The Last Jedi (2017) ****/5: This is one the best Star Wars films I've seen in awhile. Rey and Luke Skywalker were the standouts for me. The shifts in perspective were also impressive. Snoke is a unimpressive character.

(image courtesy of Star Wars.com)

The Last Jedi is one of the better Star Wars films I’ve seen over the years. What it does represent is a full break with the past and new battles to be fought by a new generation of heroes. The idea that this is the last time we’ll see the Jedi is  pretty profound historically considering they are the backbone of the franchise with various forces (Sith, First Order) embracing the dark side. Without the Jedi it means that going forward the Star Wars of the future should have its own identity. The character of Rey is so important to this thrust and one can see the possibility of several storylines with the final shot of the film. The Skywalker legacy will still live on through Kylo Ren but the character of Rey represents a fresh break with such an overwhelming family legacy; the Skywalker family story being inextricably tied to the storyline of 6 episodes of the Star Wars franchise. The Last Jedi is also a big improvement over the very derivative The Force Awakens because it’s more original in tis outlook. I didn’t see much traces of The Empire Strikes Back in The Last Jedi but I did see too much traces of A New Hope in The Force Awakens.

The Last Jedi stars, yet again, Daisy Ridley as Rey as she come to terms with her heritage and the force within her while the Resistance led by Leia (Carrie Fisher) faces its greatest test as the First Order is in the ascendancy and hope appears to be extinguished. The biggest name here is Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) who represents the last of the old order of Jedi and represents the bridge between the old and the new as his two disciples will be battling out in the foreseeable future. The other characters return such as Kylo Ren, Finn, BB-8 & Poe. A major newcomer to the team is Rose who will hopefully be featured more prominently going forward. His maturity in this film is impressive when compared to the young, swashbuckling Luke Skywalker of old.

Positives

The main positive for me are the characters of Rey and Luke Skywalker; the new and the old respectively. I was impressed with her story and what it means for the franchise as a whole. Her story represents a significant break with the Skywalker legacy. The story of the Star Wars franchise has been the story of the prestigious Skywalker family and its enduring legacies. There were other major Jedi knights before but once there was the purge and Obi wan Kenobi died then the Skywalkers were all that’s left of the Jedi. After The Return of the Jedi it seems that Luke trained a new cadre of Jedi knights, including Kylo Ren, but this came to an end when Kylo Ren was seduced by the Supreme leader Snoke, one of the most unimpressive new characters. Ren seems to have destroyed all that Luke stood for and forced him into hiding or retreat as a failure. This film finally gives the necessary back story and there is some connection established between Rey and Ren but with the advent of Rey it brings back the familiar adage that a hero can come from anywhere. This is very democratic or a good exercise in expansive story telling. It’s actually a relief knowing that Rey might not be yet another Skywalker. If she is then it would be very limiting to the franchise going forward. There is a moment where Kylo Ren dismisses Rey’s supposedly lowly heritage in comparison to he who is from a very prestigious line. This is a major storytelling element because now that the force has awakened it means that new heroes must emerge. The line of the Jedi might end but the force is still present which means the way of the Jedi may become diffused throughout the universe. It might no longer be seen as a holy doctrine with sacred texts but will become a part of everyday life like all great theories or practices. What will remain the same is that only a few people will be able to use the force. The final shot at the end is telling. Maybe by the time of Episode IX Rey will be much wiser and alongside her will be other individuals strong with the force but not necessarily Jedis.

 I loved the final shot in the film. It reminded me of the good old days as a young person when you would stargaze and wonder about the great universe and then think to yourself if these great stories of Star Wars lore were real or wonder about other forms of life in the universe. Star Wars, and others, did that for many then, and The Last Jedi comes close to being as evocative although I’m much older now. In the case of the child in the final shot of this film there are great battles to be fought. It shows that the resistance to tyranny cannot die. The resistance to tyranny is essentially a democratic movement. There is also an important part of the film where Finn and Rose go to a planet where the citizens are very wealthy and are living lavishly where once it was a cesspool. One would consider that this is a positive but when the truth is revealed showcasing the negative- that it was a haven for war profiteers- my perspective shifted and I became aware that this is a thinking film. It’s the first time a Star Wars film has made me think or made me consider something realistically beyond the presentation of this fictional world through the medium of film.  Normally I watch Star Wars films at a distance but there are several moments where shifts in perspective are so important to understand clearly what’s going on in The Last Jedi. Poe has to learn the hard way as does Kylo Ren and Rey, to some extent. Rian Johnson, the director, deserves a lot of credit.

