Blue Beetle (2023)

 

So this new comicbook flick is based on a Latino character? Yes I definitely think he was supposed to be of Latino heritage, a Latino Spanish-speaking character. Yep I definitely got that vibe, so much Latino, you want Latino? You got it here. They didn't even bother with English for much of the movie, it's that Latino-based. Seriously though why do they do this? Yeah I get this new incarnation is Latino but the fact they make almost 100% of the cast Latino, including background characters, and cram it full of Latino culture seems kinda unnecessary frankly. Does it need to be made this way? This top-heavy? As I said this character wasn't even Latino originally, they just race-swapped him.

So I went into this umpteenth comicbook adventure with an open mind as I didn't really know anything about the character. He has a cool name, the movie poster was cool, and I like the retro 80's vibe it had going on. Sure I was also getting some heavy Guyver/Iron Man/Spider-Man vibes but nevertheless, I was intrigued. So it was REALLY disappointing to find myself watching a poor man's Iron Man/Spider-Man flick with a Guyver vibe, ugh!

It's getting really hard to review some of these movies these days because they are all virtually the same and in turn I end up writing the same damn thing! So yes the plot is your standard fair with no surprises. An artifact or mcguffin is found and eventually ends up in the hands of our young hero Jaime Reyes (Jaime and not Jamie? Really?). Said mcguffin attaches itself to our young hero and he inadvertently becomes the Blue Beetle. Low and behold Blue Beetle must battle a company who's director plans on using the mcguffin to help her create an army of super soldier types...geez, haven't seen this before.

Everything in this movie looks cheap and horribly CGI, everything. The Blue Beetle suit in question is awful looking, like some kind of lowkey mishmash of Guyver, a Power Ranger, and a random cosplay. Seriously it looks like one of the rubbery villain costumes from 'Mighty Morphin Power Rangers'. The suits even acts like the Guyver suit being symbiotic with its host and comes with inevitable Iron Man-esque internal HUD shots. This look approach must have been pinched from the various franchises I have mentioned as the original Blue Beetle was nothing like this, he was more like The Phantom. Oh and he also doesn't like to kill his enemies no matter what they do, so expect lots of throwing moves and the inevitable destruction that usually causes.

Horrible looking hero suit aside what else is there? Well there's the really weak villain combo of Susan Sarandon trying to be bad and her lone single henchman who is also a CGI super soldier (ugh!!!). So yes there are lots of faceless CGI armour-plated Gundam-esque fight sequences that we've definitely not seen before. There's a woeful looking Blue Beetle Batcave/mancave that appears to be a simple backroom with neon blue strip lights everywhere. Oh and the less said about the huge bug-eyed Blue Beetle tank/craft thing the better (get better CGI). Oddly enough the transformation sequence for Reyes into the Blue Beetle was probably the most disturbing thing in this entire movie. It actually looked unpleasant and scary, definitely not a fun ''morphin time'' for this guy.

Jaimes's (Jamie's) family are supposed to be the lighthearted comic relief but are easily the most cringe elements of the movie. Granny with a big-ass gun? Oh please no. Anyway they all speak Spanish, often with no subs, and apparently have no problem killing the hordes of faceless bad guys (seriously how many faceless bad guys?) despite Jamie/Blue Beetle refusing to. Don't get me started on George Lopez's pathetic attempt at being this off-the-wall Danny Trejo-type crazy guy.

Look, Xolo Maridueña is a likeable main hero and his family (cos family) are a somewhat likeable and relatable group. The real problem here is I've seen this movie before, many many times before. There is nothing new here. This movie has a serious lack of good special effects. It relies WAY too much on subpar CGI. There is a huge villain issue in that there isn't a good one. This flick might have been received much better back in the late 90's or early 00's but these days there's far too much competition and it's way better than this. Ultimately this looks and feels like a straight-to-DVD, made-for-TV, Power Ranger knock-off. And I get the character is called Blue Beetle but did we really need all the blue/purple neon lights everywhere? Was the director really going for a certain tacky 90's Batman vibe here or what?

3/10

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (2023)

 

Another month another year, another reboot or remake, and we're back with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles again after the failed Michael Bay attempts. 

Plot wise again I wasn't overly impressed. Let's not get carried away here there isn't much you can do with the Turtles and this offering is clearly aimed at the younger generation so...Baxter Stockman is killed and his mutagenic ooze is stolen, but not before some falls down into the sewer and creates our heroes. Years later the now fully grown Turtles must try to stop a criminal known as Superfly (not Baxter Stockman for some reason). Turns out Superfly is a big mutant with a mutant gang (guess how?) who are planning to turn the human race into mutants with the ooze.

What's the fundamental change this time? Well it mostly appears to be the visuals for the most part. On the whole I appreciate the art style used, I appreciate the attempt at a new angle and approach visually but I have to be honest and say I didn't really like it. Personally I just thought it looked messy, I know that is the style but I would have preferred it a bit neater. Whilst some shots/sequences definitely looked gorgeous (night skylines for sure), at many times I felt everything looked a bit hectic.

