thatsgottahurt-1

Why do they keep making these movies? They cram as many cliches and tropes as is possible into any given project, every time. This ones different though, it's set in the 60's! There are any number of glaring plot holes. The plot itself is predictable, as is the ending. It's just not good. Without spoiling, Reed Richard's, the smartest man on Earth, who invented a faster than light drive, a teleportation machine and an intelligent robot, is unaware of the existence of defibrillators. There's only one super hero movie to see in July, and this isn't it.

Just out of the cinema after seeing it eight days post release. It's good, very good. This thought struck me during the movie "this is what comic book movies should be". Corensweat is a good Superman. Whether he's as good as Henry remains to be seen but he hits the right notes in his portrayal. Was it perfect? No, of course not, but it's a bright ray of sunshine in a genre jaded by the constant release of mediocre fare by Disney/Marvel. I laughed, had tears, held my breath and felt good. Exactly what this genre is supposed to elicit from its watchers. This aims to please fans of the big guy and give hope for future offers. In this it succeeds wonderfully.

A story about a largely uninteresting group of second tier superheroes, who manage to succeed despite their mediocrity. The dialogue and group dynamic is exactly what you've come to expect, and be bored by, from current MCU offerings. It provides nothing fresh or original, just retreads of previous movies, only with fewer thrills and excitement. The movie is quite timid in its treatment of the Sentry character, who instead of being a genuine global threat, felt like a version of bad Superman with the handbrake firmly on. They seemed too scared to truly make him the "big bad", opting instead to water his actions down to a level of "oops, did I do that?" And the means of controlling Sentry was verging on the ridiculous in terms of plot. They didn't take the steps needed to make the film better.