benmundie
Joined Oct 2018
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings6K
benmundie's rating
Reviews41
benmundie's rating
"Just because someone stumbles and loses their way doesn't mean they're lost forever."
'Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness' is the latest film in the MCU phase four. It sees the role reprisal of many MCU stars but most importantly sees the return to comic book films for legendary director Sam Raimi after 15 years since the release of 'Spider-Man 3' in 2007. This is the MCU's first in-depth dive into the Multiverse and it is definitely the most interesting part of this movie, with it setting up a very intriguing future in regard to this corner of the cinematic universe.
As mentioned this film saw the return of the legendary director Sam Raimi who helmed this project after previous director Scott Derrickson left due to 'creative differences' with the studio. This was the biggest film of his since the aforementioned 'Spider-Man' trilogy in the early 2000's. Now, anybody who is familiar with Raimi's great work will understand what I mean when I say that he has his 'style' and it is absolutely all over this film leading to him stamping his mark on the MCU. For those who don't know, the Sam Raimi style consists of a quite camp tone, which granted can become a bit too much at times but for me I think he regulates it here to the perfect amount, quick camera cuts and zooms all of which blend together to somewhat divulge from the 'Marvel formula' that has become a staple of these films. Something else that has become a mainstay in a Raimi property are the horror aspects of his work. This stems from his start with the incredibly popular 'Evil Dead' series of films. This is the first real MCU horror film and I think they bought in the right man to do the job, especially thanks to the campy aspects of the film linking nicely to the naturally comedic tone the rest of the MCU has.
As for the acting, it's solid throughout. Elizabeth Olsen is absolutely brilliant. She has always been very good in the role but this is by far her best performance as the character. They presented her as the main antagonist which was a smart idea that ultimately paid off. She has really believable motives that are even somewhat relatable and I can't wait to see what they do with her character moving forward. Rachel McAdams also returned from the first Doctor Strange film as 'Dr. Christine Palmer', despite her performance being sound first time round, she was completely wasted in the role. An actor of her calibre deserves a large part in a film like that and before this instalment I worried it would be the same the second time round and to my disarray I was proven correct. Her part is definitely increased this time but it still isn't enough for me to suddenly care about this character or anything that happens to her and disappointedly that lack of sentiment rolls over to her relationship with Stephen Strange. Something that has somewhat become a staple for the most recent MCU films is for them to have a certain amount of surprising cameos that can either service the plot or attempt to distract the viewer away from the poor writing, and for this movie I believe for the most part it is the former. Trust me, the writing isn't perfect but the key cameos are only on screen for a small amount of time so it doesn't end up taking away from the overall narrative.
One of the more inconsistent parts of the film are the effects. At times they're stunning, holding up to the usual MCU standard, however, elsewhere it looks poor to such an extent that it is distracting from the action happening within the sequence. I have to say though, the practical effects are brilliant and are something that relates to the aforementioned Raimi style and was very prominent in his 'Evil Dead' films. Some of the action sequences in this film are really innovative and genuinely nothing I've ever seen before. The best being the 'music fight' towards the end of the second act. It is a perfect blend of great effects, writing and suspense, it also acts as the perfect place to show off the brilliant work of famed composer, and frequent collaborator of Sam Raimi, Danny Elfman.
One problem with this film was that the marketing was all wrong. First things first, they showed way too much in the trailers. I mentioned the surprise cameos, nearly half of them were shown before the film even came out. That is ridiculous. What is the point of having the big surprise if we already know what's coming? It's a shame because it could've resulted in an even larger crowd reaction. Another mistake was making Doctor Strange the titular character. In my opinion this was clearly Scarlet Witch's story with Strange as a supporting role and it should've been marketed as her film. I'm not a massive fan of Doctor Strange as a character so personally I would've been more exited going into this if it was advertised as her picture.
Overall, this film is great. I have been quite negative near the end but all of the 'Raimi-ness' and a decent cast (carried by Elizabeth Olsen) lead to it being a very decent MCU movie. I'm much more interested in the future of other characters like Scarlet Witch and even Wong in comparison to Doctor Strange but either way I'll see what is next for the character and I hope that they bring back Sam Raimi if/when they do a Doctor Strange 3.
8/10.
'Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness' is the latest film in the MCU phase four. It sees the role reprisal of many MCU stars but most importantly sees the return to comic book films for legendary director Sam Raimi after 15 years since the release of 'Spider-Man 3' in 2007. This is the MCU's first in-depth dive into the Multiverse and it is definitely the most interesting part of this movie, with it setting up a very intriguing future in regard to this corner of the cinematic universe.
As mentioned this film saw the return of the legendary director Sam Raimi who helmed this project after previous director Scott Derrickson left due to 'creative differences' with the studio. This was the biggest film of his since the aforementioned 'Spider-Man' trilogy in the early 2000's. Now, anybody who is familiar with Raimi's great work will understand what I mean when I say that he has his 'style' and it is absolutely all over this film leading to him stamping his mark on the MCU. For those who don't know, the Sam Raimi style consists of a quite camp tone, which granted can become a bit too much at times but for me I think he regulates it here to the perfect amount, quick camera cuts and zooms all of which blend together to somewhat divulge from the 'Marvel formula' that has become a staple of these films. Something else that has become a mainstay in a Raimi property are the horror aspects of his work. This stems from his start with the incredibly popular 'Evil Dead' series of films. This is the first real MCU horror film and I think they bought in the right man to do the job, especially thanks to the campy aspects of the film linking nicely to the naturally comedic tone the rest of the MCU has.
As for the acting, it's solid throughout. Elizabeth Olsen is absolutely brilliant. She has always been very good in the role but this is by far her best performance as the character. They presented her as the main antagonist which was a smart idea that ultimately paid off. She has really believable motives that are even somewhat relatable and I can't wait to see what they do with her character moving forward. Rachel McAdams also returned from the first Doctor Strange film as 'Dr. Christine Palmer', despite her performance being sound first time round, she was completely wasted in the role. An actor of her calibre deserves a large part in a film like that and before this instalment I worried it would be the same the second time round and to my disarray I was proven correct. Her part is definitely increased this time but it still isn't enough for me to suddenly care about this character or anything that happens to her and disappointedly that lack of sentiment rolls over to her relationship with Stephen Strange. Something that has somewhat become a staple for the most recent MCU films is for them to have a certain amount of surprising cameos that can either service the plot or attempt to distract the viewer away from the poor writing, and for this movie I believe for the most part it is the former. Trust me, the writing isn't perfect but the key cameos are only on screen for a small amount of time so it doesn't end up taking away from the overall narrative.
One of the more inconsistent parts of the film are the effects. At times they're stunning, holding up to the usual MCU standard, however, elsewhere it looks poor to such an extent that it is distracting from the action happening within the sequence. I have to say though, the practical effects are brilliant and are something that relates to the aforementioned Raimi style and was very prominent in his 'Evil Dead' films. Some of the action sequences in this film are really innovative and genuinely nothing I've ever seen before. The best being the 'music fight' towards the end of the second act. It is a perfect blend of great effects, writing and suspense, it also acts as the perfect place to show off the brilliant work of famed composer, and frequent collaborator of Sam Raimi, Danny Elfman.
One problem with this film was that the marketing was all wrong. First things first, they showed way too much in the trailers. I mentioned the surprise cameos, nearly half of them were shown before the film even came out. That is ridiculous. What is the point of having the big surprise if we already know what's coming? It's a shame because it could've resulted in an even larger crowd reaction. Another mistake was making Doctor Strange the titular character. In my opinion this was clearly Scarlet Witch's story with Strange as a supporting role and it should've been marketed as her film. I'm not a massive fan of Doctor Strange as a character so personally I would've been more exited going into this if it was advertised as her picture.
Overall, this film is great. I have been quite negative near the end but all of the 'Raimi-ness' and a decent cast (carried by Elizabeth Olsen) lead to it being a very decent MCU movie. I'm much more interested in the future of other characters like Scarlet Witch and even Wong in comparison to Doctor Strange but either way I'll see what is next for the character and I hope that they bring back Sam Raimi if/when they do a Doctor Strange 3.
8/10.
'The Northman' is the latest film from the predominantly horror director Robert Eggers. His previous work includes 'The Witch' and 'The Lighthouse', the former of which also saw him work with star Anya Taylor-Joy. This film is a period piece set during the early settlement of Iceland which is also known as 'landnámsöld'. This was definitely a draw going into this because it is a time period that has not been explored and delved into in a big film like this and with this amount of historical accuracy. The Norse mythology that it's based off is something that I find very interesting as it is something I have come across through many different mediums but nothing has gone into as much detail as this film does.
The ensemble cast is star-studded, but the big names don't take away from the story. Anya Taylor-Joy did not have as much screen time as expected going into the film but she kills it with the time that she does have. She has been a frequent collaborator with the director and it's clear that it is a partnership that brings out the best in both of them. The rest of the supporting cast all bring something different even with their limited time on screen. This is most apparent with Willem Dafoe ('Heimer The Fool') and Ethan Hawke ('King Aurvandil War-Raven'), both are established A-list actors who bought something unique to their respective roles. Claes Bang portrayed the main antagonist of the film in 'Fjölnir The Bortherless.' This is the first picture I had seen him in and he brings a threatening yet loving nature to the role. He is the perfect choice for villain, he portrays his warped thoughts of what is right and why he believes what he has done is justified. The standout is of course the protagonist, the revenge seeking 'Amleth' played by Alexander Skarsgård. He got into crazy shape for this role, he looks absolutely amazing and it definitely sells both the time period and the physical acumen of the character that the actor had to bring. The emotion of his role is perfect for the circumstances of the plot and he delivers a performance that is both believable and threatening towards the antagonist.
