Despite the prospect of WWII soldiers going up against twisted Nazi experiments being an exciting premise, audiences may want to temper their expectations.
Image Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Produced by J.J. Abrams and directed by newcomer Julius Avery, the film tells the story of a small group of soldiers who barely make it into France as D-Day approaches. Their mission is to destroy a communications tower near a Nazi-occupied village to clear the way for their oncoming troops. However, things become complicated as they uncover the secret of what the Nazis are doing to the people of the village: creating an undead, superhuman army for Hitler’s Thousand-Year Reich.
The premise alone was enticing enough to inspire attendance, but, unfortunately, the film’s balance between war drama and horror schlock tends to lean toward the former.
There are some positives to the film worth addressing. The action scenes, especially the way in which the film opens with the soldiers in a plane being fired upon, and visuals are impressive and atmospheric. When the film does get down to the nitty gritty horror aspect, it does unleash some impressively startling visuals. The acting was also very commendable, with Jovan Adepo, as the wide-eyed, pacifistic lead character, Wyatt Russell, as the battle-hardened soldier in command, and Pilou Asbæk, as the film’s deliciously sadistic antagonist, the standouts. Even when the film dedicates its time towards being a war film it manages to engage with legitimate emotion and tension.
Despite this, that’s not exactly what the film advertised.
Image Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
While the film does well enough with both sides of the equation, one is given more time than the other. For instance, the film lingers often on Adepo’s character objecting to leaving people behind to die or torturing the enemy for information. It’s executed fairly, but the problem lies with the fact that it’s difficult to take the moral quandaries and the horror of a war as seriously as the filmmakers want when the villains are cartoonish in their deviousness and the characters are going up against zombies with super strength. When you have a villain with half of his face blown off, sneering like a supervillain at a certain point, it puts the first two acts of the characters going through what feels like a different film into perspective. The film even opens with a title sequence that harkens back to the days of pulp adventure stories, something the film does evoke later when it does get to the zombie experiments attacking people, so one would think the filmmakers would’ve opted to go for something less serious and just go for over-the-top spectacle. It’s especially disappointing considering the unique opportunity that Bad Robot had with such a unique premise that normally wouldn’t be given such high production value.
Image Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
Overall, while the film has its moments of gory fun, impressive visuals, and a somewhat engaging cast to keep the film grounded and watchable, it feels as though it shies away from what audiences may have been hoping for. While not terrible by any stretch, I dare to say that it is a mostly good film, it’s one that should be approached with certain expectations in mind before seeing. If you enjoy war films, you’ll be pleasantly surprised. If you enjoy horror, it has it’s spots, but you may not be satisfied.
With David Gordon Green’s Halloween setting box-office records, is it possible that we might see a resurgence of the slasher genre?
Image Courtesy of Paramount Pictures
This year saw the release of the film (confusingly) titled Halloween. Written as a direct follow-up to the John Carpenter classic, the film followed an elderly Laurie Strode, once again played by Jaimie Lee Curtis, as she encounters Michael Myers once again after 40 years. While a bit jarring in its tonal shifts, the film, for the most part, was well-received by fans and critics, leading to the thought: will history repeat itself, generating more entries in the genre?
Back in 1978, Halloween revolutionized the slasher genre in horror. While certainly not the first slasher film, with some citing Black Christmas or even Psychoas the first, the film did popularize the idea of masked psychopaths attacking and killing young folk one by one. With a measly budget of approximately $300,000, Halloween easily made back twenty times what was given to the creators, and thus started a trend of creators using what little they had to create horror films of their own in a similar style. From smaller fares such as Prom Night, The Burning, and My Bloody Valentine, tothe famous Friday the 13th, this gave birth to what many believe to be the “Golden Age of Slasher Films,” going from 1978 to 1985, much to the dismay of film critics.
Image Courtesy of Miramax Studios
However, the genre’s popularity would eventually die down near the end of the decade. With the next two decades, there was a dip back into the spotlight with the likes of Wes Craven’s Scream, a step back down with the onslaught of critically panned remakes put out by Platinum Dunes that kept many franchises on the back-burner for years. While you had the occasional cult classic, such as Behind the Mask: the Rise of Leslie Vernon or Adam Green’s Hatchet trilogy, there hasn’t been stable momentum for the genre since the 90’s.
