2015 Movie Power Rankings

2015 movie rank

Welcome to my first-ever power rankings for a year in film! This list is essentially a snapshot of 2015’s entire year in film, ranked with letter grades.

The first list below includes only the movies that I’ve personally viewed and graded. There’s a second list that combines my rankings with the opinions of several other critics I’ve chosen, giving you a full breadth of movies that were released this year. These “third party” reviews are colored gray.

I update these rankings weekly, so you can check back once in a while to see what’s new. I’ve already updated rankings for films I missed and managed to catch up with. Be sure to let me know if I missed something. Enjoy!

2015 Movies I’ve Seen, Ranked

  1. The Good Dinosaur (November 25th) | A+
  2. It Follows (March 27th) | A+
  3. Mad Max: Fury Road (May 15th) | A+
  4. The Hateful Eight 70mm Roadshow (December 25th) | A
  5. Inside Out (June 19th) | A
  6. Room (November 6th) | A
  7. Spotlight (November 6th) | A
  8. Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (June 12th) | A
  9. Paddington (January 16th) | A
  10. The Martian (October 2nd) | A
  11. Beasts of No Nation (October 16th) | A
  12. Creed (November 25th) | A
  13. The Intern (September 25) | A
  14. Ex Machina (April 24th) | A
  15. What We Do In the Shadows (February 13th) | A
  16. Brooklyn (November 6th) | A-
  17. Steve Jobs (October 9th) | A-
  18. Bridge of Spies (October 16th) | A-
  19. Sleeping With Other People (September 25th) | A-
  20. The Stanford Prison Experiment (July 17th) | A-
  21. Sicario (October 2nd) | A-
  22. The Gift (August 7th) | A-
  23. Carol (November 20th) | A-
  24. Kingsman: The Secret Service (February 13th) | A-
  25. Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 1st) | A-
  26. Selma (January 9th) | A-
  27. The Visit (September 11th) | A-
  28. Still Alice (January 16th) | A-
  29. Anomalisa (December 30th) | B+
  30. Star Wars: The Force Awakens (December 18th) | B+
  31. Jurassic World (June 12th) | B+
  32. Love & Mercy (June 19th) | B+
  33. The Big Short (December 11th) | B+
  34. Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (July 31st) | B+
  35. Ant-Man (July 17th) | B+
  36. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 2 (November 20th) | B+
  37. Spectre (November 6th) | B+
  38. 99 Holmes (September 25th) | B+
  39. Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (September 18) | B+
  40. While We’re Young (April 17th) | B+
  41. Digging for Fire (August 21st) | B+
  42. Krampus (December 5th) | B+
  43. Diary of a Teenage Girl (August 7th) | B+
  44. Southpaw (July 24th) | B
  45. Crimson Peak (October 16th) | B
  46. Straight Outta Compton (August 14th) | B
  47. The Night Before (November 20th) | B
  48. Black Mass (September 18th) | B
  49. Furious 7 (April 3) | B
  50. Unexpected (July 24th) | B
  51. Clouds of Sils Maria (July 14th) | B
  52. Cinderella (March 13th) | B
  53. People Places Things (August 14th) | B
  54. The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (August 14th) | B-
  55. The Revenant (December 25th) | B-
  56. Cooties (September 18th) | B-
  57. Ted 2 (June 26th) | B-
  58. Burnt (October 30th) | B-
  59. Unfriended (April 17th) | B-
  60. The DUFF (February 20th) | B-
  61. Tomorrowland (May 22nd) | B-
  62. Focus (February 27th) | B-
  63. Goosebumps (October 16th) | C+
  64. Paper Towns (July 24th) | C+
  65. The Gallows (July 10th) | C+
  66. Hotel Transylvania 2 (September 25th) | C+
  67. True Story (August 4th) | C+
  68. Dope (June 19th) | C+
  69. Project Almanac (January 30th) | C+
  70. Fantastic Four (August 7th) | C+
  71. The Wedding Ringer (January 16th) | C
  72. Spy (June 5th) | C
  73. In the Heart of the Sea (December 11th) | C
  74. Grandma (August 21st) | C
  75. The Spongebob Movie: Sponge out of Water (February 6th) | C-
  76. Chappie (March 6th) | C-
  77. Trainwreck (July 17th) | D+
  78. Aloha (May 29th) | D+
  79. The Transporter Refueled (September 4th) | D+
  80. Lazarus Effect (February 27th) | D
  81. Insurgent (March 20th)| D
  82. Pan (October 9th)  D-
  83. Home (March 27th) | D-
  84. Jupiter Ascending (February 6th) | D-
  85. Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension (October 23rd) | F
  86. Hitman: Agent 47 (August 21st) | F
  87. Strange Magic (January 23rd) | F

