The new trilogy nobody asked for reaches its peak with Dominion. And how better to conclude a trilogy nobody asked for than with the worst Jurassic movie ever made? I had little to no faith in this, even watching the trailers, so when the first reviews came out, and literally every single person I follow (and some liked either Jurassic World (2015) or Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)) disliked this movie, I knew this must be something exceptional. But not in a good way, more in the “how do you fuck up so royally?” way. Let’s try to break it down.

I have many strong opinions, but most of them I am open to discussing and changing my mind. One of the exemptions that confirm the rule is this new trilogy started on an awful foot the moment it tried to convince us that you could train velociraptors, you could domesticate them even! I know we have done it to many other modern creatures, and honestly understand why they thought it was a great idea, but no. Let’s put the fact that they are dinosaurs from a long, long, long time ago aside. We would still have no way of knowing/learning so much about them to do anything remotely close to that, considering they were brought back to life not long ago, according to these movies. But ok, let’s say we have somehow managed. The other issue with this, and this was more important to me, is the creators are taking these smart, killing machines from the original “trilogy” (even though the Jurassic Park films aren’t trilogy per se) and effectively making them into “confused” wolves that won’t hurt you as long as you lift your hand up.

Another thing I also don’t understand is how Chris Pratt, somebody I loved in Parks and Recreation (2009 – 2015) and I still like in the Guardians of the Galaxy films, can be so bland throughout this trilogy he is supposed to be leading. I remember thinking back in 2015 that he was on track to become this generation’s Harrison Ford, leading two popular franchises and skyrocketing to the ultimate stardom, yet somehow, I don’t think it happened. And I also don’t believe this is me showing my bias against this trilogy; he just kind of exists in those films. Especially in this one, we had so many characters that it was hard to say there was any lead. That on its own isn’t a strange thing per se, ensemble movies exist and have existed for a while, but it seemed like his character got from the evident lead in the first film to “just a part of this group” in the last one. It almost felt like even the studio and/or people behind this film didn’t trust him enough. Weird.

One of the biggest selling points was that all your favourites from the previous movies would come back in this movie. And they sure have Laura Dern, Sam Neill, and Jeff Goldblum returned, and they are… serviceable. I thought their characters felt out of place, especially Sam Neill’s character. I had no idea why he had to be there. Don’t get me wrong, I was happy to see a familiar face, but from the story perspective, the movie justified both Laura and Jeff being there, but he came with Laura because… she needed a witness? Really? And when you have a film full of flimsy excuses just to get our “old favourites” and the “new generation” finally together, you know they stopped caring about logic and want you “just to switch your brain off and have fun”. Ok, let’s try it then.

Arguably the principal selling point of Jurassic World: Dominion; was the dinosaurs are finally living amongst us. No matter whether it makes any sense (no, it does not, and I could write a couple of paragraphs about the ending of the previous movie and how it made zero sense but let’s not), they are. So what fun is in the store for us? No island, fences, and dinos of all shapes and sizes roam freely, so we should undoubtedly get lots of tense moments. Wait, what? We get one decent action sequence on Malta, followed up by going back to some island where the movie takes place?!?!?!??!?!!?!? So the whole “how will we live together, species separated by evolution” plotline and idea were just scrapped? And I know the movie tries to have some nice sentiment about it in the last five minutes, but that was laughable. If all “bad, bloodthirsty dinosaurs” we see are on that island and not outside of it because we must have the locus plotline about evil big corporations controlling the world’s food supply, your theme no longer makes sense. And you can show us all the footage about “animals living together alongside dinosaurs”, but I am not buying it as that’s not how anything works.

The sad part is I understand and believe something similar might happen; in the future. Some giant organisations might think it would be neat to control the food supply, and I believe there is a decent thriller to be made with that idea at its core. But not in the third movie about dinosaurs where you keep promising people “dinosaurs are now roaming free”, and then we get three, four scenes max with the last five minutes saying: “Trust us, every single animal is living in total harmony with these prehistoric creatures that are crushing their territories, all good vibes and chills here, peace.” I believe that is where Jurassic World: Dominion fell short it tried to be so clever, but it lost the plot. If you delivered what you promised and explored the theme of dinos living freely amongst us, you might have had something there, like a fun movie. But in its current state, the film felt like a mess that doesn’t know what it wants to be with people who are just “kinda” there. Almost nobody stands out.

