The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What was really good was the acting of Josh Hutcherson.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And then there was Jennifer Lawrence.

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

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

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

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

But what do I mean by this franchise peaking?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hear me out on this.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Man From UNCLE

So I did actually see The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 2 before I saw this movie, however I did just finish it and I wanted to get back in the habit of writing posts as soon as quickly as I could after the actual viewing because that just provides for a better analysis especially if it is fresh in my mind. I promise my review of Mockingjay Part 2 is next, if not being posted tonight, but I thought I should give you a fresh review right now and get to Mockingjay in a little bit.

Back in the sixties, there was a show by the name of The Man from UNCLE. The show centered around a spy organization that utilized the expertise of multiple countries, most prominently, the Soviet Union and The United States. Being the sixties, this was a new concept because the two were basically sworn enemies and any kind of alliance between the two would be preposterous. But it provided for a show that was on the air for four years.

Now, up until this movie came out, I had no idea that this show was actually a thing. I am quite younger than the 60s and have not seen most shows that came out in the sixties. I have not seen The Man from UNCLE. I have nothing to compare it to, and therefore will not have any comparison.

The funny thing is, I don't think too many other people have seen that show either. And if there happens to be anybody who has seen that show, they watched that show about 60 years ago. I'm sure there are people who have watched it since its release but I can't imagine there is a huge fan club that begged for a movie version of this show.

The Man from UNCLE follows the story of two spies for the CIA and the KGB. Henry Cavill plays Napolean Solo, a former thief who was apprehended by the authorities and recruited into the CIA.

On the other side you have Illya Kuryakin (played by Armie Hammer) an agent with the KGB.

These two were the main reason I was interested in this movie. While I really enjoy Henry Cavill in his role as Superman in Man of Steel and the upcoming Batman v Superman, I don't feel like he has a huge filmography and I want to know what he can do beyond Man of Steel. I think that he is a talented actor from what I've seen and this movie definitely helps that case.

Furthermore, I've never really seen a lot of what Armie Hammer has done and I wanted to see him in this movie. I think I always had an unwarranted thing against Armie Hammer because his name was down for Batman for such a long time and I didn't want that because I didn't see him in the role.

Seeing this, I actually could find myself being a little bit more interested in that, however, I'm glad it didn't pull through. However, I do want to give him a little bit more of a chance and I think this was a good place to start.

From the beginning, these two find themselves at odds with one another going after the same target. A girl located in East Berlin during the Cold War. They begin as enemies and it really shows the dynamic between the two of them.

They of course are both trained killers and the best of the best in their respective organizations however they are very different. Solo is more of your suave charismatic type, whereas Kuryakin is your brutish silent killer.

I kind of mentioned it in my review of Spectre, but both are a style of Bond. Solo is a little bit more the Roger Moore or Pierce Brosnan Bond (exactly how I would expect him to be) and Kuryakin is more your Daniel Craig brutish type. Both can pull off the other's speciality, but one is better than the other in some respect.

Anyways, once Solo rescues the girl from East Berlin, the two spies are brought together again but this time are forced to work with one another in order to find the girl's father and stop a nuclear warhead from getting into the wrong hands. The CIA and the KGB working together in order to save the world, putting their best agents together despite them despising one another. Sounds like a popcorn flick to me.

The first thing to say about this movie is the performances. I already touched on the dynamic between Cavill and Hammer and its done very well. These two are really two sides of the same coin but they couldn't be more different and they clash so well that it makes for some really funny lines and really funny sequences.

The girl they use for this operation (played by Alicia Vikander) while not horrible, isn't exactly the best part of the movie. Its not like she can't act or anything, I just thought that they put more time into her weird relationship with Kuryakin and other parts of her story that it kind of took away from what was really good in this movie, the dynamic between Cavill and Hammer. The rest of the cast is your pretty generic spy villains and characters. Again, Gabby (Vikander) isn't bad. She does have an important part in the story and putting everything aside, she's not bad to look at either. But I just didn't enjoy her as much as the other two primary characters.

That is of course with the exception of Hugh Grant. In every review I've read or seen of this movie, everyone says that Hugh Grant really steals the show at the end and its the truth. I wish that this movie had had more of him instead of Vikander and I think I would have enjoyed this movie a lot more than I already did.

It really kind of bums me out because I remember when this movie came out and nobody went to go see it. Which is a shame because it really does have a style of its own and I feel like I had more fun going to this movie than I did going to Spectre believe it or not. I liked both movies but this one just felt like it was more playful and light hearted whereas Spectre was dark and bruiting with oddly timed jokes in it.

Now the ending of this movie suggests a sequel, I don't know if it will happen, especially with the performance at the box office this movie had. However, I did have a lot of fun with this movie and that's something worth mentioning.

The problems I had with this movie is partly something I actually liked about the movie and that's the direction of Guy Ritchie.

While I'm not overly familiar with what makes a Guy Ritchie film a Guy Ritchie film, I do know that this is a style of movie that I'm not totally sure works with a spy thriller movie.

While not nearly as big of a stylistic change, I kind of had moments where I thought, I guess this is what a spy movie directed by Wes Anderson would be like. Though the two have very different styles, this movie is done in a way that is more focused on the moment and the comedy in that particular moment than in the action.