Then there came the past couple of years…
Image courtesy of Universal Studios
Slasher films have been steadily reemerging from their hiatus. With films such as Hush, Tragedy Girls, and even the return of Chucky from the Child’s Play series, filmmakers have shown that slasher films not only still have a place in the public mind, but could also be positively received by critics and fans. The only perceivable reason that they haven’t broken the floodgates is due to their relative obscurity.
The closest to overcoming this was 2017’s Happy Death Day, receiving fairly positive reviews and admirable box-office numbers. This could very well change with Halloween (2018), as it did currently sits at having a $250 million box-office against a $15 million budget. Not only that, but there have been recent announcements of Friday the 13th coming back in the next few years, spearheaded by Lebron James’ production company, Springhill Entertainment, as well as hushed whispers of Robert England returning to the role of Freddy Krueger from the Nightmare on Elm Street series after donning the glove and sweater in the show The Goldbergs.
With slasher franchises attracting renewed interest, this could be the start of a new era for slashers. It could just be a lot of talk between actors and studios that goes nowhere as before with such projects, but if these endeavors are successful, then there could be hope for the genre regaining a bit of the spotlight it once had.
After so many years of sequels and remakes, David Gordon Green has wiped away the slate and delivered the best Halloween film since the original.
Since 1978, John Carpenter has set the standard for slasher films. Halloween spawned numerous imitators, made a household name of Jamie Lee Curtis, created an icon of cinema, and began a franchise that, while containing a few standout films enjoyable in themselves, never recaptured the same magic of the first film.
While that’s still debatably true, there’s no denying that the latest attempt, which sets itself up as the true sequel to the first film by ignoring everything but the original, is not only a great follow-up story, but also a thoroughly entertaining horror film in its own right.
Image courtesy of Universal Pictures
It’s been 40 years since that Halloween night where famous masked killer Michael Myers menaced the streets of Haddonfield, Illinois, and Laurie Strode, the sole survivor of Michael’s rampage, has never forgotten it. Living in constant fear that Michael may, once again, escape captivity, Laurie has remained in isolation from the world, including her own family, to prepare for the worst. Her fears are soon realized when Michael, having remained silent and inactive all this time, breaks free and returns to Haddonfield to continue where he left off. With her family to protect, Laurie must engage Michael head-on in hopes of finally ending the nightmare she has lived through for so long.
Green’s direction is worth commending. Certain shots and scenes are definitely owed to Carpenter, but Green’s method of bringing the film to life is his own, as it doesn’t feel as though he’s trying to imitate Carpenter. Long takes and wide-angle shots recall the original, but there’s a modern sensibility that helps the film stand apart. For instance, one scene feels like it would have been staged by Carpenter, but its execution feels new and eerie. If you’ve seen the trailers you’d know I’m referring to the tracking shot of Michael as he goes from the streets to someone’s garage to someone’s house to steal a knife and kill the person inside. It’s all done in one, continuous take as it follows Michael, and it’s a stunning moment.
Image courtesy of Universal Pictures
The acting from most of the cast was excellent, with Jamie Lee Curtis giving the best performance. You feel how the trauma of that event has affected her character solely through her body language and line delivery. She’s reclusive, withdrawn, paranoid, and depressive, having occasional crying fits in public. It’s uncommon for slasher films to focus on how the life of a victim, or “survivor girl,” was impacted by their encounter, and, thankfully, Curtis was able to impeccably realize this rare opportunity by giving one of the best performances I’ve seen from her in some time. Other notable performances include Judy Greer as Laurie’s estranged daughter, Karen, who feels as though her mother ruined her childhood, Will Patton as the town’s deputy, and Jibrail Nantambu, an unknown child actor who easily stole the show whenever he was onscreen as a funny little kid babysat by one of Laurie’s granddaughter’s friends.
