"Jason Bourne" Review

After a 9-year absence, director Paul Greengrass and superstar Matt Damon return for fourths on Jason Bourne. For a franchise that, at one point in time, reinvented spy thriller movies, it's so depressing to see the Bourne we supposedly know and love in a film that falls spectacularly short of the series' soaring heights. Dare I say Damon's long-awaited return to the role comes in a movie that's even worse than the Jeremy Renner-led The Bourne Legacy.

We catch up with our hero laying low in Europe, keeping in shape by fighting in underground boxing matches. We also find Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles), Jason's former contact, working with a WikiLeaks-like hacker group. She tracks Bourne down in Greece and shares sensitive information with him about Treadstone, including a conspiracy involving his late father. Fueled once again by a need for answers, Jason traverses Athens, London, Berlin, and Las Vegas trying to find out what happened with his dad. Meanwhile, shady CIA director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones) looks to cover his tracks as Bourne's quest points to a collusive backdoor deal between the agency and Deep Dream, a popular social network.

This film's weakest point is its story. This is a completely original scenario devised by Greengrass and co-writer Christopher Rouse. It is not adapted from any of the previously published Bourne stories written by Robert Ludlum. The pathos of this new film doesn't resonate as clearly as it did in the earlier trilogy. I think this is due to the fact that the plot itself feels both frustratingly convoluted and all too familiar. Bourne has been here before - a quest to uncover an unsolved mystery about the hero's past, shady government Black ops organizations, CIA directors with something to hide, informants who may or may not be on the hero's side. We've seen it already, and therefore the stakes are all but moot this time around.

Jason Bourne also lacks the breathless, non-stop action sequences that defined its predecessors. It has maybe 3 marquee scenes, and that's it. Save for a satisfyingly gonzo chase scene down the Las Vegas strip with an armored truck, the action is shot terribly. The chase sequences and fight scenes in the earlier trilogy were so tense and memorable because you could actually see what was going on, and frenetic hand-held cinematography made it feel as if the audience were part of the fight. Here, all the action is cut to ribbons to the point where it's nearly impossible to appreciate the stunt choreography. The climactic fight scene between Bourne and Vincent Cassel's hitman feels anti-climactic because of this. For a series which, in the past, has hinged on its game-changing stunt work, this is such a crushing disappointment. 

With seemingly less action scenes, there are several dry stretches punctuated by silly dialogue between Jones and Alicia Vikander who stars as CIA agent Heather Lee. These are two great actors, but they're given far too much pull in this film. It's supposed to be Damon's show, but you'd never know it. 

Although this isn't one of his finer efforts, Paul Greengrass still has an assured hand as a director, if not so much as a screenwriter. Jason Bourne simply lacks the intrigue and the execution that made its predecessors great. This is a series that would've been best left a trilogy.

D+

"Star Trek: Beyond" Review

Having switched allegiance to Star Wars, J.J. Abrams steps out of the director's chair for the third installment of his rebooted Star Trek movie series. Star Trek Beyond is helmed by Justin Lin (the Fast & Furious series) and written by Simon Pegg & Doug Jung. Out of these three newer movies, this is the one that feels the most like classic Star Trek. It's also the least entertaining.

Here we find the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise at the mercy of Krall (Idris Elba), a villain who despises Starfleet and everything it stands for. With the crew divided and held captive on a remote planet, it's up to Captain Kirk (Chris Pine), Scotty (Simon Pegg), Chekov (the late Anton Yelchin) and the fierce nomad Jaylah (Sofia Boutella) to get everyone back and stop Krall from wiping out Yorktown, a vital Starfleet base.

Facing steep odds, the crew use the visceral power of none other than the Beastie Boys' hit song "Sabotage" as a space weapon to destroy thousands of technologically superior swarm ships.

Seriously, that happens.

It isn't a spoiler for the end of this movie so much as it spoils the franchise. Now, every time I think of Star Trek, I will recall this scene and be salty. The shark has irrevocably been jumped. Thanks, Justin Lin / Simon Pegg.

More of the problems I had with this movie...

Elba proved back in April that he can play a ruthless, terrifying villain when given the right material (see The Jungle Book). Here, he's underutilized as Krall and feels like yet another disposable "baddie of the week." His exact motive isn't revealed until the last 25 or so minutes, so prepare to spend most of this movie wondering exactly what in the hell this guy's beef with the Enterprise is.