Therefore, the action is stylized in a way that is different and little bit more artsy than I expected. If we're comparing it with Spectre (which you shouldn't) Spectre definitely had better action whereas Man from UNCLE was more stylistic and creative. Now that's not a bad thing, it just wasn't what I expected and might throw you for a loop if you're looking for an action filled spy movie.

Again, its sort of a double edged sword. It works if you go into it thinking you're going to watch a Guy Ritchie film, it might pull you back if you go into thinking you're going to watch an action spy film.

The dialogue is also very sharp. Its a lot of fun when you pay attention. Is it ground breaking? No. Its just good. You probably shouldn't go into this movie thinking that the dialogue or the action is going to blow your mind. Its not. Its just going to be good.

And that's probably the take away you should take from this movie. Its good. Its an entertaining movie with a lot of fun humor, action, and a fun story. Is it groundbreaking? No. Is it bad? Absolutely not. Its just not flashy or different enough to really push its way out in front of the pack. With all the spy movies that came out this year, it will probably be pushed aside and forgotten about, which is a shame because if you're not comparing it to anything, it is a fun movie. However, its just not a movie made for competition.

I can't say enough how much I enjoyed the performances by Hammer and Cavill as well as the surprise delight of Hugh Grant. The rest was pretty okay. Not bad, not good. Just okay. I think if we were giving it a grade, I'd probably give it a C. And you may think that's bad, but I've gone my whole life thinking Cs were middle of the pack good enoughs. Man from UNCLE is pretty much good enough and middle of the pack. Not bad, but not exceptional.

I don't know if it would have made a difference, but I don't think they should have called it Man from UNCLE. I know its based off of the show, but like I said at the beginning, I don't think there was a fan club of the TV show just begging for this movie to be made. And I don't think the marketing should have been so focused on how this was a reboot of the show. I think it should have been marketed as a run of the mill international spy thriller comedy made by Guy Ritchie. Its bound to find some way to make itself stand out, but I feel like some of the drawback could have been them trying to tap into the nostalgia... even though there wasn't much nostalgia to begin with.

But those are my thoughts on The Man from UNCLE. What did you think of it? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for future reviews I should put on the blog. If you want updates on future movie news and reviews, subscribe and you may even get live tweets of movies I am watching a more.

I'll leave you with this. I feel like sometimes I say good things about female actresses, like Vikander in this movie, and always mention she's attractive. I don't know if anybody has an issue with the fact that I say that, but I don't want to appear sexist or only focused on looks. I try to focus on actress's talent more than their looks but sometimes I just can't help it. So I thought I'd even it out by saying out front, Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer are quite handsome looking gentlemen. I wanted to put a video of them reading the phonebook sexily but I'm still figuring out which videos I can put on here and which ones I can't... so here's them playing never have I ever. Enjoy!

Spectre

I feel like I’ve been apologizing a lot on this page recently just on my lack of posts. In case you didn’t know, I recently started a full time job and some other personal issues have come up and this blog has unfortunately taken a little bit of a backseat. I saw Spectre about a week or so ago and I feel like I had a window where releasing this review would have been perfect, especially with all the James Bond movies I watched leading up to it. I’m hoping to be more consistent and I’m flirting with the idea of more content, especially video reviews and more. So stay tuned please.

Well here it is guys. I can’t say I prepared for this movie as well as I probably could have. In a matter of days, I watched Goldfinger, Die Another Day, and Quantum of Solace… probably not the best movies to represent the James Bond franchise, let alone all together. Regardless, I wasn’t worried because I really do love the Bond franchise and I was excited for Spectre nonetheless.

The first thing that I have to say is that regardless of your thoughts on Sam Smith’s Bond song, I actually really loved the opening credits for this movie. I have been listening to the song Writings on the Wall a lot recently so that may have had a little bit to do with it, but I thought the visuals and the graphics used in that opening sequence were really good.

Spectre takes place not long after the events of Skyfall. I mentioned in my review of Quantum of Solace that I would have actually been interested in Bond going rouge and seeking revenge for what happened in Casino Royale apart from MI6 all together. Well it turns out, going rogue is pretty much what happens in Spectre as Bond receives a cryptic message from M (Judi Dench) from beyond the grave. Her message leads Bond on an investigation of the shadowy organization called Spectre. And eventually the key to uncovering Spectre is by protecting a woman (played by Lea Seydoux) connected to the organization and foiling their plot to gain more power over the world.

Now that’s a really tight and clean synopsis for a movie that is a little bit bloated and just full of plot holes.  But I wanna talk about the good things about this movie first because truth be told, I did like it. I’m realizing I may say some things about this movie that will make you think that I did not like this movie, I definitely did. I just think it could have been better.

First off, I think it was a smart move for the new Bond franchise to bring in Spectre. I’m not a huge Bond buff so I really only figured out a lot of the lore behind the franchise in the past few weeks, but Spectre is a secret evil organization that has become the main antithesis of Bond’s existence. And this movie does a pretty good job at setting up Spectre as a future threat to Bond, MI6, and the characters I’m starting to really enjoy.

