Hello everyone! As some of you may know, I am writing for the website COMICONVERSE. I have been covering the current comic books from Marvel Comics and BOOM! Studiossuch as Doctor Strange and Kong of Skull Island.
For myself and anyone else interested I am documenting each of my articles here at Blood Work.
If you haven't checked out this latest article here you go!
You know what? I kinda hated this comic book. I was really looking forward to it and it is such a waste of space.
Sick of me praising everything?
Read this for a "not so happy" comic book review. It's not pretty. Truth be told it is a lot of pent up nerd rage for the last four years of Captain Marvel comics all coming out here. I'm not proud of it. But I had to vent.
Check out my other articles for ComiConverse linked below!
Hello everyone! As some of you may know, I am writing for the website COMICONVERSE. I have been covering the current comic books from Marvel Comics and BOOM! Studiossuch as Doctor Strange and Kong of Skull Island.
For myself and anyone else interested I am documenting each of my articles here at Blood Work.
If you haven't checked out this latest article here you go!
This is the last chapter of my series of articles attempting to act as a truncated annotation for the Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning's run on the Marvel cosmic books during the latter of the 2000's. Yeah, I know. I really nerded hard on these articles. I am so grateful for ComiConverse for publishing these (I wasn't even sure they would publish them!). For publishing any of my articles really.
I actually had a lot of fun writing this series of articles. It was kind of like connecting the dots, treasure hunting, and fun research. If someone paid me to do a complete annotation of this section of comic books I would. Hell you probably wouldn't even have to pay me. Anyway, I hope you all enjoyed reading these uber-fan articles as much as I enjoyed writing them.
Check out my other articles for ComiConverse linked below!
One of my favorite genre's of cinema is action. I love larger than life heroes and all around badasses. I grew up in the 80's and 90's on the films of Schwarzenegger and Stallone, Bruce Willis, and others. And over the years I've discovered other great actors and characters and begun to appreciate some I hadn't quite attached to in my youth. I still love most of these movies and most definitely love a good action movie.
DISCLAIMER:
"Action" can be a broad term so let me define the parameters of this list. Excluded from this list are Super Hero movies like Marvel, DC, Image, and so forth. I've excluded westerns and samurai films (we just did a top ten on cinema samurai!). No Hong Kong martial arts films or any martial arts films for that matter. And no cartoons or animes. All of these will no doubt be top tens of their own (I am looking forward to many of them actually).
I had to narrow this field down because there are so many heroes of the silver screen that I love and I must do them justice so way or another.
So now that we have the parameters defined, on with the list!
As usual I've included a bonus!
#11 JAMES BOND
Films: Oh I don't know, all twenty-four of them for starters.
You cannot have an action hero list without James Bond on it. The Super Spy, James Bond has been around for a long time (the first novel by Ian Flemming came out in 1953!). He's gone through many incarnations and his adventures have ranged from classy spy espionage, sci-fi super tech based thrillers, even a little voodoo mysticism, and then some balls out action epics. James Bond is an extremely versatile character, each actor in the role bringing something different to the table.
James Bond is too cool and one of cinema's most enduring icons.
THE TOP TEN
#10
JASON STATHAM
Okay, I can't narrow down a single character from Jason Statham that I particularly love more than any other because really it's Jason Statham himself whose persona has become the character. He kinda plays the same sort of character in his action movies, with little variations here and there, but it's that character that I want to see every time I watch a Jason Statham movie. I don't mean that remark as a detriment but rather as the reason why I love watching Jason Statham.
If I had to choose just one of Jason Statham's characters that I enjoy the most it would be Chev Chelios from the CRANK films. But his roles in DEATH RACE, PARKER, HOME FRONT, Dekkard Shaw in the FAST & FURIOUS films, THE MECHANIC, and others have all been great too.
Taking
the "Super Cop" to a whole new level. A member of an elite special
forces unit in Vietnam, Riggs was trained to kill with any means
possible. He is the lethal weapon. After completing his Mad Max
character, Mel Gibson began building another great character in Martin
Riggs. Emotionally (and maybe mentally) unstable, humorous, scary, and
deadly, Riggs is one complex and incredibly interesting character.
Over
the course of four films we watch Riggs go from a "damaged" man to
fully healed, thanks in large part to his partner and friend Roger
Murtaugh and those friends they meet along the way. And Riggs in turn
shows the nearly retired Murtaugh that there is still plenty of life
left in them and that they are not too old for this... stuff.
#8
DIRTY HARRY CALLAHAN
Films: DIRTY HARRY (1971), MAGNUM FORCE (1973), THE ENFORCER (1976), SUDDEN IMPACT (1983), THE DEAD POOL (1988)
One of cinema's greatest actors, a man who's played many heroes, is Clint Eastwood. The man is just plain cool or at least his onscreen persona is. It was the Man With No Name films that first hooked me and made me a fan of Eastwood's. Then I discovered the Dirty Harry films. Inspector Harry Callahan was a gruff and abrasive character always seeing the worst in humanity. A natural maverick, he was quick to disregard protocol when it got in his way and as a result was a constant pain in the ass for his superiors. He was a good shot with his .44 Magnum. And he was always quick to fire off a one liner.
Harry Callahan was the original "Super Cop" and set the standard for so many action heroes to come after. He also set the tone for rated R action films too, often brutal violence on displace and some disturbing imagery. Definitely not a hero you appreciate as a kid.
#7
INDIANA JONES
Films: RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARC (1981), INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM (1984), INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE (1989)
Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, and Harrison Ford created perhaps the ultimate adventurer in the character of Indiana Jones. These films capture the imaginations of both children and adults. These are some of the films you watched as a kid and discovered that they still held up when you were an adult. And the hero of these films is just as strong. Taking the swagger and confidence of Han Solo but toning down the scoundrel, Harrison Ford added more intensity and physicality to create another truly iconic character.
A man of action, thinking on his feet, rescuing the women, and saving the world from the badguys, heroes don't get much grander than Indiana Jones. He's the hero you pretended to be in the backyard as a kid and wished you were as an adult.
#6 MAX ROCKATANSKY
Films: MAD MAX (1979), THE ROAD WARRIOR (1981), MAD MAX: BEYOND THUNDERDOME (1985), MAD MAX: FURY ROAD (2015)
The
Road Warrior was on my top ten favorite movies list of all time for
quite a while. It may still be. When I was in high school I discovered
the Mad Max films and The Road Warrior above the rest blew me away. I
wasn't as keen on the other two films back then but as time has passed
and I've grown a bit older I have come to appreciate and enjoy them as
well. Mel Gibson's performance as Max evolves from film to film. We see
him first as a young man with a family and friends only to lose it all
as well as his humanity. Next we see him as a shell of the person he
once was, more animal than man. And in Thunderdome we see him regain
some of his humanity.
It's a great arc for the
character which translates to a great character. I like Tom Hardy's
interpretation too but he isn't given as much to work with as Mel had.
But Fury Road is so ridiculously good. I really wish it had been Mel in
Fury Road. Oh well.
#5
CONAN
Films: CONAN THE BARBARIAN (1982), CONAN THE DESTROYER (1984)
Conan is the ultimate swords & sorcery hero. No others save for maybe Red Sonja could compare to the raw power of the character. Seeing Conan grow up amidst the most violent and deadly of time periods, survive, and emerge like a piece of forged steel is an incredible journey to watch. Arnold Schwarzenegger embodies the character nigh perfectly. There's something about Conan that connects with a primal part of humanity, a time long forgotten and a life once lived.
Arnold Schwarzenegger was one of my top favorite action heroes growing up and I still love his films today. It was a tough call putting Conan here as opposed to where another Schwarzenegger character stands on the list. I'm sure you can guess who it is...
#4
JOHN McCLANE
Films: DIE HARD (1988), DIE HARD 2: DIE HARDER (1990), DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE (1995), LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD (2007), A GOOD DAY TO DIE HARD (2013)
Why John McClane is awesome is because he wasn't a "super cop" but merely a normal guy faced with impossible situations. He survives through determination, ingenuity, and a lot of luck. He was the "every man's" hero, in essence, a real person with a marriage on the rocks, two kids, and a smart mouth. Bruce Willis' performance was perfect and embodied everything I mentioned above (at least for the first three films). McClane was unsure of himself, self-deprecating, and well aware of his failings. He went into every situation thinking he was going to die and we could see that written on Bruce's face. That alone elevated the excitement to a higher level, knowing John McClane wasn't invincible.
I definitely prefer the first three films over the latter two. With the final two installments in the series John McClane became a confident badass super cop, which is interesting to see too but not as compelling, at least for me. But I definitely like "invincible heroes" too.
#3
T-800
Films: TERMINATOR 2: JUDGEMENT DAY (1991), TERMINATOR 3: RISE OF THE MACHINES (2003), TERMINATOR: GENISYS (2015)
Okay, technically there is nothing heroic about a machine doing what it was programmed to do, but you're just gonna have to give me this one. The Terminator is an incredible force to behold. He doesn't do fancy tricks or martial arts. He takes everything thrown at him, bullets, knives, fiery explosions, and walks right through them. Proficient in the use of every weapon, and even without a weapon, he'll put his fist through anyone and anything. The Terminator was terrifying as a villain, but when he became a hero it made history. He's like the tough guy we all wish we were, able to take whatever the other guy throws at us and keep coming. Plus that endoskeleton is so rad.
The original Terminator film is not on this list because, well, that particular T-800 was a different character and most definitely not a hero. The T-800 that first appeared in Terminator 2 is the hero. I guess by that logic the T-800 in Terminator 3 is a different character as well and also a hero.
#2
SNAKE PLISSKEN
Films: ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK (1981), ESCAPE FROM L.A. (1996)
Once the great hero of World War III, now a disillusioned outlaw, Snake Plissken went from the hero of a country to criminal number one. Through blackmail and a bomb placed in his neck, Snake was forced to do the government's dirty work once again. Snake could care less about the country, world governments, or the world itself. Even the suffering of innocent people doesn't do much to move him to help. Anti-hero to the core, Snake is a bit of mystery. Much of his past is only hinted at in the movies and it's this backstory that has made the character so intriguing to me. That and what we do see of him in the movies is just so ridiculously cool.
Snake Plissken was a character I had a hard time understanding when I was younger. I always thought he was cool but he was a little too nihilistic for me. But as I have grown older the appeal of the character has grown tremendously. Kurt Russell is just too cool as Snake and under the direction of John Carpenter makes for a perfect character in my opinion surpassed by only one other...
#1
JOHN RAMBO
Films: FIRST BLOOD (1982), RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART II (1985), RAMBO III (1988), RAMBO (2008)
Too obvious, right? Of course it's Rambo!
A soldier returns from a disillusioned war only to discover he has no country to go home to. His fellow soldiers are dead and the world wants nothing to do with him. Rambo is pushed to the breaking point and wages his own war. Rambo did not start off as the typical hero. His first war shown in the movies was a war against his own country and fellow Americans, disillusioned and outraged that his country didn't support him after he fought for them in Vietnam. Rambo's first enemy was the injustice towards the American soldiers who fought in Vietnam. Then he fought for the soldiers still suffering in P.O.W. camps, soldiers the world had forgotten. Next he fought to help the only friend who ever stuck by him.
It's easy to just think of Rambo as the quintessential action hero, but when you really look at him you discover he's not the typical hero at all. He's not the hero of the innocent everyday person, but rather the soldier's hero. At his core though he is a man trying to meaning again when everything he believed in had betrayed him. He was a tool used by someone else and then discarded. Even to the end of his final film he's still a lost soul trying to find his way back. Yeesh, no wonder the alternate ending of the first film has Rambo committing suicide. Heavy stuff to be sure.
And I love watching him blow stuff up though. I really love watching him blow stuff up. He's my number one because no one kicks ass as good as Rambo does. He can drive a chopper, a tank, a motorcycle, he can blow stuff up with arrows and bazookas and rip a dude's throat out with his bare freakin hands! He even disembowels a guy with a machete! YES! ARRRRHHHHHHH!!!! He's like the Jason Voorhees of action heroes!
I'm definitely a child of the 80's.
And there you have it!
Who are your favorite action movie heroes?
Let me know in the comments below or comment on our Facebook page!!
And for more of our Top Ten Lists check out these below!
There is something mythic about Stephen King's novel IT. The novel was released in 1986, at a time when horror cinema was all the rage and the horror genre as a whole was "in." Just four years later the first film adaptation of IT came to the small screen in households everywhere. Directed by Tommy Lee Wallace and starring Tim Curry as the terrifying Pennywise, IT became the reason why many from my generation hate clowns. The high acclaim for the book and the powerful performance by Tim Curry have made the status of this story legendary in the hearts and memories of the populace.
With nostalgia proving to be an extremely profitable business in cinema these days (Star Wars and Jurassic World), and horror remakes still going strong, what better time to revisit the story of Pennywise?
Andy Muschietti, director of the horror film Mama (2013), directs this new version of Stephen King's IT. In the first weekend alone the film has shattered horror movie records across the board. Being rated R did not hurt the film whatsoever as it made $123 million it's opening weekend. It's certified fresh with 86% on Rotten Tomatoes and receiving rave reviews across the board. And people are already trying to figure out diplomatic ways of saying they prefer Bill Skarsgard's Pennywise over Tim Curry's Pennywise. Needless to say, for the moment this movie is taking cinema by storm and could possibly go down as the film that launched a new era of horror greatness.
For the last several years I have been measuring new horror films against the likes of the first Conjuring film and The Evil Dead remake (both 2013). After seeing IT do I have a new standard with which to measure all other new horror by? Read on and find out.
THE PLOT
The small town of Derry, Maine has a problem. A monster has laid claim to the town and has a particular taste for children. In 1988 a young boy named Georgie disappeared while his older brother, Bill, watched from his upstairs window. Bill and his friends have now taken up the search for Georgie. But the closer they come to finding Georgie they soon find themselves the targets for the monster. Evil descends on these seven friends from all sides as they are victimized by their parents, hounded by bullies, and stalked by the monster. Everything is against them. And if they are going to survive they'll need to rely on each and remain fearless in the face of their worst nightmares.
WHAT I LIKED
The Effects. The biggest let down for me when watching the original film is that the monster effects didn't live up to the scope of story. Granted it was a television mini-series with an incredibly low budget so I can't fault the filmmakers for making the best of their resources. But Tim Curry delivered such an amazing performance that it was a shame the special effects couldn't deliver as well. Here however the filmmakers had more than enough money to realize Stephen King's nightmarish sequences. And they use a mix of practical make-up effects and CGI for the best looking monsters and gore one could hope for. Once again Tom Woodruff Jr and Alec Gillis, the same men responsible for Annabelle: Creation's monsters and effects a month earlier and responsible for so many horror film legends from the 1980's on to today, are the ones to thank for IT looking so good.
Bill Skarsgard. After seeing him in the Netflix series HEMLOCK GROVE, when I heard he was cast as Pennywise I knew the movie was going to work. Nailing Pennywise is one of the essential ingredients for an IT adaptation, maybe even the most essential (I'd argue getting the best child actors is equally important too). And Skarsgard knocks it out of the park. He approaches the role in a different way from Tim Curry too, in a way that doesn't make a Tim Curry IT purest feel ashamed for liking Skarsgard's Pennywise. Curry plays the role with pure malevolence and revelry for the suffering of others whereas Skarsgard lends a subhuman quality to the character. Pennywise in this film isn't so much enjoying what he's doing but rather performing his tasks as a cat plays with mice or as a lion stalks its prey. There's less humanity in it and more animalistic drive. Yeah, Pennywise is evil but I get the feeling from Skarsgard that it is merely Pennywise's nature, not a choice It's making. Whereas I feel the real evil in the film comes from the human antagonists like Henry Bowers and Mr. Marsh.
The Narrative Structure. In the book and the original film, the narrative is told from two alternating timelines. We received a piece from one timeline and then a piece from the other, experiencing both narratives simultaneously. Here the film only shows us the children's timeline and presents it uninterrupted in a more streamlined approach. Set in the 1980's versus the 50's, IT actually channels a STRANGER THINGS/A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET vibe which is something audiences have really responded to as of late. The filmmakers also resist the urge to populate the film with an abundance of 80's pop songs, which for me felt refreshing and reinforced the serious tone. The humor was also used sparsely and more through clever dialog than forced moments of levity. In short, I felt the screenplay was well written and executed.
NITPICKS
Too many scares? No such thing, am I right guys? Well, maybe. I used to think there was no such thing as too many scares in a horror film but in my later years I've come to realize the old axiom "quality over quantity" is quite true especially in terms of horror. There are a ton of scares in this film. Now I'm not saying the scares weren't good. They were very good and the 2 hour and 15 minute run time flew by. But even though they were all well done, I felt a little numb to the scares by the end of the film. And I can't even remember them all. In many instances the film rolled from one scare to the next over and over without the time to digest the previous scare and contemplate what had happened. I also felt some scares weren't given a proper build up and were lessened as a result. Like I said, all of the scares were good but there were so many of them that a portion of the scares have become lost in and among the rest.
The Rules. When dealing with supernatural subjects or magic systems in stories I feel the rules and parameters of said worlds need to be firmly established and adhered to or the story ceases being compelling. If the badguy can literally do anything then how do you expect me to believe that a bunch of kids could defeat it? And vice versa in the case of the hero, where is the threat when your goodguy has every power you can think of? Now there are plenty of great arguments against this and that's cool if you feel differently than I do.