The action in this film was very impressive, especially the space battles. The opening sequence is the most impressive action set piece I have seen in a Star Wars film, especially as a space battle. The only other major space battle of the Star Wars franchise that made such an impression on me was the battle against the Death Star in A New Hope.

The visuals are also very impressive. I really liked the layout of the island where Luke was located. It has a very organic feel and look.

Negatives

The primary negative is that I still don’t get the First Order. They just appeared out of nowhere led by Supreme Leader Snoke. Snoke is such an unimpressive character and the Emperor of the previous trilogies was definitely more sinister. This is probably because the structure of the story was much more elaborate for the previous 2 trilogies which explains why they are still so influential even now. Snoke and the First Order are like an afterthought. I am just not impressed by their development. It will always stick with me that they are a carbon copy of the original malevolent forces led by the Emperor. The comparisons aren’t so clear cut in this film but the presence of Snoke is so unimpressive. At first I thought he was a giant lizard but he has apparently shrunk in this film. I hope that there is some back story in the next installment explaining how Snoke and the First Order came about. This backstory must have some implications for the films going forward. His bodyguards seem to be very strong with the force as well. This will always be a weak point of this new trilogy: no proper explanation about the rise of the First Order.  Say what you want about Episodes 1-3 but in terms of developing the political backstory they were impressive. An effective resistance movement needs a great tyrannical force. The First Order is going after the rebels but how much of an impact is this having on the wider galaxy. Does the First Order have a major presence throughout the Galaxy? Are their forces stationed throughout? I am just not convinced that the First Order is a major force. It’s just roaming about the universe attacking the rebels. In terms of building the universe it does not seem as effective in its incorporation into the physical environment of the universe; the various planets, moons etc. You just don’t get the sense that the First Order is an ever present force apart from when you see them in space battles.

Without a proper outline of the First Order then the resistance loses shape as well. I was not clear who the allies of the resistance were and how widespread is the rebellion. These anonymous allies better show themselves sooner rather than later. The resistance seems to exist in a vacuum as well. What about the political structures which govern the galaxy? These political structures were in place when the emperor seized control in episodes 1-3 but it’s not clear what they are or were in this new trilogy. After this trilogy it’s something these filmmakers will have to improve on instead of just throwing these new developments in our face.

Justice League (2017) ***½ /5: The DCEU is moving in the right direction but some elements are still rushed. A lot of people will be entertained by this film

Justice League clearly demonstrates that DC/Warner Bros. is moving in the right direction. The main problem is that there is still an element of rushing to get things out in order to compete with Marvel. DC’s failure to effectively compete with Marvel where it matters, $$$, is a good example of  the downside of being competitive. Warner Bros. needs to focus on just making good comic book movies based on DC comic book characters. This is why they should have fired Zack Snyder from the project earlier or given another director a chance. The DC films are mostly under the influence of Snyder stylistically. Man of Steel probably would have been worse if he was the main writer and not Nolan. I have already explained the fundamental differences between the styles of Nolan and Snyder in an earlier blogpost. Suffice to say that Snyder is a second rate version of Nolan. The structure of the DC cinematic universe is being hampered by this rushed and disjointed approach or reaching for things that aren’t there. Again I will make some suggestions of how the DC cinematic universe can reach its full potential without SNYDER; without SNYDER then things will begin to take shape. Snyder leaving this project early as a result of family issues is ultimately a good thing even if the circumstances are unfortunate.

This film stars Ben Affleck (Ben Affleck), Gal Gadot (Wonder Woman) and Henry Cavill (Superman) who, along with the newest additions such as CyBorg, Flash and Aquaman, battle the forces of Steppenwolf who wishes to take control of the entire planet. These heroes end up forming the Justice League.

