REVIEW: “Deadpool & Wolverine” (2024)

[WRITER’S NOTE: The following review contains minor spoilers.]

It’s fair to say that the MCU has been struggling since after Avengers: Endgame. Releasing theatrical features alongside numerous streaming series on Disney+, the otherwise highly-successful comic book studio has been losing traction for supposedly going woke and being more agenda-driven than story-centered. While titles like Shang Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings, Spider-Man: No Way Home, and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 were exceptional, others like Eternals, Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania, and The Marvels underperformed.

Enter Deadpool & Wolverine (both the characters and the name of the new movie they star in). Picking up off of the post-credits of Deadpool 2, in which Wade Wilson altered aspects of his universe, Wade’s actions now apparently get the attention of the Time Variant Authority (or, TVA, from Loki), but not in ways that it seems. Long story short, Deadpool has to find a different version of Wolverine, since the one in his world (as seen in Logan) died, in order to save that world and everyone he cares about. That, and to address and satirize the aforementioned issues that people have had with the “Multiverse Saga” so far. 

Being the only MCU release this year, it is exciting to see Ryan Reynolds’ Merc With the Mouth and Hugh Jackman’s claw-fisted mutant on screen together—the latter sporting his iconic yellow outfit from the comics and early-90s animated T.V. series. (Really, it took over 20 years for Hollywood to do this?) Director Shawn Levy (who previously worked with Reynolds on Free Guy and The Adam Project, and with Jackman on Reel Steel) certainly gives fanboys and -girls a team-up they’ve been waiting for for years. (The train wreck that was X-Men Origins: Wolverine doesn’t count.) Plus, the surprise cameo appearances (none of which I will spoil) made me lose it. They were that jaw-dropping and mind-blowing. Like No Way Home, certain characters who never got a proper closure to their respective franchises get theirs in this movie. 

Reynolds and Jackman have gone on record that they would not mess with the latter’s previous 2017 outing (at the time, the Aussie actor thought it would be his final portrayal of the character). And while this version is a fairly alternate iteration, I couldn’t help but feel as if the filmmakers were occasionally treating James Mangold’s film as a running gag. An insane opening sequence has Wade Wilson digging up Logan’s adamantium skeleton and then using it as ammunition. The plot points that follow can be convoluted, and the story can be a little hard to follow (including its locations and timelines. You read that right). 

On the other hand, there seems to be a trend with this series, in terms of how surprisingly in-depth the narratives get under all the insane mayhem. Deadpool, for one, wants to put his old ways behind and do something, as he says, “matters.” But as one fan-favorite character assures him, “You don’t fight because you need to. You do it because they [the people you help] need you.” Wow. The titular Wolverine we encounter in this story, meanwhile, is carrying a lot of grief and regret over people he lost (which he may have been responsible for). One genuine moment finds a younger character thanking the former (if misguided) mentor: “You were always the wrong guy. Until you weren’t.” Now that’s good stuff. 

The bad news (and we all saw this coming) is Deadpool and Wolverine will be a disappointment for families and parents, who should really think more than twice about this anticipated blockbuster. (I pity those that don’t.) Need I remind my readers that Deadpool is not a child- or family-friendly character, not even in the slightest? This movie has made no secret of its hard-R rating (a first in the ongoing MCU). Stylized graphic violence becomes a splatter-fest, including one particular bloodbath sequence. And if you thought the last two Deadpool movies were nuts, this one wipes the floor with them. In one word, Deadpool and Wolverine is bonkers! 

To be fair, this isn’t the first R-rated movie released by the Walt Disney Company. Back in the early-1980s, when they created a subsidiary called Touchstone Pictures, their focus was to release more adult-oriented pictures that they couldn’t under their main family-friendly label. They would subsequently do the same with their short-lived Hollywood Pictures and Miramax Films divisions. 

References to the entire X-Men franchise are a bit much; the movie otherwise comically (and cleverly) laments the end of 20th Century Fox—before it became 20th Century Studios (which is credited as a co-production here). Then there’s that whole twisted spiritual angle, where Deadpool calls himself “Marvel Jesus,” indicating that he’s going to “save” the MCU. And did I mention the film’s subversive pop music soundtrack (including Madonna’s “Like a Prayer,” which features prominently in the marketing)? 

This unapologetically graphic and foul flick works as a standalone entry, so viewers need not worry about missing anything in this current MCU Phase. More discerning viewers would do best to seek cinematic fare elsewhere, no matter how popular, record-breaking, or dynamic this iconic duo does in theaters, or what they do for the future of the MCU. 

REVIEW: “Robot Dreams” (2023)

An Academy Award-nominee for Best Animated Feature earlier this year (overshadowed by Hayao Miyazaki's The Boy and the Heron and Sony's Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse), this Spanish production from director Pablo Berger (with distribution by indie studio Neon) wasn’t released in North America until this summer. 

The story takes place in New York City in the early-1980s, in a world of anthropomorphic animals. The main character is a lonely dog who comes across a commercial for companion robots one night, and decides to order one for himself. What happens next is really something—and more than just the titular "Tin Man" being fascinated by everything he sees. 

Robot Dreams is essentially a silent picture, full of color, sound, and life. While there’s no dialogue per se, its auditory soundtrack naturally (and cleverly) fits the true nature of a world of animals. One of the film’s centerpieces has the main characters skate dancing to “September” by Earth, Wind & Fire. (The playlist of songs throughout is very nice as well.) 

It’s also serves as a time capsule of the Big Apple, with the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center playing significantly in the background. Another truly mesmerizing sequence pays homage to The Wizard of Oz, with NYC as the Emerald City and a field of flowers doing an impressive tap number (perhaps the biggest floral dance routine since Fantasia). Robot even steps out of the frame--literally--during this segment, until it comes tumbling down. Coney Island also plays a key role into the story’s second act, as Dog unintentionally leaves a rusted Robot (a result of swimming) at the beach and is forced to wait until the following summer when the place reopens. 

This is a charming and bittersweet story that spans every season over the course of one year. The result is a deeper journey than you might expect. Which begs the question: is this a film for children? The answer: yes and no. While Robot Dreams certainly has an eye-popping aesthetic and fantastical elements that will easily appeal to kids (the birds who first see Robot come to life are cute), its themes are more for the adult demographic. It’s also not afraid to hit us with doses of reality, including feelings of loneliness, neglect, and apathy. In a way, the film stands shoulder to shoulder with Wes Anderson’s take on Roald Dahl’s Fantastic Mr. Fox and Spike Jonze’s version of Maurice Sendack’s Where the Wild Things Are. It also reminded me of Kelly Reichardt’s film, Wendy and Lucy, about the relationship (and separation) between a woman and her dog. 

While no language or sexual content issues are present (although, one scene plays with the notion of animals wearing or not wearing clothes, something that Disney’s Zootopia poked fun at as well), there is a brief moment earlier in the film where street hoodlums give some middle fingers, while Robot mistakes them for friendly gestures. When Robot is stuck at the beach, Dog tries several times to break him out, only to be arrested and jailed, and leaving him no choice but to wait for months and months. During a Halloween montage, Dog dresses as a vampire, using ketchup as fake blood. Some of the trick’r’treaters include the twins from The Shining and Freddy Kruger. Dog is even seen reading King's novel Pet Cemetery. Brief smoking and some heartbreaking elements involving a pawn shop are present as well. One bizarre sequence involves a snowman and a penguin at a bowling alley, drinking slurpies. It should also be noted that the friendship between Dog and Robot is a platonic one. Still, parents should make the decision before letting their kids see this film. 

I did wonder, at times, what Robot Dreams was saying about our current culture, about human relationships or the lack thereof (one scene finds Dog going on a ski trip and unsuccessfully trying to make new friends), and the issue of artificial intelligence (turning to things for value and companionship, similar to Jonze's film Her?). 

There are, however, other touching moments, like a mother bird raising her three babies (one of them being the outcast). This is one of the film's many visual metaphors of starting anew. (Wait until you see the character Rascal.) It’s a life-affirming message that things may not go as we plan them to, but we can still live, and always remember those moments with the ones we love. As for relationships and/or friendships, they may start with a spark, and last for a moment or a season or so. But sometimes, they may not be meant for each other or for the long run. But that’s okay. And it’s those themes and daring directions that make this an underrated gem worth checking out. Again, it’s really something. 