Image courtesy of Universal Pictures
Then there’s the core question posed about the film: is Michael Myers, a character that most people are familiar with and has been used to, scary? Yes, he is. Not another film in this series, apart from the second, has been able to make Michael as fearsome or alarming as he was in the beginning. Fortunately, that’s been rectified with this film. Michael is as brutal and unpredictable as he’s ever been, going after characters you wouldn’t expect him to target, setting up gruesome, macabre decorations for people to find, and stalking the night without anyone being aware of his presence until it’s too late. The tension when he’s on the screen is palpable, and even if you don’t see how some characters meet their demise, the aftermath paints an even more horrifying image in the viewer’s heads.
Image courtesy of Universal Pictures
Part of the advantage with Michael in this movie is the fact that the creators focused on what made him threatening to begin with. He’s still human and, feasibly, able to be hurt and stopped, unlike in some of the sequels where he felt like a copy of Jason Voorhees. In the first film, an almost supernatural quality showed about how ghostly and determined he was. It fools the audience in believing that he is this unstoppable force or, as Samuel Loomis put it, purely and simply evil.
While nothing ruined my satisfaction with the film, a few negatives are worth addressing. For starters, the film does fall into the usual horror tropes that we’ve come to know for years, especially for the slasher subgenre. Characters, no matter how appealing or likable, make illogical decisions only to further the plot or build tension, teens partake in scandalous activity only to be viciously murdered, predictable jump scares are present (thankfully, minimally), and so on. Another point against the film is the pacing. For long stretches the film trails on and on, specifically in some moments of comic relief that stops the film in its tracks, and takes away from time that could have been dedicated to other, more important, characters. Finally, a certain plot twist near the end of the film, while interesting in concept, feels too last minute and confusing. I won’t go into further details than that to spare everyone from spoilers, but know that there is a twist and it is a touch perplexing to say the least. Once again, if the film took a little more time from moments of comedy, that twist could have been stronger and easier to grasp.
David Gordon Green’s Halloween is a welcome return for Michael Myers and Laurie Strode, and judging by how well the film has been doing at the box office, Blumhouse Productions may be opting for a continuation. If they iron out some of the issues here while maintaining what worked well here, I think we’ll all be in for a treat in Halloweens to come.
After so many years of development and discussion about bringing to life one of Marvel’s most popular characters, Eddie Brock AKA Venom, I’m sad to say that Sony’s attempt to kick-start their own cinematic universe may need to go back to the drawing board after this outing.
Image courtesy of Sony Pictures Entertainment
Let’s begin with the plot. The story focuses on Eddie Brock, played by Tom Hardy, a hard-hitting video journalist who ruins his own career and social life when trying to expose the illegal actions of a genetics corporation, the Life Foundation, ran by the film’s villain, Carlton Drake, played by Riz Ahmed. Due to the nature of Drake’s research involving a downed spacecraft containing several oily extraterrestrials, referred to as “Symbiotes,” Eddie is infected with one of the alien parasites that he can hear in his head, turning him into a hulking, black creature with large, white eyes, sharp teeth, claws, and a long tongue. Intent on capturing and studying Eddie, Drake pursues him while Eddie seeks help from his ex-wife, Anne Weying, played by Michelle Williams, to help him control or remove the monster that compels him to give in to his darker impulses.
While Ruben Fleischer’s attempt at bringing the character to life is more enjoyable and, more or less, accurate to the comics in comparison to his disappointing first appearance in Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 3 back in 2007 and, the film is, unfortunately, a disjointed mess of a film with conflicting tones and awkward execution.
