Deadpool (2016)

Title: Deadpool

Year: 2016

Director: Tim Miller

Rating (by the MPAA): R for strong violence and language throughout, sexual content and graphic nudity

Official Synopsis: Based upon Marvel Comics’ most unconventional anti-hero, DEADPOOL tells the origin story of former Special Forces operative turned mercenary Wade Wilson, who after being subjected to a rogue experiment that leaves him with accelerated healing powers, adopts the alter ego Deadpool. Armed with his new abilities and a dark, twisted sense of humor, Deadpool hunts down the man who nearly destroyed his life. (via 20th Century Fox)

Official Page

Official Trailer

STEPH SAID

Rating:

Review:

Knowing only the toned-down version of Deadpool that appears in kid’s cartoon TV shows, but having heard much about its reality, I can say this movie does not disappoint. At all. In fact, I can safely say this movie is pure perfection. I found nothing wrong with it! Nothing!

The pacing was perfect. The movie opens in the middle of the action and takes a few breaks to explain how we got there. Or so I thought. The movie divided parts of action in the present and moments of drama in the past so well that I didn’t notice into how much detail the “narration” of the story went. The pacing was so perfect that I was halfway through the movie, super entertained and hadn’t noticed that most of it was the explanation for why we were there. I love that they didn’t take much time to explain that mutants existed in this world. Just one line and we already knew what we were dealing with. They didn’t take much time to develop the love story, just a few scenes over the years, the Deadpool way. They also didn’t take much time developing the Deadpool alter ego or his suit. These were all straight to the point and back to the action. It is a "origins story" and yet, it didn't feel like it.

What I enjoyed the most was, Deadpool’s sense of humor. His fourth wall breaking, his allusions to actors' names and production budgets were hilarious. The way he makes fun of everything could have gone bad, could’ve felt campy and forced, but it wasn’t. It was naturally funny.

This is a movie done right. This is an adaptation done right. Just give the fans (and soon-to-be fans) what they want. Is that so hard to do? I don’t think so! It was done perfectly in this movie. I hope they can keep this up in the sequel.

Allegiant (Divergent #3)

Title: Allegiant

Author: Veronica Roth

Year: 2013

Synopsis: The faction-based society that Tris Prior once believed in is shattered - fractured by violence and power struggles and scarred by loss and betrayal. So when offered a chance to explore the world past the limits she's known, Tris is ready. Perhaps beyond the fence, she and Tobias will find a simple new life together, free from complicated lies, tangled loyalties, and painful memories.

But Tris's new reality is even more alarming than the one she left behind. Old discoveries are quickly rendered meaningless. Explosive new truths change the hearts of those she loves. And once again, Tris must battle to comprehend to complexities of human nature - and of herself - while facing impossible choices about courage, allegiance, sacrifice, and love. (via goodreads)

STEPH SAID

Rating:

Review:

After the disaster that was Insurgent, my expectations were really low for this book. And maybe because of that it managed to surprise me. The pacing was really good, enough to be entertaining. It was also really nice to have Tris back. The smart, quick girl from the first book is back.

However, the plot was basically the same as the previous books. There's an evil government and a group of rebels revolts against it. The specifics of this story, the reasons behind the factions and everything, actually makes sense. So, I have to give the author that. Yet, it was riddled with plot devices in order to move the story forward. Instead of letting the story come alive, the author already had an idea in her mind and manipulated some characters and situations to get her way. For example, the fact that Four is not divergent, but genetically damaged, is bologna. Caleb and Peter are the perfect example of genetically damaged people. They can't help themselves. Even after Peter was reset, his traits came back, because that's the way he is. That’s how a genetically damaged person should be, according to the reality of the book. But, Four was not damaged by his genes, he was damaged by his upbringing. There's a difference between them. And even with his damaged past, Tobias was able to be smart and selfless and brave. Of course, we could start the old nature/nurture battle to defend one point or the other, but I believe that is not the point of this story.

But what ruined the whole story for me was Tris' ending. It was stupid and unnecessary. The author only did it for the shock value. And, every writer should know that that is the worst reason to write something into a story. It lacked a purpose, a motive, an ideal, a sentiment, a message, anything.

If she had died due to the death virus -- if it had taken her slowly, and after releasing the memory serum she collapsed and died -- it would have been a glorious death, the death of a hero. That death would’ve had purpose: to save everyone. Nevertheless, she survived the death serum and is shot by a guy in a wheelchair. She could've thrown something at him and wrestle him for the gun. But instead she just stayed there while he shot her.

Everything afterwards was unimportant.

To be honest, I like that peter reset himself. I think that Tobias should’ve reset himself as well. That excuse that Tris wouldn’t have like it was rubbish because, first, she wasn’t there anymore, so who cares. Also, it is OK for Peter to reset himself because we don’t agree with him or like his way of doing things or his personality, but it is not ok to let Four do the same because we like him. That’s not equality and it’s not fair. If it’s wrong for Tobias to reset himself, then it is wrong for Peter to do so.

The author gave us an epilogue to try to tell us that everything worked out in the end; Chicago is finally free. As I finished the book I asked myself, how many years is that happiness going to last? 