I also couldn't stand the cinematography. The frame seems to constantly rotate 180 degrees, and when it's not doing that, everything feels like it's shot at a 45 degree angle. I walked out afterwards with a splitting headache, (Chris) pining for the days of J.J.'s lens flare.

I'll show myself out in a minute...

Otherwise, Star Trek Beyond is less of a "bad" movie and more of a "decent" two-hour TV episode. As I mentioned, out of the now three rebooted films, Star Trek Beyond is the most in-tune with the original television series. The character dynamics are more consistent with their original counterparts, which fans of the show should love. Kirk finally drops the smarmy playboy shtick and fully embraces his role as a leader. Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Bones (Karl Urban) spend most of the film together, and their repartee could not be more perfect. Yelchin makes what is likely his best turn yet as Chekov, and I look forward to seeing what remains of his tragically curtailed, unreleased filmography.

Star Trek Beyond just doesn't have much else that makes it feel distinctly cinematic and therefore worthy of your hard-earned cash at the box office. The IMAX showtimes may try to convince you otherwise, but this is precisely the kind of action flick you wait to enjoy on cable.

C+

"Ghostbusters" (2016) Review

After about 30 years and countless failed attempts to turn the original Ghostbusters into a trilogy, Sony has hit the reset button and put director Paul Feig (Bridesmaids, The Heat) in charge of one of the most beloved comedy franchises in cinema history.

Honestly, though, if it were really as "beloved" as the vocal minority on the internet would have you believe, there would probably be no less than eight decent Ghostbusters movies and a theme park. Instead all we've had are two movies (only one of which is any good), a short-lived cartoon, a bunch of mediocre video games, and a flavor of Hi-C if you can count that. Ecto Cooler was gone for nearly 30 years!

Having seen Feig's all-new Ghostbusters movie (this makes three), I can promise that you're childhood isn't ruined just because some silly girls wanted to come play for two hours of your miserable life. Heck, they literally brought your favorite neon green refreshment back just for you! Anyone who brings Ecto Cooler is A-OK in my book.

Suffice it to say, that's not a ringing endorsement of the entire film. It has plenty of flaws, but Ghostbusters (2016) earns a fair shake from someone who was open-minded about the casting but was extremely let down by the trailers. 

The story they go with here isn't entirely different from the original. Here, paranormal enthusiast and university professor Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) is let go just as she's about to be given tenure. With nowhere else to go, she turns to estranged colleague Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy) with whom Erin co-authored a book about the paranormal. Since Abby and Erin originally parted ways, Abby has been working with Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon), a brilliant and eccentric engineer, to try and prove the existence of ghosts. Following a close encounter at a local mansion-turned-museum, the girls enlist Patty Tolan (Leslie Jones), an MTA officer with a knack for New York history. Together they investigate myriad disturbances which all turn out to be part of a much larger scheme.

Feig has stated that he wanted to populate this movie with the funniest people he knows, all of whom happen to be women. We've all seen this principle cast do hilarious work when given the right material. If Feig thinks these are the four funniest women on the planet, then, for the love of Cinema, get them a script to show for it! Having loved Bridesmaids and The Heat, almost none of the comedy in Ghostbusters worked for me. Wiig is simply never funny, McCarthy is perhaps too reigned in, and Jones just shouts the entire movie. The original cast returns for cameos, but even they feel mostly forced. The only person with any nuance whatsoever is McKinnon as Holtzmann, whose archetype leans heaviest on Dr. Peter Venkman with the smarts of Egon to boot. You can tell she has a manic, perhaps even sociopathic, energy lurking just below the surface waiting to bust out. And, by God, it does. The final act of the movie loses itself a bit, but Holtzmann finally lets loose on a few ghosts in her own little Matrix-like sequence. After waiting the whole movie to really feel something special, that was the moment that had me like "YAAAAAAASSSSSSS!!!!!"

In truth, the character who really made me laugh the most was Chris Hemsworth as Kevin, the Ghostbusters' bumbling receptionist. It's so refreshingly off-type for the actor that one can't help but fall for his confident comic timing and innocent charm. 

Several reviews have criticized Feig for populating this universe with male characters who are all ignorant knuckleheads while the girls appear to be the only ones capable of "bringing balance to the Force," so to speak. It's this reviewer's understanding that feminism is about equality, not making one gender look better than the other. If that's the case, any "feminist" agenda this movie may purport to have is undermined from the start. That said, I thought the guys in this movie were far more interesting than the girls, apart from McKinnon. I enjoyed Hemsworth, and the villain Rowan (Neil Casey) works for this plot despite having generally little to do until the final act. Also, Andy Garcia as the mayor of New York City is priceless. The joke about being the mayor from the movie Jaws killed me!

What ultimately won me over were the film's generally strong horror-movie elements and stellar visual effects. Most of the scenes in that mansion at the beginning are executed with a firm understanding of what makes our skin crawl in haunted house movies. A door opens on its own over here as candles are snuffed out by a chilly breeze over there. The ghosts also are much scarier-looking here than in previous installments thanks to advances in CGI. Most of them look like the brainchildren of Guillermo Del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth, Pacific Rim), a filmmaker with a knack for dreaming up horrifying monsters. 

At the end of the day, the new Ghostbusters is worth your time. After the tapestry of vitriol that's hung over this film since its inception, I wish it could've been even better. It probably won't be enough to shut the vocal minority up, but it generally delivers what you'd expect from a summer blockbuster. There's nothing wrong with that. Its place in the zeitgeist and underlying message/agenda should serve as interesting topics of discussion going forward.

(P.S. It's absolutely better than Ghostbusters II.)

B-

"Independence Day: Resurgence" Review

"We had twenty years to prepare, and we still weren't ready."

Tagline, or general consensus towards the idea of an Independence Day sequel?

Indeed, it has been precisely twenty years since Independence Day captivated our hearts and minds on its way to becoming one of the definitive summer blockbuster movies of all time. Jeff Goldblum and Will Smith affirmed their superstar status in a film loaded with humor, charisma, and balls-out action.

Of course, the idea of a sequel to such a beloved film (especially one without Smith!) didn't sit well with most people, myself included. Independence Day is one of this reviewer's favorite films, but when I discovered that the first wasn't exactly a critical darling, I became a bit more receptive to this sequel idea.

That made all the difference in the world.

As it turns out, Independence Day: Resurgence is a sequel worthy of franchise canon. Granted it's still grossly inferior, but anyone who enjoyed the original for what it was should find more than enough thrills here.

The second chapter of the Independence Day saga shows us what Earth might look like if we had twenty years to adopt advanced extraterrestrial technology. Washington, D.C. looks like a booming metropolis with sleek skyscrapers now flanking the White House. Capitol Hill looks like it's at the 50-yard-line of a state-of-the-art NFL stadium; plenty of capacity for those rah-rah speeches. David (Goldblum) is now the head of intergalactic defense, or something. Regardless, that's pretty f**king badass. Don't we all wish we had that job?

David heads out to the Sahara desert to investigate an event that coincides with an attack on the moon. A large alien craft makes short work of an international base there, effectively crippling Earth's defenses. The last ones fit to make a stand are Jake Morrison (Liam Hemsworth), your typical maverick fighter pilot, Dylan Hiller (Jessie T. Usher), son of the deceased Captain Steve Hiller (Smith), Charlie Miller (Travis Tope), Jake's co-pilot and the film's comic relief, and Rain Lao (Angelababy), a beautiful war hero and object of Charlie's affections.

The threat is much bigger this time with the queen of the alien horde returning to mine Earth's core for energy. Instead of several small flying saucers over our major landmarks, the queen brings one massive ship that stretches across half of the entire planet. To stand any chance of survival, the young team of fighter pilots must coordinate with David and the minds at Area 51, including Dr. Oaken (Brent Spiner) and former President Whitmore (Bill Pullman).

There are too many side characters which effectively makes the already risible dialogue even more of a slog. I thought Maika Monroe and Charlotte Gainsbourg were nice additions to the cast; Monroe as Whitmore's daughter Patricia and Gainsbourg as scientist Catherine Marceaux. Gainsbourg's scenes with Goldblum are some of the film's better moments. I just wish she had a bit more to do. She deserved more screen time than, say, Dr. Isaacs (John Story) or Floyd Rosenberg (Nicolas Wright). These guys were given entirely too much to do since they're both superfluous in the grand scheme of things. The script is already inherently silly enough; I don't need a Floyd Rosenberg character trying to wring chuckles out of me.

Other than that, it's still the same mindless Independence Day you remember. Judd Hirsch returns as David's father Jules whose subplot is meant to fill the void left by Randy Quaid. This film doesn't have any moments that are as memorable as "Hello, boys! I'm baaaaaack!" But we do get Data from Star Trek telling us to get ready to "kick some alien ass" in the setup for Independence Day 3. THAT movie promises to be something like "Jeff Goldblum Saves the Universe," which is something we should all be able to get behind.

C+

"Warcraft" Review

The spawn of the late David Bowie just made a live-action movie out of arguably the most popular MMORPG video game ever created. Filmmaker Duncan Jones has a proven track record of marvelous independent work, such as MOON with Sam Rockwell and Source Code with Jake Gyllenhaal. His first foray into studio filmmaking is something of a beautiful disaster. Warcraft isn't nearly as awful as the mainstream critics would have you believe; there are some visual cues here that signify the hand of a director who knows what he's doing. The problem is that Jones (but moreso perhaps Universal and Legendary) can't make the human characters work, which is frankly shocking for a storyteller whose previous work suggests he's a master at crafting compelling human drama. For better and for worse, Warcraft often feels like an indie movie trapped in a blockbuster's body. This is a fantasy that feels at once both intimate and epic, but poor editing and uninspired performances largely keep Warcraft from confidently bursting the bad video-game-to-movie bubble.

The story that Jones and his co-writers Charles Leavitt and Chris Metzen takes its cues naturally from the lore of the game itself, which fans are sure to love. Humans and orcs have been at odds for centuries. Now, the leader of the Horde is Gol'dan (voiced by Daniel Wu), a mage of sorts who wields a deadly power called "the fell." Everywhere Gol'dan and the Horde go, everything around them dies, even the orcs' own home world. Faced with extinction, the orcs open a portal to the human realm with the expectation that they'll kill all the humans and make a new home. The humans operate under the banner of the Alliance in a nearby kingdom. Their bravest warrior, Lothar (Vikings' Travis Fimmel), leads an army under the command of King Llane (Dominic Cooper). When Lothar discovers that the orc threat will not be defeated by humans alone, he enlists the help of a powerful young mage Khadgar (Ben Schnetzer), the guardian of the human realm Medivh (Ben Foster), and a beautiful half human-half orc named Garona (Paula Patton).

Now the kicker is that there are orcs who see the error of Gol'dan's ways and decide that the best way to defeat him and save their kind is to team up with the humans. Durotan (voiced by Toby Kebbell) and his band of orcs befriend Lothar knowing that Gol'dan won't stand a chance against their unified strength.

If that all sounds a bit nerdy, trust me... it is. But as I sit here typing, I recall that the film has a modest share of twists and turns that buck traditional franchise formula, at least in Marvel's sense of the word these days. Granted, to speak on them would be to court massive spoilers, and we don't want that.

I will say, however, that I was surprised at how much more compelling the orcs were than the humans. Kebbell does a stellar job with motion capture and voice acting for Durotan. The trailers made this movie look like a montage of bad CGI in a movie that would play out like one long video-game cutscene. Turns out, the CGI is really solid, inasmuch as  the orcs themselves actually look like living, breathing characters. This makes the violence feel much more brutal. There are some gnarly stabbings, slashings and decapitations that spray green blood on the camera lens here and there. Pretty intense for PG-13 but so was Lord of the Rings.

The film also never feels like a cutscene from a video game. It always feels like a "movie," or if the humans are talking to each other, a medieval soap opera.

Seriously, as good as the orcs and the CGI are, the humans are really a drag to watch. I think Fimmel and Foster are horribly miscast. Fimmel proves incapable of carrying a potential franchise at this stage in his career. He mumbles nearly every word and has about as much leading-man charisma as a sack of rocks. Foster gives his all but manages to be impossible to take seriously as "the guardian of the human realm." Maybe it's the Gandalf hairpiece? Patton and Cooper are tolerable; any scenes with them are made better by their presence, but the material they've got to work with is just not very engaging.

The other big problem I had with Warcraft probably isn't Jones' fault. When you make a big tentpole film like this for major studios like Universal and Legendary, who specialize in this sort of cinematic spectacle, your art becomes a regulated commodity. It has to fit into a certain hole in order to appease investors. When that happens, "final cut" is usually taken away from the filmmakers and given to the businessmen who don't really know what good art is supposed to look like. That said, this movie is cut to shit with poorly placed edits everywhere. Some scenes feel cut short while others feel out of place entirely. It's a shame to think how much better this movie might have been if Jones had full creative control. As it stands, the film doesn't quite have enough good to entirely offset the bad. Warcraft surprised me in ways that you'll probably have to see for yourself in order to completely understand. It's not a complete disaster, but it won't be Jones' first film in The Criterion Collection either.

C

"Captain America: Civil War" Review

This is it. The superhero film you've been waiting for is finally here.... for the most part.

Captain America: Civil War lacks the cohesiveness of its direct predecessor but still manages to be one of Marvel's better films to date. Now overseers of the franchise, writers Chris Markus and Stephen McFeely (along with sibling directors Anthony & Joe Russo) weave a yarn that proves they understand how to make all these characters work inside of the same 2.5-hour run time. Joss Whedon proved it could be done in the first Avengers movie, and now that he's moved on, the Russos have crafted a more urgent Avengers sequel than Age of Ultron.

At the end of the last movie, the Avengers lineup looked a bit different. As such, Cap (Chris Evans) appears to have led these "New Avengers" on several missions between the end of Age of Ultron and the start of Civil War. It appears the core lineup is now Cap, Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), the Vision (Paul Bettany), and Falcon (Anthony Mackie) with Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.) and War Machine (Don Cheadle) joining in occasionally.

We pick up with the team in Lagos where they appear hot on the trail of Crossbones (Frank Grillo), one of Cap's classic nemeses from the comic books who was teased towards the end of Winter Soldier. During the operation, Scarlet Witch makes a foolhardy move that accidentally claims the lives of several innocent civilians (although, to this reviewer, the Avengers have appeared to do far worse damage before). This act proves to be the final straw to the United States government who feel some type of way about having their team of super-powered operatives making a mess of the entire world (see just about every "phase two" MCU film). The "Sokovia Accords" are passed as legislation requiring all super-humans to register with the United Nations or face retirement. This divides the Avengers in two, with #TeamIronMan in favor of the new law and #TeamCap looking to continue operating without oversight in order to eradicate evil wherever it may lurk rather than where the UN says it does. The greatest superhero clash in the history of movies ensues.

Although this reviewer is part of the minority which enjoyed the hell out of Batman v Superman, Marvel's superhero battle is every bit as satisfying as one could hope. Those disappointed in the marquee fight in DC's movie should be pleased with Civil War. Although it'd be great if the MCU films took a cue from their Netflix counterparts and gave the stunt choreography more room to breathe, a few sequences here aren't entirely masked by quick cuts and camera movement. The "money" fight scenes look incredible and contain some of the hardest-hitting action of the franchise. That said, it never gets quite as brutal as Daredevil or Jessica Jones.

By now, fans are eagerly anticipating the arrivals of Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman) and Spider-Man (Tom Holland). Rest assured, they are both perfect. Civil War left me wanting to watch Ryan Coogler's Black Panther solo movie immediately, while our now-third cinematic Spider-Man proves to be the most comics-accurate of the bunch. If you originally balked at the idea of yet another rebooted Spider-Man, wait until you see Civil War. This is the breath of fresh air we never knew the franchise needed.

So, what's wrong with all of this? Well, Civil War just has so many important characters to stuff into each scenario that it just ends up feeling like a more bloated version of Winter Soldier. This is, by and large, a Captain America movie in which the real emotional conflict can be nailed down to Cap's ongoing struggle to bring his pal Bucky / the "Winter Soldier" (Sebastian Stan) "back to the land of the living," as they say. Enter Iron Man on the other side of the aisle, and you have an interesting exploration of the costs of friendship and brotherhood. Basically, this is what you get when you explore indie-film themes with a $200 million budget.

In the end, Civil War doesn't quite shake things up for the MCU like Winter Soldier did. For that, the film comes off as a bit of a disappointment. It's a worthwhile journey despite feeling fundamentally like another stepping stone. Still, these characters are great, the performances are stellar, and the action is as satisfying as billed. Though it may not be the perfect "savior" for the genre that some are saying, Captain America: Civil War demands your attention. Not to be missed.

B+

"Hardcore Henry" Review

You may remember a number of years back a pair of music videos that appeared on YouTube for a band called Biting Elbows. These two videos - "The Stampede" and "Bad Motherfucker" - were filmed from a first-person perspective and involved the main character leaping, chasing, punching and shooting his way through suited bad guys. "The Stampede" happened in an office building, and then "Bad Motherfucker" took the action all across a grungy cityscape.

After demonstrating their skills on YouTube, Russian-American filmmaker Ilya Naishuller and producer Timur Bekmambetov (Wanted) thought it'd be a fun idea to make a feature-length action picture filmed entirely from the first-person point of view. So Naishuller strapped some GoPro Hero 3 cameras to a rig worn around one's head like a mask and set to work on Hardcore Henry.

In Hardcore Henry, the titular hero awakens with no memory as he is reassembled from bionic parts by his wife Estelle (Haley Bennett). After a warlord (Danila Kozlovsky) attacks Estelle's lab, Henry sets out to rediscover his identity and to rescue his wife before an army of bionic soldiers is unleashed on the world. Helping Henry along the way is Jimmy (Sharlto Copley, in a delightfully bonkers turn), a cripple who uses various bionic copies of himself to prepare for any situation. There's ghillie suit Jimmy, punk-rock Jimmy, RAF Jimmy, cokehead playboy Jimmy, hobo Jimmy, and secret agent Jimmy just to name a few.

The warlord Akan (Kozlovsky) throws all the bad guys he can at Henry and Jimmy (quite literally in a rooftop fight sequence set to Queen's "Don't Stop Me Now"), and in the process makes for non-stop bloody mayhem as you've never seen it before this side of Call of Duty.

Endlessly exciting and deliriously unpretentious, I could never look away from Hardcore Henry. The gimmicky visuals worked. Somehow, the migraine never set in. Those especially accustomed to first-person shooter video games should be fine.

At one point during production, someone advised Naishuller that they should include a health bar and ammo HUD (heads-up display) on-screen at all times as a joke to gamers. Wisely, Naishuller declined to let the gimmick go quite that far. Hardcore Henry remains a fun, mindless little movie, and if it had included a HUD, I probably would've brought an Xbox controller to the theater. As much as companies like Microsoft want to close the gap between film, television and video games, I prefer at least a shred of differentiation.

The biggest negatives to take away here are that the story is rather weak, and character development is slim-to-none. Akan is a nasty villain, but the first-person gimmick doesn't allow us to explore his character at all. The most well-developed character is Jimmy, and it's not even his movie. The narrative doesn't answer enough of its own questions and seems content to serve as a thin excuse to string together action sequences. The ending is abrupt, yet just cynical and funny enough to be satisfying. That said, I don't think anyone will be clamoring for Hardcore Henry 2.

Those looking for an action movie that breaks the mold should find some satisfaction in Hardcore Henry. Though the plot may be thin, the first-person gimmick, breathless action sequences, and "Looney Tunes"-sense of humor make for a fun time.

B-

"Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" Review

Remember over the past year and a half how butthurt everyone on the Internet was towards everything Batman v Superman? From Ben Affleck's casting as Batman to Wonder Woman's brown outfit to the poorly-edited trailer revealing Doomsday last December, it's been a rocky road for the Man of Steel sequel to everyone on the outside looking in.

Well, the official word is finally in, folks: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is a good movie. So good, in fact, that the R-rated Blu-ray should be a confident purchase ahead of Suicide Squad this August.

Unlike its predecessor, BvS tells an engaging story that actually seems to take precedent over the huge set pieces and visual effects. Writer Chris Terrio (Argo) may just be the best asset Warner and DC have at this point. He joins David S. Goyer (Man of Steel, the Blade series) on the screenplay.

The film picks up precisely where Man of Steel leaves off. We see Bruce Wayne (Affleck) rushing into Metropolis to try and save friends and employees from the Wayne Financial building which collapses as the fight between Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod (Michael Shannon) transpires. With scores dead and one of America's greatest cities razed, Bruce and many others fear for the world's safety if Superman's powers are left unchecked. Still, most of the world sees Superman as a figure of hope, perhaps even a deity. Leading the crusade to govern this "god" is Senator June Finch (Holly Hunter) of Kentucky. She works closely with Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) and is instrumental in allowing Lexcorp to import a rock of kryptonite from a wrecked ship in the Indian Ocean. All the while, Batman puts his detective skills to the test as he tries to understand his rival and the larger universe he represents. Circumstances eventually force Batman and Superman to confront each other one-on-one in a showdown for the ages. When a larger threat arises, the two set aside their differences and are joined by Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) for one last titanic struggle. Miraculously, it's one that doesn't put as many innocent bystanders in jeopardy. Thank God.

