ARTaylor

What's so funny about truth, justice, and the American way? That's what James Gunn asks in the latest reboot of DC's Big Blue Boy Scout. He gives audiences a movie that finally brings the legendary character into the modern age.

It's no secret Superman has had a difficult time returning to screens. It's impossible to match the cinematic perfection that Richard Donner and Christopher Reeve achieved. Bryan Singer had a terrific cast but was too slavishly devoted to recapturing what Donner did. Zack Snyder's version completely lacked the charm and personality, too involved in just displaying his power. Gunn seems to understand what made Donner's film so beloved and how to bring it to modern audiences.

Gunn had the unenviable task of trying to start a new cinematic universe. In retrospect, Jon Favreau's Iron Man was a fluke, a movie that was enjoyable on its own while setting up the seeds of the future. So many studios have tried and failed. DC tried and failed several times before finally settling on Snyder's controversial take as the basis. It missed more than hit and finally died a quiet death. Luckily, Gunn's trilogy of Guardians of the Galaxy movies and well-received Suicide Squad demonstrated how crowd-pleasing he could be.

The movie is hardly perfect, but it is a fantastic start to a new universe. It drops into the universe Star Wars style, right in the middle. It's nice not to have to sit through an origin for every single character just for this one story, like Marvel often does. Though there are some stuff I would have liked to see, like Lex being a businessman before being consumed by jealousy or the Boravia controversy not just hearing about the aftermath. Still, the amount of characters the movie introduces and how well everything comes together is nothing short of a miracle.

The cast is terrific. David Corenswet is a terrific Superman, expertly going between the strong superhero archetype and the vulnerable humanity inside. It's the kind of thing that made Tom Welling's version so beloved. Rachel Brosnahan is great as Lois Lane, as assertive as Margot Kidder but more friendly than Kate Bosworth. Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor is fine, though lacks some of the depth that Gene Hackman, Kevin Spacey, and Clancy Brown brought to the role. Everyone else is perfectly cast. Though it's the CGI dog Kypto who steals every scene he's in.

The fact that the main message of the story is about hope is a welcome change of pace. The previous DC Universe was so dark and nihilistic, while the MCU seems to have lost its way. Superman has always worked best when he's inspiring others to greatness. Checking in on innocent people in the middle of a fight. Trying not to kill the giant monster. Telling prisoners to rise up together. These are the kind of things that have long defined the character in the comics. It's refreshing to see a hero just being a hero.

The score is wonderful. The best decision was keeping John Williams' iconic theme. There are some things no one should ever mess with and a Williams score is one.

While not the best it could have been, I don't know anyone who likes that origin twist, it is an admirable start for a new series. One that harkens to the character's long history and builds to a new future.

Disney-Pixar's latest movie is a mess. The story is all over the place. The characters make little sense. The visuals are over-the-top slop.

It's no secret that Disney and its subsidiaries are having trouble recently. While Marvel seems to making progress to recapturing the magic, the rest seem oddly stubborn in sticking to whatever creative rut they've found themselves in. Pixar used to be really solid, but lately a success like Inside Out 2 seems to be the exception when it was the rule.

The story is all over the place and most doesn't work together. For example, Elio being an orphan has no bearing on all the space stuff. Individual elements are incredible predictable. It's easy to guess exactly how every plot thread will play out just a few minutes after they're introduced. Then there's a lot of stuff that doesn't make any sense. What is the purpose of the Communiverse if it's willing to disband the moment someone threatens them? They don't really do anything.

Another thing holding the movie back is just how unlikeable Elio is. We never really see why he's so desperate to go to space, so pushing away his aunt makes him seem more bratty than endearing. He tries to steal valuable equipment from someone who later becomes his friend for unknown reasons. At no point do we really become invested in him.

Like the story, the visuals are a mess. All the alien stuff is just so overdesigned, like Disney's Strange World or Marvel's Ant-Man 3. They took a kitchen sink approach that lacks any logic. The alien creatures look more like child doodles than anything that would have real world applications. It's also framed badly so that when combined with the design make it hard for the audience to know where to look. On the flip side, it's the more mundane stuff that is the most impressive. Shots of the Voyager probe traveling the cosmos or Elio on the beach are stunning. With these, simplicity works best.

Ultimately, there's very little working for the movie. It's something parents might put on for their toddlers to distract them while they do chores or something. Everything about speaks to a troubled production that didn't know what to do with it. It'll just be one of those movies you only remember you watched when it randomly pops up on Disney+.

Danny Boyle and Alex Garland return to the franchise after skipping out on the second film. The original combined George A. Romero's Day of the Dead and The Crazies to make an intense film that redefined both the zombie and outbreak genres. After skipping the first sequel, they return for a third entry that seems oddly disconnected from the the others. Despite Boyle and Garland's dislike of 28 Weeks Later, it did feature a good story that expanded the story in interesting ways, and promised interesting things to come with the virus hitting mainland Europe. Rather than exploring that world, it's dismissed in a bit of text as if it all meant nothing. If mainland Europe can be cleansed completely, why can't Britain? It's supposed to be a commentary on Brexit, but it's not very logical in-universe.

Another confusing point is the evolution of the infected. Days clearly showed them dying of starvation at the end while Weeks explained Britain was free and it was only a single asymptomatic carrier that brought it back. So why didn't all the infected on Britain die out again? I remember that the original idea for 28 Months Later would have followed up on Weeks' ending showing Eurasia taken over. And then why are some fat and bloated? Why are there these super strong alphas? How are they even having children when the previous two movies established that anger and hatred had taken over their minds? When Romero made Land of the Dead, he expanded on ideas from Dawn and Day that the zombies had memories from the previous life. It was already established. The infected making their own society may be inspired by Richard Matheson's I Am Legend but doesn't fit the established universe. Then there's the doctor who covers himself in iodine and lives among the infect. How does this work and why has no one else tried this? The movie barely explains and seems more of a set-up for a potential fourth movie.

On the positive side, the movie is the most heartfelt of the three, showing a kind of depth in the characters very few zombie/outbreak movies get into. The movie is a coming-of-age story, divided up by main character Spike learning from each parent. Alfie Williams delivers a terrific performance. Aaron Taylor-Johnson is reliable as ever as the hardened but loving father. Though it's Jodie Comer who gives the best performance as the cancer-stricken mother. Ralph Fiennes is great as usual delivering some of the most poignant moments, though his Dr. Ian Kelson is an odd addition.

Each movie has delivered on blood, gore, and scares. This one is no different. It's more in line with the bigger budget effects of Weeks.

The movie's bookends makes little sense. The opening introduces a character that has nothing to do with the story. Only for that person to show up at the very end in a scene that is so out of touch with the rest of the film that it completely takes you out. It's clearly a set-up for a sequel, which is also a shame because the first two entries were very much self-contained.

There's a lot to like about the movie. But also a lot of confusing elements that make you question what the producers were thinking.