CONS
Besides Hardy’s performance, which we’ll get in to later, most, if not all, of the characters are stock and forgettable. Despite the amount of talent present in the film, there isn’t much
Image courtesy of Sony Pictures Entertainment
Image courtesy of Sony Pictures Entertainment
to the characters besides what they contribute to the plot, with Cartlton Drake as the film’s antagonist being especially egregious. You could practically make a drinking game at how stereotypically villainous he is. Is he a rich industrialist with obvious, sociopathic tendenciesthat people will conveniently overlook? Yes he is, so take a shot. Does he monologue about his goals for mankind, constantly bemoaning how weak we are as a species as it relates to that said goal? Yes he does, there’s another shot. Does he have our intrepid hero strapped to a table to interrogate him? That he does, another shot. Does he even reference biblical scripture to make himself sound learned and intimidating, but, instead, further compounds how clichéd he is? You bet he does, and that’s another shot. I could go on, and the other characters aren’t any better either. Anne Weying is just there to further the plot and be apart of a “will they or won’t they” relationship with Eddie, Jenny Slate’s character is just there to bring information to Eddie so he can go to the Life Foundation and get infected with the Symbiote, and even Woody Harrelson, who makes a special, mid credits appearance as Cletus Kasady, is just there to set up a sequel with Carnage that might not even be made. At best, these characters will have small moments of enjoyment, but, overall, they’re utilitarian by definition.
Another issue is the advertisement for the film. What was presented with these commercials was the idea of this horrific struggle between Eddie and the Symbiote as they fight for domination. The idea showed a lot of promise considering the nature of the character. However, this was the not the film we got. While there are moments that somewhat reflected what was advertised, the film, predominately, doesn’t come close to the tone presented in the trailers, opting for a more comedic tone for about half of the film.
Speaking of the story, there’s nothing much to write home about. Villain wants thing, thing latches onto the down-on-his-luck hero, hero uses thing to run around and break stuff in a comedic fashion, villain gets his own thing, big CGI fight during the climax, and end credits. It’s a fairly standard plot, but what doesn’t help matters is how certain elements are forced for the sake of the narrative. For instance, Eddie is made to be the bad guy in the beginning of the story when he goes through Anne’s files on the Life Foundation to bring up allegations during an interview. While this does make Eddie out as reckless and insensitive, especially considering that it cost him and Anne’s job, his reasoning behind trying to expose how the Life Foundation targets sensitive cases for potentially fatal experiments paints his actions as being more noble than selfish. The problem with this is that the film really wants to create a parallel between Eddie and the Symbiote, both considered parasites in their own way, but because of Eddie’s actions being fueled by impulsive selflessness here and in plenty of other situations, it doesn’t create a natural path for his character to tread. Including an awkward scene between him and the Symbiote, which feels like a third-act breakup right out of a romantic comedy, that comes out of nowhere and other moments, the plot can be best described as labored and contrived.
PROS
Image courtesy of Sony Pictures Entertainment
One positive aspect of the film that I can say was legitimately entertaining was Tom Hardy’s performance, both as Eddie and the voice of the Symbiote. While his line reading as Eddie makes him sound out of breath throughout most of the runtime, Hardy brought a lot of energy and enjoyable insanity to his performance. Where everyone else is just going through the routines, Hardy goes nuts throughout nearly the whole movie, even going as far as to ad lib jumping inside of a lobster tank to take a bite out of them in the middle of a fancy restaurant with a disturbing amount of conviction. Despite this, as enjoyable as Eddie is, the Symbiote is the true star of the film. Hardy’s growling, oily voice companied with the few great moments of writing almost perfectly captures the feel of the original character from the comics, even down to the darkly comedic dialogue about eating people. Moreover, the back-and-forth between the two (yes, Tom Hardy acting alongside Tom Hardy) made for many amusing scenes, especially the moment in which the Symbiote asks Eddie to jump out of window near the top of a building with epic accompaniment, but Eddie decides to take the elevator instead, much to the Symbiote’s annoyance.
Probably the biggest component that made this film watchable, at least for me, is the comedy, both the intentional and unintentional. As mentioned with the elevator scene, there are a lot exchanges between Eddie and the Symbiote that made for some good comedy, but a large bulk of laughs that came from me were in regard to some unintentionally funny scenes that were either brought out from the inconsistent tone or from some other technical failing. For instance, Anne absorbs the Symbiote for one scene and attacks several guards that took Eddie hostage. The scene ends with her biting a man’s head off, giving the suit back to Eddie after kissing him with the suit still on, and Anne is taken aback by what she just did with no repercussions whatsoever. This horrifying moment in which someone was forced by an alien parasite to eat another human being is played off for a quick laugh. In a different film, this could’ve been a traumatic experience, much like in the comics when Anne became She-Venom, but, instead, it comes off as a confused bit of misguided dark comedy that works more in how it failed than how it succeeded.