Positives

The main positive of this film is that the DC cinematic universe is moving in the right direction, somewhat. I found the film entertaining for the most part. It wasn’t a drag like the overly serious and poorly conceptualized BvS. Justice League is definitely a more straightforward film than BvS but it’s a bit rushed. It is a film made on the assumption that comic book fans will know about the particulars so that they can bypass building something meaningful. Otherwise it makes for a good romp and does not necessarily run out of gas. Some people will watch this film and be entertained by the jokes and some of the action on display.

I know about the character Steppenwolf since I did read comic books in the heyday of the ‘90s and it’s clear that he had the potential to be a great villain for this film if there was a proper introduction. One can actually see this film trying to emulate parts of Wonder Woman and there is a moment when an explanation is provided about the mother boxes. I heard some people frowning about the idea but at least they explained it. If it’s an absurd concept then it can’t be any worse than the infinity stones in the marvel films. It is admirable that they (DC) are actually trying to build a universe with its own mythos. Diana refers to the Age of Heroes (taken from Hesiod) and it seems fitting since she mentions the earth realms involved in the DC cinematic universe, with two being mythic. There’s some Lord of the Rings vibe when she makes reference to the world of men. So it seems that going forward the present Justice league will be continuing the fight from a historical perspective. There seems to be a lot of old world conflicts taking place. To be fair in Man of Steel it was mentioned that a Kryptonian space ship visited earth 20,000 years ago. It seems that DC is trying to say that Earth has a long history with these more advanced alien civilizations. In DC comics we know that Steppenwolf is from the planet of Apokolips  and in this film it was revealed that he visited earth thousands of years ago. So far, therefore, two dominant alien civilizations have already visited Earth. This means that while Earth is not as civilized it does have some value and ancient wisdom (Themyscira and Atlantis). So I understand what DC is trying to do and it does work based on their own comic book lore. All that’s required is some more explanation weaved into the story which should give the actors more to work with once they internalize it. The admirable thing is that the composition of the league reflects this diversity based on the stories already told about the so called Age of Heroes. They only have to reveal the origins of the Flash correctly and effectively. It is likely therefore that the Flash might have some connection with an otherworldly force. Thankfully there was a reference to the Green lantern corps which means that Green lantern might have a solo film. The diverse composition of the league reveals that the DC cinematic universe has a lot going for it; it just needs to emerge from the shadows by just making a good comic book film. As I’ve said before the storylines in DC comics have always been superior to marvel. There is a richness of material which suggests that the DC cinematic universe should be story centred instead of character centred like Marvel films. A lot of DC comic characters have origin stories that can be translated into good films.

DC films clearly have a look that’s distinct from Marvel and it shows here. There are less bright colours. It definitely has more of a real world feel which is why they need to work on the CGI

I also liked some bits of the action especially when it wasn’t CGI heavy. The action was pretty good but it could have been better in some areas

Negatives

The primary negative is that the film is rushed. A better film could have been made if it wasn’t so rushed. It goes by in an instant and then you’re asked to tag along or keep up. A good 10-15 minutes setting up the story could have done wonders. How did Batman become aware of these creatures who feed on fear? Why are they here all of a sudden? Why did Steppenwolf decide to strike now? If he’s in exile then where has he been all this time? I thought they would have introduced Darkseid by now and made it clear that Steppenwolf is just his emissary. At least that’s what I expected. The problem is that they are telling everything from the perspective of Earth. There is nothing wrong in featuring the planet of Apokolips. It would have been much more effective if Steppenwolf was seen taken orders from a mysterious authority figure. The authority figure would have clearly given the go ahead for Steppenwolf to launch his attack. Real comic book readers would know that the figure is Darkseid. Nothing would have been wrong in actually revealing Darkseid. The origins of Darkseid should come later for Justice League  2 which will probably come after the next round of solo films. It would also be good if there was an actual reason given in the intro as to the importance of retrieving the mother boxes on Earth. Obviously this would mean that Earth is one planet that the forces of Apokolips have been unable to conquer. This frustration would more than likely explain the decision by Darkseid to invade the Earth. He will do so eventually.

