a little kink on the triptych execution - ***1/2

Director Christopher Nolan came up with the idea to tell the story about the Dunkirk evacuation 25 years prior to making the film while he was sailing along the English channel with his wife.  He wrote the story with very little dialogue, waited some more until he gained much experience in making large scale films, co produced it with 3 other countries and started filming in May of 2016.

World War II France,  the German army had successfully trapped the Allied forces on the North part of France, barricaded by a small perimeter around the beach of Dunkirk.  At the danger of losing the entire British army to the Germans, Great Britain decided to execute operation Dynamo which affected the evacuation of 400, 000 soldiers.  This movie is an impression of what happened in Dunkirk in 1940 during the days between May and June.

This film has Christopher Nolan written all over it.  He took complete control from script to directing, post and pre-prod.  The film triumphs in telling the story with very little dialogue, thus paying much attention to details.  Along with historical consultant he interviewed the surviving veterans and came up with a factual picture surrounding the events about the rescue.  But he also took it upon himself not to make the film political nor character-based.  It became more about telling what generally happened in Dunkirk according to how he sees it.

The story is told as a triptych, meaning it is told through three perspectives.  In this case there is the perspective from land, the air and the sea. At the onset there is a title when a perspective starts to be told then you realize you are watching three stories and then when all three stories are rolling the story starts to get confusing, but generally you just needed to know if they will all survive.  Generally to me it is a good film but felt like I was disregarded as the audience and so I find myself disconnected. 

Dystopia in biblical proportions - ****

Pierre Boulle wrote the book La Planete de Singes in 1963 and was translated into english as Planet of the Apes.  The book was adapted into film in 1968 and spawned four more sequels due to its success. This then translated into different forms from 2 tv series , to books and other media like comics.  War of the Planet of the Apes is already the third installment of the second reboot, taking it up from Tim Burton's 2001 release.  The first two being Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014).

The story happens 5 years after Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and the simian virus has mutated into something that also affects humans.  We find the apes led by Caesar (Andy Serkins) still at war with the humans, but now there is also another enemy called Alpha-Omega, a group of military fanatics led by Colonel (Woody Harrelson) bent on preserving the human's role as the dominant race and controlling the spread of the virus within humans by killing infected humans.

The movie boasts of a gripping and poignant narrative with conflicted and multi-layered characters masterfully told thru flawless special effects and backed by music and sound that help sustain the scene and push the story forward.  There is almost nothing in the film that I didn't like.  First of all , modern technology has gone so far that the animals portrayed here seem so real and that their emotions are succinct with how humans naturally react.  There is this suspension of disbelief that these apes are true and intelligent and capable of communicating and human emotions.  Caesar here has developed into a powerful leader and has developed into someone like Moses of the Bible who is tasked to lead his people to the "promised land'.  There are apes here who do not talk and so for the scenes where there are no lines, you hear musical scores that help support the conversation among animals.  I love the characters that this movie has created from Caesar who is at war with himself,  will he help lead his people or will he take care of a personal vendetta that he has with Colonel.  The Colonel, is the antagonist in this story has his own conflicts and you see that the real war is not out on the field but it is really within the characters.

Just a few scenes which I thought were predictable, but I understand that this is also a commercial movie that needed to fulfill some viewer expectations but I am willing to ignore that.  Overall I love this film a lot I am very glad I watched it.   And this movie came at a right time when I was really looking forward for a nice film after all the not so nice films that came along for the last couple of months.  

Spider-Man on retrograde - ***1/2

This is a second reboot of the Spider-Man film franchise, not counting the early Spider-Man films between 1977 and 1981 starring Nicholas Hammond.  (see Spider-Man early films) Its story takes off from Spider-Man's "gig"  in Captain America-Civil War, wherein we find the Avengers fighting each other and Iron Man plucks Peter Parker from New York and brings him into the Avengers stand off to break the balance, thus cementing his presence in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  The Homecoming here has a double meaning, one is the homecoming party in high school and the other a home coming welcome to Spider-Man into the MCU.

