccer ball droid poking his head around the corner and I think people, myself included, would go nuts. 

But its this shot with Harrison Ford and Peter Mayhew, in Chewbacca garb and everything, and Han Solo saying, "Chewy, We're home!" It just made me lose it. Again, its the reason I was not match for this trailer and there was not a question that i was going to watch it. 

In short, its amazing. 

The more and more I see of this movie, the more and more I'm excited about it. 

I've already written a lot of stuff on this movie so far so if you need a reference here you go

Cast

More Cast 

Canon

Standalone Films

First Teaser

Something that has always been a theme throughout all those posts however has been the slight reservation I have of these movies. I used to have a lot more reservations about this movie, but the more I see, the more I'm proven wrong. 

Worried about the original cast? Han looks phenomenal. 

Worried about J.J. Abrams? I think the last trailer might have made me a little bit worried that this was now J.J's Star Wars, and it definitely is. But there was something more familiar about this trailer. It definitely has a different feel to it, but I think seeing Han and Chewy just made it a little bit more familiar. 

There's a lot of things I could say that I'm worried about but those worries are going away every time I see that trailer. I think by this point I am 99% sure this movie is going to be amazing. The last 1% can only be assured by the movie itself. 

In short, I'm ready for December. 

Thor

Every time I think about this movie, I always think of this...

Gets me every time.

But how does Thor compare with the rest of phase one films of the Marvel Cinematic Universe?

Honestly, the first three movies of Phase One are... okay. Iron Man is good but probably overhyped sometimes, especially when we're thinking in retrospect. The incredible Hulk, I think is better than people say it is, but still pretty mediocre. And Iron Man 2... well that movie is just bad anyway you look at it.

Thor sets itself apart from the other movies in the Marvel franchise as the beginning of the film takes place in another world, not Earth.

The beginning tells the tale of Norse Mythology and how Asgard, the home of Odin (played by Anthony Hopkins) is real and there was once a war between the Frost Giants and the Norse Gods.

After the war where Odin was victorious, he raises his two sons, Thor (played by Chris Hemsworth) and Loki (played by Tom Hiddleston) to be powerful men born to be kings.

The two are both bred to be king but there seems to be a competition between them.

Fast forward years, and Thor is being named King of Asgard. At the same time a group of Frost Giants attack Asgard and try and steal back a weapon taken from them in the war with Odin. They fail but Thor believes they should march into the home of the Frost Giant and teach them a lesson.

Against the will of Odin, Thor takes his group of Merry Men and Loki into the home of the Frost Giants and basically start an interdimensional incident.

Odin saves their lives but banishes Thor to Earth, taking away his hammer Mjolnir. Before throwing the hammer into banishment along with Thor, he declares that nobody shall lift the hammer of Thor unless they are worthy.

It is on Earth that Thor meets a team of scientists, led by Jane Foster (played by Natalie Portman). Foster and her partners, Erik Selvig (played by Stellan Skarsgard) and an intern Darcy (played by Kat Denning) are researching interdimensional physics... or something like that, and are fascinated by the warp storm that brings Thor to Earth.

What eventually comes out of the relationship between Thor and Jane actually opens up a really interesting concept for the Marvel Universe. The idea that there are multiple worlds that people can travel through.

These three are kind of the human element of the movie and get to react to Thor's reactions to our world which are actually kind of funny throughout the film.

Are they the best characters? No, but they needed to have some kind of human element and a love interest for Thor and I say you can't really go wrong bringing Natalie Portman into your franchise... that is unless she's dying of a Broke Heart.

The whole interdimensional element of the Marvel Universe ends up playing a larger part in the later movies, especially in Thor: The Dark World, but for this film, it was a great way to introduce the character and explain how someone like him can exist in our universe.

I like Jane and Erik in this film but that's mainly because I know Natalie Portman and Stellan Skarsgard are good actors. While they're not exactly written very well, I enjoy their acting.

Now you can't talk about this film without talking about the main villain, probably one of the only good villains in the Marvel Universe so far, Loki.

Now Loki in this film is... okay.

I find it a little odd that Odin has two sons that he claims to care for both of them but he deliberately pits the two against one another and almost assures that one of them is going to resent the other, especially since Loki is revealed to a be a Frost Giant and is only the adopted son of Odin.

The truth is though, Loki, as sympathetic of a villain as he is, he's kind of a loser. He takes advantage of Thor who was kind of a meathead to begin with, manipulates him to do the actions that got him banished, takes over the throne of Asgard, double crosses the Frost Giants, all to make his father who neglected him proud. Again, it actually makes Loki pretty relatable as he only wants the approval of his father, but his plan just doesn't totally make sense. I don't know, I love Tom Hiddleston as Loki and he's a lot of fun in this movie.

But while that's going on, lets talk about what exactly happens in this movie.

I have to give Kenneth Branagh credit. The guy is a talent director.

This is mainly because he made a really entertaining movie about a god coming to Earth and hanging out for a day or two.

