SUICIDE SQUAD MINI-REVIEW

Well, here we are. We’ve finally gotten around to SUICIDE SQUAD, and of course, it’s getting trashed by most critics, much like BATMAN V SUPERMAN did. Truth be told, it’s easy to see why: the film is hacked to hell editing-wise (it was a victim of re-shoots in an effort to lighten the tone since since BvS was lampooned for being too dark), so much so that even Jared Leto’s much hyped about role as the Joker ends up with him being barely in the film at all. Not to mention the fact that director David Ayer (FURY) was handcuffed by the studio; the end result being an uneven film lacking a true identity.

Flaws aside though, I really enjoyed it. Hell, I enjoyed it more than BvS. The characters were well cast (jury is out on Leto, just because there wasn’t enough of him to get a true reading) and they all looked the parts, even Will Smith who I’ve never been crazy about being Deadshot. It’s a mess, but it’s a very enjoyable mess, and the fact that we now have all these great DC characters on film for the first time ever (ARROW on TV doesn’t count) makes my little black geeky heart swoon.

Like BvS before it, don’t pay attention to the critics and just go see it. Also like BvS though, I’m hoping we get an uncut version down the line where Ayer’s original tone remains intact. One can only hope.

People Hate "X-Men: Apocalypse" For No Real Reason

"X-Men: Apocalypse" came out last weekend, to a surprising amount of middling reviews from critics and audiences alike. Some of it isn't much of a surprise in all honesty (the X-Men movies have usually wavered in quality ranging from "pretty good" to "pure shit"), but I didn't think "X-Men: Apocalypse" was all that bad. Actually, I thought it was pretty good. It wasn't anything too special, and it wasn't better than the preceding "X-Men: Days of Future Past", but it was pretty good regardless.

Now, in case you haven't noticed by now, it seems any comic book movie not directly from Marvel Studios (yes I know, X-Men is Marvel, but Fox owns the film rights, as they do with Fantastic Four) gets destroyed by critics. How well it does box office-wise is a different story, but critically these movies get savaged. Don't believe me? Look at Rotten Tomatoes; and while you're there, look at the scores for recent Marvel flicks like "Civil War" and "Ant-Man". There's a damn huge difference.

Saying that there's not some kind of bias with critics for anything non-Marvel is saying it lightly. It exists, and we all know it. I watch Marvel movies, and I watch the non-Marvel Studios-produced flicks as well (except Fantastic Four, because I have no desire to whatsoever and never really have). One thing I can tell you is that with "X-Men: Apocalypse", I never felt bored. The stakes legitimately felt high in terms of its story, even if there are plot holes aplenty and non-sensical leaps in logic abound. "Civil War" had some fun moments, but given the gravity of the situation presented in the film's story, the stakes never felt high to me. That however is usually how I feel with all the Marvel movies: there are some genuine shattering events happening, and the stakes just never feel high. Because of that, more often than not, I just get bored to tears. You can shit all over films like "Man of Steel" and "Batman V Superman", but at least the stakes feel high in those films, and one thing they're definitely not is boring.

In terms of the "X-Men" movies though, "Apocalypse" is far from perfect, but it's far from being the piece of shit that everyone is labeling it. I saw some fanboy online saying it "sets superhero movies back 20 years". How do you figure? It does pretty much what every superhero movie does, and it's damn sure better than "X-Men: The Last Stand" or the first Wolverine movie. If X-Men's film rights were owned by Marvel Studios instead of Fox and this movie came out the way it did, everyone would be somehow praising it instead.

In the meantime for you Marvel fanboys that keep your assholes greased up nice for that big fat Marvel cock y'all can't keep off of, try giving something a chance, even if it isn't directly from the studio you all worship.

The Good & The Bad About An Animated "Killing Joke"

You know all about "The Killing Joke".

What many consider to be the greatest Batman story of all time, Alan Moore and Brian Bolland's classic tale is going to be the next animated DC movie. And it features Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill reprising their roles as Batman and Joker respectively. Oh, and it's rated R.

Holy shit this is actually happening.

I've loved a majority of DC's animated flicks, most notably "Wonder Woman", "Under the Red Hood", "Batman: Year One", "The Dark Knight Returns", and "The Flashpoint Paradox" among others. Seeing "The Killing Joke" get the same kind of treatment is something I've always wanted to see, although I'd be lying if I said I didn't have any concerns.

It's the fact that knowing this film is rated R, could it be solely because of the infamous Barbara scene? There's always been a slight hint that Joker may have raped Barbara after shooting her and stripping her to take those pictures in an effort to drive Gordon mad, but it was only ever a slight hint and never spelled directly out at the reader. I'm concerned that maybe that whole scene could become even more exploitative; so much so that it loses that impact the scene in the comic had and totally misses the point.

Other than that, I'm truly excited to see "The Killing Joke" in animated form. I'm excited to see one of the best Batman stories ever appear on screen, and featuring the voices of Conroy and Hamill too no less. Hell, I'm more excited for this than I was for "Batman V Superman" (and I'm one of the very few people that liked that film) or any other comic book blockbuster to hit theaters any time this year.

Get ready folks. With any luck, we'll get animated adaptations of "Kingdom Come" and "Hush" in the near future among the many other DC stories that deserve the treatment.

Real Thoughts on BATMAN V SUPERMAN

So, "Batman V Superman" finally came out, and as expected, audiences are pretty much polarized. What wasn't expected was all the hate seemingly being thrown at the film. Yes we get it: it's not a Marvel movie. It's dark, and gritty, and rarely holds back. It has a pair of balls on it the size of the fucking Statue of Liberty. Coming off of "Man of Steel", a film in which Superman killed Zod, we have a film with a brutal Batman and even features a dream sequence in which Batman kills people and Superman burns insurgents alive.

Yeah, this isn't a typical take on either character. You know what though? Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe it's just me, but I've grown kind of tired of the bubblegum, lightweight universe of the Marvel films. I'm not shitting on them, I've just gotten bored with them: in the end, they're all the same shit. "Age of Ultron", "Ant-Man", "Thor: The Dark World", and even "Guardians of the Galaxy" to a much lesser extent, all bored me to tears.

You can say whatever you want to about "Batman V Superman", but one thing it isn't is boring. It's not a perfect film by any stretch of the imagination. There's editing problems, big story problems, plot holes aplenty, and some big leaps in logic. That being said, it's still a live-action comic book brought to life, which is what these films are supposed to be in the first place. Ben Affleck is surprisingly wonderful as Batman, Jeremy Irons is awesome as Alfred, Jesse Eisenberg isn't too bad as Luthor, and when Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman first appears...well, I won't lie, I had a nerdgasm. Seeing Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman all on screen at the same time made me smile ear to ear. That in itself is an accomplishment.

So yeah, if you didn't like "Man of Steel", you won't like "Batman V Superman" one bit. If you did however like "Man of Steel"...you'll more than likely dig this more. Either way, don't believe all the haters. Check it out and see for yourself.