FINAL THOUGHTS
While there is enjoyment to be had with the occasional moments of competence and laughable flubs by the creators, it’s difficult to fully recommend Venom. It can be enjoyable with the right mindset, but the film, objectively, is a mess of tones and ideas that never fully come together. Whether that’s for the better and for the worst is up to you.
5/10
(Thought I was gonna reference the “turd in the wind” line in my critique of the film, didn’t you?)
The film is now playing in theaters, and will be available in January of 2019 for home purchase.
With a myriad of Spider-Man games and even more superhero games that have hit the market over the years, does Insomniac’s latest attempt at bringing the red-and-blue-clad hero manage to stand out? With confidence, I can say that this is not only the best Spider-Man game ever made, but also a destined classic for the PS4 and the superhero genre.
After a four-year dry spell of mainstream Spider-Man games, the last being the mixed Amazing Spider-Man 2, Insomniac has done what Rocksteady Studios did for Batman in creating an experience that delivers both in narrative and gameplay.
PLOT
Image courtesy of Sony and Insomniac Games
With Dan Slott, a veteran Spider-Man comic scribe, and Insomniac’s writing team, the game spins an impressive web. Peter Parker, our friendly neighborhood web-slinger, has been at the superhero game for roughly eight years. He’s working as a research assistant for Dr. Otto Octavius, is behind on his rent, has put away plenty of his classic rogues behind bars, is helping out at the local homeless shelter (called F.E.A.S.T.) with his Aunt May, his relationship with Mary Jane Watson is on the rocks, and has finally put the notorious kingpin of crime, Wilson Fisk, behind the bars. However, with Fisk out of the way to manage crime in the city, Peter’s problems only seem to get worse as criminal misdeeds begin to spike in Manhattan when a new crime syndicate, the Demons, led by the mysterious Mister Negative, come into play.
What makes this plot work is how the writers are able to bring together so many elements from Spider-Man’s history in such a glorious fashion. Like plenty of classic Spidey stories, he’s down on his luck but manages to persevere with a grin and snappy quip to get him through it, but, thankfully, there are some twists along the way. While you have the usual stuff with Peter and how he tries to balance his personal life with his superhero life, there are also some of the newer components from the comics. He’s long since passed working at the Daily Bugle as a photographer, and is now working as a scientist. Mary Jane is no longer a model, and now works as an investigative reporter, much like her Ultimate universe counterpart. Miles Morales, one of the most popular Spider-Man characters in recent history, has been integrated into Peter’s life as a friend and helping hand around the F.E.A.S.T. center. The list goes on. With all of this interwoven with a plot that juggles Peter’s tragic friendship with Dr. Octavius, repairing his relationship with Mary Jane, the backstory and motivation of Mister Negative, escalating danger in New York, a conspiracy involving Norman Osborn (the city mayor and CEO of Oscorp), and the formation of Peter’s most reviled enemies, the Sinister Six, you’ve got yourself an engaging story that celebrates all eras of Spider-Man that’s both satisfying for fans and newcomers.
PERFORMANCES
Image courtesy of Sony and Insomniac Games
With motion capture blending together with voice acting, nearly every member of the cast give it their all in elevating the script and story to excellence. Yuri Lowenthal, best known for his roles in Ben 10, Persona 4, Paprika, absolutely shines as Peter Parker. With so many people that’s played as the character in the past, it was, no doubt, a difficult task to stand out, but Lowenthal accomplishes this in spades by delivering a performance that balances the traits of the character from his jovial mood, his unwavering sense of responsibility, his enthusiasm for science, etc. There’s such a level of humanity in his acting, once again praising the motion capture for capturing the subtle nuances in his face, that you don’t normally see that it’s not only refreshing, but also captivating. Other standout actors include Laura Bailey as Mary Jane, having great chemistry with Lowenthal, William Salyers as Dr. Octavius, giving us what I believe to be the best iteration of the character, Nadji Jeter as Miles, and Nancy Linari as Aunt May. All of these actors and more bring their A game and pull off the spectacular.
GAMEPLAY
Image courtesy of Sony and Insomniac Games
With fancy new gadgets, weighty web-swinging, and refined combat, it’s never felt so good to traverse the Big Apple while dealing out justice. Taking a page from the Arkham games, the fighting in Spider-Man mainly consists of punching, kicking, dodging, and using the environment to fight bad guys. Thankfully, unlike the gameplay from Beenox’s Amazing Spider-Man games, this manages to stand apart from being another inferior clone of the Batman games by emphasizing Peter’s agility and the use of various web-based tools to keep Peter fast and on the move. It works in adding a whole other layer to the style of gameplay as it doubles the variety you’d normally get with this type of gameplay. More on the gadgets, a handful of them are at the player’s disposal such as standard webbing to immobilize or yank weapons from enemy hands, impact webbing, web mines, taser webbing, robot spiders, and other such gizmos to meet whatever the player’s method of play. There are even stealth stages and side challenges scattered throughout the map, some even relating to other classic characters, such as Black Cat, Harry Osborne, and Taskmaster. While much of this seems familiar, no doubt bringing the mind to Spider-Man 2 or even other open-world games, it remains engaging because of these components working together with exceptionally polished execution.
If there’s one other thing the game had to get right, it was the web-swinging, and, like everything else, it’s just as skillfully realized. The weight of the character coupled with the momentum creates what’s possibly the most realistic swinging. It can take getting used to, but once it’s mastered, it makes for some fast and fun travel that never gets old. This along with the web-zipping and parkour-like moves all add up to the best traversal of New York ever developed.
Besides the usual stuff fans have come to expect from Spider-Man games, there are some new things brought to the table with some mixed results. Some sections of the game are dedicated to Peter in his civilian clothes as he solves two types of puzzles in Dr. Octavius’ lab and investigating, and stealth sections with Mary Jane and Miles. These sections are much slower in comparison to the rest of the game, so it can feel like the game comes to a halt, but they’re still amusing in their own right and provide a different perspective that’s unique in a superhero game.
GRAPHICS
Image courtesy of Sony and Insomniac Games
From the character models, to the breathtaking in-game map of Manhattan, to all the interactive components, the game looks and plays really well. After there was some concern about the frame rate only being 30 fps, it was a pleasant surprise to see the game run smoothly with such gorgeous visuals. The people in the game have a slightly stylized look, but the subtle details of the eyes and body language give them a realistic presence, and this goes for the city as well. Never have I experienced such a lively rendition of the often used city, and it’s the smaller details that help it come alive. There are squirrels scampering in the park, citizens having parties and lunches on rooftops, and so much more that feels organic to such a busy, populated place. Not to mention the occasional weather effects look absolutely beautiful, partially the rainy sections. There were some graphical hiccups with my character being stuck in a wall during the last boss fight, as well as a moment where the target icons cluttered the screen, but a few updates could handle that in no time if this problem applies to other copies.
FINAL VERDICT
From the story, to the acting, to the gameplay, Spider-Man is a triumph. If you haven’t already converted to Sony and bought yourself a PS4, then this is definitely a game worth buying a console for. Never before has it felt so good to do everything a spider can.
9.5/10
Now available for digital download and physical purchase.
With Black Panther, one of Marvel Studios’ most praised films, and Avengers: Infinity War, their highest grossing film so far, out of the way, was the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) successful in giving audiences one last thrill for the year?
In word: yes.
