Groundhogs Day

I saw Groundhogs Day when I was pretty young. The main parts that I remember from that movie are the parts where Bill Murray kills himself and thought that this movie was a very sad movie if a guy tries to kill himself and he just keeps on waking up on the same day. I realize that those scenes were supposed to be more funny than I remember, but even watching it now, I kind of saw it as still kind of depressing.

Before I get into the full review, I should mention one part that is pretty crucial to the lens I watched the movie in. I don’t think it was intentional, but this is something that probably hurt my viewing process.

I’m not a fan of Bill Murray.

It’s not that I don’t like the guy, I think he’s a successful actor and he has to have a fan base out there. And I’m also not saying that I haven’t liked him in certain things. I liked his cameo in Zombieland and his small role in Grand Budapest Hotel. I also know that I haven’t seen him in everything. I really want to see Stripes. I also know that he has had a history doing movies with Wes Anderson, movies I’ve always been interesting in delving to.

However, a lot of the movies people think are Murray’s best performance, I just don’t really understand. Caddyshack is one. Ghostbusters I was underwhelmed with. Lost in Translation I was underwhelmed as well. And honestly Groundhogs Day is another one I just don’t understand the appeal for.

Groundhogs Day follows the story of Phil Connors (played by Murray), a weatherman with a local news station. Connors is overall, a mean guy. He’s sarcastic, he’s rude, and he doesn’t take his work seriously. All he wants to do is move up and he doesn’t care about those around. At the start of the movie, he and his crew, his producer Rita Hanson (played by Andie MacDowell) and his camera man (played by Chris Elliot), are sent to Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania to cover the famous Groundhogs Day forecast.

Things are pretty straight forward throughout the day. He gives a less than mediocre report on the groundhog, and they try to go back to Pittsburgh but are snowed in. Phil goes to sleep but instead of waking up the next day, he wakes up at the beginning of Groundhogs day and thus is stuck in a time loop where he needs to repeat Groundhogs day over and over again.

The rest of the movie is him trying to find a way out of the loop and learning to be a better person, all while stuck in a small town with a number of funny folksy characters.

Now this will be the only time I make reference to this but this exact set up was used about 20 years later in 2014 with the movie Edge ofTomorrow… and it was done better.

Now these two movies could not be any more different. The only thing they have in common is the fact that they wake up on the same day over and over again. There are a couple of conventions that repeat, like the character stuck in the loop saying things that other people are going to say before they say it and being able to predict something is going to happen before it even happens. But apart from that, Edge of Tomorrow is a serious war action movie while Groundhogs day is a Bill Murray comedy.

But in my personal opinion, I think Edge of Tomorrow used the time loop better because it was explained and it was happening for a specific reason.

In Groundhogs Day, the time loop is never explained and there’s never a solidified reason on why it happened on this specific day and to Phil Connors.

Now I’m not saying the set up for Groundhogs Day is necessarily bad, and I will explain that a little bit more later in the review, but I’m gonna get it out of the way, now that I’ve seen both films, I’m gonna say that Edge of Tomorrow did a better job in a movie about a guy going through a time loop where he repeats the same day over and over again.

But what are the good things about Groundhogs Day. While I think Edge of Tomorrow did it better, you can’t forget that Groundhogs Day was the first to play around with this concept and its an incredibly creative idea. I also think that this concept needed to be a comedy concept before it was taken seriously because it is a very funny concept. It was even comical in Edge of Tomorrow.

Furthermore, it’s a movie that has a pretty straight forward moral. Just be a good person. We live in a world where we yearn for new and original ideas and ideas and morals need to be subtle. Groundhogs Day is an example of what movies used to be in that they needed to spell out the moral pretty clearly and the ending had to be wrapped up in a tight little bow. That’s what pretty much happens in Groundhogs Day. It’s a pretty self-contained story which is refreshing and good for the nostalgia in me.