Another main factor I didn't really like here was the plain and simple fact that the Turtles make friends with all the villains to the point that they turn on Superfly AND they all get a happy finale! Now don't get me wrong I appreciate the story angle here with the bad guys realising their mistakes and admitting they don't really wanna be bad, they've just been misled by Superfly. But this really messes with the whole Turtle lore in my opinion and leaves nothing for future movies. As it stands right now, Bebop, Rocksteady. Leatherhead, Wingnut etc...are all good guys living in the Turtles lair! And can I ask, did we REALLY need the Superfly villain to actually sound like a cliche Blaxploitation character? Bit on the nose.

I was also not too overwhelmed with some new character aspects. Splinter is voiced by Jackie Chan, the master of martial arts infused with stunt comedy. Alas they have taken away the wise old man aspect from Splinter and gone with a somewhat dumbed-down comedic relief angle, minus the stunt comedy. Splinter also looks rather heavy-set and goofy truth be told. Sure he can still fight but we only see this once with the rest of the time just offering lighthearted silliness. Also not a fan of what they did with April O'Neil. Again I hate to bring up politics but yes they race-swapped April and also made her rather dumpy for some odd reason. Why?? They could have also gotten a voice actor with a real Aussie accent for Leatherhead geez!

I just feel like they've missed the mark here trying to appeal to the MCU base again. Like, Splinter and the Turtles learn martial arts...by watching TV? Was this just to get some visual laughs? Surely Splinter could have maybe gotten some literature, studied hard over the years, and then taught the Turtles himself? The fact they ALL did this at the same time is kinda stupid. All the Turtles also seem to have smartphones with no connection issues. I mean, I get they're young and I might be picky but really? How? Did they steal them? And why does Splinter fall in love with Scumbug? A mutant cockroach (gender-swapped I might add).

I know this might sound ridiculous in a kid's movie about the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles but, I didn't like that they used actual kids for the voices of the Turtles. To me it just doesn't sound right even though the ages are correct for the characters. Call me crazy but I prefer having actual voice actors for the characters. Plus we didn't really get fully fleshed out Turtles in my opinion, probably because of the age angle. For example, everyone in the movie talks about Raph's anger issues and rage, but we never actually see any of it, probably because they wanted to keep everything nice and safe. And then there's the soundtrack, yeah, trying WAY too hard guys. You didn't need to crank out a hit song for every new scene Jesus!

Unsurprisingly they leave Shredder for the sequel which was obvious right from the start, weak move. I mean I'm curious for sure but considering all the main villains are all cosy in the Turtle lair there's gonna have to be some major story U-turns. Either that or we won't be getting anymore Bebop, Rocksteady etc...? But who else does that leave?? Aside from the lesser known lesser cool villains.

So I dunno, I'm kinda torn here. It's not a bad movie that's for sure and as I've said I do appreciate the artistic style. But overall I still think it fails to beat the original way back in 1990 mostly because this doesn't really feel like a true Turtles flick. This feels more like a cool niche fantasy that just happens to have the Turtles in it. Like you could have replaced the Turtles with any number of fantasy characters and it still would have worked. I just didn't feel like there was anything that really made it stand out as a Turtles movie. I also miss that level of grit and darkness that the original 1990 movie had, all these recent versions are all too kiddie friendly, almost like weekend cartoons.

5/10

The Marvels (2023)

 

The forehead is back in the biggest load of virtuous DEI filmmaking this side of the Marvel cinematic universe, which universe? I've no idea anymore. With all the technology these days you'd think they could do something about Brie Larson's weird hairline.

So anyway this umpteenth MCU movie essentially revolves around a new team of female superheroes (Captain Marvel, Monica Rambeau, and Ms Marvel) joining forces to take on a very bog-standard baddie, who just happens to also be female, amidst more magical macguffins and space portals. That's pretty much it really, nothing special going on here, heroes vs one villain. The only hook being when one of these heroes uses their (light) powers they instantly swap places with the other, or something like that. This is explained and is predictably confusing to non-comicbook lore folk such as myself. It also equals a very confusing movie with highly kinetic yet highly convoluted action sequences.

I was also somewhat lured into the false sense of security regarding not having to watch the TV series 'Ms Marvel'. Turns out you DO need to have watched that show to pick up on some of this movies plot points. So that's a glaring issue, this movie cannot stand alone. Heck I'm still not sure what Ms Marvel's powers actually are because it's not exactly clear in this movie. All three of these female heroes just seem to be able to do anything required in the heat of the moment.

But what do we actually have? What do we get? Are we offered anything new and exciting? Alas no, what we get is yet another post 'Endgame' mega-budgeted overblown generic superhero flick. All the action generally looks good yet offers nothing we haven't seen before. All your standard CGI fighting with lots of throwing and flashy superhero lighting effects? Check. Big girl boss battle finale? Check. Lots of cringe humour? Check. The whole swapping locations when using individual powers thing was also inconsistent as it didn't always occur. Then there's the obsession with these alien cat things that can, apparently, consume anything of any size constantly, to the point where they get used as a method of transportation.

The main villain is merely another cut-and-paste baddie (who has been gender-swapped) seemingly outta nowhere. Googling this character and the original comicbook version actually looks quite cool and intimidating, but here we have a rather ugly chubby-faced space sorceress type with some silver teeth? Absolutely zero intimidation factor. Apparently she's after Captain Marvel because she caused a civil war on her home planet? It really doesn't seem very important or interesting. Overall I really failed to see how Captain Marvel isn't able to defeat this villain quite easily seeing as she's basically as powerful as Superman.

Then there's the singing planet idea that was so bad, SO bad. It also highlighted to me the rather obvious agenda in this movie which is mostly made up of females and POC. Like seriously I hate to bring this up but...what happened to White males in this universe? Kinda looks and feels like a deliberate move, and why would you do that? Again the mentality of the director and people around her exposed for all to see.

I'm actually getting bored writing this. It's amazing to see how far the MCU has fallen with this offering. This doesn't even feel like an MCU movie, it comes across like a hokey, badly acted, knock-off. A loud generic toy commercial for a new upcoming Saturday morning cartoon which in itself would be a knock-off of something better. 

2/10

The Garfield Movie (2024)

 

What's this? Another Garfield movie?? Oh geez, well I guess this should be better seeing as it's an animated flick. Oh wait it's CGI, so that's a no then. Yep, if you're looking for a generic kid's movie to simply plop your little spawns in front of for a few hours then voila! This will definitely do the job, and if you're up for some torture you could watch it with them.

So in the most generic move you could possibly make Garfield discovers his lost long dad (Vic, Vic?? what kind of name is that for a cat?) and has to work with him in order to steal some milk for another fat female cat (Jinx) who is trying to blackmail Garfield's dad. You see long ago, Garfield's dad accidentally got Jinx locked up in the cat pound so she wants revenge (ugh!). So Garfield, Odie, Vic, and another generic animal character (a bull), must break into a farm/factory to steal a load of milk blah blah blah who cares.

Seriously, how generic can something be? This was the most genericy generic waste of time and money I've seen in years, and I only watched it because I do like Garfield as a character. Yes the CGI is fine, it's nothing special but it absolutely does the generic job. They did try to emulate the style of Jim Davis but it isn't really overly obvious and merely comes across as bog standard CGI toon guff. They also crowbarred in a small section showcasing some classic Davis comic strip antics but unless you've read the actual comic strip you wouldn't know and it isn't important to the movie anyway.

The whole 'Mission: Impossible' spy aspect is also such a tired genre to spin these days. Writer 1: What can we do in the middle of this movie to make it more exciting? Espionage spin? Everyone likes that right? Writer 2: Perfect! Writer 1: Hey, we could get Ving Rhames and make him a character that's just like his character from the actual M:I movies? Writer 2: Genius!! 

All the non-Davis universe characters created solely for this movie are bland and boring, although the other cat designs did fit in nicely with the Davis style. But why not include or base the story around Nermal? Or Binky? Or Liz? Or Jon's family? And the voice-casting decisions were atrocious! Have these Hollywood types not heard of shows like 'The Simpsons'? The best voice actors for gigs like this are NOT big Hollywood stars. The casting of people like Samuel L. Jackson and Snoop Dog etc...just makes me wanna roll my eyes out of my head. Don't even get me started on the casting of Chris Pratt, this guy is in the dictionary under generic Hollywood star. So Garfield and Mario sound like Chris Pratt, who would have thought it (UGH!!!!).

And here's another thing that bugs me about certain flicks like this, off-the-wall absurdity. Take a classic CGI animated flick like 'Toy Story'. Yes the characters are unrealistic and yes the idea is fantastical, but the situations, or moments of adventure, are generally relatively grounded or potentially possible in terms of physics. When Woody and Buzz chase Andy's car on the back of RC (a battery operated buggy), yes of course its all high fantasy but the actual idea behind it works. Action figure toys riding on the back of a remote control buggy at speed? You could actually do that with real toys. Folks of a certain age could probably relate to doing things like that with their toys. But in this Garfield movie, all the action is just insane nonsense.

We already know how awesome animated Garfield projects can be from the classic TV specials, so it amazes me that in the present day they just can't get anything right. Yeah the kids will probably like it and that's the main objective I guess. But to any older folk who might be curious because they grew up with Garfield, watch out! This couldn't be more safe and generic if they tried. The only way they could have achieved that would be making the plot about Garfield losing Pooky and going off on some over-the-top adventure to find him (there's your sequel).

3/10