FULL List of Films Ranked By Multiple Critics

  1. The Good Dinosaur (November 25th) | A+
  2. It Follows (March 27th) | A+
  3. Mad Max: Fury Road (May 15th) | A+
  4. The Hateful Eight 70mm Roadshow (December 25th) | A
  5. Inside Out (June 19th) | A
  6. Room (November 6th) | A
  7. Spotlight (November 6th) | A
  8. Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (June 12th) | A
  9. Shaun the Sheep (August 5th) | A
  10. The Assassin (October 16th) | A
  11. GETT: The Trial of Viviane Amsalem (February 13th) | A
  12. 3 and 1/2 Minutes, 10 Bullets (June 19th) | A
  13. Phoenix (July 24th) | A
  14. Paddington (January 16th) | A
  15. The Martian (October 2nd) | A
  16. Beasts of No Nation (October 16th) | A
  17. Creed (November 25th) | A
  18. The Intern (September 25) | A
  19. Ex Machina (April 24th) | A
  20. What We Do In the Shadows (February 13th) | A
  21. ’71 (February 27th) | A
  22. Creep (September 4th) | A
  23. About Elly (April 8th) | A
  24. The ve ok of Silence (July 17th) | A
  25. Brooklyn (November 6th) | A-
  26. Steve Jobs (October 9th) | A-
  27. Bridge of Spies (October 16th) | A-
  28. 45 Years (December 22nd) | A-
  29. Sleeping With Other People (September 25th) | A-
  30. The Stanford Prison Experiment (July 17th) | A-
  31. Sicario (October 2nd) | A-
  32. Mr. Holmes (July 17th) | A-
  33. The Gift (August 7th) | A-
  34. Carol (November 20th) | A-
  35. Son of Saul (December 18th) | A-
  36. Kingsman: The Secret Service (February 13th) | A-
  37. Brooklyn (November 4th) | A-
  38. Avengers: Age of Ultron (May 1st) | A-
  39. Selma (January 9th) | A-
  40. James White (November 13th) | A-
  41. Hard to be a God (January 30th) | A-
  42. The Visit (September 11th) | A-
  43. Still Alice (January 16th) | A-
  44. The End of the Tour (July 31st) | A-
  45. Fort Tilden (August 15th) | A-
  46. The Last 5 Years (February 13th) | A-
  47. Don’t Think I’ve Forgotten: Cambodia’s Lost Rock and Roll (April 22nd) | A-
  48. The Duke of Burgundy (January 23rd) | A-
  49. Anomalisa (December 30th) | B+
  50. Star Wars: The Force Awakens (December 18th) | B+
  51. Jurassic World (June 12th) | B+
  52. Love & Mercy (June 19th) | B+
  53. The Big Short (December 11th) | B+
  54. Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation (July 31st) | B+
  55. Queen of Earth (August 26th) | B+
  56. Ant-Man (July 17th) | B+
  57. Mustang (November 20th) | B+
  58. The Peanuts Movie (November 6th) | B+
  59. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Part 2 (November 20th) | B+
  60. Spectre (November 6th) | B+
  61. The Boy and the World (December 9th) | B+
  62. 99 Holmes (September 25th) | B+
  63. Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (September 18th) | B+
  64. McFarland USA (February 20th) | B+
  65. Ballet 422 (February 6th) | B+
  66. While We’re Young (April 17th) | B+
  67. Mistress America (August 14th) | B+
  68. Far From the Madding Crowd (May 1st) | B+ 
  69. Pawn Sacrifice (September 16th) | B+
  70. Digging for Fire (August 21st) | B+
  71. Dior and I (April 9th) | B+
  72. Krampus (December 5th) | B+
  73. Beloved Sisters (January 9th) | B+
  74. A Most Violent Year (January 30th) | B+
  75. Breathe (September 10th) | B+
  76. Diary of a Teenage Girl (August 7th) | B+
  77. Goodnight Mommy (September 11th) | B+
  78. Southpaw (July 24th) | B
  79. Crimson Peak (October 16th) | B
  80. Straight Outta Compton (August 14th) | B
  81. Tales of Halloween (October 16th) | B
  82. Youth (December 5th) | B
  83. The Walk (October 2nd) | B
  84. The Night Before (November 20th) | B
  85. Black Mass (September 18th) | B
  86. Pitch Perfect 2 (May 15th) | B
  87. Furious 7 (April 3) | B
  88. Life (December 5th) | B
  89. Everest (September 18th) | B
  90. Heart of a Dog (October 21st) | B
  91. Unexpected (July 24th) | B
  92. Clouds of Sils Maria (July 14th) | B
  93. Cinderella (March 13th) | B
  94. People Places Things (August 14th) | B
  95. Insidious: Chapter 3 (June 15th) | B
  96. The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (August 14th) | B-
  97. The Revenant (December 25th) | B-
  98. The New Girlfriend (September 18th) | B-
  99. Truth (October 16th) B-
  100. American Ultra (August 21st) | B-
  101. Cooties (September 18th) | B-
  102. Freeheld (October 2nd) | B-
  103. Ted 2 (June 26th) | B-
  104. Trumbo (November 6th) | B-
  105. Burnt (October 30th) | B-
  106. Sisters (December 18th) | B-
  107. Unfriended (April 17th) | B-
  108. MacBeth (December 5th) | B-
  109. The DUFF (February 20th) | B-
  110. The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (March 6th) | B-
  111. Tomorrowland (May 22nd) | B-
  112. Run All Night (March 13th) | B-
  113. Welcome to Leith (September 10th) | B-
  114. Focus (February 27th) | B-
  115. Ricki and the Flash (August 7th) | B-
  116. The Danish Girl (November 27th) | C+
  117. Goosebumps (October 16th) | C+
  118. Concussion (December 25th) | C+
  119. Daddy’s Home (December 25th) | C+
  120. Paper Towns (July 24th) | C+
  121. The Last Witch Hunter (October 23rd) | C+
  122. The Gallows (July 10th) | C+
  123. Joy (December 25th) | C+
  124. Hotel Transylvania 2 (September 25th) | C+
  125. Suffragette (October 23rd) | C+
  126. Slow West (May 15th) | C+
  127. True Story (August 4th) | C+
  128. Hotel Transylvania 2 (September 25th) | C+
  129. Dope (June 19th) | C+
  130. Project Almanac (January 30th) | C+
  131. Meet the Patels (September 11th) | C+
  132. Fantastic Four (August 7th) | C+
  133. Legend (November 20th) | C+
  134. Magic Mike XXL (July 1st) | C+
  135. The Wedding Ringer (January 16th) | C
  136. A Walk in the Woods (September 4th) | C
  137. Spy (June 5th) | C
  138. Age of Adaline (April 24th) | C
  139. Secret in their Eyes (November 20th) | C
  140. Victor Frankenstein (November 25th) | C
  141. Cymbeline (March 13th) | C
  142. In the Heart of the Sea (December 11th) | C
  143. Miss You Already (November 6th) | C
  144. Chi-Raq (December 5th) C
  145. Extraction (December 25th) | C
  146. The Longest Ride (April 10th) | C
  147. Our Brand is Crisis (October 30th) | C
  148. Woman in Gold (April 1st)| C
  149. Grandma (August 21st) | C
  150. No Escape (August 26th) | C
  151. The Lady in the Van (December 5th) | C
  152. By the Sea (November 5th) | C
  153. Time Out Of Mind (September 9th) | C
  154. Minions (July 10th) | C
  155. San Andreas (May 29th) | C
  156. Where to Invade Next (December 22) | C
  157. The Cut (September 18th) | C
  158. Captive (September 19th) | C
  159. The Spongebob Movie: Sponge out of Water (February 6th) | C-
  160. The Emperor’s New Clothes (December 16th) | C-
  161. Chappie (March 6th) | C-
  162. Love the Coopers (November 13th) | C-
  163. Spare Parts (January 16th) | C-
  164. Child 44 (April 17th) | C-
  165. Get Hard (March 27th) | C-
  166. A Brilliant Young Mind (September 10th) | C-
  167. Blackhat (January 16th)| C-
  168. Before We Go (September 4th) | C-
  169. The Ridiculous 6 (December 11th) | C-
  170. Hellions (September 18th) | C-
  171. Shanghai (October 2nd) | C-
  172. Entourage (June 3rd) | C-
  173. Rock the Kasbah (October 23rd) | C-
  174. Wolf Totem (September 12th) | C-
  175. The Letters (December 5th) | C-
  176. Don Verdean (December 11th) | C-
  177. The D Train (May 8th)| C-
  178. We are Your Friends (August 28th) | C-
  179. Trainwreck (July 17th) | D+
  180. Aloha (May 29th) | D+
  181. The Gunman (March 20th) | D+
  182. Poltergeist (May 22) | D+
  183. 90 Minutes in Heaven (September 12th) | D+
  184. The Transporter Refueled (September 4th) | D+
  185. Max (June 26th) | D+
  186. Point Break (December 25th) | D+
  187. Little Boy (April 24th) | D+
  188. Scout’s Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse (October 30th) | D+
  189. The Perfect Guy (September 12th) | D+
  190. Vacation (July 29th) | D
  191. Terminator Genisys (July 1st) | D
  192. Self/less (July 10th) | D
  193. Unfinished Business (March 6th) | D
  194. The Green Inferno (September 25th) | D
  195. Lazarus Effect (February 27th) | D
  196. Kill Me Three Times (April 9th) | D
  197. Insurgent (March 20th)| D
  198. Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Road Chip (December 18th) | D
  199. Serena (February 26th) | D
  200. Fifty Shades of Grey (February 13th) | D
  201. Jem and the Holograms (October 23rd) | D
  202. Hot Tub Time Machine 2 (February 20th) | D
  203. Sinister 2 (August 21st) | D-
  204. Pan (October 9th)  D-
  205. Pixels (July 24th) | D-
  206. Absolutely Anything (August 14th) | D-
  207. Hot Pursuit (May 8th) | D-
  208. Home (March 27th) | D-
  209. Jupiter Ascending (February 6th) | D-
  210. Return to Sender (August 14th) | D-
  211. Mortdecai (January 23rd) | D-
  212. Survivor (June 5th) | D-
  213. Paul Blart: Mall Cop 2 (April 17th) | D-
  214. The Boy Next Door (January 23rd) | D-
  215. Accidental Love (February 10th) | D-
  216. Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension (October 23rd) | F
  217. Hitman: Agent 47 (August 21st) | F
  218. Strange Magic (January 23rd) | F