The only good thing about this film was the Maltese action sequence mentioned prior, and only because I was there in Malta a couple of years ago, therefore I recognise some of the streets. The only two people I thought did a good job were Jeff because he was just himself and DeWanda Wise, whom I haven’t seen anything else, but now have to because she seemed like she had fun and some funny lines. She seemed like the only person who had fun in this film; everybody else felt wasted; either wasted potential or their performance was “ok”.

I think that is how we could summarize this whole Jurassic World trilogy – wasted potential. There were nuggets of good ideas here and there and some great visuals, sure. But tonally, story-wise, or even character-wise, everything always felt off from the first movie, and it only cumulated in this last piece of the dino puzzle. It’s starting to manifest clearly, that nobody can replicate what Steven Spielberg did with the first two Jurassic Park movies. In the same way, nobody could reproduce what James Cameron was able to do with Terminator (and boy, did various people try several different times). And yeah, the second Jurassic Park film isn’t as great as the first one, but in my eyes, it is head, shoulders and one constant arm lift above any of the Jurassic World films.

Overall, Jurassic World: Dominion managed to surprise me. I went in expecting nothing and got even less than I imagined. The film has some brief moments of decent action and two fun characters, but it ultimately fails to deliver on its titular theme and fails to deliver on promises made not only to itself but, most importantly, to the audience. I don’t think I will ever rewatch any of these films, I would much rather rewatch even Jurassic Park III (2001), which is an objectively bad film, but at least it’s “funny bad” and still has some memorable moments. Dominion is just a bad movie.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Have you ever had one of those afternoons with your friends where you randomly decide to see what’s playing in the cinema after a nice meal and some shopping? Well, I had never experienced it until a few weeks ago, when we did just that and, lo and behold, Black Adam was playing (meaning the trailers for other films just started, so we walked in, not interrupting anybody, and we caught the entire movie). I thought this should be fun to see in the cinema; I heard some rumours about an impactful post-credit scene that got me hyped, and… it’s gone (spoilers for the after-credit scene). As it’s almost tradition at this point, that the post-credit scene in DCEU no longer matters, but guys, trust DC, this time they REALLY have a plan! Pinky promise they won’t just cancel everything like they did several times!

Let’s put this mess some people call DCEU aside for now and focus on Black Adam. The film starts epically; we get a historical exposition followed by an action set piece. After that, Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson finally makes his long-awaited appearance as the titular (anti)hero, and another action sequence happens. Everything is epic; everything feels epic. And this doesn’t stop for the remainder of the film. It felt like one prolonged action sequence with a bunch of Justice League rejects (I will get to those soon) and almost zero stakes because you just watch things go “boom” and Dwayne looking for his charisma. I hate to say this, but The Rock isn’t that great of an actor. Of course, he doesn’t have to be, because he is an action superstar and could literally brake me in half with just one hand, so… But I always forgive all action people that they aren’t the “best” actors as most of them have charisma, charm, something that makes us love them and forget that they can’t act and rely on that charm. Can you see where I am going with this? If Dwayne is forced to play this “tabula rasa” character with zero charm, he’s got not much going for him except his exceptional physique. It makes sense storywise why Teth Adam would be like this, but for him, this was mostly an exercise of walking with the same expression for the majority of this film.

Back to the action, sometimes it works to make your film about one place where it looks like almost one giant action set piece. The perfect example would be both The Raid (2011) and The Raid 2 (2014) – movies with very little story happening, but you don’t care because what you are watching is some kick-ass (literally) action set pieces, many shot with minimum cuts and in ways that make you say: “Hey, how the fuck did they do that?” So take those low-budget (estimated budget for the first film is just over one million dollars and for the second one 4.5 million dollars) movies and compare them to Black Adam, this Hollywood beast of a blockbuster whose budget is almost 200 million dollars. You will find many epic action scenes scored with a genuinely kick-ass soundtrack alongside a lot of CGI. That is understandable; not even The Rock can crash literal rocks, even though I wouldn’t be surprised if he tried. But these are the same action scenes we’ve been seeing over the past almost 15 years now. There are some cool shots and sequences, but it’s hard to pick one, given how the film doesn’t give you any time to breathe. Everything is so “cool” and loud and CGI all the time; you remember less and less about it, and nothing sticks out. Well, the Justice Society does, but not in the way they were supposed to.