And it really does a good job at making me care for a character who was arrogant but became worthy to get his power back in a matter of days and he only becomes humble because he realizes his power is actually gone.

So the plot is a little bit thin.

The truth is probably that Marvel told Kenneth Branagh that he had this much time to knock out a Thor standalone film for the Cinematic Universe. We needed a movie to introduce him, get it done. I can't exactly say what could have been done to make this movie better but regardless, it still is one of my favorites from Phase one. Marvel decided to go back to actually telling a story and get away from the blatant cross over hints.

That being said, that doesn't mean that they're not in there.

I mean seriously. What was the point of Jeremy Renner in this film? Did it introduce the character? No. I think as a kid I thought it was really cool because you've got this new character that is going to be in the Avengers and we get a hint at him early. But the truth is, Hawkeye didn't do anything in this film. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

I was glad that they actually made Coulson have a part in this film as opposed to his role in Iron Man 2 which was just there to hint at the Avengers. And at least they kept Nick Fury to the end of the film.

In the end is Thor a great movie? Oh god no. I mean not a lot happens. Thor gets banished. Can't pick up the hammer, makes a sacrifice, gets the hammer back and comes back and beats the bad guy. Its pretty straight forward.

But the thing I like about Thor is that it opens up the idea that a superhero doesn't have to be from Earth to be cool, to be interesting. I would not be surprised if DC does a very similar thing with Wonder Woman as Marvel did with Thor mainly because its a similar concept. Wonder Woman is an Amazonian Princess, apparently daughter of the Greek Gods, it might have a similar flare to it.

But Thor is entertaining enough. I really like Chris Hemsworth in the role. I really like Tom Hiddelston, and I love Kenneth Branagh's direction. I'm hoping that it was the case that he made do with what he was given and it ended up being really good in the end, in my mind.

If you disagree let me know. Comment and Discuss below! Or shoot me a tweet on Twitter @cmhaugen24 and follow me to get updates on movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. The Nostalgia Critic did a video a while back looking into why people love Loki. It utilizes both this movie and the Avengers, its an interesting idea on the character. Enjoy!

Iron Man 2

So I think my plan was to sit down and watch all of the Avengers films leading up to Age of Ultron. I started with Iron Man, then The Incredible Hulk, and I was actually doing a really good job. I definitely thought I was going to make it through all the films and give some kind of insight into the Marvel films leading up to Age of Ultron.

Honestly though, I think I was dreading watching this film and that's why I didn't watch it and that's why I probably won't make it through all the films before I see Age of Ultron. I mean it is only four films as I have watched and reviewed a lot of the phase 2 movies. We will see.

Anyways, let's talk about Iron Man 2. Just a disclaimer, you may find it that I can't exactly describe the actual plot of Iron Man 2 because to be honest, this movie is all over the place.

Its a little bit after the first film and Tony Stark (played again by Robert Downey Jr.) is preparing for the Stark Expo, a conference for inventors and innovators to release their new technology. It was an event set up by Tony's father and Tony wants to add it to his legacy. Furthermore, Iron Man has been fighting bad guys for a while now and things are going pretty well. I won't comment on "longest peace in US history" as I'm not totally sure what that means but whatever.

Tony is however subpoenaed by the US government and asked to turn over his Iron Man suits. Tony quickly tells them to shove off and that there won't be anything that can match his Iron Man suit for another ten to fifteen years.

Behind the scenes, though Tony is probably flying higher than he ever has before, there is a down side as the power cell in Tony's chest that is keeping him alive is actually poisoning him. Tony is dying.

At this same time, a Russian... physicist? named Ivan Vanko's (played by Mickey Rouke) father dies and Vanko constructs a power cell very similar to the one in Tony Stark's chest, keeping him alive. Apparently it was technology that Ivan's father actually developed with Howard Stark, Tony's father.

Vanko finds Stark at Monacco and... well I'm not totally sure what he tries to do in this scene honestly.

I mean I get that Vanko feels like Tony stole his father's technology and shit like that but is he trying to kill Tony? Is he trying to show off his whips? What is Vanko doing in this scene? Was this his end game? Cause if it was, it was a pretty shitty end game.

Tony quickly defeats him and he goes away for a while. First in prison, then has his death faked and goes to work for a rival of Tony's Justin Hammer (played by Sam Rockwell).

Now before I talk about Hammer, and my god, there is a lot to talk about with Hammer. I do want to talk about Mickey Rouke as Ivan Vanko.

Apparently, the final product of Iron Man 2 was much different that what was actually suppose to happen. Jon Favreau actually had a plan for Iron Man to be a trilogy that was a lot more connected then these films actually ended up being. Ivan Vanko was going to be a much more developed character. Mickey Rourke put his heart and soul into this character, getting the accent down, doing a lot of work and it just kind of got hacked to pieces by the end of the production. The result has made Rourke talk smack of Marvel ever since. There's a couple examples of this like this interview of Seth Meyers and this interview here.