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

So, M. Night Shyamalan Still Wants to Make ‘The Last Airbender 2’

the last airbender 2

Before we go any further, let’s get my opinion straight. I’m speaking to M. Night Shyamalan directly when I say, STAY AWAY FROM AVATAR: THE LAST AIRBENDER. FOREVER.

There, that’s all I wanted to say, aside from the rest of this.

Strangely, some people don’t blame the once promising director for the insulting mess that was 2010’s The Last Airbender, including Shyamalan himself. We’ll get to the lunacy of that, but first I should mention that this is still a minority opinion. A terrible opinion, but a minority opinion all the same.

Venture Capitol Post posted an article yesterday with an unforgivably misleading title that shocked and scared the eyes of hopefully only tens of readers:

‘Avatar: The Last Airbender 2’ Confirmed: Director M. Night Shyamalan Defends 1st Film from Longstanding Criticism.

Um…No, this movie is most certainly NOT confirmed. Obvious clickbait headline isn’t just clickbait. It’s actually beyond clickbait, transcending into a full on clicksnare.

the last airbender 2
This will teach readers to skim my lede.

Nowhere in the article does it say that The Last Airbender 2 has been “confirmed.” They don’t even get the name of the movie right in the title, which should be the first red flag.

No, this article only covers a few link shares to other articles published over the last few months that point out Shyamalan’s interest in continuing the franchise. In fact, I can’t find anything new or relevant in this article to explain why it even exists. So let’s keep going!

‘Avatar: The Last Airbender 2’ director M. Night Shyamalan continued to defend his first film from long-standing criticism. He is also reported ready to push through with a sequel.

Source? Nope. There’s no source for this at all. Venture Capital Post just asserts this and moves on like it’s not the biggest bombshell fans of the animated series have seen since the first reviews for The Last Airbender came out. Who edited this?

According to Movie Pilot, the filmmaker was not to blame for the Nickelodeon cartoon adaptation’s failure with critics and audiences alike.

First, it’s Moviepilot, not “Movie Pilot.” Also, they’re shamelessly sourcing an opinionated article not written by Moviepilot staff, but written by someone who’s never seen an episode of the show they’re talking about. I’m not making that up.

Let’s jump over to that “Movie Pilot” article and see what writer Rohan Mohmand has to say (and yes, it’s ironic he shares the name of Tenzin’s son).

M.Night Shyamalan is an original thinker.

Nope, nope, keep going. You can do it, Jon.

I still haven’t seen the respective show,

Wow. Yeah, so Rohan sings Shyamalan’s praises for a few paragraphs, citing that the early success for the filmmaker based on his only two widely accepted movies, The 6th Sense and Unbreakable (a case can be made for Signs, but not a good one) lends to the fact that the failure of The Last Airbender has nothing to do with him.

Because directors don’t make both good and bad movies, according to Rohan. Especially when they’ve made like five abysmal movies in a row. You know what came out before The Last Airbender? Oh, just a little train wreck called The Happening.

In that movie, the “original” Shyamalan presented a world where plants make us kill ourselves. And that’s when we learned that originality doesn’t necessarily make something good.

Today, it has been almost six years since its release, and whenever someone brings the subject of The Last Airbender it is Shyamalan to blame.

Is this a surprise? He’s writing this like it’s not valid to blame the person who spent the most time making the movie happen and overseeing its execution for how bad it is. Granted, not every movie is bad because of the direction, but how can you argue that The Last Airbender doesn’t suffer from its many Shyamalanisms?

the last airbender 2
“Let’s do ANOTHER closeup so we can see how bad the scar is!”

But Rohan’s not finished. He cites an interview Shyamalan had with IGN about this (sorry about the inception-level article sourcing. It’s not my fault, I’m only the director of this article).

This is from Shyamalan, explaining what went wrong with the movie:

“My child was nine-years-old. So you could make it one of two ways: you could make it for that same audience, which is what I did, for nine and 10-year-olds, or you could do the ‘Transformers’ version and have Megan Fox. I didn’t do that.”

First, that last line, “I didn’t do that” wasn’t cited by Rohan for some unexplainable reason, so I added it. Second, what world does Shyamalan live in?

You know what else was made for nine and 10-year-olds? Avatar the Last Airbender, which is considered by many to be one of the greatest animated series of all time. But it’s not geared toward people who like Transformers, so Shyamalan had to “adjust.”

What kind of backwards opinion is this? Your movie sucks because you made it for kids? Have you ever seen a Disney, Pixar, or DreamWorks Animation movie? You think those movies are hits because they appeal to adults ONLY? No, they appeal to a wide demographic. Kids AND adults can watch a movie like Beauty and the Beast.

the last airbender 2
Which was ONLY the first animated movie to be nominated for Best Picture. That’s all! 

In what universe do you have to believe that if you shoot for a wider demographic, you end up creating something akin to Transformers?! You know what, I actually can believe that someone as deluded as M. Night Shyamalan believes he’s making bad movies because he thinks anything else is Transformers. That’s the same delusion that must be related to his obvious and utter failure to understand how to make a kids’ movie, or why a good kids’ movie is good. 

Rohan (hopefully) digresses:

Defending his film, there’s nothing that we can do, for as the director, and also as a fan of the show, Shyamalan has all the rights. But, the question is, is he really the person to blame for the failure of The Last Airbender?

YES. Is this a trick question?

The answer to the question above is a “no.”

I hate everything.

Shyamalan is not to blame for the failure of the film. In fact, he is owed an apology.