There's a lot going on, but somehow it all feels pretty well-balanced. Credit the writers and director Zack Snyder's confident hand in juggling the action and characters in service of the larger story. There aren't many instances where it feels as if we're going on an unnecessary tangent, a la The Amazing Spider-Man 2. It's probably safe to assume that the 3-hour "director's cut" will have more self-indulgent sequences, but for now we can't judge the whole film on what we haven't seen.

Not all of the heavy emotional beats land how they should, and overall the tone may be too dark for those more accustomed to the lightheartedness of Marvel's films. However, BvS still has more emotional complexity than most everything Marvel has produced this side of Netflix.

If you're curious about how the apparently dubious casting decisions panned out, cautious optimists should be pleased. Affleck is a better Batman than Christian Bale, and Gadot surprises as Wonder Woman despite little screen time. Although, I'm more curious than confident to see how she handles her first huge leading role in Patty Jenkins' solo feature in 2017. Eisenberg is terrific but not as Lex Luthor. His squirrelly mannerisms and boyish voice would make him an excellent Riddler. He's tough to buy as Lex despite a committed turn.

I was concerned that there would be too many important characters vying for screen time and that nothing would ultimately make sense in BvS.

I've never been so happy to be proven wrong.

After seeing the film, Warner Brothers' spotty marketing may, in fact, be the stuff of genius. Lex Luthor himself couldn't have hatched a better scheme: temper expectations just enough so that the audience can be nothing but pleasantly surprised, and if they're let down, then it's not a far fall.

After all, hindsight - or is it X-ray vision? - is 20/20.

B+

"Gods of Egypt" Review

Gods of Egypt is an action/fantasy film from director Alex Proyas (The Crow, I, Robot) and stars far too many miscast actors - including Gerard Butler, Brenton Thwaites, Geoffrey Rush, and "Game of Thrones'" Nikolaj Coster-Waldau. Even Chadwick Boseman - one of the film's two ethnically appropriate actors - is forced to try on a British accent to woefully awkward avail. Elodie Yung is the only hope for accurate representation as Hathor, the goddess of love. She's great, and the rest of the cast are as good as they can be even if it is difficult to take anything, or anyone, from this bonkers production seriously.

Regardless of the talent involved, this kind of casting really isn't okay. Perhaps Gerard Butler is an easier sell as the lead of a blockbuster action film than, say, a guy like Naveen Andrews (Sayid from ABC's "Lost"), but that's the problem. Would the general public reject the film if Naveen were in the lead role? Somehow I doubt it, as long as the film's decent. Gods of Egypt offers a small handful of mindless pleasures, but let's just say the whitewashing is only the beginning of this film's problems.

The story kicks off when the angry god Set (Butler) usurps Horus (Coster-Waldau) on the day of his coronation, blinds him, and banishes him to exile. Set takes up the throne and rules by fear, pain and darkness. A mortal thief, Bek (Thwaites), seeks Horus's aide in a bid to save the woman he loves (Courtney Eaton) from death under Set's watch. This alliance between god and man begets an action-packed journey in which the heroes encounter several other gods of Egyptian legend, including Ra (Rush), Thoth (Boseman), Hathor (Yung) and Anubis (Goran D. Kleut) among others.

It looks and sounds a lot like a corny Clash of the Titans setup, but it actually ends up being a decent plot for a popcorn flick with little expectations.

It's important to realize that this tale is rooted entirely in fantasy and that none of it is meant to be taken as a serious interpretation of Egyptian history or folklore - however you like it. Some audience members at my screening found it easier to see past the whitewashing by acknowledging this.

On that note, the fantastical adventure of a film like Gods of Egypt demands spectacular set pieces and rich visuals. Some of the fight scenes are pretty intense, but the CGI landscapes and settings in which the action takes place look atrocious. For a film with a budget north of $140 million, you'd think they could afford cleaner green-screen rendering. Some sequences look so bad that they may actually be incomplete, including a scene where Bek and Zaya (Eaton) escape Set's palace by chariot and also in a later scene where Bek and Horus face two giant cobras in the deserted garden.

Gods of Egypt tries desperately to be a worthwhile diversion but lacks the heart to be considered "good" mindless entertainment. The message is a bit too iffy in the end. Combined with all the film's other glaring issues, as such it's certainly possible to find better "mindless entertainment."

D+