The 100 - Season 2

Title: The 100

Season: 2

Broadcasting Station: The CW

Official Synopsis: Season Two kicks off with Clarke and her friends trapped inside Mount Weather, a nuclear-hardened underground city where no one is safe, especially The 100. When Clarke escapes alone, it sets off a chain of events for our trapped heroes, the adults on the ground and even the Grounders. Alliances will be made, friendships will be broken and justice will be served. With everyone fighting for their right to survive, our heroes will have to ask themselves a very important question: How far will you go to save the people you love? Many will fight, some will die, all will be changed forever in 16 earth-shattering, action-packed episodes.

Official Page

STEPH SAID

Rating:

Review:

I came to this season with high expectations. The first season of The 100 was amazing, immediately turning the series into one of my favorites ever. I was afraid that this second season would drop the ball, that it would be able to maintain its intensity, suspense and wonder. I’m happy to say it didn’t.

What is most amazing about The 100, as a series, and that it’s perfectly exemplified in this second season, is the ease with which it portrays raw human nature. They reduce every character to their most basic instinct: survival. It is a series about war, after all. Everyone is trying to save themselves and their people. And for that, they are willing to make tough decisions; they will do whatever it takes. To the point where they all become warriors, and the only thing they know is survival.

I can’t believe that the characters I disliked the most in the first season are now very likable. Octavia is now one of my favorite characters. She has shown uncanny strength. In a surprise twist she became a kick-ass Grounder warrior, leaving the whiny, capricious girl behind. Clarke is still not my favorite, but she behaved better this time around. Her choices were the perfect balance between heart and mind. And, even though not everything went according to her plans, I don’t believe it was her fault. 

There was only one storyline that I didn’t enjoy. When Finn killed many Grounder innocents, old people and kids, he was sentenced to be tortured until he died. For a while Clarke and her gang tried to save him from his fate, endangering the new alliance with the Grounders. In this kill-or-be-killed world they now live in, Finn deserved to die. I know they love him or whatever, but seeing Clarke trying to save him was exasperating. However, the storyline had an acceptable resolution and I overlooked the less appealing parts.

The ending of the war against the mountain people was beautiful and fitting. It was tough and heartbreaking, but hopeful. It seems like a closed chapter that might be revisited at will, but that could be left unattended for a while. The season’s ending gave us a taste of what’s to come and it seems the series is going to take a new turn; it’s going to focus on a different story. Yet, apparently, the war is not over. What I’m hoping for is a different setting, but the same core human struggles.

Thor (2011)

Title: Thor

Year: 2011

Director: Kenneth Branagh

Rating (by MPAA): PG-13 for sequences of intense sci-fi action and violence

Official Synopsis: The epic adventure "Thor" spans the Marvel Universe from present day Earth to the realm of Asgard. At the center of the story is The Mighty Thor, a powerful but arrogant warrior whose reckless actions reignite an ancient war. Thor is cast down to Earth and forced to live among humans as punishment. Once here, Thor learns what it takes to be a true hero when the most dangerous villain of his world sends the darkest forces of Asgard to invade Earth. (marvel.com)

Official Page

Official Trailer




STEPH SAID

Rating: 

Review:

No substance. That is the reason behind the low rating. It was a watch like any other action movie: little plot, flat characters, fights and flashy colors. The movie didn't have many, long battles, or dramatic scenes, or comedy fillers, or much character development. I really can't tell on what were the two hours wasted. This movie was definitely made, only as a prequel to The Avengers. Thor is going to be in The Avengers, so the audience need to know who he is, and where he came from. And that's what the movie is. “This is Thor; this is Loki. You'll see them in The Avengers”. That's it. The movie didn't have any other purpose.

There wasn't much of a story to tell. Thor is banished to Earth and loses all his powers. Within two days’ time he recognized the wrong of his way and becomes a worthy man. Loki on the other hand became villainous within two days’ time, with no apparent goal or purpose. He may have said it was to prove his worthiness to Odin, but he has lied so many times before I doubt that was his real intention. Two hours, and two days, served to only “develop” the personality of a flat character, Thor (see below); and to ignite a fire within Loki. 

Most of the characters were flat, including the title character. Thor is a bratty prince who is banished from home to learn a lesson. There, I explained who Thor is in one sentence. Definitely a flat character; there is nothing else to him. Jane, Erik, and even Odin are also flat characters, able to be described in one sentence. What you see is what you get. (In fact, it was really weird to see Natalie Portman acting as a love-struck teenager hiding behind the face of a scientist.) The other characters are even more flat, if that is even possible. Thor's Asgardian friends, his mother, and Darcy are in the movie to fill space. 

Loki was the only character that had some substance, that was a round character, and thus, was interesting. You thought you knew what he was up to, and then he'd surprise you by doing the exact opposite. I still don't know what his intentions were and are. He is so good at deceiving people that I don't know what to expect from him. He could seem a conflicted bad boy with a sensitive heart – I bet most girls think (wish?) this – but I don't think he is that simple.

In the end, Thor exists to have another character in The Avengers, to span their horizons. And, as we will see, to have a villain good enough to round up a bunch of people with superpowers. There is no other reason to it. The movie in itself was a plot device. Looking at it in the light of the whole MCU, I can let slide a plot device. But, seeing as it is a stand-alone movie, it is just a waste of everyone’s time.