I don't doubt that Mickey Rourke had something that was really good at one point, but unfortunately, whether it was his performance, or the creative team at Marvel and their editing of the final product, Whiplash unfortunately is really one of the worst Marvel villains, and that is saying something because Marvel has never been good with villains.

I mean at the end of the film, what is Vanko doing? Is he just trying to kill Stark? Is he trying to create terror in the city? Like what is his goal here with all his drones? I mean you look at Abomination from The Incredible Hulk.

Shitty villain yeah. In comparison with a lot of the villains from other films, he's not that good.

But at least his rampage at the end of The Incredible Hulk kind of made sense. At least he was driven mad by the Hulk serum and he "wanted a proper fight" or something to that manner. At least I had an idea of what Abomination was doing in this film, even if it was not a very interesting or compelling reason and more of just a way to get the Hulk fighting something his own size at the end of the film.

What is Vanko's motivation? Why does he create an Iron Man suit with whips? Why does he create drones for Hammer at the end of the day? Whats his goal? Maybe its to kill Tony, but that's never made clear because this movie chose not to give a shit about Ivan Vanko. That is why he's probably lower on the list of Marvel villains (no matter how low the standards for that list are).

And then there's Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer.

My god, Sam Rockwell was awful in this film.

I'm not sure if they were trying to make him the poor man's Tony Stark or just an asshole but what they got was just a weird pathetic attempt to give something for Tony to fight.

In everything that I've read on Iron Man 2, Justin Hammer is suppose to be the rival to Tony Stark and Stark industries, but in this movie he's more like a loser that can't quite be as good as Stark. He's always being overshadowed by him. Which would work if it ever seemed like that, if Rockwell wasn't acting like a dumbass the entire film.

Also, between Rockwell and Rourke, I'm not even sure who the main villain of Iron Man 2 was suppose to be. If it was Rockwell, well that sucks cause he's just a corporate loser who can't quite compete with Tony Stark, and if its Rourke, why did he spend half the movie just dicking around until the end?

Again, horribly written.

So overall you have Vanko trying to get revenge on Tony, Hammer trying to outdo Tony, Tony dying, this expo, and then on top of it all, you have the government trying to get their hands on the Iron Man suit... which they do. I suppose the compelling part about all this was that its suppose to put tension in Tony and James Rhodes "Rhodey's" (played now by Don Cheadle) relationship, but I was never convinced these two were great friends, even in Iron Man one, this movie didn't change that perception.

And then on top of all of that, what was this scene all about?

Like why was Nick Fury even in this film? Personally, I think this movie ruined Nick Fury. I actually think I'm going to write a separate post on that.

And then you've got Scarlett Johansson hanging around just to look hot. And then you've got Coulson in this this film for ABSOLUTELY no reason. Like he only has two scenes, doesn't do shit, and then leaves right away. Why was he in this film at all?

Oh yeah... right... The Avengers

For some reason, at this point in time, Marvel thought that we had forgotten that itty bitty scene at the end of Iron Man 1 where Nick Fury shows up and says I want to talk to you about the Avengers initiative. Marvel thought we forgot about that post credit scene where Tony Stark is talking to the General from The Incredible Hulk. 

Marvel thought we forgot The Avengers were coming. 

In the last Iron Man film, Coulson was in the movie for a reason, he actually contributed and wasn't just there to be a teaser for the Avengers, even though he did a good job at doing that either way with the nod to SHIELD. 

All the hints at the Avengers so far had been at the end of films or very subtle hints. 

Its like Iron Man 2 was just a huge teaser trailer for this new connected universe that was coming and after Nick Fury shows up, after Black Widow reveals herself, after Coulson refers to "some stuff" meaning going to do Thor, and after he raises an obvious Captain America shield this is my reaction. 

It would be one thing if these tie ins made sense. Like there was a reason Tony would have an unfinished Captain America Shield, or it made sense for Nick Fury to be the one to talk sense into Tony after he goes on a collision course for almost no reason. And further more, I wouldn't mind these tie ins if the story wasn't an all around mess.

I kind of mentioned it before but you've got Tony dying, you've got Vanko, you've got Hammer, you've got Black Widow showing up, you've got the military trying to get their hands on the Iron Man suit, you've got all this stuff coming together and it just doesn't come together.

This movie is suppose to be about Legacy. When Tony knows that he is going to die, he actually goes on a self destructive course. He does this despite the fact that when Whiplash shows up, the US immediately starts to question his ability to keep them safe and whether or not he's a person worth trusting such immense power like that of the Iron Man suit to.

Whereas the Tony from the end of Iron Man 1 would have probably gone out and done everything he could to settle accounts, right wrongs, protect his family, all while keeping the arrogant attitude we know of Tony Stark, this movie has him peeing in his Iron Man suit, putting people's lives at risk by fighting at his birthday party, and driving in a race in Monaco. Does it make sense? No. At no point is Tony thinking about Legacy until it comes to the point where it doesn't matter anymore. Instead of progressing in this film from the change he had in the last film, Tony regresses back.

