Tag: disney

400 Words on: Thunderbolts* (2025)

or, “$180 and Not $180-Million”:
A spoiler-free mini movie review.

1 out of 5

Marvel’s “Thunderbolts*” is lustreless – not just in its “New Avengers” advertising, or its ragtag group of antiheroes: accrued from a roster that studio boss Kevin Feige himself, ironically, would call “homework.”

A lifetime ago, I made an uncouth script pitch for a cop movie to a university girlfriend, with its villain a serial rapist. She asked why it was so important to use rape as a plot device. “Because it sells!”

What I meant to say (retrospectively) was that, along with child peril & domestic abuse, rape elicits a powerful viewer response, which they want ‘avenged’ by the time the credits roll. That’s just one of the stupid things I said & did to send that relationship into free-fall, much like Marvel Studio’s stupid choices since “Avengers: Endgame” in 2019 – theirs’ being a lack of creative honour, and too much contextual juggling.

Irrespectively, Marvel productions still carry a professional-grade aesthetic, even if you don’t connect with them on a human level. But while there’s no literal rape in Thunderbolts*, it violated my other sensibilities.

[cont’d]

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

400 Words on: Snow White (2025)

or, “A Big Studio Budget Retained for Payroll”:
A spoiler-free mini movie review.

1 out of 5

Snow White 2025 is as much a product for consumer consumption as it is a snapshot of Disney’s current socioeconomic agenda – from Lion King’s Pride Rock in the background of their vanity card; to bookending sequences so similar to Beauty and the Beast’s you’d swear copycat if they didn’t both originate from the same company; to Dopey’s now-curable neurodivergence.

It attempts to redux the material as a feminocentric Robin Hood with a protagonist who’s ‘her own woman,’ but she’ll still drop everything to jubilate musically about her new White beau.

As the titular character, Rachel Zegler opts for the Queen of the High School Drama Department approach: she’s kinda hot and can carry a tune, but emotionally empty from crying about her now off-again boyfriend right before showtime. Watch her strain during the movie’s one big moment for her to act: like Zachary Levi’s recent dramatic try in The Unbreakable Boy, Zegler lacks the skill required to convincingly portray painful remorse. Go do some indies and get back to us.

[cont’d]

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Captain America: Brave New World (2025)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

4 out of 5

My wife & I were watching “FBI: Most Wanted,” and she’s a lateral thinker: why are the good guys not wearing gloves when the bad guys have sarin gas? And I said inimitably, “It’s network TV: it’s supposed to be stupid.”

While this simple oversight could amount to a mere continuity error, creatives really do appreciate it when viewers take their projects seriously – consider actor & Marvel Television alumnus Ethan Hawke’s recent call for more “offensive” art.

The general furor over “Captain America 4” (aka. “CA4”) – aside from the foreboding that delays & reshoots purport – seems to be that the filmmakers didn’t take enough thematic chances. Superhero fantasy, including comics, is one way of making sense of topical issues, but, for my money, I’d had enough thinking for the week, and wanted a big-budget spectacle with as little logicism required.

For a Marvel outsider who doesn’t let canon get in the way of a good night’s rest, CA4 serves its purpose, in the mindless way I wanted when I watched it. Audiences haven’t seen The Hulk be The Hulk on-screen in almost a decade, whether that’s Hulk or Not-Hulk, and for a treatment that amounts to “a race to stop Harrison Ford from turning into Not-Hulk,” director Julius Onah plates palatable tension, a brisk pace, coherent action, and – best of all – payoff.

Onah’s chief accomplice is “The Annihilation of Fish” composer Laura Karpman, whose dynamic soundtrack timekeeps – as opposed to handicapping – the story. The sound design is fantastic overall, and the Spanish-speaking actors (Danny Ramirez; Giancarlo Esposito) actually get to speak Spanish – always a fun surprise.

As Thaddeus Ross is such a central character here, his recasting is bittersweet: the late William Hurt didn’t live long enough to get the honour of headlining, but Grandpa Harrison is a worthy replacement, overfilling his scenes with effortless gravitas. There’s even a pleasing “Akira” visual reference, which surely adds legitimacy to anything or anyone that pulls it off, particularly a curmudgeonly senior like Ford.