Should I punch my computer now?

Last summer, Joblo penned a piece spreading the word, the story behind the making of The Last Airbender, divulged passionately on the AvatarSpirit.net forums.

So now we’re officially sourcing forums.

The story, however, is no longer available on the forum.

I wonder why.

It was published by someone who worked on the production of the film and the increased attention got her concerned as her career was going to be in jeopardy.

How do you know this? And can’t you also argue that she took it down because it was full of false information skewed by her opinion? Nope, let’s just take this at face value and source it as evidence.

I’ll give you the gist. This person claims that 80% of the decisions for The Last Airbender came from the producers, including the casting of the girl who played Katara.

last airbender 2
Yeah, I don’t remember her name either.

She argues that this casting was nepotism on part of the producers, and it resulted in them having to alter the ethnicities of many other characters, leading to the major backlash this movie suffered from before it even came out. None of the characters looked the part.

Only later would we realize that none of the actors acted the part either. Katara herself lost all of her best moments from the show (holding her own against Zuko, giving the inspiring speech to the earthbenders), and Sokka’s cleverness and wit was replaced with…brooding and being serious all the time.

the last airbender 2
Your meat and sarcasm guy.

Of course, Rohan would know this if he had watched an episode of the show.

The disgruntled forum hacker blames everything on the producers. The lack of budget, the story changes, the effects not looking right. Basically, she props up the basic challenges of any film as something that the director couldn’t control.

Except, we’re not talking about a novice director. We’re talking about M. Night Shyamalan, who at this point in his career DID have clout as a film director. I can understand a newcomer like Colin Trevorrow getting steamrolled while making Jurassic World, but you can’t give someone like Shyamalan the same pass.

And this unknown person claims that Shyamalan just gave up because none of his ideas went through. In other words, he didn’t do his job of upholding good ideas, so he’s the victim.

You know who else “gave up” on their movie? Josh Trank with Fantastic Four. You know why everyone still blames him, even after writing that cringe Tweet? Because he’s the director. It’s his JOB to salvage what the producers pick apart.

the last airbender 2
“I wanted to give you good direction, but the producers said I can’t.”

And blame the producers all you want for getting in the way. You CAN’T, however, blame them for the execution. You can’t blame the producers for the gross mispronunciation of the characters’ names. That was from Shyamalan. You can’t blame the horrendous closeups and terrible camera work. That was from Shyamalan. You certainly can’t blame the bland dialogue and writing that comes from every other Shyamalan movie and is present here (because he wrote it).

What, were these the same producers who made The Happening happen?

So Rohan concludes, claiming that Shyamalan is classy for taking the responsibility and not blaming anyone else. That’s fine. But you’re in a dream within a dream if you really think he’s not to blame for why this movie still causes physical and emotional pain for any fan of the show who’s reminded of it.

Back to Venture Capital Post, who is spinning the wheels of what you can get away with in an article that does no real work:

It is undeniable that Shyamalan is a master writer-director in his own right with successful supernatural films under his belt including ‘Lady in the Water’, ‘The Village’, ‘Signs’, ‘Unbreakable’ and 1999’s cult favorite ‘The Sixth Sense’.

No.

Just…no. It is not “undeniable.” It is, in fact, incredibly deniable that Shyamalan is a “MASTER” because only two and half of those movies were well-received by critics. Lady in the Water? Seriously? The movie that received a 24% on Rotten Tomatoes before it was “cool” to make fun of Shyamalan?

Look, I love The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable as much as anyone. And I didn’t “hate” Signs and The Village. But to call the man a master is hyperbole, and saying it’s “undeniable” is transcending hyperbole. 

the last airbender 2
How do I sleep at night? 

But Venture digresses. The writer points out what Rohan did — that Shyamalan said to IGN once that The Last Airbender is made for nine and 10-year-olds instead of everyone who else who watches Transformers, which is why “you don’t get it.” Virtually ignoring every other kids’ film that has proven the exact opposite.

Then Venture rightfully acknowledges that the creators of Avatar (Bryan Konietzko and Michael Dante Dimartino) don’t even acknowledge that The Last Airbender even exists. Yeah, it’s the Lake Laogai running gag that us fans have been using to cope for five years now, and it’s pretty effective.

According to Den of Geek, Shyamalan planned to push through with a sequel as evidenced by the introduction of Prince Zuko’s sister, Azula, at the end of the first film.

Wait, that’s not according to Den of Geek, that’s painfully obvious from watching the movie. Did you really have to source a website to know that they planned to make this a trilogy? Is this real life?

However, despite previous news that he had already penned a first draft for the follow-up, no updates have come up since then.

This sentence flies in the face of the earlier one in this article, which claimed that the sequel WAS reportedly happening. Oh, and it also clashes with the headline of the entire article. This is real life.

You’re probably wondering why I’m going to so much trouble to rip these articles apart, and it’s for a few reasons. The biggest is that I don’t want someone to stumble across them and take them in as actual reporting. This is a PSA.

the last airbender 2

Second, I love this franchise more than any other on television. I love the characters. I love the animation. I love the world they created. I love the comics. I love the spin off. I love the fan art. I even love the pilot episode. OK, the video games are hit and miss, but I still enjoyed playing them.

So I’m going to dissent with writers like Rohan who let their love of Shyamalan get in the way of honest criticism. And for the most part, he does a good job of explaining why he loves this director and wants him to succeed. I have no problem with that, even though I disagree.

My main issue is with a website like Venture Capital Post for all of the reasons I’ve already gotten into. And if you come across garbage articles like this during your time on the Internet, then I hope you do the same and call them out for it. We deserve better.

On that note, I’d like to welcome you to Lake Laogai.

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

Hitman: Agent 47 Review — This Is Not a Game

hitman agent 47 review

Hitman: Agent 47 was directed by Aleksander Bach and written by Michael Finch and Skip Woods. It stars Rupert Friend as Agent 47, Hannah Ware as Katia van Dees, and Zachary Quinto as John Smith—er—Brian.

It’s based on the video game of half the same name, Hitman, which is a popular franchise about an elite assassin with no emotions or empathy coming up with creative ways to kill his high profile targets.

He’s traditionally shown wearing his iconic red tie and nice suit. He has a shaved head, a bar code at the base of his neck from when he was “engineered” into an agent, and his trusty silver ballers, which are basically just Lara Croft’s dual pistols with silencers.

hitman agent 47

I’ve been a big fan of these video games since Hitman: Codename 47 came out in 2000. I still remember the brilliance of Blood Money from 2006, and I even liked Absolution, the somewhat poorly received game from 2012.

Even the 2007 movie starring Timothy Olyphant was a passable diversion for me. It had its problems, but it at least fell within B-movie territory. It had neat ideas, the characters were OK, and even memorable action scenes I still remember almost a decade later.

I saw Hitman: Agent 47 just a few hours ago, and I barely remember any of the action scenes in that movie. I don’t even know if I can explain the plot to someone without giving up halfway through.