REVIEW COLLECTION: The "X-Men" Part III

WRITER'S NOTE: The following reviews were written for this blog post. The short versions can be read on my Instagram page, @be.kerian. (You can read my original review of Logan from 2017 here.) 

Hugh Jackman in Logan

Logan (2017) 

In 2016, Hugh Jackman made the announcement that he would be playing Wolverine in one more movie. In fact, he and director James Mangold (who worked together on Kate & Leopold and The Wolverine) had been talking about doing such a film that was more grounded in reality, more mature, and where the setting is much more brutal and harsh. And with a hard-R rating, it’s as if the filmmakers behind Logan were doing the exact opposite of most conventional comic book movies and saying, “We’re gonna show you what would really happen when this character is in a fight.” 

Set in the year 2029, where the mutant population is nearly extinct, James Howlett a.k.a. Logan is older, much more grizzled and bruised, full of regrets and doubts, and has practically given up on life. He spends his days as a limo driver, saving for a boat to leave civilization, and caring for an ailing, more senile and dangerous, and seizure-prone Charles Xavier. But when a mysterious girl comes into their lives, it becomes an unlikely trio of three mutants forced to go on a road trip, to an Eden-of-sorts that may or may not exist. 

Again, Logan pulls no punches with its graphic violence and profane nature. From its opening five minutes alone, the filmmakers assure us that we’re in for a completely different X-Men-related story. As one character describes, “There used to be a time when a bad day was just a bad day.” When the aforementioned Laura (Dafne Keen, in an otherwise impressive screen debut) first shows off her fighting skills, it’s lethal, aggressive, and unexpected. (It’ll be hard for many viewers to see a child actress endure so much violence, including one gruesome moment where she’s impaled.) Another shocking sequence finds Logan facing one of his worst nightmares. 

Then there’s the secret program that’s been breeding and imprisoning child mutants, attempting to create merciless killers. (Some references to suicide turn up here and elsewhere.) Other moments of dialogue throughout Logan criticize the more fantastical elements of comic books, drawing a hard line between fantasy and reality. Make no mistake, this movie is rough! To its credit, the film (like Deadpool) was never marketed as a child- or family-friendly movie. And parents and adults shouldn’t make that mistake either. 

But Mangold and co-writers Scott Frank and Michael Green present more than just visceral onscreen brutality. Partially based on Mark Millar and Steve McNiven’s “Old Man Logan” issue from the late-2000s, and with a powerful and thrilling score by composer Marco Beltrami, they’ve crafted an engrossing and evocative story—one with strange poignancy, mind you—about aging and remembering what it means to live and love (“You should take a moment and feel it. . . . You still have time.”) There are even some surprisingly spiritual and Biblical parallels. As for Xavier, Patrick Stewart has never been more dimensional or poetic with this role. 

Logan also stands as a unique futuristic western, paying a few homages to the 1953 film Shane, in terms of the consequences of killing. (A black-and-white “Noir” version was released later that year, with more uniquely visceral and immersive, character-focused results.) For all their faults and flaws, these characters (Logan, and especially Charles and Laura) still have feelings, and long for something better than what they were made into, including a future full of hope. (For most of the story, Laura wears a shirt with a unicorn and rainbow.) And what a bold stroke for the filmmaker’s to end on such a shot/note. Logan is, in more ways than one, a surprisingly deep and layered conclusion to Jackman’s two-decade run with this character. 

Or so he thought . . . 

The New Mutants (2020) 

The concept was intriguing: a group of five teenage mutants, who have not yet mastered control of their powers, are locked in a psychiatric ward and eventually come face-to-face with dark forces that represent each of their biggest fears. The fact that director Josh Boone’s take on Marvel’s New Mutants comic book series was going to be a full-on horror feature combined with a coming-of-age story (think Wes Craven-meets-John Hughes) made the project distinct from its predecessors. Its small, engaging, and diverse cast (Blu Hunt, Maisie Williams, Anya Taylor-Joy, Charlie Heaton, Henry Zaga, and a chilling, against-type Alice Braga) also showed promise, as did the film’s singular setting. 

Unfortunately, that potential and momentum slowly died down for a number of reasons. For one, the film was originally scheduled for an April 2018 release (its teaser trailer premiered six months before), but was delayed several times due to reported reshoots, COVID, and the fact that Disney purchased 20th Century Fox in 2019, thereby cancelling any future plans for a potential new franchise. When The New Mutants was finally released from its waiting prison in the fall of 2020 (as the world was getting out of lockdown), the concept was still interesting, and its style was very distinct. (It turned out to be the last film credit for executive producer Stan Lee.) But the execution was mediocre. 

Glimpses of these characters’ tragic pasts (from abuse to survivors guilt) run rampant, as do nightmarish and disturbing images of slender men with freaky teeth, and references to the Essex Corp (as seen in X-Men: Apocalypse and Logan), in terms of surveillance and voyeurism. Then there’s the same-sex romance at the center of the film, with scenes of kissing and other suggestive/steamy moments involving hormonal and rebellious teenagers. 

Earlier in the film, there’s a metaphor of two bears, one that is darkness and one that is light. The one that wins is the one you feed. But there’s also a metaphor of baby rattlesnakes, regarding uncontrollable or dangerous powers. With that in mind, The New Mutants has a lot of bite, but feeds more bleakness than light. It’s a very emo vibe that wasn’t all that worth the wait. 

Deadpool 2 (2018) 

When Deadpool was released in 2016, it blew the roof off of superhero conventions and tropes we’ve been seeing in cinema for over a decade. It also opened doors for violent, R-rated comic books movies--a trend that continued with Logan the following year. Tim Miller was originally tapped to return to the director’s chair for this 2018 sequel, but left due to creative differences. He was eventually replaced by David Leitch (director of the teaser short, No Good Deed, which played before Logan in theaters), who, along with star/co-writer Ryan Reynolds, basically took what was done in the first movie and amped it up, while giving it a slightly new style. 

Following opening credits in the style of, once again, Screen Junkies’ “Honest Trailers,” as well as James Bond and Monty Python, the plot of Deadpool 2 involves a plus-size teenage boy (Julian Dennison) who can shoot fire from his fists, a time-traveling cyborg on a mission to change history (sound familiar?), and a teamup to save the former from the latter. (It’s interesting that Miller’s next directing gig was a sequel in The Terminator franchise.) Deadpool argues “this is a family movie,” considering the grief he goes through, while helping this kid becomes a way for him to get through it (commendable, but in a misguided, dysfunctional, and hypocritical way). 

As with its 2016 predecessor, Deadpool 2 has its moments. Reynolds delivers clever fourth-wall jabs at Marvel (including the MCU and X-Men), as well as the DC Universe and other pop culture trends (“Is dubstep still a thing?”). He may also be the first person to realize what should’ve been an obvious connection between Barbara Streisand’s Yentl and Disney’s Frozen. Zazie Beetes absolutely kills it as Domino, as does Josh Brolin as Cable; references to the actor’s roles in The Goonies and Avengers: Infinity War are an added bonus. I would’ve liked to see more of the naturally-funny Rob Delaney as Peter. This sequel also has a little more heart and substance than the last movie, as the towering and chrome-covered Colossus still believes in Wade, despite all of the merc’s faults and poor choices. 

The thing with Deadpool, however, is how naughty he and his movies are. This one practically opens with Wade blowing himself up, apparently over the ending of Logan (Because he has healing abilities, he comes back.) And it’s not just those passive suicidal references that are disappointing. While there are no graphic sex scenes this time around, and sexual abuse and pedophilia are seen as terrible things, there are still raunchy sex-related jokes, and a gratuitous scene where the Merc With the Mouth regrows his legs after literally being ripped in half. And let’s not forget the guy’s pansexual orientation. 

Deadpool 2 wallows in foul content, including graphic violence that slices and dices through numerous foes and characters, harsh and offensive language (Jesus and God get some ruthless jabs), and one scene where Wade blasts an entire cocaine bag in his mask. The movie may have one of the most ingenious post-credit bits (“Just fixing up the timelines”), but it also plays music by Dolly Parton, Cher, and Celine Dion, for dark laughs. Plus, the way it subverts expectations of a potential team-up, while clever, is unexpected and outrageous. 

A PG-13 recap of both movies (titled, Once Upon a Deadpool) was released at the end of 2018, featuring Fred Savage reprising his role from The Princess Bride, and being forced to listen to DP’s retelling. If you want to see a better example of a meta superhero comedy from that same year (one that even references Deadpool in a PG-rated way), see Warner Animation’s Teen Titans Go! To the Movies. It’s hilarious! 

