The Bad Guys - Movie Review - They may be bad, but their movie isn't

I love Dreamworks Animation. While not one of my very favourite animation studios, they've certainly made many terrific films and many of which I grew up watching. Despite this, I haven't really been paying attention to much of their recent work, especially in the 2020s so far. It's mostly been sequels to films I didn't especially care for, and so they've kind of gone off my radar. Their latest offering, The Bad Guys, is not one I was anticipating at all. From the trailers, this film looked very unfunny and conceptually it just seemed kind of generic. So, I wasn't initially going to check it out, but ultimately decided to after hearing some good things about it. 

In the film, a team of criminals simply known as 'The Bad Guys', consisting of a Wolf, Snake, Tarantula, Shark, and Piranha, are put the test as they are captured and only allowed to be set free if they reform themselves into better people, which is the only way they can return to the lives they feel are best for them to live.  

The best part of The Bad Guys would probably be the characters, as they are all really well realised and a ton of fun. Whether it's the slick and sly Mr Wolf, the cynical Mr Snake, the sassy Ms Tarantula, the goofy Mr Shark, or the energetic Mr Piranha, they all make for a highly entertaining ensemble. They may be a little one note, but remain entertaining nonetheless. The film also did a good job tying the particular animals that the characters are to their character traits, as you may have inferred from my brief descriptions. All the voice acting was really strong as you'd probably expect from a Dreamworks offering, especially that of Sam Rockwell, Awkwafina, and Richard Ayoade.

I also like how the film fully took advantage of the animals that the characters were, which isn't always apparent in films with a cast of anthropomorphised animals as it can just be a gimmick implemented due to a lack of creativity. Here, the opposite is true, such as the snake functioning as a rope, or the tarantula's many legs frantically clicking away at a keyboard. The animation is also really nice, having a distinct style that initially struck me as cheap but quickly won me over as the overall uniqueness of the aesthetic made the viewing experience a pleasure. I sometimes don't like animated films when they're excessively wacky and cartoony, but here it worked perfectly as it tonally aligned with what the film was going for.

The film is quite heavily focused on the action, and a lot of it is delightful. From the zany, explosive car chases, to the low-key, meticulously organised heists, it's all very engaging. But it's not just the action scenes that work effectively, as some of the simple dialogue-centred scenes are also very competent, and surprisingly don't always talk down to the younger audience members. The opening is just a casual scene in a diner with two of the main characters chatting, clearly giving off Pulp Fiction vibes, and the exchanges between them were actually very well written, and honestly would have been passable in a film not intended for children. This is true for various other dialogue exchanges in the film. I mean, it's certainly no Ratatouille, but still really decently done. The cinematography was also very solid, especially in that opening scene which is very neatly captured in one smooth, unbroken shot.

There are also some nice themes throughout the film, such as redemption, fulfillment, and the damaging nature of stereotypes. They were all fairly sufrace-level in execution as the plot itself was mostly predictable, but still nice to see the film include. It bears a fair amount of comparison to Disney's Zootropolis, which also featured a cast of anthropomorphic animals and tackled some similar ideas, though it did so with far more complexity and nuance, so this obviously can't quite live up to it. 

I don't have a ton of problems with the film; aside from the afore mentioned predictable plot, my only other main issue would be the humour. Some of the lines and sight gags were funny, but a lot of it is your typical Dreamworks humour that caters to the younger audiences. I can't complain too much as they obviously are the primary target audience, they just didn't really land for me. I also think the world of the film is quite ill-defined, as it's clearly a world where humans and animals co-exist, but it felt like only the protagonists and other noteworthy characters were animals while all the extras were humans, which ticked me off a little. I think it should've just been a world of purely animals. 

Overall, it gives me much pleasure to say that I really enjoyed The Bad Guys. It's nothing amazing, even by Dreamworks standards, but the great animation, terrific cast of characters, and generally enjoyable antics made it a jolly good time. 