Have you ever thought about how the MCU would have looked had we gotten The Avengers (2012) as their first movie? No Iron Man (2008), Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) or Thor (2011). The story would make zero sense because those films built up towards The Avengers, and most importantly, we wouldn’t care if any of them died because we would have no history with these not-so-mainstream characters, right? Yep, that’s how I felt watching the Justice Society in this film. I understand at this point, DCEU is unwilling to take notes from the MCU purely out of spite, it seems (even though now under James Gunn, things might change?). And, of course, they had to have more characters to go up against Black Adam to provide us with those glorious CGI action sequences of people mostly punching each other, but… I didn’t care about any single one of them. The fact I didn’t care is kind of shit, given there is a sacrifice towards the end of the film made by one of them that was supposed to be impactful on the film and the group itself. But since we have only met them in this film, the emotional pay-off of that sacrifice is rendered effectively mute. Black Adam feels like DCEU’s The Avengers if the MCU did everything wrong and had to redo their timeline five times.

And just to be crystal clear, I am not blaming any of the actors. I loved to see Pierce Brosnan still being somewhat cool at his age, and for what it’s worth, I liked Cyclone and Quintessa Swindell. Was she just DCEU’s Storm from the X-Men movies? Yep. Was she also the only Justice Society character that intrigued me? Also, yes, the fact she is stunning is just a plus 😉 But neither Aldis Hodge nor Noah Centineo were bad at their roles; the problem with their characters was just the simple fact they felt like a derivative of many other comic book characters we got to know much better over the years. Nobody gave a lousy performance (at least I didn’t think so); they were all just playing characters nobody except comic book-reading fans recognised. So I (and it seems like many other fans) have had a problem distinguishing them from their other, more famous, and better-executed counterparts.

The one thing I have to compliment, and I honestly believe this made the movie enjoyable on another level, was the soundtrack. Forget about Dwayne; it was Lorne Balfe; who, for me, carried this film on the shoulders of his epic music. Because I noticed all these issues I am talking about while watching the movie in the cinema – Dwayne can’t display his charm, so he feels “off”, CGI that makes everything look the same, Justice Society and their members whose identities have been so secretive I literally didn’t know anyone. And yet, I could never say I was bored or bothered (well, at least at the time). Halfway through the film, I realised it was because of that epic soundtrack that kept me pumped, hyped, whatever you want to call it; I was “it”. So, bravo, Lorne. That was one hell of a job.

Overall, Black Adam felt like it was supposed to be something epic, the start of a possible new journey for the DCEU. Instead, we got an ok introduction to a character we might not see again, a team of brand-new superheroes I couldn’t care less about and a post-credit scene that genuinely intrigued me enough that I was willing to watch a sequel. But now, knowing that even if somehow there is a sequel to Black Adam, the post-credit thing will never happen (at least not as teased by this film), this makes me sad and retrospectively makes me want to deduct some “points” from my overall rating. I won’t because the film still works as this “big, dumb fun” movie that can thank Lorne Balfe for creating that OST. If you are looking for two hours of non-stop action with no stakes and brains, Black Adam will be your favourite movie of the year.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

When I first became aware of this film, I was excited. Not many actors have garnered a reputation as unique as Nicolas Cage; it doesn’t matter if you love or hate him, the word that best describes him is truly “unique”. So it made sense for him to go even more meta than in Adaptation. (2002, my review here) and make a movie that should have been the peak of “Cageiness”. Or would it be “Caginess”? Either way, as you might tell from the “should have been”, I thought the movie mostly worked, but overall it didn’t deliver as much as I hoped it would.

This film had to have been made from the fan angle, from someone who truly loves and admires Nic Cage. It’s like with amazing comedy roasts; they only work if the person insulting the “target” of the roast likes/loves them. If they don’t care for them, it can turn awkward really quickly. And you can tell The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent was made from a pure love for Cage and his career, however odd that career might have been. But dare I say it might have been made by a fan who was maybe too close? Tom Gormican not only wrote but also directed this film, and listening to his interviews about this film, you understand that not only he is a fan of Nic’s but also he didn’t want this film to turn “mean” or punch down. And I get it, I don’t think either of us wanted that, but at the same time, I wanted more.