The one thing I’m worried about is the consideration that perhaps Spectre doesn’t really fit in the universe of the new Daniel Craig Bond, but I don’t necessarily agree with that. I just think it could potentially be an issue in future movies, and that has a little bit to do with the execution done in this movie… however, I’ll talk about that after I start talking about the good things.

I think one of the first things that I want to mention about this movie as a whole is that I didn’t see anything wrong with the performances. I will talk a little bit more about Daniel Craig, but beyond that, I thought that all the performance, even Daniel Craig’s were good. I liked Lea Seydoux, I liked her character and I thought she gave a good performance. It was great to see Raph Finnes return as M and he had his opportunity to shine and work into his new position. I liked Ben Whishaw as Q, I liked Moneypenny. And then when you get into the bad guys, again, I thought the performances were very good. I really liked Dave Bautista a lot and what they did with his character.

And then there was Christoph Waltz. Now before I say anything more, I thought Waltz’s performance was good. He was a great choice for the main villain. I personally have figured out that it doesn’t matter if it’s a movie like Django Unchained which I did like or a movie like Inglorious Basterds that I actually (to some people’s dismay) could have done without, you’re not going to get a bad performance from Christoph Waltz. There are probably movies out there that he hasn’t done a very good job, I just haven’t seen those movies.

And I’m not gonna beat around the bush with this one because you should know who Walt’z character is. If you’re well versed in the Bond franchise, the big reveal of who he is shouldn’t come as any surprise. And if you’re not versed in the Bond franchise, the reveal of who he is won’t mean anything to you.

He’s Blofeld. There I ripped that band aid off.

And performance-wise, I think they chose a very good actor to portray Blofeld. Blofeld is arguably the most iconic Bond villain and if you’re going to have anybody be that character, why not Christoph Waltz. My problem with it is, they really don’t utilize him as much as they should have. I will Waltz credit for utilizing every single scene he was in very well. But it was almost bitter sweet because even though he was only in about 3 scenes in the movie, he really did a good job and I wanted to see more. More that I probably won’t get for another 3-4 years till the next Bond movie comes out. I just think they could have done more with him in this movie.

I think the best example of what they did with Blofeld in this movie can be akin to what they did with Khan in Star Trek: Into Darkness. They really banked on the fact that people knew who Blofeld was and because of that, didn’t show as much of what was so great about that character. When they reveal that he is in fact Blofeld, I was half expecting Christoph Waltz to look over at the audience and say, did you get that? Because it was the same reveal that they did in Star Trek: Into Darkness. And the issues I had with that movie stand with this one, they were more basing his character off of his reputation as opposed to what he actually does in the movie.

The other performance worth talking about of course is Daniel Craig. Now, I’m not gonna say that Daniel Craig didn’t give a good performance. Every time he is Bond, I’m entertained. He just fits in the role that its just down right entertaining.

But I almost feel like he’s a little bit past this franchise at this point.

Craig’s Bond has always been stoic but I’ve never gotten more of a feeling that he was bored than I do in Spectre. And again, I don’t want to bash too much into Craig because some of this movie didn’t give him much to work with script-wise. But there were a couple moments where I was looking for something more from Craig and he just didn’t give it.

Last thing that I’ll mention is the fact that this movie is shot very well. The action sequences are a lot of fun, there are a lot of cool tracking shots, it’s a well produced movie… almost too well.

Sam Mendes, the director, prior to Skyfall was really only known for American Beauty. He didn’t have much of a background in action films and that’s why I think some people were surprised when Skyfall was so good.

With Spectre however, the movie while shot well, almost felt like an art project more than it felt like a James Bond action movie. A good example is the very beginning. There’s a strange opening sentence printed on the screen before the movie actually starts. Its like The Dead are all alive, or Dead Men Tell no Tales, or something stupid like that. Then the movie begins. That opening line about death has nothing to do with the rest of the film and if I wasn’t so confused by it the first time I saw it, I probably would have forgotten about it.

And the cinematography wouldn’t have been something I’d be commenting on, if the script didn’t seem like it was trying to be more than it actually was as well.

I tell you, this movie has a lot of plot holes. And I don’t know if the movie was trying to be artsy, or meaningful, or what, but it was just uneven and fell flat in many crucial moments. The humor, while not the worst thing ever, was kind of stupid and almost goofy in a series of movies that have traditionally been pretty dark with some dry humor sprinkled in. This one had jokes and they were bad. I had a lot of moments where I wondered why I was laughing at a particular spot. It just didn’t seem like the right humor for a Bond film.

But on top of all of that, there were just too many moments that didn’t make a lick of sense outside of, this is what the plot needs. There’s a part where Lea Seydoux’s character says she’s leaving because she can’t be apart of James’s life and she can’t expect him to change for her. Bond just kind of looks at her, and then they go about their business like nothing happened. And yeah, it’s a horribly acted scene but it was also obvious that she was going to be captured. Its moments like this that make the movie a little bit too on the nose and take away from the performances of the actors because their characters are doing stupid things for the sake of the plot.

And while we’re on the topic of Bond and his new girlfriend, while I liked both these two’s performances, I was not totally sold on their romance being anything more than a usual Bond girl tift. And damn they really tried. They really tried to make it so this relationship was different, and these two are in love. But the truth is, there was nothing about their relationship that we haven’t seen before in previous Bond relationships that went nowhere. Why is this any different?