So what’s this new Hitman movie about? The plot centers around a young girl who is looking for someone she’s never met who apparently holds the secrets to creating an army of super-powered assassins. She’s hunted by one of these assassins, who turns out to be Agent 47. She comes across a CIA agent who tries to protect her, but it’s revealed that he’s…the bad guy? And then Agent 47 is sort of the good guy. But they’re all looking for the same thing for different reasons…and…I think the bad guys want to…well, it’s never explained.

hitman agent 47 review

I think Jurassic World‘s militarized raptor subplot made more sense than this.

The opening scene itself lost me instantly. It’s heavy on exposition we don’t care about, and it goes on for way too long explaining things we don’t care about with computer screens and pixellated faces we don’t care about. From then on, the movie boils down to people chasing each other and explosions. That’s about it.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise if you recognize the talent of the writer I mentioned, Skip Woods. You may remember him as the guy who wrote X-Men Origins: WolverineCredentials, and…Hitman (2007)?

No, seriously, they brought back the guy who worked on the Hitman movie that completely bombed on top of the worst X-Men movie. People who make money doing this for a living made that decision.

hitman agent 47 review

Not even the director seemed to know what he was doing here. This is Bach’s directorial debut, and even though the movie has some style to it, you can tell that it lacks good direction. The action scenes and editing are put together alright, and there are even some interesting ideas here and there (though nothing truly inspiring).

But there’s a complete lack of connectivity going on between both the characters and the set pieces.

There are multiple instances of Agent 47 and Katia having what appear to be “visions” that let them know what’s going on in other parts of the building. This doesn’t work at all because most of the visions are triggered when they touch someone or something or each other, making you think they’re psychic or just having hallucinations.

Also, it makes no sense WHATSOEVER that they can see through walls. Maybe the script does a better job painting this picture, but I found myself completely distracted by the lack of logic in how everything moved and related with each other in almost every scene. Even the ones in confined quarters.

hitman agent 47 review

What about the actors? Individually, they’re fine, but once they start interacting with each other, the movie becomes a chore to sit through. The first issue is how the endless exposition seems to do more harm than good because it introduces a new plot hole every 47 seconds. There’s enough plot holes going on visually, but when the writing gets involved…

I had a headache after watching this movie. Not because it was loud and dumb, but because there were so many plot holes, I couldn’t sit still. I was constantly engaged with how poor and ill-conceived this movie was. It caused me physical pain.

The second issue with the characters is their complete lack of apparent interest in anything that’s going on. Watching Agent 47 and Katia interact is like watching two coworkers talk about work. Just look at this image:

hitman agent 47 review

And I’m not cherry picking. That’s the extent of their expressions throughout the entire film. No passion. No hint of a motivation written for them. To be fair, this is expected from Agent 47 because that’s his character (even though the games make 47 look like the Joker compared to this guy).

But Katia is supposed to be our gateway into the lore of this movie, and she’s just as bland as everyone else. It was actually a smart idea to present Hitman through a person learning how to be one from the legend himself. So it would have worked if there were genuine reactions and important dialogue coming from this character, but they’re nonexistent.

What about the action scenes? They could have been good, as some of the setups are clearly inspired from the game and play homage here and there. Unfortunately, the CGI is pretty terrible and noticeable. And the few decent scenes were always ruined halfway through.

hitman agent 47 review

There’s a great sequence where Agent 47 uses stealth to take out a few guards. It would have been great if they left it at that, but then you see him walking casually down a staircase just shooting everyone and walking away unharmed. It completely undercut any tension that started to build when the scene started.

Another scene has 47 steal the clothes from a guard he’s taken out, which is a fun throwback to the games. But then he’s encountered by another guard in what is at that point a race against time, but then he takes the time to take out that guard too and change his clothes again for no conceivable reason.

One of the most frustrating scenes is when Agent 47 has multiple opportunities to finish off the main villain, but he just walks away every time he brings the guy down. Then the villain gets back up and tackles him. Agent 47 knocks him down again and walks away. Then the villain gets up and tackles him again. This cycle happens about four times WHILE AGENT 47 STILL HAS A GUN IN HIS HAND. 

Then there’s the matter of Agent 47 being surrounded by armored guards with machine guns, but he’s able to defeat all of them in the middle of broad daylight without moving. And he doesn’t get shot once.

hitman agent 47 review

And the soundtrack? They couldn’t even get that right. One of the prime attractions of this character is how beautiful classical music contrasts with the bloodshed that’s taking place. There’s not one moment where this happens. Instead, the scarce music that does take place is a boring mix of electric guitars and…I can’t remember what else.

 

This is easily one of the worst action movies of the year, and probably the summer. While I didn’t have high expectations for it, I honestly thought we could at least get something interesting to salvage from a movie paying tribute to a fantastic game series. Now I’m more jaded than ever that they can’t get a Hitman movie done right.

Strangely, the only good Hitman movie is last year’s John Wick. Like the games, it features an overpowered assassin working within the confines of an underground organization. In fact, just watch John Wick this weekend instead of Agent 47 and you’ll get your fill.

Grade: F

And that’s all I have left to say about it. I wouldn’t even recommend it to someone who wants to “turn their brain off” and watch a good action movie. Go watch Mission: Impossible again or any of the legions of other superior action movies that are out there and avoid this mess at all costs.

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

The 5 Movies that Sum Up My Love For Movies

love movies

“Summing Up” is a fun exercise I used to take part in during public speaking courses in high school. The premise is simple: you’re tasked with sharing five things about yourself to someone else so that they can properly sum you up.

We would do this with books, sports, TV shows, and of course, movies.

I’m sure you can all relate with how frightening it is to tell someone your favorite movie, even if you’re reasonably confident and have good self-esteem. For whatever reason, many of us can have this lingering doubt that the movie we pick is somehow embarrassing or, worse, wrong (whatever that means).

Choosing a “favorite movie” says a lot about who you are, whether you like it or not. You immediately put that movie on a pedestal above legions of others movies that are probably better, and this creates a slight conflict between you and the person who’s listening.

love movies
The Godfather: Part II

For this reason, I used to play “Summing Up” when I was still figuring out my movie tastes. Instead of telling people that my favorite movie of all time was this or that, I gave them a few movies that illustrated my love for movies.

And you know what? That’s way more fun than just boldly implying that “your” favorite movie is something special, even if you really think it is.

Nowadays, I just tell people what my favorite movie is because it hasn’t changed in a long time and probably never will. But looking back, I’m compelled to revisit this exercise more often, and as it turns out, my favorite movie is on this list anyway.

If you’re thinking of movies right now that fit this exercise, please share in the comments at the end of the post so we can get to know you in a non-creepy way. For now, here are the 5 movies that sum up my love for movies, starting with #5.