For example, if you already have Nic Cage playing two roles (himself and himself again, as “Nicky”), why not use that for more self-deprecating humour? I get there might have been some references or lines the actual Nic Cage wouldn’t be happy with, but it just felt like the movie scraps the surface as to exploring the vast, intriguing mind of somebody who became a meme back when memes started. Before it was “popular” to make famous people into memes, Nic Cage was already one, for better or worse. And the movie never addresses some of the more obscure roles he became infamous for and that “helped” Nic become the “bigger than life” entity he is now.

And that was my main issue with The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent. The film feels like it’s in on the joke, but only on half of it. For as many crazy scenes as there are in this film, I expected/wanted more. Because we are not talking about any other actor, we are talking about Nicolas fucking Cage here. This approach – kinda biopic, kinda fiction action film seems to want to have it both ways, and I would like to know how much was it down to the director/writer being “too big of a fan” and how down Cage was with being the butt of some jokes. My uneducated guess would be 50/50.

Don’t get me wrong, The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is a fine film I have enjoyed. I liked the action scenes, I thought Pedro Pascal was brilliant in this film, but everything else besides him and Nic, I could do without. For example, Tiffany Haddish is in this film; and her character is totally pointless. Her character has some funny lines, but overall she and her fellow agents serve no purpose. This film is weirdly split between being an ode to Nic Cage whilst also being an action/spy film, and neither of those is working to their fullest potential. The Nic Cage ode works much better than everything on the action/spy side; I could have lived without it.

And maybe that begs the question – would this be a perfect short film? Would this film work much better as a movie with a runtime of 60/70 minutes with just Cage and Pedro talking about his life and reliving some of their favourite scenes from Cage’s films? Possibly. The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent feels like the classic movie structure hurts this film the most. And if you think about it, where else than this film could we have dropped the need for a certain number of acts? Who needs act two or three? Who needs a plot? If you have a movie titled The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent and it stars Nicolas Cage as himself, do audiences go in and expect a “by the book” film? As the meme with Pedro Pascal goes: “Life is good, but it can be better.” And that’s how I feel about this movie – it’s definitely a well-made action flick that celebrates the career of one of the most unique actors who has ever lived, but it should have been just a tad bit… more. Crazier, bigger, more unhinged.

Overall, The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent is a good time if you are a massive Nicolas Cage fan. If you get at least 50% of all the references, you are in for a good time. If not, you might want to brush up on your Nic Cage filmography a bit before watching this film. I think the Nic Cage storyline mostly works, the other storyline is your average action flick, but it still has so much going for it, the pure joy of Pedro’s performance; I am a bit forgiving. Also, if there is one thing we can all agree on, and this film talks about it very openly is the fact that Paddington 2 (2017, my review here), in fact, fucking rules.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

I remember being excited about a new Halloween trilogy. Why? Well, when we get trilogies nowadays, there tends to be a reason for them, like an overall plan, maybe some theme spread across all three films. And David Gordon Green seemed like a great choice because he came across as a genuine fan of this franchise. But after seeing the third and final chapter in this latest Halloween addition to an already crowded franchise (this is the 13th Halloween film we have gotten since 1978!) I don’t understand it. I don’t understand whether there was a theme (besides the obvious one), and I don’t understand why Halloween Ends made some choices it had. But I still had a decent time with this film (the first Halloween film I managed to see in theatres, by the way).

It’s next to impossible to discuss this movie without going into spoilers because Halloween Ends started with a choice that fascinated me. It was brave and intriguing to watch, but I don’t think it landed in the way the movie intended. I usually try to discuss new films without any spoilers, but I would be talking in riddles here and let’s face it, it’s a Halloween film. There are some surprises here, but ultimately if you are interested in horror films and this franchise, you will see most of these coming. So, without further ado…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

Firstly, I hate the current climate of movie trailers unashamedly lying to viewers. Every trailer we got for Halloween Ends emphasised the “this is the end of this saga; also, Michael will go up against Laurie one more time!” And technically, they weren’t lying, as that happens in this film. What the trailers (I am guessing purposefully) don’t show you; is that you must wait for 80% of the movie for that to happen. And listen, that alone isn’t necessarily bad; you might think: “Ok, well, the movie will at least set it up properly then!” Nope. Because of the courageous but ultimately weird choice of this final movie in the trilogy, not only starting but primarily focusing on a new character we have never met. Rohan Campbell plays Corey, who accidentally kills a child he was babysitting.