And unfortunately, I know why I wasn’t as susceptible to this relationship, and its because of Vesper Lynd.

Now Eva Green’s character has haunted this iteration of James Bond since her death in Casino Royale. And it becomes even more of a thing in this movie. And yet, they really push this new relationship Bond has with Lea Seydoux’s character and it doesn’t lift off the ground nearly as well as his relationship with Vesper.

And you may say, Connor you’re probably just biased because you liked that relationship more. And that is true, but its because I’m comparing how those two actually came together and created a meaningful relationship. They had pretty much the entire movie to develop that relationship and refine it to something that I and many people really liked. This movie just has them share a train ride together and suddenly they’re in love.

Also, this movie has a little bit of a pacing issue. There are a couple moments that if I was watching on Netflix, I probably would have paused at those moments to go get a snack or something.

But I will give this movie a little bit of slack because while it does have a lot of problems of its own, a lot of us were comparing this movie to its betters that came before (mainly Casino Royale and Skyfall).

James Bond is falling into a little bit of a pattern that the Star Trek movie did back in the day. One movie would be good, then the next one would be bad. And it would go back and forth, good bad, good bad.

I don’t think that Spectre is at all a bad movie, I just think that it didn’t quite live up to the hype that Skyfall created for it. Furthermore, the weird utilization of characters, the plot holes and sometimes awful screen writing made the movie quite lackluster in the end and while I'm a little bit disappointed by it, I think that this is probably the last outing as Bond for Daniel Craig, especially if you see the end of this movie. And that's a little bit of a shame. While I didn't hate the ending of this movie, I thought that it could have been better and I don't know if I want it to be the last goodbye for Craig.

But the question must be asked, who will take his spot for the next Bond movie?

Now the big name that I've heard in every conversation about this has been Idris Elba as they try to revitalize the image of James Bond. The question of course is, could James Bond be played by a black man when the character has traditionally been white? Does it matter?

Really, I don't think its that big of a deal. While I don't think we absolutely need to revitalize the character, I definitely think it would be an interesting choice, especially since I enjoy Idris Elba as an actor. I can't really think of any black man who I would rather see in the role.

The issue that I have with Idris Elba is not that he is black, it is instead that he is 43 right now whereas Daniel Craig was 37 when he first started. By the time this movie actually gets made, Elba will be 45 or 46, at the earliest. Still not impossible to do but I just see him as a little bit too old.

There two other actors I wouldn't mind seeing in the role and that would be Henry Cavill and Michael Fassbender.

I'm actually at this moment watching Man from UNCLE and since he is a little bit of an American James Bond in that movie, I like the idea of him actually utilizing his British accent and becoming the new James Bond. On top of that Michael Fassbender would kill it as James Bond. While Cavill would probably fall into the more luxorious and posh James Bond like Brosnan and the classic Bond, I feel like Fassbender would be more in the vein of Daniel Craig.

Unfortunately, the issue is that these two actors are both already figureheads in large franchises that are only getting bigger, Fassbender in the X-men franchise and Cavill in the Man of Steel Justice League franchise that I'm sure is only going to get better, especially from what I've seen from Batman v Superman.

I think in the end, it probably won't be any of the actors mentioned above, they probably have someone totally unknown or not as well known as you would think in mind to replace Craig and who knows who it will be. I of course am looking forward to playing the game of figuring out who will replace Craig.

Again, I'm a little bummed that this might be the last outing of Craig but don't get me wrong, I did enjoy Spectre. It had a lot of good acting, good action, good camera work and what probably could have been an interesting story. But it falls in the trap of poor writing, plot holes, and following the act of a movie that was really darn good before it.

But what do you think of Spectre? Did you like it? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 and send me your requests for movies I should review in the future. If you subscribe, you can get updates on future movie news and reviews that I post on my blog as well as live tweets from movies I'm watching and much more.

I'll leave you with this. I feel dirty doing this as I am a Vikings fan but here is Aaron Rogers Screen test for James Bond. Enjoy!

Creed

Okay, I'm sorry I took a detour with my rant on the Captain America Civil War trailer, but we're back onto Creed and its a good thing to. Because I'll be upfront with you all. This movie was awesome.

Like I said in my review of Rocky Balboa, I've never seen any of the other Rocky movies. Creed wasn't really on my radar of movies I was dying to see. I figured it might be a good movie but I wasn't going to go out of my way to see it. Then a friend calls me up and says that he wants to go see it. I obviously say yes. I thought that I'd get a decent sports movie. Decent a strong enough movie for it though.

Creed follows the story of Adonis Johnson (played by Michael B Jordan). Adonis is the illegitimate son of Apollo Creed a famous boxer who is best known in the Rocky universe as the rival and friend of Rocky in previous movies (While I haven't seen those movies, I know the relationship and its pretty well established in this movie so you don't need to have seen those movies to understand whats going on).

Adonis (or Donnie) grows up raised by Apollo Creed's widow in California. He lives a pretty privileged life but he wants to go off and be a boxer. However, he doesn't want anybody to know that he's the son of Apollo Creed as he wants to make his reputation on his own merits.

He moves to Philadelphia and tracks down Rocky Balboa and asks him to train him. The rest of the movie is your pretty straight forward, formulaic boxing Rocky movie. He finds a challenge that everyone says he shouldn't take, but of course he does. Training montage, and final fight.

HOWEVER.

This movie blows Rocky Balboa out of the water because it has a perfect dash of old and new while creating interesting, new characters, developing old ones perfectly, and bringing a story that it just compelling and makes you really care for all the characters on screen.

Whereas Rocky Balboa was about legacy and upholding it, Creed is more about making a new legacy. One that isn't tied down by the ghosts of the past but still honoring those that came before you.

I saw a review that said that it parallels well to the development of this movie as Creed wants to be its own movie and not be just another Rocky sequel, but at the same time it really honors what came before and builds off of it.

And this is mainly supported by the relationship between Donnie and Rocky. This relationship was just fantastic, from the very beginning.

The obvious performance to talk about is that of Michael B Jordan.

I know Michael B Jordan is a talented actor. I saw it in The Wire, his reputation in other things were just a great lead into what a great performance he did in this movie. Forget any bad thing he's been in (Fantastic Four) Michael B Jordan is a powerhouse actor who is on his way to becoming a huge thing.

The great part about this movie was the relationship Donnie has with the past of his family. Throughout the movie, you wonder why he fights, why he does the things he does and what it has to do with his biological father being Apollo Creed. The character is just written so well and Michael B Jordan acts it very well that its just entertaining and you empathize with him from the very beginning. He's your underdog, your hero, but he's willing to put in the time and energy to train and become the best. Too often Hollywood movies will give the sympathy to the hero for the sole fact that he is the hero, but Donnie trains hard for what he wants and he's a great character. Again, its the element of making a name for yourself in the shadow of the greats. And Michael B Jordan kills it.

And then there's Rocky.

This movie has made me take back every joke, every doubt, every word of hate I ever said about the acting of Sylvester Stallone. Despite the obnoxious mumbling, despite looking like he had a stroke, Stallone brings it in this movie. I was pretty impressed with his job in Rocky Balboa, I loved his part in Creed. It makes me want to go back and watch every single Rocky movie, and they are all on Netflix, so you might have to expect at least one or two of those movies getting a review in the next few weeks (If I can catch up on my backlog).

From the very beginning, just like Donnie, Rocky is a complex character. And they do a perfect job of having him take the backseat. This is not a Rocky movie. This is definitely a movie about Donnie Johnson. However, it definitely is a movie set in the Rocky universe and its definitely a Rocky movie... if that makes any sense whatsoever.

I'm hearing buzz that Stallone might be nominated for this movie and I really hope he does. He does a great job revitalizing a character that had become a joke in the past decade and making him someone we really do care about. Will he win an Oscar? I don't think so, but I definitely think he should at least be in the conversation.

There are other characters in the movie but the real drama and story comes from the relationship between these two. They're great characters on their own, they're even better when they start figuring out what the other one means to them and really become a great team.

It really is a seamless transition as you basically see Rocky handing over the franchise to Donnie and I'm really looking forward to more movies following this character. But if Rocky makes another appearance in the next film, I'm going to be really happy because these two make the film.

There's his girlfriend, there's his mom, there's the opponents he faces. But the real emotion is in the relationship between Rocky and Donnie and while its probably something that has been seen in movies before, again formulaic, its done so well in this movie that it doesn't matter.

And I suppose that gets us into the fights. Now if you've watched Rocky movies (at least Rocky Balboa) you'll know that there actually isn't a lot of fights in these movies. A lot of the movie is just training and character drama and development. While there are really only two fights in this movie, the movie trots along perfectly and its so good. The dilemmas these characters face are interesting, they're acted well and they make for a really good story throughout.

But the fights themselves are fantastic. I mentioned in Rocky Balboa that those fights were filmed like they were on a Pay-Per-View screen. And that's a creative way to do, especially since Pay-Per-View was bigger in 2006 and just becoming a big thing.

But the cinematography in this movie with the fights was amazing I had to mention it. If you're a fan of my blog, you'll know that I'm not incredibly versed in cinematography. I know what is good and what isn't but I couldn't tell you why. So I don't usually mention it. However, I do mention it when I know a movie does the cinematography well and incredibly crafted.

There is one fight in this movie that I am convinced is one amazing tracking shot. I'm sure that they tried to put some kind of cut in there with movie magic, but I cannot for the life of me figure out when that cut was.

And while the rest of the fights aren't one tracking shot, they're still incredibly well done and it really gets you into the tension and feeling of the movie. I would only mention the cinematography if it directly made the movie better for me, and Creed is a great example of movie going experience that was made ten times better by the cinematography. The story is great, but it was incredibly complimented by the way this movie was shot.

Furthermore, this movie just pumped me up.

There seem to be at least one movie that comes out in the past few years that has been my motivation movie. The movie that I watch and it makes me want to go out and do something productive with my life instead of watching movies. Last year it was American Sniper, this year it is Creed.

Its also helped by the sound track. Rocky movies have had a little bit of a history with having kick ass pump up music in their movies that get you pumped up but I swear, I bought the soundtrack to this movie to work out to. That's how good the music is.

So the story is great, the movie is shot well, and the music pumps me up.