I'm going to give The Bad Guys a 7.5/10

The Northman - Movie Review - A beautifully brutal epic from Robert Eggers

Robert Eggers is one of the most interesting filmmakers of the last few years. The Witch and The Lighthouse, the two films he has made so far, are both films I have some reservations about, but are both wonderfully distinct and mesmerising experiences that leave you with much to think about and piece together. So, I was very excited to see not only a new film from him, but a medieval epic, something I absolutely love.

In The Northman, after witnessing his father's murder and his kingdom get overruled, the young prince Amleth sets out on a journey of revenge, in order to fulfill what he believes to be his fate. 

This film was amazing, and it was amazing for a number of reasons. Robert Eggers is almost like a modern day Shakespeare - he takes these concepts that are relatively simple on paper and manages to craft extremely mesmerising experiences around them that explore every ounce of their thematic potential. This was true for his last two films, and equally true for The Northman. For some of my discussion I am going to go into spoiler territory, so do not read ahead if you have not yet seen the film.

This is a story about a number of things, most fascinatingly of all, the questioning of the notion of 'fate'. Amleth, played very well by Alexander Skarsgård, begins very clearly on a path where he is destined to avenge the murder of his father by killing the man who murdered him, and for the longest time, it seems as if that is what he will end up doing. Even when he finds himself embracing his animalistic side and being barbaric towards others, he manages to correct his ways and set himself back on the path that would lead him to doing this. But, at one point, it seems as if this will not be the case. In attempting to get closer to his father's killer, he becomes a slave and meets a woman named Olga, played by the fabulous Anya Taylor-Joy, whose influence seems to send him along a different path; a path where he will have children of his own and continue his father's legacy. This raises the question: is life reducible to one's fate, or is there room for change as life goes on? The film implies that the latter is true at one point, as it seems Amleth will abandon his supposed fate and live a new life with Olga and their children. But, just when this seems true, the film reminds you of the simple times this film takes place in; a time when fate was what defined someone, as Amleth leaves Olga in order to avenge his father. In the end, after a breathtaking final battle, he successfully achieves this by killing his father's murderer, but only to die in doing so, making it clear that perhaps all there is to life is a destiny that one will inevitably fulfill. This idea and all the steps along the way to build it made the film such an enaging and thought-provoking watch. 

All this thematic wonder is presented in such spectacular ways. The cinematography is so full of life and captures the scope of this story, with the huge landscapes and vast seas truly feeling as big as they are. The score is pulse-pounding and enchances the brutality on display excellently. There are visuals that are completely memorable, whether it be all the intense, bloody action, or the haunting faces around a fire, or the two damaged men fighting to the death amid lakes of lava. Almost everything about this film had me transfixed and in awe. 

With all that being said, I have a key issue with the film, and that is the overall nature. While the utter brutality of the film and its willingness to completely emphasise every ounce of pain / shock certainly created a stellar atmosphere, it does make the film a tough watch. It is quite difficult to endure and it takes its time to let every aspect be properly understood / explored. However, this is at a small cost as I'm glad the film didn't play it safe and was daring enough to be as intense as it was, and parts of this did truly make it enthralling. 

I think some people may get the wrong impression of what this film is from some of the marketing, the idea that this is "This generation's Gladiator" is quite misleading. Gladiator does have thematic and narrative parallels to this film but it is a tonally different watch - it feels more like a crowd-pleasing film with an undeniably likeable protagonist and features more sumptuous visuals due to the time period it takes place in. The Northman is far less accessible and goes further in its portrayals of some of the more shocking aspects of this sort of story than Gladiator does. 

Overall, I loved The Northman. While it is a tough film to sit through and can certainly be quite overwhelming it brings so much to the table with its excellent themes and ideas as well as its masterful filmmaking. Robert Eggers continues to prove that he's a hugely talented writer and director, and I can't wait to see what he does next. 

I'm going to give The Northman an 8.5/10

Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore - Movie Review - The magic might be starting to fade

J.K. Rowling's Wizarding World is one of the most popular and well-known franchises of all time. I'm not a massive fan of it but I've seen all the films and enjoy them all, not least Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. This spin-off of the Harry Potter franchise is terrific; a film that works for me because it limits its ties to this universe to function as its own simple, enjoyable, standalone adventure with great characters and extremely fun creatures. Even though it takes place in the Wizarding World, it can easily be enjoyed by very lukewarm fans, myself included. It also isn't really a film that I think warrants sequels, especially not four. The Crimes of Grindelwald is a perfectly enjoyable film, but feels quite narratively muddled as it tries to link the characters of the first film to narratives more closely associated with Potter. Now, we have The Secrets of Dumbledore, and I didn't really know what to expect from this entry, but I assumed it'd likely be on a similar wavelength. 

In the film, Newt Scamander, along with Jacob Kowalski, Albus Dumbledore, and his suitcase full of magical creatures, continue their pursuit and fight against Gellert Grindelwald as his influence throughout the Wizarding World continues to grow.

While the previous film in this series probably had a bit too much going on for its own good, this film suffers on the opposite end of the spectrum by having far too little going on, as you may have inferred from that plot summary. This is your typical filler film, as basically nothing of note happens throughout and it feels as if nothing new has been accomplished by the end. As a result, it can be quite boring at times as it just feels like nothing but padding. Between this and The Crimes of Grindelwald, I feel there's about enough content for a single film; the last one ended on a cliffhanger, and it feels like this is just what should've been the final act of that film extended to be feature length. 

J.K. Rowling is undeniably a talented world-builder and has great ideas for stories and characters, and I don't really think she's that bad a screenwriter either. What weakens her storytelling abilities is likely the mindset that what's being told needs to go on for as long as possible, as she's clearly aware that the Wizarding World is a lucrative property and thus wants to capitalise on that by taking this new story and extending it beyond the point of necessity. If she was more efficient with her storytelling, then I think the second and third films in the Fantastic Beasts series probably could've been condensed into one solid entry. 

The downside to this headspace Rowling is most likely in is the fact that the result is multiple films that feel either incomplete, or padded, or both. I understand that it can ensure a greater profit being made, but I also feel it can have the reverse effect. While dedicated fans will no doubt sit through hours of filler to the very end, general audiences may well pick up on the trend of these last two sequels and assume that whatever comes next will be equally dull and uninteresting, thus checking out of the series and not returning, which could be detrimental. If she just told the story of this franchise as concisely and efficiently as possible, at most forming a trilogy (keep in mind I don't know what the supposed fourth and fifth entries will consist of but I imagine will also be a single film stretched into two), then not only would the films be better off, but that fact would spawn positive word of mouth and maybe lead to solid success.

Okay, so the film overall is quite padded and uneventful, but does that mean its terrible? No. Despite its pacing issues, The Secrets of Dumbledore still has much to enjoy. Unsurprisingly, the titular fantastic beasts themselves are the best part of the film, even if they're slowly getting sidelined in a series named after them. Niffler and Pickett are back and still as fun as they were before, and there are some entertaining new additions, including these scorpion-like creatures, which lead to a funny sequence where Newt mimmicks their movements around a cave. The performances are also still great all round, with Eddie Redmayne, Dan Fogler, and Jude Law reprising their roles very well, despite the fact that their characters are hardly developed. The obvious standout, however, is Mads Mikkelsen, who replaces Johnny Depp as Grindelwald and makes the character far more menacing than he was before. There are also some well crafted set pieces, such as the afore mentioned scene with the scorpion creatures, various wand duels, and a climax that is very creatively set-up, as well as taking the Wizarding World to new locations. These factors all made the film passable while it was on, but unfortunately weren't enough to completely salvage it. 

As a whole, Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore is a fine watch, but nothing special. It has many of the good attributes of that great first film and the previous entry, but its highly uneventful and padded nature make it a fairly dull watch. This will certainly be the one, and hopefully only, film in the series that is looked back on as the skippable load of filler, with its closest relative in the Harry Potter series being The Deathly Hallows Part 1. I'm not sure if I'd rank it lower than The Crimes of Grindelwald, but the fact that stuff actually happened in that film, even if much of it is contrived and overstuffed, makes it slightly more attractive. This was nothing awful, but nothing awfully good either.