Dark Phoenix (2019) 

Simon Kinberg had been working as a screenwriter and producer since the turn of the 21st Century, and has played a key role in the X-Men franchise. In fact, his first credit as a writer in the popular film series was in 2006 with The Last Stand. Kinberg has since had regrets over how that particular movie turned out, specifically in how it adapted the Dark Phoenix saga from the original Marvel comics. Fast forward 13 years later and Kinberg made his directorial debut with another attempt at the tragic story of the telepathic mutant Jean Grey’s transformation into a dangerous entity. 

Dark Phoenix certainly had a lot going for it. Unlike the previous ensemble entries, Kinberg and company aimed for a more grounded and personal story that elevated the emotional stakes as much as (if not more than) the visual spectacle, almost on the same lines as Logan. The main characters were given their iconic yellow and blue outfits (as we saw in the Deadpool movies), if only for a while. Sophie Turner (who debuted as Jean in X-Men: Apocalypse) was given a more compelling role as the title character, who encounters and absorbs a cosmic convergence during a rescue mission in space, which unleashing dark and uncontrollable forces (and some long-kept secrets and traumas) with it. She has an equally compelling dynamic with Tye Sheridan’s Scott Summers, and a challenging one with James McAvoy’s Charles Xavier and Michael Fassbender’s Magneto. The film also marked a return to superhero movies for composer Hans Zimmer (whose previous such credit was Batman v Superman in 2016). 

Filmed around the same time as The New Mutants and Deadpool 2, Dark Phoenix went through some post-production reshoots, since a few elements were reportedly too similar to Captain Marvel (released four months earlier). Both films feature extra-terrestrial beings; the species in Phoenix (headed by the always-magnetic Jessica Chastain, no pun intended) is a malevolent race that wants nothing more than to resurrect their kind and annihilate earth. (Yeah, what else is new?) Then there’s that inexplicable age gap of these characters from one decade to the next (Dark Phoenix is set in the 1990s). Its third act was also changed due to some poor test screenings. And while the final product had a fairly consistent tone throughout (thanks, in part, to Zimmer’s score), the overall effect was a polarizing and depressing way to finish out a long-running series at Fox. 

It didn’t help that the film was released one month after the MCU’s penultimate Avengers: Endgame (both were dedicated to X-Men co-creator Stan Lee, who passed away in the fall of 2018), not to mention 20th Century Fox being purchased by the Disney company that same year. Plus, the dialogue can be conventional, its narrative can be predictable (although, it does get hopeful), and some of its character arcs can be flawed. Combined with this movie’s poor box-office results, any plans for future installments (including a crossover with the cast of The New Mutants) were abandoned. 

In retrospect, Dark Phoenix isn’t the worst X-Men movie. To be fair, this series has been hit-or-miss for nearly twenty years. Kinberg and company did manage to make a more engrossing attempt at the aforementioned comic book saga. In some ways, it could’ve been better. With the MCU now owning the rights to these characters (and hoping they do these characters and stories justice), there is, like Jean, hope for a new beginning. Hey, they don’t call it “a phoenix rising from the ashes” for nothing. 

REVIEW COLLECTION: The “X-Men” Part II

WRITERS NOTE: The following reviews were originally posted on my Instagram page @be.kerian. [My reviews for X-Men: Days of Future Past, Deadpool, and X-Men: Apocalypse here are the full versions.] 

(l-r) Michael Fassbender, Caleb Landry Jones, James McAvoy, Rose Byrne,
Jennifer Lawrence, and Lucas Till in X-Men: First Class

X-Men: First Class (2011) 

Originally, 20th Century Fox had planned a spinoff feature film centered around X-Men adversary Magneto before that particular standalone project (and others like it) were abandoned. On the other hand, some of the ideas from that film were eventually incorporated into a rebooted/prequel installment in the series. In fact, X-Men: First Class manages to not only balance the differing backstories of Eric Lensherr and Charles Xavier. It does so in a fresh and engrossing setting against the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. 

To be sure, the movie is bold, exciting, and entertaining. The production design is well-executed (with many clever homages to Sean Connery’s James Bond films from that decade), and the character arcs and action sequences are first-rate. Michael Fassbender’s Magneto and James McAvoy’s Xavier have an incredible, complex dynamic, and headline a superb cast that includes Jennifer Lawrence (Raven/Mystique), Nicholas Hoult (Hank McCoy/Beast), Rose Byrne (CIA agent Moira MacTaggert), and Kevin Bacon (the sinister, energy-absorbing Sebastian Shaw). There’s even some creative, panel-style editing (a first, perhaps, since Ang Lee’s 2003 Hulk), and the blue-and-yellow color scheme throughout is very retro, indeed. 

The problem is, the film sends the wrong message about female empowerment and sexuality. Mystique’s “nude” appearance may be more restrained compared to previous X-Men movies, but that didn’t stop the filmmakers from objectifying her blue-skinned form. At least two other characters are immorally objectified: January Jones’ diamond-covered Emma Frost (who walks around in lingerie a lot) and Zoë Kravitz’s dragonfly-winged Angel (a stripper). Some of the violence is disturbing, especially when it involves a coin. 

The movie may otherwise highlight worthwhile themes about embracing our own personal flaws or abnormalities. ("You want society to accept you," Erik tells Raven, "but you can’t even accept yourself.") The same goes for genuine horrors or fears related to the Holocaust, Communism, and nuclear war. But this X-Men falls short of being an overall first-class achievement.

The Wolverine (2013) 

After the release of X-Men Origins: Wolverine in 2009, Hugh Jackman was reportedly so disappointed with the final product that he wanted to make sure he got the role of Wolverine right the next time a solo movie came about. Fast forward four years later and filmmaker James Mangold directed an adaptation of Frank Miller and Chris Claremont’s limited comic book run from the early-1980s. 

The Wolverine acts as a sequel to 2006’s The Last Stand, as the claw-fisted mutant, haunted by the death of Jean Grey, tries to leave his past behind by living as a vagabond, until he’s pulled back in by an elderly Japanese businessman he saved during World War II. In fact, the dying Yashida (Haruhiko Yamanouchi) wants to repay the bruising Logan with mortality, but at a cost. (Ain’t it always the way.) 

The story’s Tokyo setting and lone samurai motif is certainly something we’ve never seen in this franchise, let alone a comic book tentpole movie of this level. Jackman is as lean and muscular as he’s ever been with this character. Despite some corny dialogue throughout the film, the actor also manages to give Wolverine a little more depth and thought as a man in pain struggling for a life of peace, something he sees in a romance with an heir of the aforementioned business (Tao Okamoto, in an effective film debut). 

The Wolverine also has more intense violence and fierce brawling of any X-Men movie up to that point. Sometimes it’s hard to tell who’s on which side, while its climactic twist leaves little to be desired. It also has a gripping bullet train sequence that defies the laws of physics. Then again, this *is* a movie. One that falls somewhere between an engrossing and harsh character study, and a generic and middling tentpole blockbuster. If anything, it was a step forward from that Origins outing. 

Then came the “days of future past” . . . 

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014) 

“Is the future truly set?” It’s a question that pervades this engrossing time-travel entry in the X-Men franchise. Set in a futuristic New York City, where unstoppable Sentinel robots have been destroying both humanity and the mutant population, remaining survivors of the latter race (including Charles Xavier, Magneto, and Kitty Pryde) decide to sent the ageless and indestructible Wolverine back to the early-1970s to prevent a political assassination that will ignite the aforementioned war. 

Yes, we’ve seen countless time-travel plots in film and TV before (Terminator and Star Trek, anybody?). But director Bryan Singer, screenwriter Simon Kinberg, and company manage to keep things fresh with this race-against-the-clock story that successfully balances action, thrills, drama, comedy, and relevant commentary. But the real draw of X-Men: Days of Future Past is how it acts as both a sequel and a restart, bringing together the cast of the original movies (including Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellan, Halle Berry, and Shawn Ashmore) and those from First Class (James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, and Nicholas Hoult). Plus, its gripping cross-cut action keeps us on the edge of our seats, even if some of the plot details, continuity, and timelines are a little confusing. (The 2015 “Rogue Cut” spends a little more time with these characters, including a subplot with Anna Paquin’s power-absorbing Rogue.) 