#5 Star Wars (A New Hope)

love movies

OK, let’s just get this one out of the way. While A New Hope isn’t necessarily the best “Star Wars” film, it’s certainly the most iconic, at least for me. No, Yoda isn’t in it, and Vader’s big twist isn’t until the next one, but I’m talking about story, not set pieces.

The story arc of A New Hope is my personal favorite version of the Hero’s Journey (or monomyth), made famous by Joseph Campbell. You have a central hero, impossible circumstances, a ragtag team of allies gathered along the way, and beautiful locations to watch them complete their journey.

You have a progression from zero to hero, a damsel in distress, and a main character who returns triumphant and transformed. A New Hope is my favorite movie that has this admittedly common storytelling, and it’s one of the first movies I ever watched that captured my imagination for heroes and adventures.

For that reason, most of the adventure movies I watch now end up getting compared to this one, rather than Empire Strikes Back or the Indiana Jones films.

#4 The Count of Monte Cristo (2002)

love movies

Based on an adventure novel by Alexandre Dumas, this retelling of The Count of Monte Cristo is one of the most satisfying story arcs I think I’ve ever watched on the big screen.

In case you’re unfamiliar with the basic set up, this movie is about a lovable adventurer named Edmond who is betrayed by his best friend for a crime he didn’t commit and is sentenced to life imprisonment. Meanwhile, his best friend steals his fiancé without batting an eye while Edmond plots his revenge in jail.

I won’t spoil the rest, but you can probably tell what’s coming. This movie is such a well-crafted revenge story that manages to be decently faithful to the source material. As someone who loves a great revenge movie starring Guy Pearce, this movie doesn’t disappoint in the slightest.

Every scene is pivotal, the relationships between the characters are unforgettable, and the actual message of the whole thing is timeless.

#3 You’ve Got Mail

love movies

Yes, I realize this movie is a bit of a ham, but I’ll never stop loving You’ve Got Mail. Even though the movie was considered underwhelming during its time, I’ve found it better and better the more I’ve watched it. I honestly can’t say that for a lot of movies that came out in the 90s, especially comedies.

Choosing this movie as the “romantic comedy” of the list was a hard decision because it had to win over Crazy, Stupid, Love. But really, the big difference between these movies is that You’ve Got Mail is more than just an archetype for what Crazy was trying to poke fun at.

Mail does much more with its subject material in that it contrasts relationships within the context of technology and even touchy subjects like capitalism, all set in the “center of the world,” New York City. The story works on a lot of levels, even if you’re not that entertained by the budding romance between Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan, so every time I rewatch this movie, I find more things to like about it.

While that doesn’t put this movie in the league of superior rom coms, of which I’d actually include Crazy, Stupid, Love, it’s still a movie that perfectly sums up what I look for in a movie about people falling in love.

#2 The Lion King

love movies

This may surprise a lot of you who were expecting to see Toy Story be my animation pick, but as some of you know, The Lion King is the first film I ever saw in theaters, so it had a much bigger impact on me. Though to be fair, both movies cover a compelling story about redemption, which is where I’m really going with this pick.

Granted, The Lion King is basically Disney doing Hamlet with lions, but if we can give Robin Hood a free pass, then why not this? Watching both stories, I certainly enjoy The Lion King the most because it does a much better job of getting me to invest in its characters, while Hamlet suffers from being bound to an older story that was made for a different audience.

So for that reason, The Lion King is an animated movie that I compare to almost every movie I watch that tells a story about someone finding redemption after a major tragedy and achieving their destiny.

This is actually why I enjoyed the recent Jake Gyllenhaal movie, Southpaw, which tells a similar tale with a boxer who realizes he isn’t as great as he thought it was. Even though the movie isn’t a classic, I gravitated toward Southpaw‘s story because it reminded me so much of other great redemption arcs like The Lion King and even Rocky III. 

True, I could include a host of other great animated flicks that would fit well here, like Finding NemoThe Prince of Egypt, and Aladdin. But I can’t help but hold Lion King to a much higher standard all these years later.

#1 The Mask of Zorro

love movies

This is my favorite movie of all time. Not because it’s objectively the best movie ever, but because in my eyes, it’s the perfect superhero movie.

Yes, this is my superhero pick, and it’s based on one of the first superheroes ever fictionalized (unless you count Greek mythology).

The Mask of Zorro has everything you could possibly want in a superhero film. It establishes its credibility with an original Zorro who has a compelling backstory. We watch the new Zorro train, fight, and fail under motivations that get you excited to see his transformation pull through. Even the romance plays an integral part in the story and doesn’t feel forced like some other superhero movies.

And the action scenes, even to this day, are some of the most fun moments I’ve ever had in a movie theater. Every set piece is a marvel, there’s tension when there should be tension, and there’s swashbuckling fun when there should be swashbuckling fun.

The first Pirates of the Caribbean does a good job of capturing this too, which is why I also hold that movie up to a pretty high standard for adventure films. But unlike Pirates, Zorro doesn’t rely on one interesting character to make its story intriguing. And at its heart, it’s still a superhero movie that fully delivers on everything you expect to see in one.

So there you have it! These are the five movies that sum up my love for movies. Adventure, revenge, romance, redemption, and superheroes. All of these movies are my first thoughts when said tropes are brought up, and they’ll probably stay that way for a long time.

What are your picks? Let everyone know in the COMMENTS.

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

‘The Man from U.N.C.L.E.’ Review — I Spy a Franchise

man from uncle review

The Man from U.N.C.L.E. was directed by Guy Ritchie and stars Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer, Alicia Vikander, Elizabeth Debicki, and Hugh Grant. It’s an adaptation of the TV series of the same name, and like the show, it’s a spy thriller set in the 1960s.

The movie is about two special agents, an American and a Russian played by Cavill and Hammer, who have to team up on a mission to stop a criminal organization from starting a nuclear arms race (the plot is only slightly less generic than I’m making it sound). They seek help from the daughter of someone within this criminal organization, who is played by Vikander.

Warner Brothers has been wanting to make this movie for over a decade now, but it’s somehow coming out during what I like to call “Spy Summer.” We’ve gotten a lot of pretty decent spy movies over the last few months, so how does this one stack up?

Well, one of the first things you’ll notice in U.N.C.L.E. is that the stunts are pretty well done. Cavill and Hammer did a lot of their own stunts, especially Hammer. At one point, his stunt double said in an interview that he hardly had to do anything (look out, Tom Cruise).

man from uncle review

In fact, Tom Cruise was one of the lead actors first snagged for the role of Napoleon Solo, the American agent. Henry Cavill (who initially sought the role of Hammer’s character) eventually got the part, so I think a lot of people must be wondering how the “man of steel” fares in this.

Fortunately, I can say that both Cavill and Hammer have great performances in this movie. Their characters are well written, their banter has that signature Guy Ritchie style to it, and you can more or less believe that they exist in the 60s. My only complaint is that physically, they don’t seem to match up since Hammer is meant to be a brute, while Cavill is more of the sleuth. But when you look at them side by side…well, it’s just a nitpick.