But while the movie is pretty straight forward, it is also very vague, especially in the reasons Phil is caught in this loop. I mean its basically to teach him a lesson and make him become a better person, however, you never really know what is causing the time loop. And while I mentioned before this was something that Edge of Tomorrow did better at, I think it was a good choice for Groundhogs Day to not explain that phenomena and focus more on the story. These days everyone is doing world building and trying to build a franchise. If Groundhogs Day had created an explanation for why Phil was caught in this loop, it would have been more of a fantasy film more than a straight up comedy, which I think works better in the long run and focuses more on the moral of the film.

Now I will talk about the not so great things in this movie.

Part of the reason I’m not a huge fan of Bill Murray is that he’s supposedly revered as this comic genius, and yet I have a really hard time finding him funny. I have come to understand that Bill Murray’s type of comedy is very dry and ironic. He doesn’t rely on voices, or impressions, or really even jokes. His comedy more comes from how he responds to funny circumstances with a sarcastic tone and deadpan reactions. Which I think works sometimes, but when that’s his shtick all the time, I just can’t really say that I am a fan of Bill Murray. It’s the same reason I can’t say I’m a real fan of Melissa McCarthy because while I laughed at her shtick once in Bridesmaids, she keeps doing the same thing and its not as funny as it was the first time I saw it.

Furthermore, I’m not wild about any of the performances in this film. Andie MacDowell’s character is just down right annoying both in her dialogue and her delivery of it and the rest of the characters in the movie are such small parts that its not really worth mentioning.

This movie centers totally on Phil Connors and his Bill Murray reactions to the continuous loop he finds himself in. He out of the blue is interested in his producer, probably because he ran out of women to sleep with in Punxsutawney and he finally got around to her. But the movie makes it seem like he falls in love with her but at the same time they don’t really show the days he really gets to know her the way you would expect someone to if they said they were in love with them. I mean he’s got the time.

Maybe I’m thinking about this movie too critically when it should just be a straight forward comedy. But the reason I have a hard time just taking it as a straight forward comedy is because the movie doesn’t see itself that way. There are actually some kind of serious moments in the movie, like when he tries and saves the homeless guy on the street. That’s something that is pretty serious. And when a movie has those moments, its does set its own tone, especially if its supported by comedy that is not in your face joke oriented but instead very dry Bill Murray comedy.

On top of all of that, I have a hard time staying awake during this movie because it is so dry. You’re not going to get a lot of laugh out loud moments in this movie because of Murray’s humor, because of the weird tempo of comedic moments to serious moments. I’d like to say this movie is smarter than all of that, but it doesn’t market itself as that and its just too disjointed for me to really understand what they’re actually going for in this movie.

Groundhogs Day will give you chuckles. It will also give you a pretty creative concept for a comedy and it will give you a pretty straight forward moral driven comedy. However, it will also provide you with a very dry and a lot of questionable funny moments. You may love it if you are a fan of Bill Murray, but it might not be the laugh out loud rip roaring comedy you were maybe told it was.

I know a lot of people hold this movie in high regard and I am not saying you are wrong, its just not my cup of tea because I am not a fan of Bill Murray. I tried watching his Christmas Special and I gotta tell the truth, I got kind of bored of it.

But overall, those are my thoughts on Groundhogs Day. What do you think? Can someone explain the appeal of Bill Murray please? I feel like it’s something I’ve really missed out and need someone to explain to me. Maybe my thoughts will change. Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me ideas for movies or TV shows I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter, you can also get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I’ll leave you with this. While I'm not a fan of Bill Murray films, I do recognize that the guy seems like the kind of guy anybody would want to hang out with. He seems like a decent enough person and I understand why people just like him. Here's him talking on Jimmy Kimmel and I do have to say, I get it. Enjoy!

Spy

Now I saw Spy a while ago but I didn't exactly watch the entire thing so I couldn't really give a complete review of the film. However, when I first watched it there were a lot of parts of it that I really enjoyed so I always wanted to go back and watch the entire thing. Now I got that chance.