It’s clear by his actions that Steppenwolf is some second in command and so the brief 5-10 minute intro should have introduced the planet of Apokolips. Maybe another villain can be featured in pt, 2  followed later by Darkseid in Justice League 3. This will give DC time to build something meaningful while giving the usual hints about Darkseid. The reality is that Justice League should have begun setting up the clash with Apokolips and not just throw Steppenwolf into the mix. This is why an intro to the planet itself would have been a good thing. These filmmakers are trying to make it into a big mystery and so it backfired.

DC should spend the time building the solo films before the next Justice League. They have too much good source material to be rushing to get the next Justice League out.

Batman looks a bit stodgy here. Affleck’s performance makes it clear that Batman is an old man behind the costume. He looks out of place when the pace of the action increases and there are parademons everywhere. I thought batman was going to cry at one point when superman joined the party. Flash and Aquaman really show up batman’s age.

DC need to get rid of Snyder or make him take a back seat.

One problem I had with the CGI is that if you take the real world approach then the graphics must be at a high level, Steppenwolf looks out of place here. What about old fashion makeup and then fill in the rest with CGI. As usual it was probably rushed. Steppenwolf was probably an afterthought. I just hope that Darkseid doesn’t look out of place.

I hope there are not inconsistencies with this film and the origin story of the amazons as told in Wonder Woman.

Thor: Ragnarok (2017) ****/5: This is a good film but Hulk is the standout character.It is the Planet Hulk story line that makes the movie interesting.

Thor: Ragnarok is a good film with its twists and its superficial humour (I seriously laughed only once). I watched it weeks ago but only now have I found the time to write about it (I’m not getting paid). One important thing to note is that Thor finally has a film to hold his own with Iron Man and Captain America. Thor has been invested with a lot of time and money by Marvel because he’s technically a part of the “holy” trinity which obviously includes Iron Man and Captain America. The solo movies of these three have more or less helped to define the direction of the marvel universe. There are also the Avenger movies but the trinity still takes up the leadership positions. The Guardians are still on the fringes for the time being since the major pitched battles will have to include the Avengers. Well -back to my original point- Thor has finally arrived as part of the big 3. The key to all of this is the Hulk who has been marginalized for a significant period and is only just now being developed as a character apart from being the rudimentary strong man. With the development of the Hulk character Marvel now seems complete as a universe. With his return to the fold then maybe he can form a part of the elite characters in Marvel, if they can come to some arrangement with Universal (I know it might be too late). A film called Planet Hulk would have done some wonders for the marvel universe instead the original hulk story fits strangely into Ragnarok.

Ragnarok stars Chris Hemsworth as Thor who must battle the forces of Hela (Cate Blanchett), the goddess of death, for Asgard. In this movie he comes to terms with his heritage as a son of Odin and he forms key partnerships with the likes of Loki, Hulk and Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson).

Positives

The main positive of this film for me is not the humour but the character of the Hulk. Hulk actually says more than 2 words in this film. The last time I heard him speak was in The Avengers (2012) when he said ‘Puny God’. After that it was all ‘AAAARRRRR’ ‘RAAAAwr’ and ‘Hm’ until Ragnarok. Before Ragnarok he became a rudimentary strong man, almost a secondary character. Bruce Banner was a bit more developed, but he was known for his PhDs and his relationship with another fringe character, Black Widow. The Hulk as a character was hardly developed so it left the Bruce Banner/Hulk conflict undeveloped. It is the Bruce Banner/Hulk conflict which makes the Hulk interesting as a superhero. Here in Ragnarok he is more developed and probably has something to offer going forward apart from his great strength. I’m spending a lot of time with the Hulk because the best parts of the film take part on the wasteland planet of Sakaar which is known to comic book fans because of the Planet Hulk storyline. This really should have been Hulk’s story but they have found a way to get Thor involved. I know about the arrangement with Universal but just imagine if marvel had a movie called Planet Hulk and it was actually good. Ragnarok shows how good it could have been even without Thor’s presence. Without this stopover in Sakaar the Thor franchise would have struggled to reinvent itself even if it had all the comedy in the world.