Are there good thing about this film? Sure. The action can be pretty good sometimes, the corporate warfare and the development of drone Iron Man suits, while confusing, is kind of cool. And on top of it all... I mean Scarlett Johansson is pretty hot.

But this movie is so bloated with hints at The Avengers, that it sacrifices actual story and development with the theme to focus on okay action, okay effects, and a horribly structured story.

I would like to think that Marvel has learned from its mistakes made in Iron Man 2... maybe. The critical responses to Iron Man 2 were actually really good. Maybe its just the retrospect, looking at what has come out since that makes me scratch my head when somebody could say this this movie was good, but I know that I really didn't like it.

This is something I wanted to explore as I started looking at Marvel films leading up to where we are now, less than a month away from the second Avengers movie.

The franchise is at an all time high, more and more characters are being introduced. I would say its being done pretty well so far and I'm really optimistic about the plans going forward. But was the path to movies like Captain America: The Winter Soldier as great as we remember it? I would argue no, its not.

Now would I say that Iron Man 2 was better than Daredevil. Oh god yes. I think while I don't think this movie is as good as Marvel movies I have been accustom to recently, I think this, Incredible Hulk, and the original Iron Man are leaps and bounds from where superhero films used to be.

But that's something that I will probably assess as we come closer to the end of Phase 1. Only two more movies, two movies I actually think are my favorites of phase 1, at least how I remember them.

But those are my thoughts on Iron Man 2. Hopefully it all made sense. Give me your thoughts in the comments below. Does this movie hold up five years later? Leave a comment or shoot me a tweet @cmhaugen24 and follow me on Twitter to get updates on movie news and more reviews.

I'll leave you with this. A new trailer for Ant-man came out. If you've been keeping up with my blog, you know I wasn't wild about the last Ant-man trailer, I'm still out on this one, maybe I'll do a post on it, maybe not. Here's the trailer, give me your thoughts. Enjoy!

2 Fast 2 Furious

It was pretty obvious that this was going to happen. The Fast and The Furious was a decent success, and the use of 2 in the title of its sequel had to be too tempting to pass up. I still have yet to decide if I'm actually going to get through all six movies. I'm also wondering if I'm going to do Tokyo Drift after this one or go chronological order and go straight to Fast and the Furious. Let me know in the comments which one you think I should do.

But anyway, onto 2 Fast 2 Furious.

The story takes place after the first film and Brian O'Conner (played again by Paul Walker) is no longer in the police force. Apparently letting a felon escape isn't really looked highly upon by the LAPD. I think the beginning of this movie really made me look back at that decision and think it was kind of silly. I mean Brian only hung out with Dominic for a little bit in the first movie and he's willing to leave everything behind and start a new life by letting him go?

Anyway, Brian now has street racing friends in Afro Ludacris and settles in Miami. He's a pretty well renown street racer all until the cops catch up with him.

He's brought in but the US Customs Service gives him a deal. Help undercover agent Monica Fuentes  (played by Eva Mendes) take down a drug lord (played by Cole Hauser) and his record will be wiped clean.

In order to do the job, O'Conner needs a partner and he chooses his childhood friend and former convict, Roman Pearce (played by Tyrese Gibson) to join him on this buddy cop action adventure.

Once again, the Fast and The Furious franchise was really banking on people thinking that street racing and cool stunts would make the franchise good over a really substantive story. I don't mean to say that the story is bad, but there was nothing about it that really captivated me.

I did like that the story was a little bit more focused on organized crime instead of stealing something like parts for cars or something like that. But again, if you're not really into every bit of action taking place in a car, you may be a little disappointed by 2 Fast 2 Furious.

I did like the relationship between Roman and Brian, there was a sense that these two had a relationship prior to this movie and it was kind of fun to have a sort of buddy cop element to the franchise. I suppose if they wanted to create an entertaining sequel to the first Fast and Furious movie, a buddy cop movie might be the next step.

Now I'm not saying that 2 Fast 2 Furious is bad, or that its good. Really its just a mediocre film. I think enjoyed it alright, but there was nothing about the film that made me really remember it.

I think the most memorable scenes were really inconsequential to the entire movie.

Like this moment.

Okay he didn't hit anybody but still, the relationship between Fuentes and O'Conner really doesn't go anywhere and all this scene does is show a kind of cool scene that probably should have ended the way that gif above does. 

Furthermore, Brian driving backwards to flip Roman the bird, while cool, didn't have anything to do with the story, it was just that. Cool. 

Now don't get me wrong, there are a lot of action movies that that happens, where they put in a stunt or a scene just because its cool and it adds to the whole cool factor of the film. 

But where 2 Fast Goes wrong is that all these scenes lead up to absolutely nothing. Sure it was cool to see Brian drive in reverse but I'm more focused on the story than the stunts that are just there to be cool. So at the end of the day, I don't remember those stunts. And if I do, that probably means the story wasn't that good. 

Which it wasn't. 

Now from what I know of the other films, I've heard that 2 Fast definitely isn't the worst. Its not the

best, but its not the worst. And from my own experience, I would say 2 Fast 2 Furious is probably just as good as The Fast and the Furious. Now that doesn't really mean anything when both films were pretty mediocre to begin with but I enjoyed the first film and I enjoyed the second film.