Spy is a espionage comedy directed by Paul Feig. Melissa McCarthy plays Susan Cooper, an agent with the CIA. However, Susan is the kind of agent you see in movies and TV shows who is in the background and in the ear of the real spies. However, she is also like those kinds of people in that she has a very kind heart and she's very likable. Its not exactly the same character she's played in other movies like Bridesmaids, The Heat, or Tammy. She's a decent person and it actually gives her an opportunity to act a little bit. That being said, it gets old pretty quickly and the first act of this film is a little bit slow compared to the rest of it.

Susan is partnered up with the secret spy, Bradley Fine (Played by Jude Law). When a mission goes awry and the identities of all the field agents in the CIA are compromised, Susan is tagged in to do field work for the CIA as she is just an analyst and is not on the list of agents compromised. So the rest of the film is her doing spy stuff in the Melissa McCarthy way you might be familiar (and maybe even a little tired) with.

Susan’s main target is the daughter of an international terrorist (played by Rose Byrne). And once again, Rose Byrne continues to just be an actress I want to see more and more of in everything she does. This movie is no exception. She is a lot of fun and I only want to see more and more of her as the movie goes along.

Susan is also assisted by a hardcore secret agent by the name of Four (played by Jason Statham). And I have to say, at first, I wasn’t that wild about Statham in this movie. I didn’t totally see where they were going with him but the more I watched it and the more he shows up, the more hilarious it is. He’ll just show up out of nowhere and you get the impression that he is this very competent and dangerous spy, but then there’s this great moment near the end of the film where Cooper looks at what he does and just says, he means well, he really does. That really captures everything about Jason Statham in this film and its hilarious!

The fun part about Spy is throughout the movie, it treats itself like a Bond film. The dialogue is very serious and everyone is taking it very seriously… until they don’t. The movie is pretty self-aware at times and that’s where Melissa McCarthy’s same old shtick appears and it’s where the movie gets really, really funny. At a certain point, Susan drops her always nice routine and she just becomes a total badass. She’s swearing with every sentence, she’s talking shit about people. It gets really funny.

And I know that some people are going to say that it’s the exact same thing we’ve seen from McCarthy in every movie she’s in, but honestly, it really works in this role. When the jokes are timed correctly and she delivers them well, it lands perfectly and the movie picks up a lot. But at the same time, you see some of the humanity of this character from that softer side that mixes well with the rough and tough character and overall it just becomes fun.

The funny part about this film is that once again, it feels a lot like a real spy film. It treats itself like a real spy film. If you took out Melissa McCarthy and put in Daniel Craig as James Bond, this might even make for a decent James Bond film. But because Melissa McCarthy is in it, because her character is so funny, and because everyone else has those moments where they break the seriousness, the movie has a lot of fun moments.

Now, does it over complicate itself by doing that? I’d say a little bit. There are a couple of characters that have really small roles but large implications. I’m looking at your Morena Baccarin! Also, a down side of this movie might be the fact that it is again, Melissa McCarthy’s same old shtick. 

You’ve seen this character before in Bridesmaids. You’ve seen her before in The Heat. You’ve seen this character before in Tammy. You’ll probably see this character in The Boss and Ghostbusters too. I’m going to say that it works for this movie but it might not work for you.

The fact of the matter is that Spy is actually a really straight forward comedy. This works both in its favor and against it. On one hand its very straight forward and it makes it a lot of fun. You have a lot of fun watching a Rated R action comedy and I don’t think anybody would say that it was a waste of time. However, it works against itself because this movie is not at all extraordinary. It has taken a little bit more time to get this review out because I kind of forgot that I watched this film. Nothing about it really stood out because we’ve seen movies like this.

This is movie is in essence a rated R, Get Smart but with Melissa McCarthy instead of Steve Carrell. Now I do think that is exactly what Get Smart needed to become a really entertaining movie. But Get Smart was passable. It made me laugh at the time and then I kind of forgot about it until now. The only differences between that and this is the R rating. Now that may sound like a huge difference but it really isn’t.

The movie is entertaining, but it doesn’t feel lasting. Now that might just be a personal opinion of mine, but in the long run, I don’t think Spy is going to be an incredibly memorable movie. If you find yourself watching it, you’ll definitely be entertained, but I don’t think you’re going to remember it in a month.

Overall, you have some good performances by McCarthy, Byrne, Statham, Law and everyone in the film. It’s an interesting set up but nothing incredibly original, and you might find it entertaining while you watch it but overall its not gonna leave a lasting impression on you.

But what do you think? Have you seen Spy? What did you think? Comment and Discuss below. You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @MovieSymposium as well as send me your thoughts for movies I should review in the future. If you follow me on Twitter you can also get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out on this blog.

I’ll leave you with this. Speaking of spy comedies, a new one is coming out with The Rock and Kevin Hart. I'm not gonna lie, it looks hilarious! Here's the trailer for Central Intelligence. Enjoy the link on that. But because YouTube is stupid on the stuff I can share on here, here is something totally different. Here's the trailer for Get Smart instead. Enjoy!

Spider-man and Sony's Cinematic Universe

It’s almost been 2 years since the release of The AmazingSpider-man 2 and a little bit under a year and a half since the Sony Hack. Since then, Sony has done all they can to recuperate their losses and start climbing their way back up to the top and that is definitely prevalent in their plans for a rebooted Spider-man franchise and their superhero plans in general.

Back before the release of The Amazing Spider-man 2 and the Sony/Marvel deal that fulfilled every ones dreams of having Spider-man show up in Marvel cinematic universe movies, especially Civil War, Sony had big plans to create a cinematic universe around their only superhero, Spider-man. There were plans for a Sinister Six movie to come out, a Venom movie, more Spider-man movies, an all-female super team, and my personal favorite, an Aunt May movie. Now all those plans are in question as we wait to see the popularity of Spider-man in his limited role in Civil War as well as his new standalone film in 2017.

The way I see it, those plans don’t really need to go anywhere, they just probably need to be pushed back. The deal with Marvel shouldn’t restrict Sony in expanding their Spider-man universe the way they wanted to, it should expand it even more as the deal makes it so Sony can use Marvel characters in those movies as well. Of course we need to wait and see how Spider-man is received and if there is a future for Tom Holland as the web slinger, however, this deal helps everyone and hurts no one.

No I don’t think Sony should go ahead with an Aunt May spy thriller (although Marissa Tomei might surprise me) but there is a lot of source material to go through when it comes to Spider-man. It may not be the cinematic universe Sony had in mind, but if anything, it allows for Spider-man to climb higher in his adventures because he exists in a larger universe now.

Furthermore (and this is more of a selfish reason) Spider-man can now collaborate with The Avengers to shake things up. Because of that, the Avengers can now face Spider-man villains and vice-versa.

The Sinister Six can still happen!

Sony hasn’t been totally dormant when it comes to Spider-man. They definitely have their eyes set on the standalone film because they feel they have to revitalize a character that has already been revitatlized, that is a challenge. But they also just announced they are going to be making a standalone Venom movie.

Wait… what?

That crappy bad guy from Spider-man 3 played by Eric from That 70’s Show? Now I know Venom is a better character than that movie made it out to be, at least he is in the comics, and I feel like they could do a really interesting expansion of the Spider-man universe by having Venom be an anti-hero, face off with Spider-man here and there, but have his own horror like adventures… Except… he’s going to be separate from the new Spider-man?

Wait… why?

I mean I understand wanting to create a character to stand on its own that could create his own franchise, but this is such a weird choice by Sony. Venom is an incredibly iconic Spider-man character, one of his top villains, and definitely a part of his universe. And you’re just not going to give him any connections to the Spider-man we’re going to see in Civil War? That doesn’t make any sense Sony!

Now Venom was a planned movie in the universe that was going to be set up by The Amazing Spider-man films. I remember hearing about a standalone Venom film for years and that it was going to be connected to The Sinister Six and the Amazing Spider-man films. Again, I don’t think you need to totally scrap those ideas. Sinister Six can work in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Venom can work in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, you have the materials, why don’t you use them Sony?!?

So why hasn’t Sony introduced their plans for this yet?

Well the answer is quite simple. They’ve done it before and the results were not good. They’ve released plans looking ambitiously to the future and all those plans fell through.

On top of that, there is some Spider-man fatigue.

A lot has changed since the first Sam Raimi Spider-man filmcame out in 2002. The superhero genre has cracked open and now B or C list characters like Guardians of the Galaxy are being discovered and thriving. In fact Guardians destroyed The Amazing Spider-man 2 in 2014 when it came to box office results. Ant-man is getting sequels greenlit and while think that movie was surprisingly fun but probably pretty formulaic in the grand scheme of things, people are more interested in the new characters Marvel can create interesting stories for rather than the same old rehash of Spider-man for the 3^rd time. This will be the 6^th Spider-man film in 2017 and Sony has an uphill battle to make Spider-man exciting again.

I wrote this post mainly in response to the new of the Spider-manless Venom film and to say Sony just keeps on missing the point. I get it, Sony is a business that wants to make money, money is in franchises these days. I also get it that this deal with Sony and Marvel is probably not as conducive as a relationship as I’d like to believe that it is. The fan in me sees this as a perfect opportunity for both organizations to maintain autonomy over their property while creating a larger universe. But knowing what I know about Marvel and their very restrictive creative control, I wouldn’t have been surprised if this Venom thing is a way to maintain creative control over a property that Kevin Fiege would have instead taken down his own dark rabbit hole that is the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But I don’t really see the alternative Sony!

This is the situation we have found ourselves in, a situation where Spider-man is a part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and struggling to remain relevant. I understand that it won’t be until 2017 that Sony reveals any future universe building plans, but I think I’m just impatient.

I like any other comic book fan want to see Spider-man fight the Sinister Six and recruit help from Tony Stark or other characters from The Avengers. I want Captain America to fight characters from the Spider-man mythology. And the thing is, we now have the opportunity for all of that to happen. Maybe I just want to hear the plans to know that its going to happen, but right now all I am hearing is that Spider-man is going to show up in Civil War in what seems like a very small role and he’s going to have ANOTHER standalone film in 2017 reintroducing the character even though we’ve seen him recreated 2 times already!

The hope that I have is that all of this is going to come to its real fruition after Infinity Wars. That will open up Marvel’s slate a little bit more and they can use that partnership to continue their world, even after the biggest thing that could happen (The Infinity Wars) happens.

Maybe some of these questions will be answered after Civil War, maybe the interest for Spider-man will peak again after his small role in that movie. Because of that I will probably do another post like this after Civil War comes out, but until then I will keep my ear to the ground to see what the plan is for Spider-man and the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But hey… it could still fail.

But what do you think? Where do you think they’re headed with the Spider-man Universe and its connection to the Marvel Cinematic Universe? Do you think I used the word universe too much in this review? Comment and Discuss below!

You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as send me your requests for future movies to review and stuff to talk about. If you follow me, you can also get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I'll leave you with this. Here's a video of a Spider-man vs a T-Rex... Enjoy!

X-Force and the Future of the X-men

Fox’s expanded universe is the universe I like to talk about probably the most because it’s always changing. One minute it seems like its following a certain scheduled pattern and the future is written pretty clearly, then a movie like Deadpool or X-men: First Class really comes out of nowhere and surprises me.

I remember when I first started this blog I wrote a post on The Wolverine and where I wanted the X-men universe to go. I wanted Hugh Jackman to be visited by Samuel L Jackson and then the X-men universe would be roped back into the Marvel Cinematic universe and all would be right in the world. Then X-men Days of Future Past came out and not only did it solidify the X-men in Fox’s hands, but it opened up a lot of possibilities for future films.

It’s pretty obvious that X-men are going to stay within their own universe for the near future, especially with the success of Days of Future Past and the hype over Apocalypse. But from my perspective, Apocalypse has a very similar vibe to it that X-men: The Last Stand had in that it didn’t necessarily mean the franchise was ending but it was concluding a chapter for the universe. Apocalypse is definitely going to be the last movie for stars like Jennifer Lawrence and it seems to be the end of a trilogy that was started by First Class. On top of that, the final old guard is leaving with HughJackman’s last X-men film said to be the third Wolverine movie. Obviously a cast of new stars is being groomed for the future like Tye Sheridan and Sophie Turner.

The X-men universe is not over concluding with Apocalypse, but my question is, where do they go from there?

Well before Deadpool, it seemed like the person that was destined to take over the X-men universe as the new “Wolverine” was going to be Channing Tatum as Gambit. Originally the Ragin Cajun was suppose to be coming to theaters later this year. But with difficulties with the production of the movie, it looks like Fox has taken the Gambit movie off the slate for now.

Furthermore, the disappointment that was The Fantastic Four has sprouted rumors that Fox has sold Marvel’s first super team back to Disney. That hasn’t been confirmed, but there is definitely not going to be another Fantastic Four movie any time soon and it definitely won’t be connected to the X-men Universe for a while. So again, where does the future of the X-men universe lie?

Well honestly, it lies with Deadpool.

Deadpool is the highest grossing X-men movie of all time and if you watched the end credit scene from that movie, you know that they have bigger plans for sequels to the rated R comedy. They confirmed that the time traveling Cable is going to be in Deadpool 2 and Ryan Reynolds has said that X-Force is his next priority.

With the success of Deadpool, Fox is flirting with the idea of making more of their priorities R rated. This includes the 3^rd Wolverine movie and X-Force. I guess my question is, is there a place for the run of the mill PG-13 X-men movies we’ve come to know up until now?

The answer really comes with the success of X-men Apocalypse. If Apocalypse turns out to be not as big of a success as Deadpool, Fox might see the future of their brand, not with McEvoy and Fassbender and the new generation of X-men, but with Deadpool and the R-Rated superhero world.

Now the other question will be how well Deadpool and the R-rated X-men integrate with the mainstream X-men.

Now the PG-13 X-men movies have not been devoid of mature moments. The Wolverine actually has an uncut version that is definitely R-Rated and I was even surprised when they threw in an F-Bomb into Days of Future Past. But at the same time, from the beginning, the X-men franchise has been PG-13. Maybe flirting with R, but pretty PG-13 across the board.

The question I have for Fox is do they want to begin a shift for all their properties to be rated R?

Again, it all depends on how Apocalypse is received and if they have plans for the mainstream X-men, and if those future plans seem profitable.

Now the fun part about Fox shifting their focus from the mainstream X-men to a more R-Rated, X-Force centric universe is that it might be a perfect Segway to reintroduce Wolverine when Hugh Jackman leaves.

Now for the longest time, I was on the team saying that Wolverine should not be rebooted for a while. I think we can go for a little bit without a Wolverine to give some breathing room between Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine and the new one. That way there is some time that if they brought in a new one they could give an actual good explanation as to why it’s a different guy, or they could reboot the entire franchise and the new Wolverine could be just as new as everyone else.

But with the X-Force, I could see that being a great way to reintroduce a new Wolverine, keep him separate from the original characters as to avoid any awkward conversations, but of course you can have Deadpool give him so much crap about not being Hugh Jackman. I think that would be hilarious!

I have no idea who they should recast as Wolverine and the good thing is we won’t be figuring that out for another year or two until the third Wolverine movie comes out. Maybe I will do a post on who I think should replace Hugh Jackman down the road but for now, I’m going to stay on the side of they shouldn’t reboot Wolverine.

It’s really fascinating to have the X-men franchise at such an interesting crossroads.

Obviously they’re going to try and milk as many X-men movies out of James McEvoy and Michael Fassbender as they can, they’re obviously going to build a franchise around the new characters introduced in X-men Apocalypse, and it really looks as though they are going to create a new sect of the franchise with Deadpool leading the charge as the punkish rogue that will show up every once in a while to do a fourth wall joke.

What does interest me is Fox’s future plans for the Fantastic Four.

Since the horrible turnout at the box office and the horrible critical reception, any news on future Fantastic Four movies have been very quiet. For a long time I thought The Fantastic Four were going to be a property that Fox was going to capitalize on and make a larger franchise within the X-men universe. But now that the sequel has been scrapped, there doesn’t seem to be a future for Marvel’s first super team.