Other standout characters include the antagonistic Sentinel program director Bolivar Trask (a brilliant Peter Dinklage) and the scene-stealing Quicksilver (Evan Peters). The latter headlines one of the film’s centerpieces: a break-in and escape from the Pentagon (in slow-motion and fast-motion, set to Jim Croce’s “Time In A Bottle”), while another jaw-dropping sequence involves a baseball stadium. Plus, Hoult’s Beast is given a much-better design and look than the last movie. 

Similar to X2 from 2003, Days of Future Past features an unlikely team-up, this time where a former-learner (Wolverine) now leads his soon-to-be mentor (Xavier, displaying a different personality, as well as longer hair and a beard). It’s fitting that half of this story is set during the end of the Vietnam War era, as some of these characters have seen friends die, and who have understandable but misguided intentions. Ultimately, the film’s central themes revolve around hopelessness, the power of choices, and second chances (“to define who we are”). As the older Xavier proclaims, “We need you to hope again.” 

To be sure, Days of Future Past does have content issues. Its violence and action is intense, and some of its language is rough. Then there’s its sexual content, including one brief moment of Wolverine in the buff, and of course Mystique’s “nude” figure. To be fair, Raven/Mystique is a fully-dimensional character here, and not so much there for eye-candy. She does have a redemptive arc, as does Xavier, but still. And with emotional stakes that are stirring and evocative (including an incredible face-to-face moment for the ages), this is the best crafted, the best acted, and the best X-Men by far. How’s that for set? 

Deadpool (2016) 

If you were to look up the term, “self-deprecating humor,” one famous name that should be included in that description is Ryan Reynolds. The Canadian actor and natural funnyman has been working in the industry since the early-90s, but hadn’t officially become a household name until the mid-2010s. Since then, he’s become known for making fun of his own career, including one particular superhero role that he’s made no secret of hating. (Hint: green and animated.) 

For about a decade, Reynolds had been trying to get a solo feature film outing, based on the ever-popular but profane and violent costumed antihero Deadpool (created in the early-90s by Rob Liefeld and Fabian Nicieza), off the ground, especially after an abysmal interpretation of the character in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. But it wasn’t until a test reel (shot in 2012) was mysteriously leaked on the internet and fan momentum went through the roof that the project got greenlit. (Or should I say, red-lit?) 

Furthermore, Deadpool was released during a time when the superhero film genre was starting to get oversaturated. Zack Snyder would present a divisive battle between Batman and Superman. The MCU was entering its third phase of movies. And Bryan Singer would be directing his fourth X-Men movie for Fox. And then there was Reynold’s meta-driven Merc With a Mouth and his Special Ops alter ego Wade Wilson, known for his jabs at all things superhero, as well as random pop culture references. 

To be fair, the character can be funny, with his wisecracking fourth wall asides to the audience (“Fourth wall break inside a fourth wall break”), and the movie itself (a parody of a superhero origin story, as well as being its own) has amusing, even hilarious, moments, including fake opening credits. Again, Reynolds is a natural comedian, and witty improviser. Plus, for all its problems, the movie even manages to inject some genuine pathos, in terms of the harsh realities of cancer and the like. 

But Deadpool is also, perhaps, the most foul and shameless character in the Marvel universe, taking no prisoners with his banter and violent nature—and making no apologies for it. (The film also spends an entire montage on sex scenes/acts—except for Lent—while another sequence takes place in a strip club with one “gratuitous cameo.” Really?! It should also be noted that Wade's girlfriend is a prostitute.) Make no mistake, this is bloody, graphic, and hard-R material, through and through. And the complete opposite of Uncle Ben Parker’s “With great power” mantra. It’s more than self-deprecating. It’s brutal. At least the guy is right when he says, “I may be super, but I’m no hero.” 

X-Men: Apocalypse (2016) 

For this third installment in the X-Men prequel/reboot series (and director Bryan Singer’s fourth installment overall), the filmmakers went bigger than ever—more than First Class and Days of Future Past put together. Both Singer and screenwriter Simon Kinberg (another key figure in this franchise) have described X-Men: Apocalypse as the origin of the traditional ensemble team, with the titular mutant as the most powerful antagonist they’ve ever faced. 

While the main action takes place in the early-1980s, the origins of Apocalypse a.k.a. En Sabah Nur date back 4,000 years to Ancient Egypt, with elements of transference and cultism, as well as themes of false deities, intact. I couldn’t help but think of Stephen Sommer’s special effects-heavy takes on The Mummy amidst all this spectacle, which later becomes world-destroying on the lines of Roland Emmerich or Michael Bay, but with more mythological religious proportions. That said, some of the action and violence is more intense and disturbing (the scene where Angel gets metal wings is wince-inducing, while Wolverine’s forced cameo is as bloody as it’s ever been by far). 

Overall, there are things about this entry that work, and others that don’t. I liked the subplot where Erik Lehnsherr a.k.a. Magneto has a wife and daughter—and lives a normal life—in Poland until tragedy strikes. (Michael Fassbender is powerful and emotive.) The younger cast members do an admirable job of emulating the actors that preceded their respective character roles, including Sophie Turner’s Jean Grey, Alexandra Shipp’s Storm, Tye Sheridan’s Cyclops, and Kodi Smit-McPhee’s Nightcrawler. I would’ve liked to see Lana Candor’s Jubilee more (her outfit screams 80s culture). We do get to see James McAvoy’s Charles Xavier with a bald head for the first time and are reminded of the power and strength of teamwork and community. 

I do think Oscar Isaac (a terrific actor) was kind of wasted in the role of Apocalypse, despite some impressive makeup and a freaky gaze. This movie also gets back to colorless matching uniforms and conflicting perspectives that feel a little repetitive at times. Apocalypse even tries to outdo that great slow-motion Pentagon escape from Days of Future Past, by having Quicksilver (an awesome Evan Peters) do the same with Xavier’s School as it’s exploding. Set to “Sweet Dreams” by the Eurythmics, this sequence is impressive, though maybe not as memorable as the Pentagon. X-Men: Apocalypse has a lot going on. And I mean a lot! 

In another scene, some of the younger mutants attend a screening of Return of the Jedi and express differing opinions on the original Star Wars trilogy, potentially agreeing that third chapters are the least of all. Could the filmmakers of Apocalypse have been self-deprecating here like Deadpool? It’s anyone’s guess. 

REVIEW COLLECTION: The “X-Men” Part I

WRITER’S NOTE: The following reviews were originally posted on my Instagram page @be.kerian. 

X-Men (2000) 

Comic book movies were scarce throughout the last quarter of the 20th Century. While Superman and Batman presented colorful if divisive watermarks, most of the other “superhero” entries were dark fantasy thrillers, from The Crow to Blade. It wasn’t until we entered the 21st Century that the first of many such movies started (to paraphrase DreamWorks co-founder Jeffrey Katzenberg) a revolution, not an evolution. 

Watching the X-Men animated series in the early-90s was like a rite of passage, much like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Batman, and Spider-Man. So you could imagine our excitement when a live-action version of Stan Lee and Jack Kirby’s series about social outcasts with superhuman abilities was coming to the big screen. Directed by Bryan Singer (The Usual Suspects), X-Men managed to be both intense and entertaining. Brooding and dynamic. Thought-provoking and action-packed. It featured some cutting-edge (if dated) VFX, and was stacked with some A-list talent (including Anna Paquin’s power-absorbing Rogue, Halle Berry’s weather-controlling Storm, Famke Jansen’s telekinetic Jean Grey, James Marsden’s laser-eyed Cyclops, and a then-unknown Hugh Jackman as the claw-fisted Wolverine). 

The story itself is uneven, keeping the backstories of many of the characters a mystery. Instead, the filmmakers put us right in the middle of the action and focus on different storylines dealing with evolution and human rights, represented in Bruce Davidson’s prejudiced U.S. Senator Kelly, Patrick Stewart’s compassionate professor Charles Xavier, and Ian McKellan’s retaliating Magneto. It’s a good balance of thought and spectacle. 

Then there are the suits. With the possible exceptions of Storm, Rogue, Toad, and the shapeshifting Mystique (a titillating character overall), the suits lack the colorful imagery of the comics and cartoons (something video essayist Kaptainkristian criticized the film for, and understandably so). Then again, the non-costume wardrobes for each respective character make up for that in a way. Still, that color could’ve made a difference in this tentpole that otherwise ushered in a new millennium of blockbuster cinema.