Image courtesy of Marvel Studios
In the follow-up to Peyton Reed’s 2015 superhero film, Ant-Man, our story picks up where the life of Scott Lang, once again played by Paul Rudd, has gone since he aligned with Captain America in 2016’s Captain America: Civil War. He’s under house arrest after brokering a deal with the government. With only a few days left, and the superhero game behind him, Scott is inches away from freedom. However, he’s pulled back into the growing and shrinking shenanigans by Hope Van Dyne and Hank Pym, played by Evangeline Lily and Michael Douglas, when he begins to have mysterious visions of Hope’s long-lost mother, played by Michelle Pfieffer, within the immeasurably microscopic “Quantum Realm.” With Scott’s help, and with Hope donning her own shrinking suit, taking on the name of the Wasp, they might free her from her miniscule confines. Unfortunately, a phantasmic, cloaked woman who can walk through anything, referred to as Ghost, means to claim the energies of the Quantum Realm for herself, and our heroes must use their strengths, wits, and abilities to grow and shrink at will to stop her
While the previous film was enjoyable, it didn’t rank particularly high on my list of films from the MCU. The villain, Yellowjacket, felt like an uninteresting retread of Iron Monger from 2008’s Iron Man, Scott didn’t have a high enough personal stake when it came to helping Hank and Hope, Hope was insistently angry throughout most of the film, the humor didn’t always strike a chord, and the title hero wasn’t given enough dignity or credit for what he tries to accomplishes. With that in mind, I went into this film with a minimal set of expectations.
That said, I’m happy to announce that Ant-Man and the Wasp was a much better outing for the character.
Image courtesy of Marvel Studios
To begin with, the villain, Ghost, played by Hannah John-Kamen, is a far more interesting antagonist than what we saw before. Her motivation is a fairly unique one – her powers are killing her and she needs the Quantum Realm to fix it. This could spell danger for Hope’s mother, which is why the heroes are on the opposite end of things, but this doesn’t necessarily make her a bad person. Apart from that, the actress provides a fairly unsettling performance in some scenes, coming off as physically and emotionally erratic. While certainly not the best villain we’ve gotten out of the MCU, Ghost is among the most interesting in how different she is, in look, abilities, and motivation.
Image courtesy of Marvel Studios
Another positive that this film has over the other is the plot. The first film was a serviceable origin story with elements of a heist film, but this film is a little more engaging. Apart from the race to keep Hank’s research out of the hands of Ghost, there are a few subplots being juggled around. We have one where Scott is trying to keep up the appearance that he’s back home and not pulling off illegal activities with Hank and Hope, another where a group of arms dealers, led by an amusingly Southern Walton Goggins, want Hank’s research as well, Scott’s old gang, with a returning Michael Péna doing his usual funny shtick, working on a security company, and Hank’s old colleague, played by Laurence Fishburne, getting involved. We see the return of Giant Man, there are car chases with shrinking and growing objects thrown into the mix, and psychedelic imagery could compete with Doctor Strange. There plot goes in many directions, but it never feels exhausting, and it all around felt fresher and more energized than the previous film.
Image courtesy of Marvel Studios
The biggest hurdle I felt the film had to leap was the relationship between Scott and the Pym’s. As I said, Scott didn’t feel as involved with the stakes of the plot as he should’ve been. Part of the reason behind that was his relationship with Hank and Hope. Hank treated him as a necessary helping hand and Hope, mostly, didn’t want anything to do with him. This got old for me fast, but, thankfully, they improved that here. Scott has a greater personal connection because he wants to make things right for stealing Hank’s suit, going to Germany without telling anyone, and causing his friend’s to be put on the FBI’s most wanted list for being associated with him. There’s a reason this time for people to dump on Scott as he made a massive mistake that dampened the bond between everyone, and you want to see them patch things up. Not to mention with Hope becoming the Wasp, which was a joy to see another classic character come to life, this allowed Rudd and Lily to have more moments of banter and camaraderie and much less of Hope being an angry, wet blanket. This not only improved Hope’s character, but her relationship with Scott, and eventual romance, feels much more authentic than it did before.
After so much had happened in Infinity War, it was nice to have a smaller (excuse the pun) adventure with Scott and the gang. It’s not a particularly deep film or a game changer in the superhero genre, not to mention being the 20thfilm of the MCU, certain points can be a little confusing to the uninitiated, but it is a visually pleasing, well acted, mostly funny, action packed film that served as a great closing for the summer and for the this year’s run of MCU films.
8/10
The film is available now in digital stores, and will be available next week on October 16 on DVD and BluRay.