Then, we have a time jump (I believe four years) where the film forces the debate “nurture vs nature” regarding evil, and we are led to believe; he might be transforming into the new “Shape”, and the only thing it takes is to be “in the wrong place at the wrong time”. And look, this idea is worth exploring and could yield something interesting, but this should have been done before, not in the last film of this trilogy! This decision was my biggest problem not only with Halloween Ends but with this new trilogy too; instead of having some vision regarding what themes you want to explore, it seemed like there was little to no plan for these three films. No matter how this Corey storyline pans out, you aren’t as invested because you have not met him before this film. Imagine for a second how great it would be if he were one of our main heroes in Halloween (2018), and during that film, he would have done something similar to what he does here (kills a child by accident). Then we would see his storyline play out a bit more in the sequel, but with him still being a supporting character and seeing “cracks” appear slowly. We would watch how the entire town is slowly turning against him whilst still focusing on Strode family against The Shape. And then, he would take centre stage in this last chapter, entirely on the evil side, a fully fleshed-out character we have watched grow over these films into what he ultimately becomes. Doesn’t that sound better?

The other thing that struck me as odd about Halloween Ends was The Shape itself, aka Michael Myers. I get he is getting old, but since when does he tag team with anybody? In this final film, Corey becomes Myers’s apprentice, a choice that (again) comes out of nowhere. And to repeat, this should have been set up throughout the trilogy. Maybe had we seen them bump into each other in the previous film, Michael would have let him survive, and this film could have gone back to that…? Yes, as you can tell, I am having a hard time judging this film on its own merits because I can see how this trilogy could have been improved and given us something new, something that would have paid off in the last movie.

Ok, let’s talk about some positives. The kills were creative (mainly the DJ’s death), and I really liked Andi Matichak‘s character as she seems to be the only semi-normal one in this world. It’s through her we see both Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) and Corey’s characters and how both are trapped in this fucked up world full of death, and she is the only one who still has a chance to escape and have a “normal” life. But since we spend most of the time with Corey’s character, I thought they missed a trick with Allyson as there is one clear theme throughout this trilogy – trauma, sense of loss and fear. But instead of delving deeper into that through Allyson’s character, who lost her mum in Halloween Kills (2021, my review here), she gets put aside so we can “catch up” with this new character, Corey. A character, by the way, that gets wasted towards the end so we can have the big “Laurie vs Michal, one last time” finale.

Can you see now why I had to talk spoilers straightaway? This film wants to explore some deep themes, but it didn’t take the time to set everything up suitably. And the big theme of Halloween Ends (nature vs nurture) would have been inspiring had it not felt like it was pitched five minutes before the cameras started to roll. If you want to elevate the Halloween franchise and make it about something more than this unstoppable “Shape”, give Michael some motivation, instigate a debate on how evil can be just a reflection of how people around you treat you, that’s fine. But in order to do that, you must have SOME plan, some roadmap for how you get there and where you need to “stop”. And individually, these films work on “it’s an average slasher film with some interesting visuals”. But I have a hunch that the people behind this latest trilogy wanted much, much more than that, and I am afraid they ultimately failed to deliver that. It’s a shame because it seemed that, this time, they had everything going for them, from Jamie Lee on board for them to learn from the mistakes of the past ten Halloween films. Oh well…

Overall, Halloween Ends is technically a solid horror film. It is shot very well, the jump scares are mostly ok (even though they are predictable), and the main cast is trying their best. Where it fails is this film (and the other two before) failed to justify a trilogy. The film starts the age-old “nature vs nurture” debate which would be fine if the film’s answer wasn’t the copout: “Well, it’s kinda both.” I still enjoyed myself enough that I don’t regret seeing this in the cinema, but I don’t know whether I will want to rewatch this new trilogy, knowing everything I know now. The lack of any plan, themes and character development is puzzling, notably, since the people behind this claimed: “We always planned this as a trilogy”. As the meme goes: “Press X to doubt”.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke