THE FANTASTIC FOUR: FIRST STEPS Review

Shang-Chi and The Eternals didn’t need to be the next Iron Man. The Marvels nor Anthony Mackie’s Captain America never stood a chance at being such given the climate they were released into (not to mention their generally poor quality) whereas Thunderbolts* needed to do a lot of things but it didn’t necessarily need to turn over a new leaf or define the next generation of super hero films in the way 2008’s Iron Man did. This third iteration of "The Fantastic Four" in thirty years though…it did kind of need to be the next Iron Man; not necessarily in terms of look, feel, or execution but by doing what that film did for the genre upon its release: revitalizing it. The challenge facing The Fantastic Four: First Steps is that it both needs to feel fresh, be something of a departure from the MCU thus far signaling a changing of the tide while retaining audience investment in the future of the universe at large. Herein lies the issue as First Steps is essentially a self-contained, single issue comic book story that introduces, entices, and entertains - all good things on their own merits - yet it still feels uncertain how convincing the film is at persuading casual viewers that they should follow Marvel’s first family into the future.

The simplicity and practicality of Marvel’s approach to the introduction of this version of The Fantastic Four echoes through the story, the design of Earth 828 where the film takes place, as well as extending to the mentality of all of the characters; what is right and wrong not only seems evident to everyone but it is purposefully communicated the majority are on the same page -- tensions only arising once the nuance of Galactus’ ultimatum does and even then, humanity trusts The Fantastic Four enough to not question their methods. Director Matt Shakman began with Marvel on Wandavision, so his hiring for this retro futuristic take on the superhero family makes sense and to he, the editors, and the screenwriter’s credit the film efficiently conveys not only the context within which this team exists but the place they occupy in society and in the world.

SIN CITY: A DAME TO KILL FOR Review

In the spring of 2005 my newly minted eighteen year-old self highly anticipated director Robert Rodriguez's adaptation of the Frank Miller comic Sin City. Keep in mind this was a world before Christopher Nolan's genre re-defining Batman Begins or Zack Snyder's influential visual stylings of 300 and so to see something so inherently original in its take on both aesthetic and story was exciting even if I wasn't familiar with the source material. Add on to that the fact Rodriguez enlisted the creator of the comic book as his co-director and gathered up an expansive cast that included Bruce Willis, Benecio Del Toro, Clive Owen, Jessica Alba, Rosario Dawson, Brittany Murphy, Michael Madsen, Powers Boothe and the first interesting role Mickey Rourke had taken in some time (essentially the one that made him cool again) and you had something people were generally intrigued by. Almost a decade later though and the anticipation for any such follow-up to the film has long since faded and thus the original would have likely survived best if left alone rather than trying to return to the days of former glory with a sequel that doesn't really expand the world of the titular environment as much as it gives us the same things we were treated to the first time around, only this time with less of a punch to the gut. Less punch because we've seen them before, less surprise because we know the characters better, more of the same because we realize the characters weren't as developed as our first impression led us to believe. In short, the sequel more or less points out the flaws of the world in which it exists rather than enhancing or expanding the universe the original set-up and when a sequel does this it only makes its existence feel all the more forced than necessary. There are of course a few redeemable aspects here, the stark visuals still elicit a certain mood and look stunning on the big screen and the addition of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and his storyline is engaging and deserved more screen time, but these aren't enough to spice up what is overall rather boring and a flat narrative. There will always be a certain nostalgia for the original Sin City given it's place in time and my stage of life when it was released, but if there was any hope A Dame to Kill For might do the same, re-create those feelings, or even spark interest in eighteen year-olds today those hopes were dashed when Rourke's narration began and the style was more cloak and pattern than function to deepen story or theme.

THE LAST EXORCISM PART II Review

I re-watched 2010's The Last Exorcism just the other day as I planned on seeing the sequel this week. I remembered liking it much more than I expected, but not for the reasons one expects when going to see a horror flick. No, I was never truly scared by what I saw on screen with the original film but more I was intrigued by the originality of it. Just when I thought I'd seen every kind of incarnation in which an exorcism could be presented on screen this found footage, documentary-like movie set a new standard for the exorcism film. The heart of that film, despite Ashley Bell's wonderfully innocent performance as sheltered yet possessed farm girl Nell Sweetzer, was Patrick Fabian as Reverend Cotton Marcus. Fabian created a charismatic character that was difficult to like, but at the same time able to create a sympathetic reasoning for his actions. He was a con man toying with peoples beliefs, but he was funny and to be fair he always had the best of intentions. The first film that needed no sequel, that called for no continuation of the story, or left anyone with a desire to see what happened to Nell (I think we all just assumed she died giving birth to a demon child!) was a brief hour and twenty-seven minutes long. The Last Exorcism Part II (which may be the most misleading title in the history of cinema) clocks in at only a minute longer, but feels like it goes on for days. It has an episodic feel to it that never picks up and never feels like a coherent work but instead a compilation of scenes that show our protagonist running from something, who we're never given a real reason as to why, and are expected to be frightened every time a loud sound interrupts the scene over and over again.

First Image and Trailer for THE LAST EXORCISM PART II

I actually rather enjoyed The Last Exorcism when it arrived in late summer of 2010. It was certainly riding the waves of the horror film done in the found footage manner but it featured a wonderful leading performance from Patrick Fabian as a pastor so lost in his faith and feeling like a fraud that he is able to give a sermon about banana bread without the least bit of remorse. This performance anchored the film and brought about several layers that were certainly unexpected in this defiantly genre film. Now, there is no reason whatsoever for a sequel and a sequel in March is less than an inspiring lest here we are and here we have the first trailer for the redundant The Last Exorcism Part II. Ashley Bell returns as Nell Sweetzer who, at the end of the first film, is left for dead in the woods having just escaped a demon ritual and is unable to remember the last several months of her life. She is the only surviving member of her family (which is a shame as Caleb Landry Jones played her brother in the first film) and so she must begin to form the basis for a normal life. Naturally, to justify this continuation of the story the demon that wanted to take control of Nell in the first film is back with an even grander plan to completely possess the young girl this time. I'm not going to be optimistic at all about this film, but I did enjoy the first one enough to be at least somewhat interested in how this turns out. We won't have to wait too long to see as The Last Exorcism Part II opens on March 1 and stars Ashley Bell, Spencer Treat Clark, Andrew Sensenig, Judd Lormand, Julia Garner, Muse Watson, E. Roger Mitchell and David Jensen.