Speaking of nitpicks, I didn’t find as many as I normally do in spy movies like this, and that’s a testament to the fast pace and good writing, even if there are a few too many cliches in the overall story. I can’t say I was very invested in what was going on in this movie, and at times I felt a little lost. The movie is shot with a lot of shaky cam during its action sequences, and the script kept reusing an Ocean’s 11 plot device that felt useless by the third and fourth time.

man from uncle review

That said, the movie had a lot of memorable moments, rivaling Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation (the other spy movie that came out this month). A drunken Alicia Vikander tackling Armie Hammer’s daunting character out of nowhere was great to watch, and a certain scene involving a sandwich was the film’s best moment.

Overall, U.N.C.L.E. is an entertaining B movie with some neat surprises and good performances, though a little bogged down by a generic plot. What truly saves it from getting into mediocre territory is the soundtrack, which is currently my fourth favorite of the year (behind Mad Max: Fury RoadInside Out, and Paddington).

Grade:  B- 

If you like spy movies, throwbacks to good spy movies, the 1960s, and Guy Ritchie, then this is a must-watch.

Extra Credits: 

  • Again, I’ve never seen the original TV series, so I’m curious to know how U.N.C.L.E. stacks up. Let me know in the comments if you’ve seen both and can share your thoughts.
  • No after credits stinger, but it’s definitely setting up for a sequel (assuming it makes enough money).
  • Elizabeth Debicki is my next pick for playing Audrey Hepburn in any kind of biopic.
  • So Superman, the Lone Ranger, and an Artificial Intelligence try to stop a nuclear war…

man from uncle review

If you want to hear more thoughts on this movie before checking it out, listen to our upcoming podcast episode of Now Conspiring, where we’ll do a roundtable review with multiple critics. The episode will be ready for download this Sunday at 9:00 am (Pacific).

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

Were There Self-Aware Toys in ‘Monsters Inc,’ All Along?

toy story monsters inc theory

Since the release of my new book, The Pixar Theory, I honestly haven’t given much thought to expanding these Pixar-related connections because…vacation.

So, I’m back and here’s something potentially interesting for you to seek your teeth into. A few weeks ago, a regular visitor to the site (cheers, @ThomastheBrainEngine), brought me some interesting evidence of toys being “self-aware” in Monsters Inc, a la Toy Story.

In Toy Story, we learn that toys are sentient. They move around on their own when we’re not watching, and their entire lives revolve around the children who love them.

One of the main tenets of my theory, which tries to unite the Pixar movies, is that toys are alive because in the Pixar universe, human imagination is like a battery, and it gives life to ordinary things (maybe even cars).

toy story monsters inc theory

I argue that this is the same concept as monsters powering their society with the energy of children in Monsters Inc. But despite a few cameos (like Jessie and the Luxo ball), there’s nothing tangible linking Toy Story and Monsters Inc, especially if you consider Jessie’s appearance in Monsters Inc., to only be an easter egg, not a hint to something more.

But ThomastheBrainEngine presented a fascinating thought that I had not yet considered: what if we do see evidence that the world of Monsters Inc. has sentient toys? 

So I looked into this, and the evidence is solid, believe it or not. And it all hinges on the movie’s first scene.

Mr. Bile, can you tell me what you did wrong?

toy story monsters inc theory

This opening sequence introduces us to the basic mechanics of how monsters scare children. The monster, Mr. Bile (Phlegm), sneaks into a child’s room and attempts to scare him, but the kid wakes up and sees him. We see that Mr. Bile is actually more scared of the child than vice versa, and he trips and falls for comedic effect.

This, of course, is a simulation. A demonstration of how not to scare a child, so that the movie can cut to Sulley, our main character, who is the best scarer at Monsters Incorporated. The simulation we just watched was at the factory, and it’s our set up for everything that happens next in the movie (notably, that the worst thing you can do is let in a child by leaving the door open).

toy story monsters inc theory

Something that has bugged a lot of people, including myself, is a major goof (or series of goofs) that transpires during the simulation. When Mr. Bile walks in, we get a clear shot of the room’s layout and where everything is located. The soccer ball is under the bed, the toy train and its tracks are at the foot of the bed, and one of the books near the window hangs over the edge.

But as the scene changes, everything moves around. The soccer ball inexplicably moves to the side of the bed. It’s in a totally different location, and it eventually shows up again at the foot of the bed, where the train tracks have disappeared. Instead, there’s a bunch of jax in its place. Mr. Bile steps back on the soccer ball and falls on the jax (see above) like we’re watching a better version of Home Alone 3. We even see that the books on the toy box have moved a little bit, but they return to their original spot toward the end of the scene.

toy story monsters inc theory
The soccer ball is now under the bed again.

It’s nitpicking, but I’ve always been annoyed by how overtly obvious these goofs are. I’ve sat through a dailies session at Pixar, where the director and a group of animators will scrutinize every single aspect of what’s on the screen. Even for a movie that was made in Pixar’s early days, it’s strange to think that they could make so many continuity errors in just a couple of minutes, and the movie’s first few minutes at that.

Granted, these goofs happen all the time, and some are caught too late in the game to be considered worth the effort of fixing them. But they’re usually separated and scarce, not gathered in a cluster.

So, what if this entire scene wasn’t a goof at all? What if we were meant to see them? They’re certainly hard to miss, after all.

monsters inc toy story theory

The idea is that the toys moved on their own because the rules of Toy Story bleed into Monsters Inc. Part of any good simulation would be to make sure monsters are prepared for anything that could happen. If toys are able to come alive and possibly protect their sleeping owner from an invader, then it makes perfect sense for these simulations to include these variables.

Without those toys interfering, Mr. Bile probably would have been able to successfully leave the room and escape before the child could get up and go through that door. So part of the simulation could be to move the toys around, like they would in a real situation, in a way that conspires against the monster pulling off a scare. In this case, that meant moving the ball to where he would fall on a bunch of conveniently placed jacks that weren’t there in the first place.

It’s definitely possible, at least. The monsters controlling the simulation are creating atmospheric effects (the curtain moving like wind is blowing it, the child moving around in reaction to realtime events). If toys could move, too, then the monsters could simulate that experience.

monsters inc toy story theory

Would toys really do this, though?

I don’t think it’s a stretch based on what we’ve seen in Toy Story. Woody breaks the rules and unites Sid’s toys against him just to get back to Andy. He goes to incredible lengths to make Andy happy, so I’m pretty sure he’d also go pretty far to protect Andy from a terrifying monster.

It might not happen every time with every kid who has toys, but it could happen enough to warrant a response from Monsters Inc. When you watch Monsters University, you see that the higher ups are teaching the monsters tons of useful tips and facts about this profession, ranging from how the doors work to how monsters can adapt to any given situation.

monsters inc toy story theory

They have to prepare the monsters to be so stealthy, not even the toys know they’re there (which is possible, since we see that the toys do sleep when Woody has that nightmare in the first movie).