Overall, this movie is just down right good. I've heard people say best movie of the year, and I definitely think its on a Top 10 list for sure. In case you were wondering I will be doing a Top 10 list in January, that is coming up and depending on what the rest of December brings, we will see if Creed makes it. But for right now its just really damn good.

I guess a critique could be the formulaicness of the movie and how it really is just any other sports movie that you've seen before, but even that argument doesn't really hold water because of how they execute it and how well this movie is done.

Overall I loved Creed. If you haven't already, check it out.

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

I'll leave you with this. I'm gonna try and watch the first Rocky movie soon, but here's the trailer. Enjoy!

Batman v Superman Trailer 2

This trailer has been the bright light in a dark tunnel that has been this week. I was looking forward to this trailer so badly that I considered staying up to actually watch Jimmy Kimmel, as the trailer premiered on his show. That being said, I was way too tired for that but waking up and knowing that there was another Batman v Superman trailer was my mini Christimas before my mini Christmas before the actual Christmas which is Star Wars.

Now a little bit of context, on Monday this dropped…

I loved this little teaser to the actual trailer. There was a lot of good acting without even saying anything between Henry Cavill as Superman and Ben Affleck as Batman. It was only about a 50 second clip but it was promising to be the herald to the actual trailer that came out last night.

Now I didn’t do a post on that teaser because first off, it was 50 seconds of two guys looking at one another. As awesome as it is, I didn’t think that was worth doing a whole deal on it. Secondly, I knew I was going to do this post so I didn’t think that it was worth doing a mini posts on a teaser and a post on a trailer when I could just do a regular (Maybe larger sized) on both. And thirdly, I’m tired as hell guys. I’m have a real job now. I want to keep doing these things but I’m getting tired as hell.

But anyways, so this morning came. My mini Christmas had arrived and…

My initial reaction was a little disappointed…

Don’t get me wrong, this is a good trailer. I’m still incredibly excited for this movie. I still thought a lot of the stuff in this trailer was really great and I will definitely talk about those things in this post. But for a couple reasons, this trailer just didn’t sit well with me initially.

1. The Tone: Now I do have to give DC credit for trying to lighten up a little bit. Up until this point, all their trailers have been incredibly dark and bruiting. Its definitely not Marvel where they throw in a quip here and there. DC has gone on record that their movies are not going to have a lot of comedy in them like Marvel. 

But for some reason they decided that they wanted to show a little bit of the lighter comic relief element that is going to be in Batman v Superman. 

Now I don’t want to say that it didn’t work at all. There were just moments where the movie seemed like it was trying to go a little bit more Marvel than I would want it to. I’m okay with Man of Steel only having a crappy joke about how one of the Captain’s thinks Superman is hot. Yeah it was a dumb joke but I’m okay with the movie not having too much of that humor. I’m okay with the DC universe being more serious and maybe even more about ideas, kind of like the way Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy was.

Furthermore, when I first saw Man of Steel, I was impressed on how it didn't exactly feel like a comic book movie. It felt more like a really good movie about a man who has superhero abilities. I know these are comic book movies and I'm glad that they are, but I kind of saw a way for the DCU to distinguish themselves by instead of making epic comic book movies, they make epics that happen to also be based off comics. If that makes any sense at all. Bringing this back to the trailer, the tone gave off a little bit of a comic book vibe with the jokes and I wasn't incredibly wild about that

Let me be clear, this is not a light hearted trailer and I'm sure its going to be just as dark and bruiting as Man of Steel was. And I'm sure in context of the movie, these little jokes will land a little bit better. But for the moment, I didn't think the tone served the trailer very well. 

I feel like it has everything to do with the way the trailer was structured and not so much with the movie, but sometimes you assume the worst with these trailers and when it comes to a property like Batman v Superman that has so much riding on it, you get a little bit nervous. 

The big moments that I’m talking about are at the beginning and the end when Lex Luthor (and I will get to Lex Luthor) comes up and flat out says, now you too don’t go fighting now you hear. 

The other moment came at the end when Wonder Woman appeared and Batman and Superman look at one another and say, “Is she with you?” “I thought she was with you”. 

Again, it’s not horrible and I commend DC for trying, especially if it works within the context of the movie, but I don’t think it really landed as well as they probably thought that it did and I’m hoping that this battle between Batman and Superman isn’t a tongue and cheek battle, I’m hoping that they are legitimately fighting for a reason. 

All the commentary I’ve heard on these trailers is that the best part is that these two look legitimately pissed at one another. Like they aren’t just fighting because its Batman and Superman, but that this battle is personal. And while I still think that is going to happen, I just don’t see that personal reason yet, at least for Superman. I don’t quite see the reason why Superman is fighting Batman and I want to see this become a personal story for Clark Kent. 

2. Lex Luthor: Now maybe I haven’t been as vocal about it on here, but I recently started warming up to the idea of Jesse Eisenberg being Lex Luthor. I liked what I saw in the first trailer and it opened me up to the idea of him being the character. I feel like I still needed to see more but I was optimistic for now

This trailer makes me reconsider that faith that I was beginning to have in Eisenberg. 

When I think of Lex Luthor, I think of a collect megalomaniac who is one of the most brilliant but also most evil men in the DC universe. And he does this by maintaining a face of a legitimate business man while hatching schemes in the shadows. 

Jesse Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor just seems a little bit more like a cartoon mad scientist than he does a collect and scheming super villain. He’s all animated and pulling off that stupid joke in the beginning. There doesn’t seem to be anything subtle about him. 

The funny thing is, I don’t think I would mind this character so much if he wasn’t Lex Luthor. I think there’s a theory floating around that Jesse Eisenberg is not actually Lex Luthor… yeah and Ben Affleck is not actually Batman give me a break. But in reality, I would be more interested if Eisenberg was a different character entirely, because that would fit better than this weird interpretation of Lex Luthor that we’re obviously going to get. 

Now, what I am interested in with Lex Luthor is this complex that he has going on like he’s starting up a gladiator battle between Batman and Superman. My theory is that they are going to remain true to the character of Lex Luthor in that he hates Superman probably just as much as Batman looks like he does in these last few trailers. And Luthor is going to use Batman to prove man is greater than Gods. 

And when that doesn’t work obviously, he says, if Man won’t kill god, then the devil will. (And We’ll get to that in a second). I do like how he’s trying to destroy Superman already and there does seem to be a little bit of a classical feel to that drive. I don’t know quite how to explain it but he sees it as Gods vs men and that’s really how this movie should be. The Justice League are suppose to be titans, almost the modern retelling of the Greek Gods. And I do like that tie in there as Luthor tries to destroy the gods.

I’ve said in earlier posts that I wish they had limited the role of Luthor in this movie and given the villain spotlight to a Superman villain we haven’t seen before or just have it be a personal battle between Batman and Superman. I think Luthor could have been built up to return in later Superman films or be a quintessential villain in the justice League. But instead they just decided to go with Luthor as the villain… again. 

We haven’t seen Metallo, we haven’t seen Brainiac, we haven’t seen any other Superman villain besides Zod and Lex Luthor and that sucks because they are good villains. Now I’m sure that they will show up in later Superman and Justice League movies, but I just wish they wouldn’t have gone back to the same ol’ stuff they’ve done in the past. 

Now… that being said, that does lead me into probably the biggest problem I had with the trailer. 

3.Doomsday: Why?

Why Zack? Why did you do it? 

Now I can’t act too surprised. This was something that had been rumored for about a year now. The reveal of Zod’s body in the first trailer only furthered that theory. And Michael Shannon mentioned that he had some weird part with flippers or something. 

But why Zack? Why blow your load with Doomsday so soon. 

Listen, I have a lot of faith in Zack Snyder. I loved Man of Steel. I have a collection of Zack Snyder’s movies at home. I know he’s had some bad movies, but he’s also had some good movies. I still have faith in Zack Snyder. 

But if they blow their load and ruin this movie by shoehorning in Doomsday into this movie. I might cry. 

This is the biggest issue I’ve had with the trailer. Because this just makes me think that perhaps Snyder is blowing his wad with this movie which could have just been a personal dual between Batman and Superman. You have the potential for a great movie there. The scene with Bruce and Clark talking about how Batman and Superman are basically the same thing but at the same time they’re not. That was great. I feel like I would love that if that was the whole movie, them fighting between who is right and who is wrong. 

But then you throw in Doomsday and everything gets thrown out the window. Now longer is this a thought provoking film about two titans clashing, it’s going to turn into a “Let’s defeat the monster movie”. 

I have no problem with teasing Doomsday. I think that Batman v Superman could have easily been a tale of two titans butting heads and eventually joining together to take down a different villain all the while Luthor is biding his time like the Emperor, obtaining Zod’s body, creating Doomsday, and the end of the film could be Luthor bringing life to Doomsday to perfectly lead into the Justice League. 

But instead we Luthor revealing himself as the villain too early. We have Doomsday being put into action too early. And it all seems to be focusing on creating a larger franchise before we can even decide on whether or not the movie was good or not. I want there to be a Justice League, don’t get me wrong, but I want it to happen naturally and in due time. 

Now, I could be overreacting. This Doomsday isn’t really what I expected Doomsday to look like. And if you know anything about the comics, Doomsday was created to become the perfect death machine. He was exposed to elements and torture and death multiple times but kept on being recreated until he was the death machine that led to the death of Superman. I could see them defeating Doomsday in this movie, Luthor picking up the pieces and coming back with an even more powerful Doomsday in later films. I'm willing to put money on the idea that this will not be the last time we see Doomsday, and if it is, they wasted a huge opportunity. 

I just don’t want Snyder to blow his wad too early on this one and it ends up blowing up in his face. 

But along with all of that, I guess Doomsday is my biggest issue because it gives away the entire movie. Put aside my personal feelings, it potentially gives away the third act and shows that Batman and Superman are going to resolve their issues and fight side by side. 

Now we all knew that was going to happen. We knew Justice League was happening so they'd have to resolve their issues. We knew that these two were friends in the comics and they weren't going to be enemies forever. I just don't see why they dropped the whole Batman v Superman that was going so well for them in previous trailers and jumped to the Dawn of Justice which nobody seems to be excited about. At least not as much as the personal battle between these two. 