I'm going to give Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore a 6.0/10

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 - Movie Review - As much zany fun as it ought to be

Sonic the Hedgehog was one of the last big releases to come to cinemas before COVID struck. I didn't catch it during its short yet successful theatrical run, but I did see it on Netflix a few months ago, and it wasn't too bad. I'm not a massive Sonic fan, the only game featuring him that I remember playing as a kid is Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games on the Wii as well as maybe a few others, but the movie was still a perfectly servicable time. Quite generic and maybe a bit tiring, but still fun in parts. As it managed to perform pretty well, it was only a matter of time before we got more Sonic on the screen, and after hearing some good things about this sequel, I decided it might be worth a watch. 

In the film, Dr Robotnik and his new ally, Knuckles, are on a journey to recover a powerful item known as the Master Emerald. So, Sonic, along with a new companion, Tails, must beat them to it to prevent them from causing chaos. 

Sonic the Hedgehog 2 was a ton of fun, far more so than its predecessor, and I think this is due to a few things. The main thing is that the antics in this film are far more in line with what a Sonic film ought to entail. As I said, I'm not the biggest fan of this character, but even I could recognise that the first film was just your typical movie where a popular character is given the realistic CGI treatment and shoved into the real world, and the main character just happened to be Sonic. This feels much more like an adventure out of a Sonic the Hedgehog video game, and that instantly made this one more engaging. There were plenty of solid set pieces and the action was consistently exciting.

The new additions are also really enjoyable. Knuckles, voiced to perfection by Idris Elba, was really entertaining, and Tails was a really endearing sidekick too. Watching these two alongside Sonic had a certain charm to it, and I really liked that. The returning characters remained enjoyable as well, with Sonic still being a likeable protagonist, and Jim Carrey as Robotnik being extremely fun to watch, and even more so in this film than the first as his appearance is made more wacky and closer to the source material.

Some big issues I have with the film are the pace and the story structure. At one point, the plot kind of screeches to a hault as a sub-plot involving a wedding with the human characters is given far too much focus, with jokes that weren't even funny enough to make up for that fact. The film is also just too long in general; by the third act I felt I'd had enough even though what was going on was still fine, it just felt like it was meandering on at that point. But, to be honest, those are really my only problems with this film. 

While nothing amazing, Sonic the Hedgehog 2 was just as fun as it needed to be. It may be a bit too long and a tad messy but it's a big step up from the original film by having a far more interesting series of events and well realised characters. I doubt I'll be watching it again any time soon, but I certainly wouldn't mind sitting down and having fun with it again, and I'll also happily watch any inevitable further sequels if they're on the same level of quality. 

I'm going to give Sonic the Hedgehog 2 a 7.0/10

Morbius - Movie Review - A morbid misfire

Spider-Man: No Way Home came out just over three months ago and it was absolutely phenomenal. Everyone has sung its praises, myself included, and only now is the dust around it beginning to settle. So, with that in mind, it's about time the next Marvel outings see their releases, isn't it? Marvel Studios have taken somewhat of a break since No Way Home, only now just getting started once again with the gradual release of their new show, Moon Knight, and their next film, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, releasing in just over a month. However, also releasing their new Marvel outing at this time, that being Morbius, is Sony, who have lately been trying to replicate Marvel's success with their own Spider-Man cinematic universe. I really wasn't excited for this film, but I thought it may be worth going to see it, similarly to how I thought Venom: Let There Be Carnage from last year may be worth going to see despite very minimal anticipation. 

One thing that occurred to me was all the delays this film received. Of course, its initial July 2020 release as well as some of the subsequent ones had to be pushed back due to COVID closing cinemas down, but it felt like they kept postponing it even when the virus wasn't much of a concern. I mean, at one point it was scheduled to release in late January, a time when cinemas were doing great business thanks in no small part to No Way Home releasing a month prior, yet it got delayed once again to now, the start of April. I suspect Sony were wary that the hype around No Way Home would still be quite formidable around that time, which it was, and thus thought best to push the release back so Morbius wouldn't get stuck in Spidey's shadow. Based on that, maybe this film is something special and the filmmakers thought it deserved the absolute best release window. Maybe, right?