This also solves another major inconsistency that was brought on by Monsters University. If monsters have to go to college to get jobs as professional scarers, then why is Mr. Bile having such a hard time? And why is he doing this, anyway, if he has experience and a college education?

Well, if you watch Monsters University again, you probably won’t notice any of these instances of toys getting in the way. And that’s probably because introducing them as a variable is when you get into the expert mode of scaring. This would make scaring so hard for monsters that it wouldn’t be a critical point of the simulator until you actually got the job, explaining why Mr. Bile is sort of talented, but he ends up falling on his face, despite the rigorous standards of professional scaring established by Dean Hardscrabble in MU.

monsters inc toy story theory
Weirdly, Phlegm was good enough to hide this with a sweater.

To sum up, I think this evidence is pretty strong, mostly because those goofs I pointed out just seem overwhelmingly obvious. It is possible that the monsters controlling the simulation could be moving the toys around from the control room just to make things harder for Mr. Bile, not because toys are expected to come alive. But that just seems sort of harsh.

Mr. Bile walked into that room and surveyed everything as he was trained. Mixing things up for no good reason in a scenario that wouldn’t possible happen just to make things harder undermines how the monsters are trained in Monsters University. It’s like testing high school students on a different subject with information you never taught them—OK, wait, that happens all the time.

Let me know if you’re convinced or unconvinced and we can hash it out in the comments. If you’re interested in the Pixar Theory (that is, how all the movies may be connected and why) enough to read an entire book about it with all of the clues and arguments I’ve collected over the past few years, don’t forget to check out my book, which is available now in print and as an e-book on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, etc.

I’m Jon and thanks for reading this. You can subscribe to my posts by clicking “Follow” in the right sidebar. Or just say hey on Twitter! @JonNegroni

‘Fantastic Four’ Review — Doomed Expectations

fantastic four review

Fantastic Four feels more like the pilot to a promising TV series than an actual movie. That’s not a really a bad thing, but it’s certainly a deal breaker for most critics and FF fans.

We could talk all day about the troubled production this film has gone through, the obvious reshoots, and how director Josh Trank was fired halfway through and is pretty bitter about it (enough to denounce the film via Twitter before it even came out).

The obvious end of Trank’s career aside, this is a movie that is best enjoyed by audiences who want something a little more fresh from their superheroes. Fantastic Four is a welcome surprise for anyone who thought this year’s Avengers: Age of Ultron was a little overstuffed and overly self-aware. Instead of focusing on spectacle, FF focuses on characters coming of age in a science fiction backdrop.

Weirdly, superpowers are more of an afterthought.

FF is about a group of loners who build a teleportation machine that can take them to a “new dimension.” The journey alters and grants them powers, of which the military is anxious to capitalize on (it makes more sense than the army wanting to weaponize raptors).

fantastic four review

Most of the film is that first part of the story, in which we meet each character and get to know their origins and what motivates them. For this reason, I really enjoyed the first half of the film. It’s tightly written, the eventual villain has a decent arc, and I had fun watching these characters interact in a story that was obviously building up to something great. Only some of it was a bit eye-rolling (the science fair ex machina, for example).

Unfortunately, post-production rewrites sort of gutted the weight of the movie by essentially skipping over the second act. We jump from Act 1 (getting the powers) to Act III (using the powers for one, final showdown). There’s no real buildup or failure/success cycle you’ll find in a good story.

We don’t even get to see how these characters feel about getting superpowers because of a strange time skip. This is ironic considering Trank’s last movie, Chronicle, almost exclusively focused on the fun part of figuring out what it would be like to have superpowers.

TV pilots are typically guilty of these rushed plots. And sure, it all leads toward something that could be great in the future. But the ending is instead too one note to feel earned.

fantastic four review

My theory is that the second act had to be streamlined because it would have felt too familiar. The 2005 Fantastic Four movie already did the “getting our powers and learning how to use them” thing, so this reboot attempted to do something different with these frankly unpopular characters. I can easily see FOX discussing how fans were tired of the incessant Spider-Man reboots repeating the same story and trying to come up with a unique solution for this.

I appreciate the gesture, but it could have been much better executed.

The effects aren’t very memorable, and the action scenes were overall unimpressive. I did enjoy the look and brutality of the Thing, played by Jamie Bell. And my favorite scene (that I wish they extended) was the fight between Reed Richards and his pursuers. Pitting Reed against his future teammates (not just the Thing) would have been a great way to demonstrate how great these powers are. Instead, the movie decided to just tell us because it was getting too long.

I will say that with the exception of Reed and Doom, the look of these characters was good, even great (Human Torch was spot on). Kate Mara’s Sue Storm went the safe route and Miles Teller had way too many scenes where he needed a shave, for example.

fantastic four review

Doom himself does get a chilling scene straight out of a horror flick that is quickly undercut by how goofy he looks, but this can all be compartmentalized into a rushed third act that doesn’t force you to dwell on his character design anyway.

SUMMING UP

This movie will be very polarizing for years to come. Fans who enjoyed enough of the movie to forgive some of its blatant flaws will be met by others who were immediately turned off to the third act. A great example is Iron Man 3, another superhero film I thoroughly enjoyed despite immense backlash for its “twist.”

It’s not saying much, but I consider this the best of the Fantastic Four movies (of which there’s now four). To be fair, I abhor the 2005 and 2007 film. Comparisons aside, FF on its own is something I want to see more of. It’s a mess of a film that could be leading to something superb down the line, though I doubt it will ever get the chance under the weight of its abnormal expectations.

Grade: C+ 

fantastic four review

Extra Credits:

  • I really like how they gave Ben Grimm the idea for “it’s clobbering time.” And it was fun to see more substance and backstory come into play for Johnny Storm, who was overly silly in the last two of these movies.
  • There’s nothing after the credits, and I don’t think FOX is ready to hint at any crossovers with their X-Men and Deadpool movies unless FF is received well. I think this is fine because FF doesn’t seem to fit in a world where mutants live.
  • No Stan Lee cameo. He approved of the Human Torch being cast as an African American, but that wasn’t necessarily a recommendation for the film. He probably wants FF to be folded into the Marvel Cinematic Universe at this point.
  • Look, I get that it would be cool to have FF in the MCU. It would also be cool to have X-Men and Deadpool in the MCU. But the fact is that FOX bought these rights when Marvel was on the outs. They deserve to get a return on their investment, especially since their bailing out of Marvel two decades ago pretty much led to the sacred cow cinematic universe you seem to like so much.

Fantastic Four was directed and written by Josh Trank. It was also written by Simon Kinberg and Jeremy Slater. It stars Miles Teller as Reed Richards, Michael B. Jordan as Johnny Storm, Kate Mara as Sue Storm, Jamie Bell as Ben Grimm, Toby Kebbell as Victor von Doom, and Reg E. Cathey as Franklin Storm.