There have been rumors that The Fantastic Four could be returning to Marvel, especially with no plans to do a sequel at Fox. That has not been confirmed and if it is true, there is a good chance they won’t appear until after the Infinity War films.

But the funny part is, that movie didn’t seem to hurt anybody. With the possible exception of the director Josh Trank, everyone involved with The Fantastic Four seems to be doing alright.

Fox soared to the top with Deadpool last month, Michael B Jordan is doing fine, especially with Creed, Miles Teller is in talks to play Han Solo (I don’t think he will but it means he’s still getting work) and I just watched Kate Mara in House of Cards… she’ll be fine.

The success of Deadpool and the excitement for X-men Apocalypse seems to be overshadowing any doubts people have about the future of the X-men universe.

Overall, this is an exciting time for Fox.

It’s pretty interesting because the X-men movies overall have been pretty self-contained adventures. While the Thor or Iron Man movies are self-contained stories unto themselves, it feels a lot more like a franchise. When Captain America comes into Age of Ultron, you feel the implications of a movie like The Winter Soldier, you feel like the crossover movies are continuing a personal narrative.

Whereas you could watch X-men Days of Future Past without watching The Wolverine and you’d be just fine.

I’m not saying either ways of doing things is a bad thing or a good thing, Marvel has its down side because it requires you to watch ALL the previous movies in order to get the full experience. Whereas X-men feels a little disjointed and not totally connected.

I’m really interested in seeing X-men Apocalypse. While I’m obviously excited about movies like Batman v Superman (10 days!!!) or CaptainAmerica: Civil War, X-men Apocalypse intrigues me more than I’m excited about it. That’s probably because I know less about X-men than I do about Batman v Superman or the Civil War storyline, but that’s also a good thing. Because I don’t know that much about the X-men universe, it could go in any direction and I can’t predict that direction.

But what do you think is the future of the X-men Universe? Do you think we’re going to be getting that Gambit film in the near future? Who do you think should play Cable in Deadpool 2? Comment and Discuss below! You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as your requests for future movies to review and topics to talk about. If you follow me you can also get updates on future movie news and reviews coming out of this blog.

I’ll leave you with this. In case you haven't seen it, here is the trailer for X-men Apocalypse. Its coming out soon! Enjoy!

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Sword of Destiny

I’ll be honest; I have never watched any of the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movies.

I’ve heard they’re good movies and I think I’ve had the interest, I just haven’t had the drive or the opportunity to watch any of them.

Suddenly on Netflix, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Sword of Destiny shows up and my friend says, let’s watch this!

I was hesitant because I hadn’t seen the previous ones and I didn’t have much of a context with what was going on. According to him, the story was very simple to follow and you didn’t necessarily need to watch the previous films to know what was going on. Was that actually the case?

Sword of Destiny centers on a renowned warrior named Yu Shu Lien (played by Michelle Yeoh) as she travels to a town in the midst of a war with a warrior clan called West Lotus. This town has in its possession a legendary sword called Green Destiny that is coveted by West Lotus and many people around the world. At the same time, a young man named Wei-Fang (played by Harry Shum Jr.) and a young woman named Snow Vase (played by Natasha Liu Bordizzo), come to the town to find them sword themselves. Wei-Fang is looking to steal the sword for his master Hades Dei (played by Jason Scott Lee) of the West Lotus, while Snow Vase is looking to steal the sword to defeat Hades Dei herself.

Wei-Fang is captured but he warns Shu Lien of Hades and his army coming to steal the sword for himself.

In order to protect the sword, a contract is put out to mercenaries willing to come and defend the sword, and that contract goes out to a warrior named Silent Wolf (played by Donnie Yen). He gathers a group of mercenaries to come and defend the sword. The rest of the movie is them defending this sword, good guys versus the bad guys, good versus evil, great visuals and a lot of sword play.