We find Peter Parker younger than himself compared to the other Spider-Man films.  He is fifteen years old in Junior High studying in Midtown School somewhere in the Bronx.  He has his powers already from being bitten by a radioactive spider and is bent on being a super hero, a title he so desperately wants to deserve with the approval of his mentor Tony Stark.  His struggles are typical for a fifteen year old except that his powers make him different than the rest and he tries to find his place in the world by fighting crime and staying grounded at the same time.

Tom Holland bested over a thousand aspirants for this role.  He was chosen based on his chemistry with Robert Downy Jr. and Chris Evans after a couple of screen tests.  And he was really perfect for this role.  His Peter Parker is a normal kid with some vulnerabilities and his Spider-Man is a very determined would-be super hero.  Also doing a good job here is Michael Keaton as the villain Vulture.  His character has many dimensions, he is a businessman but he is also a family man,  his character does not want to destroy the world he just wants to give a good life to his family.  So it was hard to completely hate him, his is a villain you can sympathize with and be scared at the same time.

If it were not for the surprise twist,  this story was just too simple to be interesting.  I was struggling to watch it and realized that maybe I am not the target market for this film..  The story feels like a young adult novel that got translated into film because essentially it is a coming of age film  but on a super hero level.   Being a regular guy trying to be a super hero, Spider-Man finds a match with regular guy at the onset of being a villain, and everything is sort of scaled down.  But this would be a good view for the young because Peter Parker here can be a good role model for the teenagers. 

a questionable love story - ***

This MGM produced film is based on a 2015 young adult novel of the same title written by Nicola Yoon.  She's written two books and Everything, everything was her first novel.  The film was directed by a black Canadian film director, Stella Meghie.  She studied screenwriting and this film is her second film but her first mainstream movie, being that her first film, Jean of the Joneses was considered an indie film. 

The film is about a couple of things; it is about a young lady trapped in her house because of some serious illness, who took the risk of dying in order to experience love and the ocean.  It is also about how love can cloud our judgement negatively affecting the people around us and most the ones we love.

This movie started of really nicely, the difficult conflict that it presents made it interesting.  There were some lines in the film that tugs your heartstrings and some motivational ones.  I particularly enjoyed watching the female lead, Amanda Stenberg.  She's a very pretty girl with very expressive eyes.  She played 'fragile' really well and it made it really easy to empathize with her character.

The problem starts when her character, Maddy meets and falls for Olly played by Nick Robinson.  Maddy is an extremely shy girl being someone who has never stepped out of the house since she was a baby and Olly being the new neighbor whose interactions with Maddy are limited due to her illness.  Most of their initial interactions were considered awkward because of  Maddy's emotional limitations and Olly's physical that it did not seem possible for them to fall in love the way they did in the movie.   Nick's Olly failed to develop her relationship with Maddy that his feelings comes off as ambiguous.  Is Maddy really in love with Olly or has she been too trapped inside her house that she falls for the first guy that she meets.  So short in saying the failure of the love story is caused by the questionable integrity of their relationship.

plagued with flaws - **

The Mummy is a reboot of the Mummy franchise that started in 1999 with the movie of the same title. then followed by two others, The Mummy returns and Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.  A fourth film was cancelled.  This new film is the first of a series that will feature other monster characters like Frankenstein, Wolfman and Dracula.  (see Dark Universe)

Princes Ahmanet (Sofia Boutella), in ancient Egypt, wanted to grab the power from her brother, killed her family and made a deal with the evil god Set.   In exchange for power, the deal will allow Set to exist in corporeal form thru a human sacrifice.  But before she was able to kill her lover as the sacrifice, she was captured and was buried alive in Mesopotamia, now Iraq.  Her tomb was later discovered by Nick Morton (Tom Cruise) inadvertently freeing Princess Ahmanet and making him the new choice to be the human sacrifice to complete the promise of Set.

The character Nick Morton showed a lot of promise because of all the conflicts and the ironies that befall him.  He has done many mistakes in the past and is almost at the brink of change.  A grave situation is thrown at him and he had to make some big choices; to live or die, to be good or evil.  His character is conflicted and eventually became the unknowing and reluctant hero.  I like the character's potential and I was certainly interested in how his story will go.

Unfortunately this was not portrayed well by Tom Cruise.  It is a question of who will adjust, will the actor adjust to his character or the other way around.  But being the big Hollywood actor as he is the character was suited to fit his old Hollywood iconic image.  This movie lends itself to a lot of cliches that make the narrative almost incoherent.  It tries to please the audience by giving them what they think they want sacrificing the integrity of its characters.  And just a little short of becoming a campy zombie film. 

rhythm is marred by backstory, constrained comic attempts and a hesitant romantic angle - ***1/2

DC Entertainment President, Diane Nielson along with Warner Bros agreed that Wonder Woman is one of three priorities as solo film subjects that even though studies for this film had started since 1995, the idea to produce this film never fizzled out.  The material had gone through many changes and went through so many hands until it finally landed into the abled hands of screen writer Allan Heinberg in 2015.  According to a poll generated by Fandango with 10,000 respondents, Wonder Woman is the most anticipated summer movie of 2017 satisfying the high demand for a female superhero.

Thematically a coming of age story with World War I happening in the background.   An innocent Diana (Gal Gadot), Princess of Themyscera saved an american spy, Steve Trevor (Chris Pine),  working for the british intelligence whose plane crash landed in Themyscerian waters.  She learned of World War I and decided to finish it by killing Ares, the god of war. In his desperation to leave the island, Steve agreed to bring her where the war is even though the idea of killing one man to end the wars sounded a little silly to him.  She comes into the real world with fresh idealism and naivete but her exposure to the ravishes of war and the feeling of true love, allowed for her much strength and maturity to become the superhero we know now.

So many things I like in this film,  I like how the production created Themyscira, the island is fascinating,  the inhabitants' looks are consistent, the Amazons' costumes are feminine but not slutty.  The way the fighting scenes are staged they look like they have their own fighting style.  I love Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, she just grabs your attention with her beauty and you never get tired looking.  Her fight sequences were well crafted.  Her Wonder Woman started as innocent and pure but when she fights she still looks hot but being a 'badass' at the same time.

Between fight scenes is when you try to develop the story, or try to put in some comic relief to grab the audience attention.  This is where the movie fails a little. I got bored a little and almost fell asleep because of some lull in the story, some backstory that is not really necessary, comic scenes that were not quite there and a romantic angle that was not developed well.  It could be Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman fails to connect with other characters and it sort of makes the story a little messy. But overall I'm happy I saw this film and I am certainly looking forward for a sequel. 

'Pirates of the Caribbean' sails into familiar waters - ***

Jerry Bruckheimer producing this series for the 5th time for Walt Disney Pictures came up with a totally different set of people to work on this possibly last episode. New directors, writers and composers try to work together to bring back the old charm of the first episode. Originally intended to be released in 2015, the film was delayed due to conflicts with the script and some budget issues. In other countries like the Philippines it is titled as Salazar's Revenge.

This is really about the search for the Trident of Poseidon, which was believed to be able to break all the curses at sea.  Henry Turner (Brenton Thwaites) wants it to save his father Will Turner (Orlando Bloom) from the curse of being bounded to the sunken ship the Flying Dutchman. Carina Smyth (Kaya Scodelario) wants it to know more about her father who left her as in infant with the book that includes a map that leads to the Trident of Poseidon. Together they partner with Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) as captain of the Dying Gull to help with the search.

This movie delivers a steady dose of action sequences and an impressive work on their CGI animation to match. It also tries to go back to the feels that the first episode has generated by adapting to what the original director Gore Verbinski has done.  Though the directors (Joaquim Ronning and Espen Sandberg) claim that they had simply executed what is, according to them on the 'impressive' script they had put their own Norwegian touch by involving more 'heart' and emotions into some scenes.  I am particularly impressed by the new characters in this story,  Javier Bardiem's Salazar is scary and vengeful , Henry Turner provides the heart in this film and Carina Smyth brings in a lot of emotions in this story while being strong at the same time.

After two episodes of this series I got tired already and did not watch the third and fourth.  I am even surprised that there is this 5th installment and there are talks that this film is just the beginning of the final episode.  I think I just simply lost interest in pirates and sea action sequences and it does not help that Jack Sparrow has been reduced to a drunken Mr. Magoo . Though the directors admit that they had made him like what  he was in the first episode which is 'not the main character' his character somehow became a nuisance to the other protagonists in this story.