Do I think that these two films warranted five more films after it, No I do not. But that's what happened so that's neither here nor there.

The bottom line is, both films are mediocre. They are your standard action flicks, they just happen to think that car racing is the shit and use every single opportunity they can to throw in street racing. Now I know that that doesn't end up working out for them in the end and after the third or fourth film, they really kind of throw that out the window in return for the Rock.

But for now, I can say, 2 Fast 2 Furious is okay. If you're looking for an early 2000s action flick to watch in the background or at a time when you want to turn your brain off, its probably a great choice. But as a film, its nothing spectacular.

Do you agree? Comment and Discuss below! Or follow me on Twitter @cmhaugen24 and tweet your thoughts. Also get your movie news and reviews from me as soon as their up.

I'll leave you with this. One of the coolest scenes from the movie is when Brian and Roman jump a car into a boat. Cause... you know, that's cool. Enjoy!

Daredevil (2003)

So yesterday, no shit, I woke up, looked at the date, saw April 10th and my immediate thought was, OH SHIT, DAREDEVIL IS COMING TO NETFLIX. I of course am talking about the TV series, not this movie. Now I've had seen most of Daredevil coming into this viewing. I knew that the movie was not that good. Now I had heard that the director's cut of the film added a little bit more to the film and therefore made the film a little bit more bearable. So I thought I thought I'd give this film the benefit of the doubt, let it give me its best shot to impress and I will pass judgement after I had seen the ENTIRE movie from beginning to end.

Daredevil came out in 2003, a time where superhero films were still in a state of not knowing quite what to be. The first Sam Raimi Spider-man had come out a year prior to this film and had done pretty well and I assume had been green lit for a sequel. Everyone wanted to have a film that could spawn a sequel and Daredevil was no different. But it was also a time when superheroes needed to be dark and gritty. While Sam Raimi's Spiderman was fun, Daredevil, Punisher, and Blade were all dark, and because of this, not as entertaining to watch. And to top it all off, this movie caught Ben Affleck at a year which I would say it probably his lowest year of acting. I think with the exception of Paycheck, which I actually enjoy, this movie and Gigli are probably considered two of his worst films he's ever done.

Let's take a look into Daredevil.

Daredevil centers on the story of Matt Murdock. While the movie starts off with a horrible flash forward then flash back thing, it really starts when Matt is a kid and shows the relationship between him and his father (played by David Keith), a boxer with connections to organized crime.

After a horrible accident with hazardous material, Matt is struck blind. However, while he is blind, his other senses are heightened to superhuman ability and has a sort of radar vision.

In the movie its really kind of a rip off of "the one" vision from The Matrix but that's neither here nor there. I would say it kind of negates the fact of him being blind. What the movie does it put you in the eyes of Murdoch and shows you how his other senses make him able to basically see but in kind of a blue matrix-y way.

At the time it might have been a cool visual, but it kind of makes me think that Matt Murdoch is blind but its more "blind".

Anyway, after learning to master his new abilities, almost instantly, Matt's father is murdered when he doesn't throw a fight. Its really kind of a blue collar Bruce Wayne storyline.

After this, Murdoch decides that he must be the one to serve justice when the corrupt system cannot.

Fast forward when Matt has turned into "blind" Ben Affleck and Matt is now a defense lawyer with his partner Franklin "Foggy" Nelson (played by Jon Favreau), looking to defend the innocent, despite the fact that that doesn't exactly pay the bills.

 Here's what I'm going to say about these two. A little bit more of the lawyer angle is added to the Director's Cut as there is an added subplot, and the fact is, these two are awful lawyers.

Franklin Nelson can't hold a courtroom without Matt, Matt never shows up because he has commitment issues, or something like that. I mean I get that totally innocent people can't usually pay but damn, these guys don't deserve the fluke they get. They're really awful.

That being said, the subplot of Coolio being accused of killing a hooker does kind of tie the story together a little bit better, it does touch one something that I think the television series (from what I've seen) does better.

But because these two are awful lawyers, this allows for Matt to dawn the red devil costume and seek justice for those who did not get it from the system.

Now I've always thought Daredevil's costume looks a little silly. Maybe its the leather, maybe its the mask, something, but I've never liked the costume, at least in this film.

In the beginning of the television series, he has a sort of ninja looking costume that I really like. I want them to stay with that costume for the entire time because the red really doesn't do anything for me.

Now the way that Daredevil distinguishes himself from other superheroes is that he is totally cool with letting a rapist be run over by a subway. He's okay with dolling out his own justice when the system is broken. Now this could have been a really good moral question. Who gives him the right to dole out this justice? What does this do to him as a person. There's a couple scenes where Matt is saying to himself, I'm not the bad guy. I'm not totally sure if this is the movie trying to develop those moral questions some more but it really doesn't go anywhere... at all. At the end he doesn't kill the Kingpin, even though the Kingpin is probably the only person he would want to kill and his reasoning is, "I'm not the bad guy". What the fuck does that mean? It could have really been an opportunity to learn more about Murdoch as a character, but nope.