X2: X-Men United (2003) 

Considered to be one of the first superhero sequels of the 21st Century (after Blade II) to surpass its predecessor, X2 expands its singular universe with more intense action and deeper character arcs. And for a large ensemble team-up, the movie ironically doesn’t feel overstuffed. 

X2 opens with a bang, as the teleporting circus performing Nightcrawler (Alan Cumming, in what may be his best screen role) breaks into the White House. But the real conflict begins when the anti-mutant Colonel William Stryker (a menacing and chilling Brian Cox) orders an attack on Charles Xavier’s school and plans to manipulate and control Xavier (and his mind-reading abilities) to eradicate the entire mutant population. 

Bryan Singer steps behind the camera once again to direct several returning players, including Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine (on a search for answers to his mysterious past), Famke Jansen’s Jean Grey (who starts hearing voices and senses that something terrible is on the horizon), Patrick Stewart’s Professor X, Shawn Ashmore’s Iceman (who has a complicated relationship with his own family, and a potential romantic one with Anna Paquin’s Rogue), Rebecca Romijn-Stamos’ shapeshifting Mystique (who has a bit more depth, but is still little more than objectified eye candy), and Ian McKellan’s Magneto (who forms an unlikely alliance with the main heroes to stop the aforementioned plan). 

The film works more as an episodic roller coaster (it does seem to underplay a few of its characters, like James Marsden’s Cyclops and Halle Berry’s Storm), while its action gets more gripping and even disturbing; Wolverine’s (mostly bloodless) rampage in an earlier scene, and a claw-to-claw brawl later on, really test the film’s PG-13-rating. And while some of its themes of prejudice and identity can be a little subliminally political or agenda-driven—its sexual content is more problematic as well—there are surprising themes about faith and finding community. To paraphrase Spider-Man’s Uncle Ben, just be careful how you interpret those themes. And never forget how sharp those claws really are. 

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006) 

For every success that Marvel had to offer this decade, there were as many (if not more) letdowns. From the violent and mediocre Daredevil, to the sluggish and depressing Hulk, and even the cheesy-but-fun Fantastic Four, these films didn’t live up to expectations—or missed the mark, one way or another. The same could be said for sequels in the X-Men franchise. 

With the third installment, The Last Stand, Brett Ratner replaced Bryan Singer as director (the latter decided to make a Superman movie at Warner Bros.), while most of the original cast and crew from the first two entries returned. Screenwriters Simon Kinberg and Zack Penn attempted to adapt the well-regarded "Dark Phoenix” saga from the comics, while also telling a story of scientists who have developed a “cure” to reverse genetic mutation, with conflicting issues (political and ethical) of intolerance and acceptance thrown in. The results were lackluster. 

And it’s not just the fact that this sequel was reportedly rushed by the studio. The Last Stand made the polarizing decision to kill off or “cure” some of its key characters, while others (like Anna Paquin’s Rogue, Ben Foster’s Angel, and Famke Jannsen’s Jean Grey/Phoenix) are underwritten or given little to do. Its themes about the use and misuse of power and control are intriguing and constructive (ditto themes of leadership and teamwork), even if they’re a little cliché. Some language choices, on the other hand, are harsh. Certain characters wear revealing outfits. And the violence is more brutal and gripping, as is the emotional weight of the story. 

I will say this: the perfect casting of Kelsey Grammer as Hank McCoy a.k.a. Beast was the best part of this movie—and not because he’s my favorite X-Men character. (Rick Baker was credited as a makeup effects consultant.) This was also the first movie that used de-aging technology, which put Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen back in their prime for an opening scene. And that post-credits bit: wow! But The Last Stand is a mixed bag overall, and the story and characters deserved better. That’s where the attempted Origins spinoffs came next . . .

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009) 

At first, it seemed as if Fox attempted to expand the X-Men franchise with an origin story of Hugh Jackman’s grizzled Wolverine. Instead, what we got was a retcon of the titular mutant’s history, while several other Marvel characters made underwhelming screen debuts. The result was an abomination of a superhero movie. 

Opening with Logan as a child in the mid-1800s, with bone claws (wait, what?), up to his reluctant participation in a governmental experiment that replaces said claws with adamantium metal, X-Men Origins: Wolverine tries to do too much. And not just within its first 10-20 minutes. They even inserted Logan and his screen brother Victor Creed a.k.a. Sabertooth (Leiv Schreiber, rebellious without a cause) into various wars, including stock footage straight out of Saving Private Ryan. 

The movie is loud and highly stylized, with lazy (sometimes childish) dialogue, unbelievable action (sometimes to a bludgeoning, even disturbing, pulp) that’s more laughable than gripping, and very poor CGI (including the most fake claws Wolverine has ever sported, not to mention an ever-infamous climax that sewed Deadpool’s mouth shut and gave him multiple powers). And don’t get me started on that farm sequence. Wolverine doesn’t even act that surprised at his new claws. The same could be said for an obvious connection to the original film series. 

Jackman subsequently admitted that he wasn’t happy with how this movie turned out. After all, X-Men Origins takes itself too seriously and rushes. (This movie was deeply affected by the 2007-2008 Writer’s Strike.) Lynn Collins (as love interest Kayla Silverfox) and music artist Will.i.am (as the teleporting John Wraith) are exceptional, on the other hand. Ditto appearances by mutants Cyclops and (who looks like) Emma Frost. They should’ve done more with Taylor Kitsch’s Gambit. Alas, like other characters (and the movie itself), he goes as quick as he comes. 

A spinoff centered around Magneto was planned, but never came to fruition. Instead, the studio decided to reboot the series with a new, younger cast. (More on that later.) 

REVIEW: “Inside Out 2” (2024)

I think it’s fair to say that Hollywood, in recent years, seems to have been more about pushing agendas than simply telling stories. That includes Disney and Pixar as well, to name a few. So when news and trailers for a sequel to one of the latter company’s most ambitious and creative films (about the emotions inside a young girl’s head) was announced, I was anxious that the CGI studio might present us with another “woke” narrative (Lightyear from 2022, anybody?). The good news is that Inside Out 2 doesn’t fall into that same category. Instead, it gets back to the basics of the storytelling, as well as genuine heartstrings and emotions, that Pixar has long been known for. 

Picking up two years after the 2015 original, the aforementioned Riley is now officially 13 years old and heading to a hockey camp for the summer. She hopes to make the team the following school year, with her main emotions still in tact—and providing amusing and relatable commentary. (Amy Poehler, Phyllis Smith, and Lewis Black reprise their roles as Joy, Sadness, and Anger, respectively. Tony Hale and Liza Lapira replace Bill Hader and Mindy Kaling as Fear and Disgust, respectively). And then new emotions unexpectedly join the team, not to mention conflicting motivations and objectives. These include the fast-going Anxiety (voiced by Maya Hawke), the wide-eyed Envy (Ayo Edebiri), the lazy Ennui (Adèle Exarchopoulos), and the shy Embarrassment (Paul Walter Hauser). 

The story takes viewers to new, interesting places in Riley’s mind, like the Sar-Chasm (get it?), bedrooms where all her emotions “sleep,” office cubicles that resemble animation desks, and unique interpretations of a “stream of consciousness” and a surreal “brain storm” that gives Mad Max: Fury Road and Twister a run for their money. There are even hilarious uses of different animation styles for some of Riley’s other interests (two of which cracked me up). 

At the heart is a story about growing up and dealing with sudden changes, what we can (and cannot) control, and letting go (a relatable theme for overprotective parents or adult figures as well). The same goes for the power of belief systems, particularly one’s sense of self (both the positive *and* the negative aspects), as well as a misguided sense of “happiness” and fitting in (which narratively don’t go where you might think they will). To their credit, the filmmakers consulted with teenagers from the Bay Area in California to make sure their portrayal of teenage adolescence was accurate and not “cringy”. And the film is all the better for it. 

But the ultimate theme of Inside Out 2 may be that emotions don’t get to choose who a person is. And they shouldn’t. And yet, it’s okay to not be okay. Andrea Datzman’s brilliant score pushes all the right buttons here. This is a follow up that is just as (if not more) daring, subversive, and tear-jerking as its predecessor. Inside Out 2 is easily one of Pixar’s best films in recent memory. It’s an emotional roller-coaster. 

REVIEW: “Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga” (2024)

During pre-production on Mad Max: Fury Road, director George Miller and co-writer Nico Lathouris wrote an entire backstory that chronicled Charlize Theron’s tough-as-nails Imperator Furiosa, from her lost childhood to the warrior we came to know her as in that now-unforgettable 2015 chapter. Reportedly, the actress wondered why they weren’t making her character’s origin story instead of Fury Road, as she found the former more interesting. Well, that backstory stayed with Miller and many of the same crew. And with Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga, it comes to fruition as both an exhilarating and immersive odyssey, and as a different kind of Mad Max story. 

For one thing, we get to see locations and set pieces only spoken about in Fury Road, such as the Green Place of Many Mothers (this narrative’s Garden of Eden, with “healthy, nourished full lives”), Gastown, and the Bullet Farm. We also get to see more of the Citadel, a younger--and a bit more sympathetic?--Immortan Joe (Lachy Hulme replaces the late Hugh Keyes-Burne), and earlier versions of his massive War Rig. We also get a genuine sense of how strong Furiosa is--like mother, like daughter. The Wasteland, meanwhile, is as savage, brutal, and dangerous of an environment as we’ve seen by far in this franchise. (Plus, you would not want to be a War Boy. Just saying.) 

Anya Taylor-Joy steps into the titular role like her signature mechanical arm and makes it all her own; her eyes, stares, and quiet rage saying everything. Although the actress doesn't technically show up until halfway through the movie (Alyla Browne plays Furiosa as a child), what an entrance it is! And what a risk on the filmmakers' parts. Tom Burke is equally terrific as her partner Praetorian Jack. But Furiosa is also a rare case where the main villain steals the show. And with the big-nosed, sadistic warlord Dementus, Marvel veteran Chris Hemsworth (almost unrecognizable) has never been more against-type, nor so broad, colorful, or sick. The dynamic between Hemsworth and Taylor-Joy leads to several moments that’ll leave you breathless. 

One of Miller's specialties is the power of stories, of history, and of mythology. With this film, there is not only a battle for power and control (cue Dementus against Immortan Joe), but also a fight for Furiosa to get back home and to preserve what little she has left of where she came from. (She carries a tree seed throughout.) In fact, there are very few characters in this story who believe there is something better out there than all the madness around them, while everyone else argues that such places no longer exist--or at least want to pilfer and overtake whatever abundance they can get for their own personal gain. Praetorian Jack is one of the few characters to exemplify somebody fighting for something greater. (“Even as the world fell, my parents fought to be warriors for a virtuous cause.”) 

But while Fury Road had a redemptive arc or two, Furiosa is essentially a slow-burn revenge thriller. (Furiosa was forced to watch her mother murdered right in front of her.) Sure, it literally rides off into the sunset. But it heads toward the sun while it’s still hot, and slowly, quietly comes to a boiling point. The result, like Tom Holkenborg's subtle and intense score and the film's thunderous sound design, is heart-pounding and jaw-dropping. And graphic, nnot just because of Furiosa’s severed arm. One truly gross scene involves maggots and decomposing limbs in creepy underground tunnels. There are also grim scenes of torture and psychological tension, leaving a lot to the imagination. 

Furiosa also seems a bit more dialogue-heavy (then again, so were the 1979 original and 1985’s Beyond Thunderdome). Its two-and-a-half-hour runtime may try the patience of viewers used to fast action and crazy stunts (which this movie has plenty of), but I give Miller and company credit for presenting a different, more layered, and subversive kind of Mad Max. The chapter titles help make it feel like a piece of classic literature or ancient mythology. Its narrative structure, amazingly, comes full circle, from white to black, from innocence to antiheroism, if you will. The film does fall short in some of its visuals, half of which are clearly CGI panoramas; ditto massive crowd shots and insane car crashes (perhaps due to safety concerns from the last movie). 

Still, the effect is nothing short of gripping and exhilarating. For someone in his 80s (so are Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola), George Miller remains as skilled and crafty a filmmaker as he’s ever been. He really understands, and knows how to create, cinema. I guess all that's left is that pre-Fury Road backstory he and Lathouris wrote for Max Rockatansky, titled Mad Max: The Wasteland. We'll see. Remember that. 

REVIEW: “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes” (2024)

[WRITER’S NOTE: The following review was originally posted on May 13, 2024.] 

Passing the torch of a film franchise from one director to the next is always a daunting task, especially if there’s a generational gap. What’s interesting about the original Planet of the Apes movies is they were products of their time (the late-1960s and early-1970s were a period of Vietnam, Watergate, and civil rights marches). 

The rebooted trilogy from the past decade has allowed filmmakers and artists to successfully update author Pierre Boulle’s original concept, by transitioning from practical effects to digital performances, all while keeping the storylines engrossing and thoughtful. In retrospect, 2011’s Rise, 2014’s Dawn, and 2017’s War, strangely foreshadowed where the world would be in the not-too-distant future. (Since 2020, we’ve had to deal with a global pandemic for real.) So the themes in this larger narrative remain as (if not more) relevant than ever.

With Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, director Wes Ball (The Maze Runner) picks up where Rupert Wyatt and Matt Reeves left off. Set 300 years after the events of War, a young chimpanzee named Noa (an engrossing Owen Teague) has much growth and knowledge to gain in his community. But when his village is attacked and taken captive by a power-hungry simian army, he goes on a quest to find his tribe and bring them back from a sadistic bonobo leader named Proximus (a commanding and chilling Kevin Durand). Along the way, he meets a wise orangutan named Raka (a wonderful Peter Macon) and a mysterious human girl named Mae (an incredible Freya Allan) with more to her than meets the eye. 

The world-building of this new iteration is captivating and awe-inspiring, from the sights of algae-covered skyscrapers in ruins, to motifs of waterfalls, eagles, and telescopes and satellites (symbols of hope and communication) looking to the sky. It’s a seamless balance of visual effects (courtesy Weta) and real locations. Proximus’s “wonderful day” catchphrase even gives this series another thing in common with Mad Max. 

The story of Kingdom takes on mythological and even Biblical proportions. Specifically, the idea of stories and legends from one generation that have either been forgotten or not passed on to the next. This is exemplified in two different clans of apes going toe-to-toe, physically and with conflicting worldviews and ideologies about community, laws, and how they treat or view human beings. Ditto themes of meaning, understanding, truth, trust, and honoring or dishonoring who we are and where we came from. It also begs the question (as cliché as it is): is it possible for two different species to co-exist and rebuild in a broken world? 

While Kingdom doesn’t quite reach the rock-climbing heights of Reeves’ previous installments, Ball’s take manages to be both a clever homage and a jaw-dropping, subversive narrative. Some throwbacks to the 1968 original are a bit much, but Kingdom represents a full-circle event that carries on the series in some unexpected and challenging directions, regarding the roles of humanity and stewardship (or the lack of both), as well as issues of submission, conformity, and ownership. It’ll be something to see where this franchise heads next. 

REVIEW COLLECTION: Legacy of the “Planet of the Apes” Part 2

WRITER’S NOTE: The following reviews were originally posted on my Instagram page @be.kerian in March and April of 2024. (For this post, the reviews for Dawn and War have been extended.) 

[POSTSCRIPT: My review for Kingdom was added on May 13, 2024.] 

Planet of the Apes (2001) 

At the turn of the century, Hollywood attempted to remake several classic films for a new generation. This 2001 revamp from director Tim Burton (based off the 1968 sci-fi saga starring Charlton Heston) was one of them. In this version, Mark Wahlberg plays an Air Force pilot on a space station that uses chimpanzees as test subjects for interstellar travel. When one of them gets lost, Wahlberg’s Leo Davidson goes on a mission to bring him back but gets caught in a wormhole that sends him to a strange planet where talking apes rule and humans are enslaved. 

Honestly, the one great thing this Planet of the Apes had going for it was Rick Baker’s incredible makeup effects. As it turns out, this would be the last time that makeup artists would work on an Apes feature. For Baker, it was a dream come true. And it shows, especially with such committed actors as Michael Clarke Duncan (as a brute soldier) and Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa (as a doubtful gorilla). Tim Roth (as a snarling general) and Paul Giamati (as a wacky orangutan), on the other hand, ham it up too much. 

While this flick has spectacle and action to spare (and a few homages to the original), it lacks the intellect that made that flick such a thrilling adventure. The visual effects, technology, and millennial vibes in this reimagining haven’t aged well, while other elements are just weird and suggestive. More importantly, the story is convoluted, forgettable, and lacks a genuine sense of mystery, including the origins of the titular planet. Even its own twist ending is confusing rather than shocking—an element that ruins the rest of the movie, and is likely one reason it performed below expectations and killed a potential new franchise. 

Filmmaker James Cameron once claimed that this remake didn’t work because the studio hired the wrong director. Agreeably, Apes isn’t really Burton’s kind of movie. (Even he admitted it wasn’t a great experience, as the studio reportedly set a release date before a script was even finished.) At least his next film (Big Fish) was more up his alley, while it would be another ten years before Planet of the Apes found a better one.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) 

Ten years after an unsuccessful reboot, Fox decided to give the Planet of the Apes series another try. Only this time, instead of using practical makeup effects, the filmmakers of Rise of the Planet of the Apes turned to the same motion-capture technology and visual effects company (Weta Digital) that brought the Na’vi of James Cameron’s Avatar to life. And for the Apes lead character, Caesar, they turned to actor Andy Serkis (the same man who breathed life into Gollum and King Kong). The result is a thoroughly convincing and evocative performance. 

Like the 1968 original, Rise doesn’t just rely on its technical achievements. (This was also the first movie to shoot mo-cap in outdoor environments.) It succeeds as a smart and thrilling present day sci-fi drama—in which a group of scientists (headed by James Franco’s sympathetic-if-misguided Will Rodman) create an experimental drug as a potential cure for Alzheimer’s disease. When a chimpanzee test subject tragically dies, the serum transfers to her offspring (Caesar), whom Will decides to raise. Caesar’s intellectual growth eventually persuades Will to try the drug on his ailing father (a compelling John Lithgow), a further key example of the story’s central-if-cliched notion of “playing God,” especially when the consequences eventually rear their ugly head. 

But when Caesar is discovered and feared in public, he is forced into an animal shelter. Considered by many as a loose remake of 1972’s Conquest sequel, Caesar plans an escape and revolution for him and the other captive simians. (Audiences should know that this gripping and jaw-dropping film is also, according to the MPAA, “intense and frightening.”) 

As for the film’s human cast (including David Oyelowo’s business CEO and Tom Felton’s animal control employee), some of them come across as one-dimensional. The story also rushes a bit, but really works when it’s just apes communicating through body or sign language, or when they’re in nature. It’s really something to see and hear. A film that apparently nobody asked for but far exceeded expectations, Rise is the best reboot since Batman Begins.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) 

The second installment in the rebooted Planet of the Apes series has something in common with Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior: both predecessors took place in the present-day, while the sequels represented more of the post-apocalyptic worlds they’re generally known for. In Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, a virus that resulted from an experimental drug gone wrong has wiped out much of the human population around the globe. The few “genetically-immune” survivors try to make do with the resources they have, and to make contact with the outside world. Meanwhile, a colony of intelligent apes (led by Caesar) roams the forests on the outskirts of what remains of San Francisco—and Western civilization. 

The latter group is what makes the more elemental and universal Dawn feel like a silent picture half the time, as these simians communicate through sign and body language, and a limited vocabulary. Caesar is much more reserved and snarling this time around, wanting to protect his family and community. In fact, several other characters (like Jason Clarke’s Malcolm and Gary Oldman’s Dreyfus), who illustrate strong parent-child relationships, want a better life, and hope to reconnect, rebuild, and share resources with others. And while Caesar wants nothing to do with humanity at first, he comes to see the morally gray areas of both man and beast. It’s a testament to the dedication of actor Andy Serkis, as we really feel what Caesar is thinking, even if we don’t know what it is exactly. 

This is a rare sequel that really improves on its predecessor in every way, thanks, in part, to phenomenal direction by Matt Reeves, incredible production design by James Chinlund, and brilliant writing by Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver, and Mark Bomback. It ranks as another milestone in motion capture performance (courtesy Weta Digital), this time shot in raining environments and in a taller aspect ratio. 

That being said, Dawn is also a much more violent entry (competing with 1972’s Conquest), with scenes of gunplay, language issues, and a few startling moments. Part of that has to do with characters’ conflicting motivations and agendas. Characters who are unwilling to let go of deep-seated anger and hatred, resulting in betrayal and broken trust. 

The chief example is the bonobo ape Koba (Toby Kebbell), an abused test subject (from Rise) who serves as this film’s main antagonist. Like Aldo in 1973’s Battle, he’s a character who is willing to kill even his own kind to get what he wants, adding to this narrative’s themes of fear and destruction against peace and understanding. And although Michael Giacchino’s score does have some clever homages to Jerry Goldsmith’s music from the original movies (scenes in underground tunnels recall 1970’s Beneath), Dawn is a more gripping and exhilarating slow-burn of a drama. 

War for the Planet of the Apes (2017) 

As its title suggests, this third installment in the Planet of the Apes reboot series is a war picture. But it’s so much more than that. Set two years after the events of Dawn, military soldiers answer a distress call to search for and eradicate the ape colony led by the now-legendary Caesar. While the rest of his community relocates in search of a safer haven (an Exodus, if you will), Caesar goes on a personal mission to find the merciless Colonel (played by a chilling Woody Harrelson, channeling Kurtz from Apocalypse Now) who murdered Caesar’s family sans his youngest child. 

Accompanied by three companions, including fellow chimp Rocket (series regular Terry Notary) and the wise orangutan Maurice (Karin Konoval, who’s been a standout since Rise), the journey is both epic and intimate. It’s Sergio Leone-meets-David Lean, from the shores of a beach to the frozen hideout of a former zoo animal named “Bad Ape” (played with comic relief by the naturally-funny Steve Zahn), and the central “Alpha Omega” military base that cages and enslaves other apes. Meanwhile, the virus that wiped out half of humanity (between Rise and Dawn) has apparently mutated, leaving its victims literally speechless, including a little girl that Maurice eventually names “Nova” (played wonderfully by newcomer Amiah Miller). 

But War is not just a physical conflict between men and simians. It’s also a soulful and moral struggle for Caesar, as he is haunted by memories of his deceased friend-turned-enemy Koba (the antagonist of Dawn) and risks losing his own humanity and compassion. This easily tops its predecessor as the most violent Apes chapter, with numerous battle sequences and brutal winter conditions that test our characters physically and psychologically. It’s also the most melancholy, emotional, and spiritual entry, with deeply biblical and mythological parallels (some profound; others, quietly empowering), thanks, in part, to Michael Giacchino’s moving score (especially Nova’s theme) and a thoroughly gripping, subversive, and literally explosive tone. 

The motion capture technology has become so seamless by this point—as great as it’s ever been, actually—that it blurs the line between science-fiction and reality at times, even in groundbreaking snow conditions. Director/writer Matt Reeves and co-writer Mark Bomback have done an equally great job of interweaving themes and definitions of “mercy,” “nature,” “sacrifice,” and “salvation,” as well as themes of identity and character.

On the other hand, it is ironic that the narrative has us rooting for the apes more than the human characters, most of which are unsympathetic here, or die from bloody illnesses. (Nova may be the lone exception.) As Bad Ape describes, “Human get sick while ape get smart”—a potential prelude, as well as thematic full-circle connection, to the 1968 original. What a way to cap a trilogy for the time being. 

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes (2024) 

Passing the torch of a film franchise from one director to the next is always a daunting task, especially if there’s a generational gap. What’s interesting about the original Planet of the Apes movies is they were products of their time (the late-1960s and early-1970s were a period of Vietnam, Watergate, and civil rights marches). 

The rebooted trilogy from the past decade has allowed filmmakers and artists to successfully update author Pierre Boulle’s original concept, by transitioning from practical effects to digital performances, all while keeping the storylines engrossing and thoughtful. In retrospect, 2011’s Rise, 2014’s Dawn, and 2017’s War, strangely foreshadowed where the world would be in the not-too-distant future. (Since 2020, we’ve had to deal with a global pandemic for real.) So the themes in this larger narrative remain as (if not more) relevant than ever.

With Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes, director Wes Ball (The Maze Runner) picks up where Rupert Wyatt and Matt Reeves left off. Set 300 years after the events of War, a young chimpanzee named Noa (an engrossing Owen Teague) has much growth and knowledge to gain in his community. But when his village is attacked and taken captive by a power-hungry simian army, he goes on a quest to find his tribe and bring them back from a sadistic bonobo leader named Proximus (a commanding and chilling Kevin Durand). Along the way, he meets a wise orangutan named Raka (a wonderful Peter Macon) and a mysterious human girl named Mae (an incredible Freya Allan) with more to her than meets the eye. 