In the film, Dr Michael Morbius is a renowned scientist with a rare blood condition. After spending his whole life searching for a cure, he soon finds something that may actually be what he's been looking for. However, it ends up making things worse for him as he soon acquires the characteristics of a vampire bat, most significantly having the horrific desire to consume blood, turning him into a murderous monster.

The major problem with this film is that it just borrows from every other superhero film we've seen to the point where it feels it doesn't have a single original aspect outside of the main character being one we haven't seen on screen before. The plot just trudges through the typical motions; the main character with a conflict of sorts, the inciting incident giving them a set of powers, a montage where they come to grips with said new powers, then an action scene or two where these powers are exercised, and, of course, a baddie who acquires the same set of powers but uses them in bad ways, resulting in a final battle where two characters with the same set of abilities punch it out until the good one wins. Sorry if that's spoiled the film for you, but if you couldn't see any of this coming, I really don't know what to say. Narratively, this film offered absolutely nothing. It was so predictable and thus such a boring experience. 

What's irritating about this is the fact there is an interesting story buried in here somewhere. The film highlights how Morbius is put into a position where he will eventually have to consume human blood in order to stay alive, which is actually quite a fascinating dilemma, and I think you could derive some very compelling drama from it. However, this isn't Avengers: Infinity War, or Spider-Man 2, or The Dark Knight, that being a superhero film that manages to properly explore the themes and conflicts associated with the main characters while also being a fun and exciting watch - this just raises the questions and moves onto some action scenes and extensions of its cinematic universe, so the attributes that could make for a really intriguing film are just plainly abandoned.

Speaking of action scenes, they're the sort of thing you'd expect to be at least passable in a film of this nature. For example, I'm not such a big fan of films like Venom or Captain Marvel, but they do at least have a couple of noteworthy action scenes to keep themselves afloat amid their rather flimsy narratives. Here, however, they're actually quite incompetent; just a load of ugly CGI combined with an excess of shaky cam and that effect from 300 where what's happening goes from normal speed to slow motion in quick succession, so nothing especially engaging. There's some mildly interesting stuff when we see Morbius harnessing the abilities of a bat such as echolocation, but most of it was just incomprehensible and hardly enjoyable unfortunately.

Is there anything good about the film? Not especially, but there are certainly things that aren't bad. The performances were all fine, albeit nothing outstanding. Jared Leto, who I don't really think is that good an actor, was perfectly adequate in the lead role, and nothing more. I guess he looks the part, but that's about it. Matt Smith was equally fine as the villain, and Tyrese Gibson was actually fairly enjoyable, though that can entirely be attributed to the fact that I just find him innately likeable. I suppose one thing I can praise the film for is its runtime. It's about fifteen minutes short of two hours, which is fairly short compared to other superhero movies. The pacing itself isn't great but at least the film doesn't outstay its welcome. Also, being a new entry in a big cinematic universe, there are a couple of scenes during the credits to hint at what's coming next. I won't spoil what happens in these scenes, but they were moderately intriguing, and actually managed to clear up some confusion I had from the trailers I saw for this film, so that's something I suppose.

One final thing I'll note is an extremely personal factor, and that is the role of bats in this film. Bats are the single thing in the world that I am scared of the most; not because I'm scared they'll suck my blood and kill me or whatever, but because they just look absolutely horrible. So, this film, which features a frankly extortionate amount of bats on screen in great detail, more so than every film I've seen about a character literally called 'Batman', was absolutely nightmarish for me, and I had to look away on numerous occasions. This alone made the viewing experience quite unpleasant, though it is, as I said, a highly personal factor. 

Overall, Morbius is a dictionary definition of mediocre. It's so average, so bland, and so ordinary, that I felt I just got absolutely nothing out of watching it. It isn't dreadful enough for me to hate it and I'm certainly not disappointed by the way it's turned out, but it's still boring and bland. All I can say is that maybe it was delayed as much as it was because the filmmakers wanted to keep it away from us for as long as they could before there wasn't enough room left on the shelf that it'd been sat on for nearly two years. 

I'm going to give Morbius a 4.5/10