Now, the best part of this film has to be the visuals. OH MY GOD, they're absolutely stunning. The cinematographer Jarin Blaschke smashed it out of the park. He leant heavily into an orange colour palette, something that is quite common nowadays, but he blended it perfectly with a mixture of practical and visual sets and effects. As this film is set in the region of Iceland, a large amount of filming had to be done on location in the country and that lends itself to some of the magnificent shots we get. If you were ever debating whether or not to go on holiday to Iceland, I think this is the biggest advert for the natural beauty that this country can offer, and the practicality of the filming is so immersive for the story and is a huge plus for this film.
The writing is interesting in this. On paper it comes across as quite basic and straightforward. It is a general revenge plot, something that we have seen so many times before in all kinds of media, but this time round it is elevated by the time period for which it is set. Eggers and his fellow writer Sjón realised early on that there were so many different plot points that were focussed on the mythology of the film so knew that a more sophisticated story would only end up confusing casual audiences. The revenge aspect of the narrative paints the story as a Shakespearean tragedy, one that is reminiscent of some of the most influential stories ever written.
One thing that puts me off Eggers' previous pictures are the weird (for lack of a better word) scenes. As interesting as his stories can be, as a result of the periodic thrillers he opts to write, they often tend to veer in the wrong direction and it gravitates towards the bizarre, especially when the rest of the picture is somewhat grounded. This is only heightened due to the bloated runtime which means that there is more room for these odd sequences and sometimes boring patches throughout.
In conclusion, this will be loved by anyone who is a fan of Robert Eggers' previous work and is at least mildly interested in the history surrounding this time period. It has some brilliantly violent kills and is massive in scope, enhanced by the simple story that it's housed in. If not for the prolonged runtime and the deviation away from the aforementioned main plotline this could have been the perfect historical period piece.
7/10.
The ensemble cast is star-studded, but the big names don't take away from the story. Anya Taylor-Joy did not have as much screen time as expected going into the film but she kills it with the time that she does have. She has been a frequent collaborator with the director and it's clear that it is a partnership that brings out the best in both of them. The rest of the supporting cast all bring something different even with their limited time on screen. This is most apparent with Willem Dafoe ('Heimer The Fool') and Ethan Hawke ('King Aurvandil War-Raven'), both are established A-list actors who bought something unique to their respective roles. Claes Bang portrayed the main antagonist of the film in 'Fjölnir The Bortherless.' This is the first picture I had seen him in and he brings a threatening yet loving nature to the role. He is the perfect choice for villain, he portrays his warped thoughts of what is right and why he believes what he has done is justified. The standout is of course the protagonist, the revenge seeking 'Amleth' played by Alexander Skarsgård. He got into crazy shape for this role, he looks absolutely amazing and it definitely sells both the time period and the physical acumen of the character that the actor had to bring. The emotion of his role is perfect for the circumstances of the plot and he delivers a performance that is both believable and threatening towards the antagonist.
Now, the best part of this film has to be the visuals. OH MY GOD, they're absolutely stunning. The cinematographer Jarin Blaschke smashed it out of the park. He leant heavily into an orange colour palette, something that is quite common nowadays, but he blended it perfectly with a mixture of practical and visual sets and effects. As this film is set in the region of Iceland, a large amount of filming had to be done on location in the country and that lends itself to some of the magnificent shots we get. If you were ever debating whether or not to go on holiday to Iceland, I think this is the biggest advert for the natural beauty that this country can offer, and the practicality of the filming is so immersive for the story and is a huge plus for this film.
The writing is interesting in this. On paper it comes across as quite basic and straightforward. It is a general revenge plot, something that we have seen so many times before in all kinds of media, but this time round it is elevated by the time period for which it is set. Eggers and his fellow writer Sjón realised early on that there were so many different plot points that were focussed on the mythology of the film so knew that a more sophisticated story would only end up confusing casual audiences. The revenge aspect of the narrative paints the story as a Shakespearean tragedy, one that is reminiscent of some of the most influential stories ever written.
One thing that puts me off Eggers' previous pictures are the weird (for lack of a better word) scenes. As interesting as his stories can be, as a result of the periodic thrillers he opts to write, they often tend to veer in the wrong direction and it gravitates towards the bizarre, especially when the rest of the picture is somewhat grounded. This is only heightened due to the bloated runtime which means that there is more room for these odd sequences and sometimes boring patches throughout.
In conclusion, this will be loved by anyone who is a fan of Robert Eggers' previous work and is at least mildly interested in the history surrounding this time period. It has some brilliantly violent kills and is massive in scope, enhanced by the simple story that it's housed in. If not for the prolonged runtime and the deviation away from the aforementioned main plotline this could have been the perfect historical period piece.
7/10.
Insights
benmundie's rating
Recently taken polls
9 total polls taken