The also do the same thing with Murdoch as a character. Him picking and choosing their clients, only choosing those who are actually innocent is an interesting moral stand. It deprives them of monetary wealth but if I don't know anything about the moral compass of this character, I just see that as stupid. Furthermore, apparently Matt is afraid of commitment or something like that? There's a couple scenes where you hear on his voicemail that he is this distant sole that nobody can crack, but then its just thrown away. I mean what are you going to focus on here? His moral dilemma of killing criminals? His bad lawyering skills? Or the fact that he can't commit to anything.

...Unless you're Jennifer Garner that is.

And that's another thing, the movie can't focus on a theme, it also can't decide which storyline to focus on. The very second we get any development with him and Elecktra, there's a scene of Bullseye and Kingpin (oh don't worry, we'll get to them). When there's a break in the case of Coolio, they jump over to Daredevil doing vigilante shit.

Now I will concede that some of that is due to the director's cut and the fact that the Coolio subplot was cut for time but as I'm watching it, I do see some connection, but at the same time there really isn't. There isn't any connection between Murdoch moping over the city saying, I'm not the bad guy to Elecktra's father being murdered. There's doesn't seem to be much of a connection between Joe Pantoliano running around trying to figure out who Daredevil is to Matt being Daredevil.

But anyway Matt smells Jennifer Garner come into a cafe and asks for her name. She doesn't give it to him, he follows her to a play ground and what we get is probably the weirdest fight scene I've ever seen in a superhero film.

There is no surprise in this scene, no question at any point how in god's name a blind guy is able to do these incredible things. And on top of that, its really a dumb fight scene.

I think the movie was really trying to be Matrix-y and it just turned out looking really stupid. Its a hot chick fighting a blind guy at a playground. There had to have been one guy at Fox Universal that said, "hey... maybe this scene is incredibly stupid".

Obviously not as Elecktra and Matt start a relationship that came out of flipping no where.

Now to the plot I guess.

Michael Clarke Duncan plays Wilson Fisk (aka Kingpin) and he wants to control all of New York's organized crime. Now from what I understand, he feels he can't do that with Daredevil running around, therefore he hires a hitman, Bullseye (played by Colin Farrell) to come and do hitman-y stuff.

Now, by villain's standards, these guys are actually not horrible... I mean Colin Farrell is but I'll get to that in a second.

Let's start with Kingpin. Casting the late Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin I think was a brilliant choice. Its more how he's written that isn't that great. He's mainly the bad guy because people say he is. He kills people sure, but he doesn't have any huge plot that he actively pursues, he just kills people. Which don't get me wrong is bad, but he doesn't actually do any incredibly main villain-y things. There's no plot being uncovered, with the exception of the murder of a prostitute. I don't know, I think Michael Clarke Duncan did a good job with what he had, but he really didn't have that much to begin with.

And then there's Colin Farrell. And my god, Colin Farrell is bad in this film. Again, I think its mainly a matter of a poor script. But I think Colin Farrell just said fuck it with this film and went over the top to the nth degree. His lines are horrible but he's just fun to watch. I really hope, with all my faith in Colin Farrell as an actor, he knew this script was bad and he just decided to have fun with it regardless but going all the way.

Well anyway, Kingpin orders the hit on Elecktra's father and Bullseye kills him. Due to the circumstances, Elecktra believes Daredevil did it and vows revenge.

The rest of the movie is, Daredevil and Elecktra fight, Elecktra wins. Elecktra and Bullseye fight, Bullseye wins, Elecktra dies. Daredevil and Bullseye fight, Daredevil wins. Daredevil and Kingpin fight, Daredevil wins. The end.

This movie is so sloppily put together that I can't tell you an overarching plot of this movie besides Daredevil versus Bullseye.

The structure of this film is its greatest weakness. It runs on the assumption that as long as you get a guy in a ridiculous costume fighting another guy in a ridiculous costume that people are going to flood to the theaters and enjoy this film.

It doesn't work like that.

The reason Marvel and Fox (now. Not during this film) is so successful is because they are creating stories for these characters. Iron Man is more than just a guy in a mechanized suit, he's Tony Stark who is an interesting character who fights evil in an Ironman suit. Its not the punches or the action these people do, it what they do as characters that is interesting. Has Marvel always done it perfectly? No. I would say that upon second look at their phase 1 films, some of them really aren't as great as people say they are. But I can say that because we've reached a point in comic book films where we expect the rich story provided to us by Captain America: The Winter Soldier, or X-men: Days of Future Past. We expect the entertaining characters of Guardians of the Galaxy, and when we know what good is, its easier to point out something like Daredevil for being just awful.

Now... the question you've all been waiting for.

What does this mean for Ben Affleck becoming Batman next year?