The world-building of this new iteration is captivating and awe-inspiring, from the sights of algae-covered skyscrapers in ruins, to motifs of waterfalls, eagles, and telescopes and satellites (symbols of hope and communication) looking to the sky. It’s a seamless balance of visual effects (courtesy Weta) and real locations. Proximus’s “wonderful day” catchphrase even gives this series another thing in common with Mad Max. 

The story of Kingdom takes on mythological and even Biblical proportions. Specifically, the idea of stories and legends from one generation that have either been forgotten or not passed on to the next. This is exemplified in two different clans of apes going toe-to-toe, physically and with conflicting worldviews and ideologies about community, laws, and how they treat or view human beings. Ditto themes of meaning, understanding, truth, trust, and honoring or dishonoring who we are and where we came from. It also begs the question (as cliché as it is): is it possible for two different species to co-exist and rebuild in a broken world? 

While Kingdom doesn’t quite reach the rock-climbing heights of Reeves’ previous installments, Ball’s take manages to be both a clever homage and a jaw-dropping, subversive narrative. Some throwbacks to the 1968 original are a bit much, but Kingdom represents a full-circle event that carries on the series in some unexpected and challenging directions, regarding the roles of humanity and stewardship (or the lack of both), as well as issues of submission, conformity, and ownership. It’ll be something to see where this franchise heads next. 

REVIEW COLLECTION: “Ghostbusters” Series

(Courtesy Logo Design Love) 

WRITER’S NOTE: Except for the first and last ones, the following reviews were originally posted on my Instagram page @be.kerian. 

Ghostbusters (1984) 

Ghostbusters is a classic movie, there’s no denying it. It wasn’t the first time that different genres have been seamlessly combined. But Ghostbusters took that blend of supernatural horror, science-fiction, special effects, and improvisational dialogue, and elevated it to a whole new level. After all, director Ivan Reitman, writers Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis, and co-stars Bill Murray and Rick Moranis, had been involved with some of the most popular comedy films and T.V. shows of the era. This marked the first time they’ve all worked together on the same project.

The quirky characters remain iconic, from the carefree Peter Venkman (Murray) to fascination-fanatic Ray Stantz (Aykroyd), Twinkie-loving straight man Egon Spengler (Ramis), new-recruit Winston (Ernie Hudson), motormouth tenant Lewis Tully (Moranis), the beautiful Dana Berrett (Sigourney Weaver), and deadpan receptionist Janine (Annie Potts). And who could forget those brown jumpsuits, complete with the ghost logo and proton packs? And there’s the Ectomobile and catchy theme song. 

Except for Winston (who would join later), these characters start out as university parapsychologists who are fired, and decide to set up their own business: catching and entrapping the paranormal and all things that go bump-in-the-night. And their timing couldn’t be more impeccable, as their business oddly begins to boom, EPA reps get angrily concerned, and residents begin to get possessed by dark forces, including evil minions who are awaiting the coming of a destructive force, which eventually takes the Godzilla-like form of a corporate mascot. 

Yes, Ghostbusters is a comedy. And it’s as scary as it is funny. But when we really consider this film’s handling of spirituality (including the fact that many of these characters are occasionally clueless when it comes to supernatural), not to mention outdated sexual innuendos and scenes of smoking, it’s a reminder that there’s no such thing as, “It’s just a movie.” 

Ghostbusters 2 (1989) 

When it was first released, the makers and stars of Ghostbusters were surprised that their movie was not only popular with their target adult audience (hence that film’s adult humor), but also with kids. This reported demographic shift led to a Saturday morning cartoon (The Real Ghostbusters), as well as a more family-friendly sequel in 1989. 

Set five years later, the ever-popular paranormal exterminators have moved on to other lines of work (and non-smoking habits), from psychic talk shows to occult book stores. But when gallons of pink slime start to surface in the Big Apple around New Year’s Eve, Peter Venkman (Billy Murray), Ray Stantz (Dan Aykroyd), Egon Spengler (Harold Ramis), and Winston Zeddemore (Ernie Hudson) get back in business and eventually face off against an evil ancient Viking. 

Murray has expressed disappointment over this installment, claiming it was more special-effects driven—a fair statement, considering the gallons of pink slime, kooky specters, and ridiculous or loud humor that populate the screen. The story isn’t as strong or memorable either. And then there are scary scenes of child endangerment, which is another story. But Ghostbusters 2 has its moments (“Come on, there’s always room for jello”), including a clever, updated animated logo. And it still knows how to balance laughs and scares effectively. 

Most of all, it’s fun to watch Murray, Aykroyd, Ramis, and Hudson (along with Sigourney Weaver, Annie Potts, and Rick Moranis) once again. Talks of a third movie have circulated over the years since, with most of the main cast—and director Ivan Reitman—expressing interest, but reportedly only moving forward if Murray agreed as well. With Moranis’s retirement ten years later and Ramis’s passing in 2014, Ghostbusters 2 would be the last time they all worked together on the same movie.

Ghostbusters a.k.a. Ghostbusters: Answer the Call (2016) 

After years of being in, quote-on-quote, development limbo—and despite an ingenious homage in the 2009 horror-comedy Zombieland—a new Ghostbusters was finally greenlit, and even endorsed by Ivan Reitman and the original cast (including Bill Murray). The 2016 gender-swap reboot attempt (from Bridesmaids director Paul Feig), however, isn’t what people were expecting. As with most franchises, it’s true that nothing will ever top the original. But this version of Ghostbusters got a lot of heat on social media as soon as the first trailer was released. (At the time, it was the most disliked movie preview on YouTube.) 

The movie itself, admittedly, is not perfect. It has too many special effects, and its improvised banter doesn’t always land. Plus, its trademark secular and scientific views of spirituality and the afterlife (even as a fantasy) make it out of bounds for more discerning viewers. Ditto some crass dialogue, a few questionable song lyrics, and a scene involving the suicide of a disturbed adversary. (For those reasons, I myself can’t endorse this.) It’s sort of ironic that critics seemed to favor this movie more than audiences—the opposite reaction towards Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman (which is a different story). 

I will say that this Ghostbusters otherwise stands on its own, largely thanks to the camaraderie among its four leading ladies: Kristen Wiig’s physicist Erin Gilbert and Melissa McCarthy’s paranormal researcher Abby Yates have funny bits, but it’s Leslie Jones’ MTA officer Patty Tolan and Kate McKinnon’s quirky engineer Jillian Holtzmann who get the biggest laughs. It was also this movie that arguably certified Chris Hemsworth (as clueless receptionist Kevin)’s comedy chops—and that the MCU vet wasn’t afraid to laugh at himself. Original cast members make clever cameo appearances as well (although Murray’s feels like a missed opportunity). 

In 2021, director Jason Reitman (son of Ivan) commended Feig for “expanding" the franchise, even if it was divisive. But sometimes, those are the best lessons in moviegoing, especially with tentpoles like this.

Ghostbusters: Afterlife (2021) 

Originally scheduled for a 2020 theatrical release (and with help from a clever teaser trailer in 2019), this continuation of the genre-bending supernatural comedies from the 1980s was pushed back by over a year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. But as people were slowly heading back to the theaters, this new take from indie director Jason Reitman was a surprising pass of the baton to a new generation since Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Harold Ramis, and Ernie Hudson first sported jumpsuits and proton packs, and caught various specters around New York City over 35 years before. 

In Ghostbusters: Afterlife, a struggling family (single mom Carrie Coon, teenage son Finn Wolfhard, and brainy daughter McKenna Grace) inherits an old farmhouse with a mysterious connection to one of the original members. Excitement and thrills abound within this nostalgic roller-coaster of a movie. It also works as an engrossing coming-of-age story about family dynamics, not to mention a moving dedication to the late Ramis. 

Paul Rudd is also terrific as a science teacher, while a new ghost named Muncher (who feeds on metal, and is voiced by Josh Gad) steals the show. The surround sound is booming, while the filmmakers strike a great balance of practical and digital effects (the Ectomobile has a gunner’s seat?!). Ghostbusters: Afterlife only falls short in its last act, where it plays more like fan service than an original concept. And it goes with saying the film has dark spiritual elements (more than the original film did, honestly) and some genuine jump scares. 

The more dramatic tone and small town vibe also has as much in common with Stranger Things and Poltergeist as it does with the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man (who appears in miniature, macabre form here). Overall, this was one of the best times I had at the movies (exclusively) in recent years. Am I ready to believe the next theatrical installment will have more originality? We’ll see.