Let’s delve into those good things first. This movie is gorgeously shot. The landscapes and tones of the movie are really well done and just down right beautiful to look at. I also have to say that the swordplay and fighting scenes are just beautifully choreographed. It’s interesting because when I saw Kill Bill, I understood the exact kind of movie it was trying to recreate and now that I’m watching a movie like that, I understand a lot of the nuances and style of the film. I don’t think this movie would have seemed as significant if I hadn’t watched Kill Bill first, so I have to give Tarantino credit for that one. At times it seems ridiculous, but once you understand the style of fighting they’re going for and you get used to it, it’s a lot more fun.

Another thing worth mentioning is that it is very good to see a movie that really gives a lot of roles to Asian actors. I wasn’t a huge supporter of the #OscarsSoWhite movement, but I do recognize that Hollywood just doesn’t give the same opportunities to actors of color that they do white performers. Seeing a movie like this that is all Asian actors is really encouraging to see. I’d like to more roles open up for performers of all races and not require the movies to be Asian martial arts movies. However, this is a good start and a good jumping off point as Netflix does reach a larger audience.

However, while there are a lot of good things about this movie, I will say there are a lot of not so great things about this movie.

The first thing is that the story and a lot of the characters are pretty one note and simplistic. I will say there might be a little bit of a benefit for a simple story as it can portray the narrative as more of a legend. I don’t know if that’s really what they were going for, but having a simple story and simple characters creates it more as a story you might tell around the fire or before bed. However, if you’re talking about a major motion picture, it’s good to have a little more complex characters.

And when you have pretty one note characters, some of that is on the script, but another part of that is on the performers themselves. And with the exception of a couple characters, the actors in this movie don’t really give the best performances.

On top of that, I’m not totally sure if this is a sequel or if it’s a movie that stands on its own. I’m pretty sure Michelle Yeoh’s character is a returning character from the last movies but am I supposed to watch those movies first? Are there characters that I could keep track of better if I had watched the previous movies first? 

I’m not totally sure if this is a complaint or just something I would have rather seen, but I was actually surprised on the lack of violence I actually saw in this movie. For being a movie with a lot of sword play and a lot of extras getting sliced open, I thought I would have seen more blood. But instead a lot of it is done off camera leaving it to the imagination.

Now I’ve seen this done before and depending on how you do it, it can be done really well. Sometimes you really don’t need that R-rated violence and it’s almost more graphic if you don’t see guts flying everywhere.

However, I feel like this movie maybe could have used some more graphic violence, and could have used some blood. While some movies use that PG-13 fighting scenes to make it even more intense, I feel like this movie could have and should have gone for a more Rated R stance and shown some people dying horribly by swordplay.

I understand if the movie was going in a way that has worked for them in the past (again, I haven’t seen any of the other Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon movies) but I personally would have liked to see them take advantage of Netflix in this version.

But going back to the simplicity of the story. On top of the movie being simplistic, I feel like it just wrapped up way too conventionally. Bad guys and good guys fight, good guys are victorious. I think these days we like movies that the good guys can win, but it either has to be at great cost, or they had to have worked really hard to make sure everyone got out alive.

This movie unfortunately wraps everything together with a convenient red bow and you don’t necessarily feel like anybody really developed was lost. Sure people die at the end of this movie, but with the not so great writing and the bad performances, while it was a bummer some of the characters died, I didn’t feel it took a huge toll on me by the end of the movie. Honestly, the main reason I was sad some characters died was because I thought they just fought in a cool style and that style wouldn’t be done by that person. This was a bummer because again, this movie is gorgeous, even the fighting, and the loss of someone with a particular style makes the audience lose out on some cool imagery.

If you’re looking for an easy to follow story which is pretty simple with some sub-par performances, a lot of good fighting, and some great visuals, Sword of Destiny might be a fun ride. But if you’re looking for something more complicated, you can probably skip this one.

But those are my thoughts on Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Sword of Destiny. Have you seen it? What did you think about it? What do you think I should review next? Comment and Discuss below. You can also send me your thoughts on Twitter @cmhaugen24 as well as requests for future movies and shows I can review on this site.

If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news and reviews I’ll be posting in the future.

I’ll leave you with this. Again, I haven't watched the entire movie, but here is the trailer for the original Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Maybe it will inspire me to watch it. Enjoy!