I'm not gonna say Ben Affleck was good in this film. He wasn't. Affleck was really phoning this one in, hopefully because he knew how bad the script is. And the script is bad. Again, I said that this movie's biggest downfall is the script. There really wasn't anything that could be done about it. I think that even if Affleck brought his A-game, this movie still would have tanked and Affleck still would be questioned when it was announced he was playing Batman.

The hope here is that Affleck learns from this incident how not to make a superhero film and how not to be a superhero. I think people are right to be skeptical about Affleck playing Batman because the truth is, this is exhibit A.

I would say the biggest thing that I didn't like about Affleck in this movie was that he was just down right boring. To use the television show as a comparison, Charlie Cox plays Matt Murdoch as an interest character who has this dark side to him when he dawns the ninja costume and becomes Daredevil, but he doesn't monologue dark depressing thoughts when he's Daredevil, and when he's Matt Murdoch, he's quiet but at the same time he's witty and actually a fun guy, when you can get a moment with him. I've only seen a couple episodes of the show but so far they've really done a good job with Matt Murdoch.

Now, I haven't seen Ben Affleck acting as Batman. I've seen him in the costume... kind of and I still am skeptical to be honest. However, the hope is that the script for Batman v Superman is good because I think Affleck can act if given a good script.

I don't know, what do you think? What do you think of the 2003 incarnation of Daredevil? Do you think it will tarnish Affleck's Batman? Comment and Discuss below! Also shoot me a message on Twitter @cmhaugen24 and follow me to get updates on movie news and reviews.

I'll leave you with this. Here's the honest trailer. Enjoy!

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt

Oddly enough, I finished Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt in a matter of days. I didn't really mean to, my parents mentioned it and said my sister enjoyed it. I was just coming on to Spring Break so I thought, why the hell not?

What I did not know is that Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt is a show created and produced by Tina Fey.

And suddenly, everything made sense.

While I don't think 30 Rock is the most hilarious show that has ever hit television, I did have a long time where I just binge watched it for hours. I personally love almost everything Tina, and Tracey Morgan do. Alec Baldwin is becoming just a hilarious guy all around in more and more things. Overall 30 Rock has a special place in my heart.

And that's especially true with its style of comedy. I call it, The Fey.

Its a very obscure humor that is very dry and slides in incredibly funny bits that you have to be paying attention to, along with the usual jokes and humor signature to Tina Fey's writing. Overall, she's very good.

And unsurprisingly, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt has that same kind of humor.

Unbreakable stars Ellie Kemper (Erin from the Office) as Kimmy Schmidt. At the beginning of the show, her and three other women are rescued from a bunker in which they were held captive by a leader of a cult. (You later figure out, played by Jon Hamm).

The women are instantaneously local celebrities and known as the Indiana Mole Women. They had been in that bunker for 15 years and were not aware of the world that had gone on above them.

Its at this point that Kimmy decides to leave the rest of the group and go and experience life in New York City.

The joke of course throughout the entire show is that she's been living in a bunker for 15 years and doesn't know the intricacies of life in 2015.

Along the way, she becomes roommates with a gay failed actor named Titus (played by Tituss Burgess), gets an insane landlord (played by Jane Carol), and an insecure wealthy trophy wife boss (played by 30 Rock's Jane Krakowski).

Now personally, while I grew to like Tituss Burgess, Jane Carol and Jane Krakowski's characters, I really felt like this show probably should have focused on Kimmy and the other mole women. They really only show up at the beginning and at the end, but that is actually where the show gets very, very good. Kimmy is very much the leader, taking care of the others. There's one mole woman who is indoctrinated by their captor, one mole woman who doesn't speak English, and another who can't really make decisions for herself.

I get why they wanted to focus on Kimmy going out into New York, but I almost feel like her with the other 3 was where a lot of the comic gold was.

The best way I can describe this show to someone would be to say, "You know Erin from the Office, well imagine that exact character, don't change anything about her, got locked in a bunker for 15 years and started working for Jenna Maroney from 30 Rock, also don't change anything about her, and had a gay roommate.

For me I think the show had a lot of elements going for it, and a lot of elements running against it.

While I like the actor Titus Burgess, I'm not totally sure I really liked Titus as a character. He just always seemed like the over the top gay man which, don't get me wrong, this stereotype does exist, but I think the time of that being incredibly funny has passed.

The show also had some oddly racial central jokes that while I don't think were trying to be offensive, or were being more satirical than anything, maybe didn't land as well as they could have. Its kind of like Get Hard, I don't know if the show is incredibly bold for making such odd and offensive jokes, or they're just dumb and trying to be bold.

And then they really wanted to drive home the fact that Jane Krakowski is actually Native American...

I mean... c'mon

But I think the fact of the matter is that Tina Fey has always been restrained by network television, maybe it was time for her to go a little bit farther than usual for her jokes. Some of them went just the right amount farther... others, not so much.

I think a prime example of this was her and Jerry Minor playing the prosecutors of the Reverend near the end of the series. 

In reading more about the series, the joke is that these two are incompetent and supposedly trying to satirize the lawyers in the OJ Simpson trial. 