Captain America 4’s advertising isn’t misrepresentational, so why project onto it? In one brief shot, Ramirez is playing a crisp-looking version of Williams’ “Defender” on an old Motorola flip phone – on a screen only double the resolution of the original monochromatic Game Boy – and he’s acting like he’s enjoying it. It’s a studio movie: it’s supposed to be stupid.

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Does Anthony Mackie have what his co-stars call “the sauce?” Do you wish the film delved more into the news of the day? Esposito was a late-production addition: do you have thoughts on bringing the other actors back to reshoot scenes they had already shot, but with retooled dialogue? What do you think of the detail in Red Hulk’s nipples? Leave us a comment below!

Posted on by wd 0

Dub’s Take: Deadpool and Wolverine (2024)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.

NO STAR RATING *

Actor-turned-filmmaker Viggo Mortensen says, “More and more…what passes for critical thinking in terms of reviews… having some understanding of film history, how movies are made—the level is really low. … It matters to me more…than as an actor because the fate of the movie…hangs in the balance as to how it’s received critically.”

On one hand I agree: modern accessibility in media production means that anyone with a passing interest in cinema & an opinion can produce a TikTok video, or free website (ditto), or novel-length Facebook post to showcase it. Film Criticism may be a category of Pulitzer, but Roger Ebert never bragged about his salary like Dan Bilzerian. On the other hand, even if I have the training (I’m a dropout), why would I want to apply Film Theory to a movie that doesn’t justify it?

I could not take one word of “Deadpool 3” seriously, to the extent I feel a shot-by-shot analysis is not necessary – nor do I think homaging “Intolerence” ever crossed the minds of Ryan Reynolds et al while they made it. I could be wrong, but you don’t get more High Concept than a superhero spoof: they’ve been making spoof movies for years, and Marvel needs one now more than ever.

But Deadpool 3 isn’t a spoof. This is a full-fledged Marvel Studios & Disney production, unlike its pre-merger forerunners. And – despite appearances from Jon Favreau’s Happy and the TVA, firmly mounting this instalment in the same canon – it’s so disconnected thematically from the rest, with it’s incessant fourth-wall breaking & non-sequitur humour, sickening violence (the fight in the Honda Odyssey), and litany of profanities, that I have trouble picturing the upcoming “Secret Wars” even using Deadpool at all, unless he’s toned-down by executive order.

Everyone else seems to love this one: “it’s just for fun, Warren”; “it’s some jokes & cameos, stop taking things so seriously.” I’m not a fan of Reynolds’ deadpan improv and that may be part of my problem. But I’m a fan of Hugh Jackman’s, and his appearance here screams a divorce-inspired desire for future financial security. One cameo was fantastic and another appeared stoned the whole time. As a motion picture, it looked, moved, and sounded fine.

No one cares what I think. Deadpool 3 and its box-office success is the contemporary poster-child of ‘critic-proof’.

*this is a reflection of my feelings towards the film’s posterity, and not the film itself. If I were to give D&W a star rating, it’d be a 1.

Poster sourced from impawards.com.

Posted on by wd 0

Jay’s Take: Mulan 2020

A spoiler-heavy movie review.

mulan

In Disney’s ongoing venture to remake every property they’ve ever produced so as to hold the new generation upside-down by their ankles and shake all the money out of their pockets, here we have “Mulan”. You know already whether this is something you are going to watch, whether that be for the THIRTY DOLLARS Disney is asking its Plus subscribers right now to pay for the privilege (which was my burden to carry, thank my wife and pandemic-fatigue), or waiting until December when it will be available to anyone who uses the service and still gives a shit. Let’s get this out of the way right now: the $30 price-tag is obviously an experiment with no reasonable grounding in reality. When was the last time you paid $30 to see a movie in theatres? Even in my neck-of-the-woods, Cineplex’s shaky-seat D-BOX format is only $25, and you get a two-hour massage out of it too. Yes, I understand it could be worth it if you held a twenty-person viewing party (and so everyone is only retroactively-paying $1.50), but then your bigmouth neighbors would call bylaw enforcement and you would have a social gathering fine to worry about (which we were told could be in the thousands, but obviously depends on where you live and who you know). If Disney is successful in getting enough of their subscribers to pay, then it will be a dark day for movies-on-film champions like Chris Nolan: you could be looking at a multi-billion-dollar enterprise cutting out struggling theatre chains with a pricier alternative. Know what else isn’t grounded in reality? Mulan 2020.

Continue reading →
Posted on by wd 0