The movie itself has a fairly interesting story involving Hela. It does go into a lot of exaggerated conflict but it does capture in its own way the original premise of Ragnarok, the destruction of Asgard. The Hela back story is also interesting because Hela is the silent character whose history has largely been forgotten. It does capture the hypocrisy on Odin’s part despite his pretensions to nobility. He needed Hela to conquer but didn’t need her when he became respectable. This goes to show how politics can influence how history is written. One of the good things about the Thor franchise is that it never sought to portray Odin as a heroic figure and the trend continues here in Ragnarok.

The comedic elements are good but they are stronger on the planet Sakaar. A lot of things happen on the planet during the film including a change in Thor’s image and brighter tones normally not attributed to a Thor film. The comedic elements on the planet reflect this change in image for Thor the character and Thor the franchise. The comedy would not have worked without the brighter colours. The character of Valkyrie is also discovered on Sakaar. It seems to be a place where the rejected come and if they manage it they can  be reborn. No character who lands on Sakaar is the same afterwards, apart from maybe Loki. It does apply to Thor, Hulk and the Valkyrie.

The fight between Hulk and Thor in the arena was pretty good. ‘Are you not entertained?’

Negatives

The primary negative is that the film has a superficial quality that does not really fit with a heavy theme like Ragnarok. Now the Ragnarok would have worked if the old style of Thor worked or was successful. Then they would not have needed this sojourn in Sakaar. If the old style of Thor worked then the theme itself would have been more resonant. Ragnarok seems like an afterthought but it gets the job done superficially. What I normally read about the  Ragnarok is much more brutal than it’s portrayed here in Ragnarok. The old Thor style, if it worked commercially, would have captured the pathos of the old Ragnarok. This Ragnarok didn’t have much gravity. This is one of the first Marvel  films where the heroes are incapable of overcoming the villain on their own. So this film is not about who wins; which is good, because of Odin’s hypocrisy. Defeat can be a good thing and so Thor ends on a high. Ragnarok seems like a last gasp for the franchise before going under. Technically a lot of that had to do with the sojourn on Sakaar which is more Hulk’s story than Thor’s. Hulk might come out the better than Thor here. The Hulk has undergone a greater transformation than Thor. Without the Hulk twist then this movie doesn’t work so for me this is just as much Hulk’s movie as it is Thor’s. So while Ragnarok  was a last gasp for the Thor franchise it actually showed what could have been if Marvel was able to release a series of Hulk films.

Blade Runner 2049 (2017) ****/5: Good film but could have been more action packed and gotten to the point quicker. The detective work in the film is first rate

(image courtesy of Empire.com)

I liked Blade Runner 2049 because it does expand the world of Los Angeles in this particular dystopian future. This sequel also stays faithful to the original; some might say a bit too faithful. Blade Runner (1982) is my all time favourite sci-fi film, particularly the Final cut version,  and so my expectations were high for the sequel but not that high because one could immediately tell that the aim was to produce a Blade Runner film for 21^st century audiences. What really surprised me- before I went to watch the film- was the budget of US$150 million. When I went to watch the film I was anticipating that the sequel would be more action packed but it never really caught on which means a lot of people will be let down. It’s not easy to spend that much on a film without some significant action behind it. Were the visuals that expensive? The vision of Blade Runner has already been realized fully by its progeny (Total Recall, The Matrix etc) so 2049 probably needed to go in a new direction in order to really develop beyond the confines of its predecessor.

2049 starts with Ryan Gosling as Agent K on the hunt for replicants. While on a standard mission he makes an important discovery that will fundamentally alter the society of Los Angeles. It’s a discovery that unravels all the important events that transpired following the end of the original Blade Runner. He eventually teams up with the original Blade runner, Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), while also trying to elude the minions of Niander Wallace (Jared Leto).