I'm not exactly sure what OJ Simpson has to do with prosecuting the leader of a cult and I really don't think this bit worked. I was getting really excited for Fey's cameo... and it just didn't really work out for me. I just didn't think these two were funny. 

So again, I think Fey has moments where she's very good in this series, and especially times where she's very clever. I read an article on how this show is kind of bringing back humor from Arrested Development where there is the humor for those just casually watching, and then there's the humor you have to look for and I actually really like that comedy. 

Do I think Unbreakable is going to get renewed for a second season? Maybe? I mean personally I'd like to see some more Arrested Development on Netflix, especially to make up for that fourth season, but I would probably watch another 13 episodes. That was a nice thing, the season went by really quick and I didn't feel like it was overly long or too short. It felt just right. So for me, if Unbreakable doesn't get renewed, I'm not going to cry over it. I think it did what it set out to do and I think it did it pretty well. I'll actually probably go back and watch it once more in the near future just to catch onto the jokes I missed, but overall, I'm not gonna rave about this show. I think 30 Rock was a little bit better. 

But what do you think? Comment and Discuss below and let me know what you thought of Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt? Or you can shoot me a message on Twitter @MovieSymposium and follow me to get more updates on movie/tv news and reviews. 

I'll leave you with this. Of course, I couldn't finish this review without talking about the theme song. Put every criticism aside, I love the opening theme to this show. The cool thing is, it was created by the same guys who do Autotune the News. And personally I love it when there are success stories of guys just having fun on the internet. And they really did a good job with this theme. I still go back every once in a while and listen to it. Here is the theme, Enjoy!

Black Sheep

The first time I saw any clip from Black Sheep, I honestly thought they were deleted scenes from Tommy Boy. Later on I realized that this was a real movie and it came out about year after Tommy Boy. I mean why not capitalize on success right?

For a long time, I thought the plots of the films were very similar. It wasn't until it came out on Netflix that I decided to take a look and see how different the films actually are.

Black Sheep is the story of Mike Donnelly (played by Chris Farley). Donnelly's brother, Al (played by Tim Matheson) is running for governor of the state of Washington and Mike is becoming more and more of a problem as the election comes up with his clumsy antics and Farley-like behavior.

His campaign manager (played by Timothy Carhart) tries to advise Al to make Mike go away for a little bit until the election is over. Despite Mike's attempt to be helpful in his brother's campaign, he just keeps screwing up. They need someone to take care of Mike until the election is over and that person ends up being Steve (played by David Spade) a campaign aid who wants to succeed in Al's future administration.

After a series of events, Mike needs to lay low and the two of them escape to a cabin in the woods.

Honestly the rest of the movie is a bunch of hijinks that display Chris Farley's physical humor in the middle of the woods.

And unfortunately, the movie does seem like its just a lot of deleted scenes from Tommy Boy. Yeah there are a couple parts where he's trying to help his brother win the election, but its a problem if I used to turn this film on and think that it was just scenes I missed from Tommy Boy.

What's weird about this film is that they actually try and pull out some of Farley's acting chops. There are a lot of points where he is legitimately sad or distraught over things that happen to him and the people he cares about. On top of all of it, David Spade doesn't really reprise his role of being the smart short guy who criticized Farley for being a large oaf. Spade is actually on his side for the majority of the film and doesn't really lose patience with Farley at all.

And honestly, while I think the movie was trying to differentiate itself from Tommy Boy, that was something they could have ripped off. The part where Tommy and Richard are fighting is actually a really funny part and that doesn't really happen in this film. Mike and Steve really just become friends and that's it.

Honestly, I watched this film a couple months ago and I've been meaning to write this review for a while. The honest truth is that the film really isn't that memorable. It might be a great example of how Farley can make things really really funny if he has a spanning wood line and a log cabin, but in the end this movie really doesn't resonate with me the same way Tommy Boy did. The villain is pretty bland, his brother is pretty forgettable and while I love the duo of Spade and Farley, to me, Black Sheep will always be the scenes that didn't make it into Tommy Boy.

Don't get me wrong, if you like Tommy Boy, Black Sheep is a great way to get some of the same laughs just watching Farley be Farley. And there are some good parts of the film.

Gary Busey is in this film and oddly enough, he's a lot of fun. Not nearly memorable as he should have been but I think if you have a night free and just need a good laugh the only way Farley knew how to do it, Black Sheep might be the way to go.

As a movie though, its not that great.

I'm realizing that this is probably a shorter review than the movie deserves, especially since its been a couple weeks after I actually watched it, but I thought I'd get this review out and let you guys know about Black Sheep and my thoughts.

What did you think of Black Sheep? Where does it stand in the list of Chris Farley films? Comment and Discuss below! Or shoot me a message @cmhaugen24 on Twitter and follow me to get updates on movie news and reviews!

I'll leave you with this. Its a short video for a short review and I know that some people were Wisconsin fans last night that got heart broken when they lost to Duke. In case you didn't know, Matt Foley loves the Wisconsin Badgers. Enjoy!