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. 

a modern take on a loose interpretation - ***

Intended to be a 6 part movie series by Warner Bros, this 2017 fantasy film loosely based on the King Arthur legends spent $175million in production cost and only getting box office returns at $55.2 million.  It started filming in February of 2015 and was intended to be released in July of 2016.  The release has been postponed several times until it finally opened in May this year.

Jealous of his brother's power as king of the Britons , Vortigem (Jude Law) orchestrates a coup and summons a demon knight to kill his brother King Uther Pendragon (Eric Bana) by sacrificing his own wife to the sea witches.  The King senses the plot and tries to flee his family to safety.  His infant son Arthur escapes by boat , his wife is killed by the demon knight and the king plunges in himself the excalibur and turning himself into stone to prevent Vortigem from acquiring the sword.  As destiny would will it,  Arthur comes back a grown man, reluctantly claims the sword and must accept his fate as the new king of the Britons.

Charlie Hunnam made quite an impression on me when I saw him on Pacific Rim. And I really said I will watch out for his next big film and this film was the next one that came along.  His King Arthur started out as someone from the streets trying to earn a living for himself and his foster mother and later would develop into somebody more concerned with the fate of the land and accepting a bigger responsibility.  Charlie is just part of an interesting set of cast members which include some very good uknowns along with popular ones like Jude Law, Djimon Hounsou, Aidan Gillen and Eric Bana.  They have truly done their part as actors and have come together to make it an ensemble act to help further the story.

The director Guy Ritchie has his trademark firmly imprinted in every scene of this film.  If you have seen Sherlock Holmes you will notice how he is fond of some quick cuts to the next scene to demonstrate urgency and push the pace of the story.  Some of his shots and editing style were very expressive and gets the audience to feel what the characters are feeling. It helps generate excitement on a setting that  looks drabby and dark.

I was a little disappointed that the story is not really the classic tale of King Arthur but more of an artists interpretation of how he rose to power.  It is a loose interpretation that acquired too much artistic freedom breaking our own idea of what King Arthur should be like, others would use the word iconoclastic.  I had hope to see the classic story told in a modern way but it went all modern in style and somehow it did not gell very well together. 

as tiring as it is thrilling - **

Wikipedia - Alien Covenant is second to the prequel of the 4 Alien series; Alien (1979), Aliens(1986), Aliens 3(1992) and Alien: Resurrection (1997).  It follows the previous prequel that is Prometheus (2012) and there are two more coming to finally connect the story to the first Alien film.  Of all the Aliens films, Ridley Scott directed 4 of them.

Covenant is a ship in 2104 that carries 2,000 colonists and 1,000 embryos.  It's mission is to reach a remote planet, Origae-6 with the intention of starting a new population of inhabitants.  The ship is manned by a synthetic named Walter (Michael Fassbender) while the crew and the colonists are put to cryosleep.  The ship suffered an accident killing several crew members including the captain Jacob Branson (James Franco).  The crew is awakened  to deal with the situation by fixing the ship.  While doing this they  intercepted a message coming from a planet later discovered to be habitable by human beings.  A contingent went down to investigate and discovered the earlier version of the xenomorph that was cultured by the only survivor of the Prometheus expedition, a synthetic named David who looks exactly like Walter. The investigation proved to be dangerous because of this and escape rendered necessary.

Ridley Scott has mastered this deep-space, close quarter suspense genre that it is almost iconic.  To me who is not really fond of this genre, I had a hard time watching this movie because one I don't like scary movies and two I don't sit well with a lot of gore and blood.  While this movie seemed to get the nod of a lot of critics I did not like it for its story..  The story does not really say much aside from what happened after the Prometheus expedition and maybe an introduction of what might happen in the following installment.  Being a prequel, this movie will just pave the way to the main story that is the Alien series and we will mostly know how this movie will end.   So what prequels can do is mention what is precedent to the main story and help us the audience understand the characters more by giving them more dimension. 

story suffers from a reluctant conflict - **1/2

This movie is based on a 2013 novel of the same title. It is co-written by the author of the book, David Eggers along with the director James Ponsoldt.  Aimed to be a techno-thriller, the movie did not reach its projected income on opening week and ranked 5th at the box office running behind The Fast and the Furious and The Baby Boss.

Mae Holland (Emma Watson)  was hired by a powerful internet company called The Circle upon the recommendation of a college friend Annie Allerton (Karen Gillan) as part of customer relations.  Getting the attention of the co-founders of the company, Eamon Bailey (Tom Hanks) and Tom Stenton (Patton Oswalt) she was asked to be part of a transparency experiment that later proved to be fatal to her and to her loved ones.

This movie boasts of a powerful cast,  a writer who also wrote the source material and the co-writer who also directed the movie.  It is about an issue that is so significant in today's era of the social media where privacy is cheap and almost non-existent.  But the movie fails to present an urgent conflict to make it interesting at best.  At the onset, when Mae got into the Circle, we as viewers were presented with what is obviously wrong with the company but it seems like the people in the story do not seem to recognize this.  And I feel I was pushed back just to allow the story to unravel and when it did I wondered where all the problem is coming from and I realized it should have come from the co-founders of the company but the actors who played these characters seem to be reluctant to be villainous thus making the story almost incomplete. I was a little disappointed watching this.  This is not Tom Hanks' best movie for sure. 

a hilarious crowd-pleaser -***1/2

James Gunn, the writer and director of this film said that he wanted this sequel to be fresh and different from the first one by giving it a totally different plot structure.  Furthermore,  he was not inclined on adding more characters for this sequel , and instead focus on the existing characters by adding more depth thereby allowing the audience to get know the Guardians emotionally.

Upon completing a mission , the Guardians set out from the land of the sovereign race only to be chased by remotely controlled ships in order to kill them due to Rocket's misdoing.  They were saved by Ego and had to land on a nearby planet.  Ego revealed that he is Peter's father but turned out to have some plot to conquer the universe and use Peter's and his combined celestial power to do it. A battle ensues between father and son, while the others plot to destroy the planet that will eventually kill Ego.

I think this was really an improvement of the first episode in terms of story.  We get to really know the characters very well in this sequel.  Drax the destroyer is showing more personality here and has proven that he is not just a killing machine.  Gamora has shown another side of her with the help of her half sister Nebula.  Rocket revealed more of his human side despite him being a genetically engineered mercenary and bounty hunter.  And we get to finally close the subplot concerning Peter Quill's mysterious roots.  So generally the story moved quite a bit forward while further developing the main characters without any sort of distraction from the other new support that came along.

With fascinating visual effects and very interesting worlds and aliens this movie tries to be a little bit of everything to please quite a diverse set of audience. Mostly funny and action packed, it also tries to be melodramatic, mysterious,  somewhat romantic.  It tries to get into family issues , with siblings and fatherhood.  It also tries to get into the psyche of why people behave the way they do. Though this diversity did not at all dampen the entertainment value of this movie, I think the vol. 3 sequel could use some more resolve.

A rivetting story simply told - *****

The writer and director of this movie Tom McCarthy along with co-writer Josh Singer completed the award winning screenplay in 2013.  He said that one of his goals for his film is to highlight the power of journalism which according to him was 'waning'.  The movie premiered to a 'sustained applause' by the audience of the 72nd Venice Film Festival in 2015 as a non-competitive entry. And in 2016 the movie won Best Picture at the Academy Awards.

Spotlight is a spot at the Boston Globe handled by a group of investigative reporters.  The story is about how the team came about exposing the systemic sexual abuse of Catholic priests in the Boston area, starting with the directive of incoming editor Marty Baron urging the team to pursue the story and ending with the exposure of more sexual abuses by the clergy.  The series of articles won for The Boston Globe the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2003.

This film was superbly made in a way that everything was under control.  Even  the Catholic Church agrees how factual the story was presented regarding the Boston scandal.  Not over dramatizing it, not even exploiting the ploy of the victims, not demonizing the priests nor lionizing the journalists here that to me are the heroes, this movie really told the story as it is.  And it stars an ensemble cast of good actors nobody is dispensable.  I particularly noticed the kind of work that actor Mark Ruffalo puts in his role as Michael Rezendes.  His portrayal is deep into the bone, getting into the essence of his character ultimately changing his outward appearance from within.  I actually almost did not recognize him.. and I'm not talking about prosthetics. 

I feel very lucky having able to catch this film on a special screening.  I really rarely give a 5 star rating to any film because there wil always be something wrong.  But to me this film is what movie making should be all about. 

a contrived story that meant well - ****

Hugh Jackman was eyed to star in this film but he had to decline to be able to do the film Logan.  The producers thought of getting Johhny Depp until Overbrook Company  took over production and took on Will Smith to star in it as well.  The writer Allan Loeb had said that the idea of a depressed person due to death writing letters to the universe has been in his mind for so long that he was sure that it meant something. 

This is about a New York advertising executive trying to cope with the death of his daughter and how his three colleagues connived to save the company by proving his mental instability. It is also about how fate stepped in with the help of Death, Time and Love and tried to fix things for these four people.

I was so intrigued by this movie ever since I saw the trailer. I made a mental note to watch it when it came out.  Unfortunately I didn't have time to go to the theater when it finally did.  And so, now three months after, I am finally able to see it by renting it on iTunes. Really I am always concerned about what would the world say if it could talk.  Or what would abstract things look like when they are personified. The main character, Howard wrote letters to Death , Time and Love not knowing that they would one day come back to see him to reply to his letters.

Though this film did not quite turn out the way I think it would, to me it still sent the same  message despite taking on a course that the this movies trailer made me believe it would.  If that did not make sense to you, I can just say the trailer was a little misleading.   But I knew this movie would be somewhat heavy in feel and very serious in theme but there was nothing really remarkable about the way it was made except that, to me the two strongest points of this movie are script and casting. 

Though I have never been a fan of Will Smith, I know he has such a presence when he starts to speak and he probably gave his best in this film earning him a recognition by the NACCP Image Awards.  He is backed up by quite a strong ensemble cast led by Helen Mirren who is just delightful here as Death personified.  I like the sensitivity that Michael Pena gave to his role as one of the colleagues. Other cast members contributed in there own little way as well.

The script successfully strengthened the integrity of the characters who personified Death, Time and Love by saying things that really grab the essence of who they represent.  Like when Love said, something like love is present in the eyes of Howard's daughter it is also present in the tears that Howard sheds every time he thinks of her.  Or when Time told Howard that time is a gift and it is not for him to waste it. Or how the character Death reminds Howard that we as humans do not have control over death and that we should just accept.  On a certain level, we all know these things but to be able to hear it out of their mouths solidifies the truths that they stated.

Though the script was good the story to me felt too contrived that it was almost funny except that there was some doubt if they were really Death , Time and Love or are they were just actors pretending to be them.  Then it felt like there were too many coincidences going on that that makes you stop and think maybe they really are for no human could ever be that intelligent to be in the right place at the right time.  

Overall, I though this was a nice film although most movie critics will disagree with me. But I am glad I was finally able to watch and I am even thinking of watching it again. 

Possibly a good enough kids' movie - ***

Originally intended to be The Smurfs 3, the people behind Sony Pictures decided to make this latest animated movie a reboot from the previous full length animated versions making it more based on the vision that the comic book creator, Peyo started with.

In Gargamel's attempt to gain more power by capturing the smurfs and absorbing their essence,  he discovered that that there is another smurf village in the forbidden forest.   Smurfette learned about this and joined by three other smurfs they sought out the the lost village of smurfs to try to warn them.

A couple of things I like about this movie, most of it regarding the story and how it has chosen to make a girl character, Smurfette as the main protagonist of this film.  It has also decided to make a whole village full of strong women, the smurf version of Amazons.  The animation is very crisp and the design is more or less consistent with what we saw on TV which was really based on the comic book that Peyo created.

What I don't like about this film is the way the story was told.  I understand that this is a movie intended for kids and that a complex plot would be too bewildering for the young minds.  But to me the story was just too predictable.  Though I really appreciated that I was able to take a nap by a few minutes but the story's predictability failed to grab my attention. 

Cool visuals try to enchance a somewhat common story - ***

This is an American film produced by Paramount Pictures based on a Japanese manga written by Masamune Shirow.   The writer and illustrator of the manga intended the series to be read by adolescent boys and men who are old enough to read kanji.   The books were serialized in 1989 and the  series describes Shirow's vision of 21st century Japan that started in 2029.

The movie starts with the creation of the first successfully enhanced cyber-human, Major Motoko.  This cyber-human was created from a salvaged brain that is put inside a full prosthetic body and was assigned to be part of a team in charge of protecting public security.  While on a mission to fight against cyber terrorists, her paths crossed with someone that led her to discover the conspiracy behind her true identity

I admire the efforts the designers put in creating the Japanese prefecture set in 2029.  What is clearly the strong point of this film are the visuals, both in design and execution , be it by computer generated visuals or real sets and costumes.  Cinematography solidly sets the mood and the tone of the entire film ably supported by dark characters and Scarlet Johansson's internally intense interpretation of her character as the lead Major Motoko. 

But as the story unfolds you realize that you have probably heard this story before, maybe another hero story gone wrong or a conspiracy theory that has been published in several books already and I start to fall asleep and loose interest.  What kept me from totally dozing off are the action sequences and Scarlet's magnetic presence. 

It's the plot that needed saving. - **

This is the third movie of the Power Rangers film franchise all of which were produced by Saban Entertainment, an American/Israeli company operating outside the US.  Mighty Morphin Power Rangers came out in 1995 while the second film,  Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie came out in 1997.  Both of which and including this newest installment are all based on the Power Rangers TV series.

Rita Repulsa was close to acquiring the Zeo Crystal which will give her the power to destroy worlds.  The wizard Zordon kept the crystal from her along with 5 coins and willed them to find 5 strong individuals to give them powers to be able to protect the crystal from being taken by Rita Repulsa.  For the most part the movie was about how 5 individuals became the Power Rangers we know now.

While this is an American film, the movie is based on a Japanese TV series.  What this film tried to do is to veer away from the Sentai style of portraying superheroes and tries to create something that is more palatable to the Hollywood crowd by utilizing more modern visual effects and computer graphics.  This particular series is unique in a way that it created heroes one of whom is autistic and the other one could possibly be a lesbian.  So the story takes a more modern take than its predecessors by doing this.

The wizard willed the coins to look for 5 strong individuals to protect the crystal, and it turned to be more of a work of fate than a work of wizardry, but the truth is, Zordon needed the 5 rangers to combine powers so he can come back to life and so the backbone of the whole plot of sort of skewed.  The character development lacked focus thus taking it a longer time for each character to find something solid they can work on. The story took a long time to move forward and so there was really no morphing happening up until the last quarter of the film.  And when the real action finally starts you become uninterested already that nothing about it becomes thrilling.  Did not like the cast either, some of them were sort of flat and uninteresting while others were just pushed back a bit to give equaly exposure to others.

Overall, I did not like this film.  I got really excited by the trailer and thought how the Power Rangers have come a long way from sentai, but it did not really create much excitement for me to say that it was worth it.  If you are not really a Power Rangers fan you'd probably better off choosing another film to watch.

Twice the enchantment and four times the magic - ****

This is the live action remake of the 1991 animated Disney movie of the same title, while the former was produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation the latest version was still distributed through Walt Disney Pictures and is produced by an American independent film company housed in Walt Disney Studios, Mandeville Films.

Based on the abridged fairy tale which was adapted from Gabrielle Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve's La Belle et La Bete this story is about discovering love in dark places like fear and bitterness.  It follows the story of Belle and her desire to reach other worlds other than her small town of Villeneuve and the prince whose curse can only be undone by finding love and being loved in return.

The film took on the good points from the animated original and added more to it by adding some dimensions to its characters.  It took the best tracks from Menken's original playlist and added new songs to further develop the characters giving them a more complete persona. The actors were well casted in this film taking on Emma Watson to play Belle and Luke Evans was just perfect as Gaston and it turned out this movie has a powerhouse cast having Emma Thompson, Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen and Stanley Tucci playing the staff of the castle who were turned into objects as part of the curse to the prince.  Visually enchanting, the big feature of this movie is the production design the costumes and the scenes were well styled and the animated effects add magic to its already solid scenography.

There is really nothing in this film that I didn't like.  It was a good experience watching this film on 3D IMAX and it took quite a bit of strength not to sing along the familiar songs from the animated version.  This is a good date movie and also one the whole family will truly love.