Positives

The main positive for me was the detective work in this film. The detective work expands the film as Agent K goes in search of answers to this strange finding. You get to encounter a variety of characters and to visit many locations that wasn’t possible in the first Blade Runner that was limited primarily to the city environs. In 2049 we get a good look on the outskirts of the city and the lives of the marginalized or those not fully incorporated into the  city wide matrix. When you watch 2049 you’ll realize that it’s not a surprise that  replicants account for the majority of the marginalized. There are other characters and groups however that also provide some texture but they are not fully realized. They act more or less like typical scavengers. The revelation of life on the outskirts of a very large city does have some impact because of events that transpired between 2019 and 2049. It’s clear that the city has expanded even further and that some of the old structures that now make up the outskirts of the city were probably inhabited in 2019 up until the massive blackout. This blackout seems to have changed things dramatically; made a sharp division between the old and the new. The mystery at the heart of the film is very well developed. In order to arrive at the truth K cannot simply rely on the available information; he has to go beyond and do some old fashioned research in some cases since a lot of the usual details would have been lost after the black out. A lot of blood is shed to arrive at the truth.

The detective work also takes us into the creepy halls of power. This Mr. Wallace must truly represent the high point of capital in Los Angeles just as Tyrell did for the original. It’s a new division between the old and the new but much more sinister much more exploitative because in the case of the new Wallace seems even more powerful and influential than the oldTyrell. His replicant products are more advanced and he’s clearly into synthetics. One thing that will always be striking about the Blade Runner world is this distinction between master and slave which is developed well in 2049. It is the backbone of the entire franchise and I’m expecting a sequel to this film where the contradictions will become full blown in the form of violence. No more subtle reflections. Wallace said something important about civilizations being built on the backs of an unwanted workforce. Not sure but I’ll look out for it the next time I watch it. This is a very important statement from a historical point of view. I understand why the first Blade Runner just mentioned the off world colonies but it’s time that these sequels show us these colonies so we can get a better understanding of the slave like conditions of replicants.

The detective work makes it clear that this sequel uses the black out to make sharp distinctions between the old and the new world. This distinction is good because the world in 2049 has a somewhat different look and yes the rain is still there. The visuals must be where most of the money was spent along with the salaries for the actors. The many locations in this film have a distinctive feel because of their elaborate design. The outskirts are given a lot of attention in this film and in some cases there is a menacing feel when K goes towards these locations especially an area with a high level of radioactivity. The billboards are much more developed in this film especially for a particular pleasure product. I missed the connection with the off-world colonies in this film which were a standout of the original. The new world of 2049 is somewhat the same with noticeable changes but the core is still there. It’s no longer remarkable apart from the push into the outskirts of the city.

Harrison Ford really embraced the role of an older Deckard really well.

Negatives

The primary negative for me is that this film is too faithful to the original in terms of stylistic approaches. The eyeball in the opening scenes, for instance, is so similar to the original but it’s not effective because it has no bearing on what the audience is seeing. Modern audiences who have not seen the original will not have an understanding of the issues because the eyes don’t reveal anything as spectacular as the original. The music is similar as well as the emphasis on the L.A dystopia, particularly the commercial and industrial landscape where the sun never seems to shine. The final scene involving K is faintly reminiscent of the ‘Tears in Rain’ sequence but definitely not as effective. The mood can be oppressive for those not acquainted with the atmosphere. For me the best way to have lightened this atmosphere was to have more action scenes. The detective work is very interesting but it’s not enough because the film is about 2 hrs and 38 minutes if you exclude the credits at the end. More action was needed to get modern audiences fully on board with the Blade Runner universe. As I mentioned before the Blade Runner universe was successfully built upon by its progeny (The Matrix etc) which placed more emphasis on action while still holding on to themes of control and exploitation.  2049 does have action but it’s of the sort you would expect from a Blade Runner: short and unspectacular.  The hallmark of the series is clearly the detective work but it actually could have developed a distinctive style of action to fill in the universe much more.

The length of the film is somewhat problematic because the original Blade Runner was very economical. The length does seem to be overbearing because there is simply not enough to fill in the gaps even with the new L.A landscapes. More action was required and there were hints towards the end that there will be more action in the third film but it might require a director with a different mindset to pull it off. A lot of time is spent on Agent K’s relationship with a holographic female model, Joi,  but it takes away from what Blade Runner should be about especially if the creators wanted to be faithful. Without too much emphasis on the pleasure model then this film would have gotten moving in the necessary direction much quicker.