destroyerwod

I watched the first half of the movie in theatres but due to circonstances that had nothing to do with it, i had to leave halfway. I told myself i would wait for the VOD to finally finish it as it was late in its theatre run.

What i can say right away is that if the movie theatres do make a difference its for a movie like that. Even tough the second half had the best stunts, the "grandness" was a lot more present in theatre. Now that i got that out of the way lets "review" the movie as a whole.

This franchise is famous for original stunts on grand scale and this one does not disappoint. You see a lot of them in various way and the originality is still there.

Its more in term of story that i felt this was a bit "unoriginal". AI, nuclear armageddon, where did i saw that before? Hummm. Thats not to say the story is bad, but it relied a lot on exposition dumps and followed familiar patterns you likely saw before in movies.

On the other hand some set pieces are so beautifully filmed that you kinda pass above it and just appreciate what you see on screen.

Now if this is really a goodbye for the franchise, i would say its well earned. Its not my favorite MI movie, but it was a good movie as a whole. Now i wish there would had been some aknowledgement of Jeremy Renner's character, but due to many different issues (scheduling conflicts in previous installements and then his terrible accident), it was not meant to be.

That said i wouldn't be surprise if this franchise does not stay dead long, even if it mean no Ethan. Spinoffs? I would bet they coming. So wouldn't be surprised that maybe Jeremy reappear one day.

I will pretty much echo a lot of other reviews on this. Ever since it came out, it intrigued me but i also came to watch it in 2025 for whatever reasons.

What if Superman didn't grew to be the hero we know, but an evil supervilain without any hero to stop him? Sadly this concept is barely scratched at the surface in a script that feel like 40 minutes was chopped out of it.

There is 2 main issues in my opinion. The first is that the writer and director wanted an horror movie, but there is no real reason behind it. Everytime the "child" is portray as Michael Myers stalking his preys, its only to make it feel like a horror movie. But there is no "in-movie reason" behind it really. Why would a "Superman-like" creature need to be stealthy or such? I don't know if its the lack of acting skills from the actor or the script was this way but i never read any "pleasure" from him doing it, wich could give an actual reason.

The other one is how badly executed the plot is. It seem like it was suppose to be a 2h+ movies but they chopped it to 90 minutes. Not only very few is explain but the characters "progression" is inexistant. They use a "mcguffin" to make the child becomes the killer they need and never really explore any psychology or reasoning behind it. The movie clearly tell you that the child was normal, caring, and he grew up with great parents who loved him, until that "mcguffin" incident happen.

There was a lot of possibility on how to actually turn the child into an evil killer, but the movie took the most lazy way.

Its funny in 2025 to think James Gunn finally got his own actual Superman (wich i enjoyed and gave a 7 out of 10). Technically James didn't write the script for Brightburn. Its other peoples with the same last name so i assume related to him and its directed by someone else, but as producer you can clearly see some trademarks of him like cameos and such. I wonder how much says he had in making it the way it is.

Ultimately it took me 6 years to finally get to it, after almost having watched it in the last 2 Halloween Marathons i had, and all i can say is "meh" ... I didn't "hated it", but i didn't liked it either. I think i just like the idea but the execution was off. That said i gotta give credit to the blood and gore wich was pretty gruesome.

If you never watched Chronicles, i would recommand it as a better movie exploring peoples getting Superman powers and not using them for good.

Brightburn get a 5 out of 10 for me. Its average... On one side i kinda wished the movie was 40 minutes longer to develop it more, but in its actual form i was happy it ended before i could get "tired" of it. This bluray is going into the "thriftstore pile" for my next visit. Yes its one of those i paid 1$ out of the final video store sale (i had it for a while in my backlog).

Yesterday i watched the first movie, wich i saw 20 years ago, so it was almost like a rediscovery and i enjoyed it way more than i think i would. Gave it a 8 out of 10.

So while i was on "the wave" i decided to watch the second one tonight as i also had a copy of this laying around. And well... its not as good... in my opinion. But its still alright.

I think it really comes to the story. Its a lot more compelling in the first movie and somehow this one felt kinda "forced" as in "we need to make a sequel, find something for a plot".

Its not terrible or anything, its just i was way less compelled in the whole thing. Maybe its because i watch the first (a 2h20 movie) the day before, i dunno, but i was pumped for this one... So i should had enjoyed it as much in theory if it was as good.

That said im not saying it was bad by any means, i just think the antagonist is less interesting, the general plot as well, it try to repurpose some characters and they felt out of place.

I do recall i watched this one back then as well, because some scenes were familiar, but in true honesty i am unsure if i ever watched the third one. I will see when i do. It does feel like this movie, even at a higher runtime than the last, is still a bit of a "setup" for the third.

Either i will borrow the third from my local library if they have it, or maybe i will order it off ebay as i saw some cheap copies, but i will likely watch it in a close futur (just not back to back like i did 1 and 2).

So in the end... definately not as great as the first so 7 out of 10 seem fair. As its still a fun movie overall... just not "as fun".