And finally

Wonder Woman: What the hell is she doing in this movie? I mean the only scenes we’ve seen her in is all dressed up in what I can assume is that party that lex Luthor is holding that has been in every trailer, and in her battle garb in what looks like the final battle with Doomsday. So what is her role in this movie?

Don’t get me wrong, the trinity looks awesome. I’m definitely looking forward to Wonder Woman in this movie. But the fact that they haven’t given her any dialogue means one of two things. Either she doesn’t have that big of a role in the movie and she’s just coming in for the last fight to hint at a Justice League movie in the end, which I’m kind of okay with… sorta. Or (worst Case scenario) she looks really great, she doesn’t act that great. I don’t think that’s the case. I’m still very pumped that Wonder Woman is in this movie even though I still think that it’s too early. I think that Gal Gadot is going to do fine. 

However, I just didn’t feel like this trailer gave me enough that I didn’t already see in the first trailer. There were a lot of cool shots, but I don’t feel like anything was really revealed outside of Doomsday which we already could speculated and could have been held off on revealing until closer to the movie. 

I still don’t know how this fight is going to be personal between Batman and Superman. I don’t know what is driving Superman to take part in this fight. Something that was missing from Man of Steel was really getting to know Clark Kent as a person as much as they should have and this could be a really good opportunity for that. There has to be a reason Superman is so pissed and a reason why he’s doing this fight. 

Now before I talk about the good things, and I promise there are things that I did like about this trailer. I want to talk about the teaser we got on Monday and all the scenes that are set in that desert area. 

Now the desert scene has intrigued me for a couple reasons. In the teaser, it looks like the moment that Superman realizes that Batman is Bruce Wayne. On top of that, there are soldier who seem to be working for Superman inspired by Injustice Gods Among Us (A phenomenal video game on a somewhat related note). Now for some reason, from the teaser trailer, people have been speculating that this sequence has been a dream sequence for a couple reasons. 

While I was a little bit confused on why this would be a dream, it kind of seems like, from a certain shot in the trailer that that probably is likely. I mean you see a bunch of guys with wings (which if it is a dream they're probably bats, and if Batman is scared of bats it all checks out), and suddenly a dream sequence seems a little bit more probable. 

Now this is all meaningless if there isn’t any context to it. I’m sure there is a reason why Batman is having a weird nightmare about Superman having an army of henchmen and thinking about it more, the scene in the trailer with a lot of bats makes sense that this is a dream. So I am intrigued, I just hope that it make sense and it doesn’t take away from bigger things happening in the film. 

Now I do want to talk a little bit about the good things. And I feel like I already have been because while there were a couple things that didn’t quite sit right with me on this trailer, even those things had a silver lining that could make this movie great. 

The first thing I loved about this trailer was the opening scene where you have Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne already starting their battle as their alter egos. I do love how they’re questioning one another on the ethics of the other hero while the other one is doing the exact same thing. 

I mean we’ve always seen the scenes where someone who doesn’t know who Batman is asks Bruce Wayne what he thinks of the Batman, but we’ve never seen Superheroes, unaware of who the other one is, ask each other about their respective hero. It just continues to really point towards a great dynamic between these two. Everything that comes out centered on Batman and Superman as characters and the rivalry between them so far has looked great. I want more to be revealed and be developed in this rivalry, but I love it so far. 

I'll be very interested in seeing Superman's side of this argument and what brings him to odds against Batman. Right now it seems like he has a problem with his vigilantism and his methods but I really want to see this fight get personal. There's a great part where Superman just says, "Just stay down, if I wanted it, you'd be dead already". I want to see him have his own arch and personal trials in this movie that they kind of alluded to in the comic-con trailer with his conversation with his mother. 

I already mentioned a little bit that I do love the theme sitting in this movie of Man versus God. It is facilitated by the rants of Lex Luthor and his desire to see this ultimate Gladiator fight. This was something that was apparent in the first trailer with the Superman statue that said false god. I really think that there are ideas being thrown around in this movie and I want to see those ideas developed. 

All the fight scene shots are great. I have no doubt that the fight between Batman and Superman is going to be fantastic. 

All around, the film looks beautiful. The visuals look stunning and I’m looking forward to seeing this epic unfold in March. 

Overall, I’m still 100% on board with this movie. I still have faith that its going to be awesome and it’s going to launch this new wave of legitimacy for DC. But the questions that I had, and I think a lot of people had, I don’t think were totally answered in this trailer. We just got more questions and I feel like my confidence in this movie was shaken just a little bit with this trailer. 

I’m still super pumped for this movie and I can’t wait for March. We got even more of a look into this film and the question marks that this trailer provided will hopefully be erased when the movie finally arrives. 

But I really want to know your thoughts on this trailer. Does it fill you with more confidence or give you more question marks about it? Comment and Discuss below!

You can also send me your thoughts @cmhaugen24 on Twitter as well as requests for future reviews and movie rants. If you subscribe, you can get updates on movie news and reviews of the future and also some live tweets while I'm watching movies. 

I'll leave you with this. I recently saw a recut version of this trailer without Doomsday and much less Lex Luthor and it actually makes the trailer a lot more awesome. If they had left it to this, I would have absolutely no doubts. Not that I have a lot right now. Anyways, Enjoy!