As I was watching I couldn't help but notice Pennywise's seeming omnipresence and omniscience. I don't feel the film established Pennywise's abilities and limitations very well. They talk about a connection to the Well and traveling through the sewers. So, was there a manhole cover or plumbing in Bill's garage? Or the upstairs of the synagogue? Or the library archive? And why doesn't Pennywise kill the Loser's Club outright? He killed Georgie and Patrick outright? And he had Beverly, Eddie, Stan, and Richie dead to rights... in his place of power no less. If the argument was that Pennywise needed his victims to reach a certain level of fear before killing them then Georgie and Patrick reached that level stupid fast. But you can't tell me that the others weren't scared shitless at numerous points in the film, both in their own homes by themselves and at the old dark house.
FREDDY KRUEGER IS PENNYWISE IN DISGUISE
As the film progressed I couldn't help but notice how similar the movie felt to the original A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. The cast of young characters and a town's youth being stalked and murdered by a supernatural being. Pennywise feels like an amped up, more powerful version of Freddy. I never noticed this before due to the unique storytelling method employed in the book and the original film. Here, with the narrative being strictly the children's timeline and the special effects finally able to showcase Pennywise's powers convincingly, the parallels were unmistakable.
Stephen King has said that the original idea for his story came about in 1978 but he didn't start writing it until 1981 and that the monster started out as something quite different. The book didn't come out until 1986, a full two years after Wes Craven's A Nightmare on Elm Street film. Now, I'm not saying Stephen King was inspired by Wes Craven's film, more that both men were tapping into the same idea. Granted, Pennywise is portrayed quite differently in the novel than in this new film, more of a shapeshifting slasher killer than an insanely imaginative magical being like Freddy.
Both are brilliant stories and incredible films, but with the parallels so strong I can't help but compare the two. I'm not comparing the novel but rather the film approaches. In this case I feel A Nightmare on Elm Street is the stronger of the two due to satisfying my personal hangups of firmly establishing the magical story parameters of Freddy's powers. But even so, this new IT is one helluva film. Feel free to fight me on this or point out these missing story parameters for the new IT that I may have missed while watching (it is conceivable that they're there and I totally missed them).
THE VERDICT
Director Andy Muschietti delivers a strong sophomore horror film and the powers of Pennywise the Dancing Clown have never been better displayed, albeit maybe not as defined as I would've liked. Bill Skarsgard takes the role of Pennywise and makes it his own and delivers a truly frightening performance. I daresay Skarsgard has established himself as a new horror icon. The narrative structure is streamlined and as a result we only get one half of Stephen King's original story. Of course this is merely a setup for a sequel, which in this case is really the other half of the novel (so is it really a sequel then?).
Compared to The Conjuring and The Evil Dead remake, I still hold both of those in higher regard. I really enjoyed this film but it didn't get to me as much as other horror films from the past few years. But then I was never too scared of clowns. I do feel this film is stronger than the original, quicker, and easier to digest than the three hour television epic. I feel though with a little more restraint that this film could've been even better. Maybe I'm being extra critical, but even so I do feel it is a really good horror film.
Every year more and more genre and franchise films are released and the number of movies on my "Watch List" just grows and grows. In 2003 Disney released the very first film in the Pirates of the Caribbean series, a movie that I thought was going to be dumb because the ride at Disney World I remember being dull. But to my surprise the film was a hit. I wasn't blown away by it but the more I watched it the more I enjoyed it. In 2006 and 2007 the second and third films were released. Here's where I am split with most people I talk to. I actually enjoy the second and third films more than I do the first. The grander scope of story, the thundering scores by Hans Zimmer, the threatening Davy Jones, and the convoluted plotline all worked well with me. It was those two films that really made me a fan of the series.
On Stranger Tides (the fourth film from 2011) I enjoy as well. I was looking forward to seeing a pirates film that didn't focus on Elizabeth Swan and Will Turner, characters with which I wasn't terribly fond of. I loved the mermaids, the treasure hunting for Ponce De Leon had some fun twisty moments, and Ian McShane was awesome as Blackbeard. But the fourth film was missing something, a compelling subplot bearing greater import for the future maybe. A plot reveal about Captain Jack Sparrow that would blow the audience's minds and maybe question what we thought we knew about our favorite pirate. I don't know... It was missing something though that kept it from rising to the level of the previous films in the series.
Now, six years later (the longest stretch between Pirates films to date) we finally have the follow-up film to Stranger Tides. PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES came out in May of this summer and I am just now getting to it. From the trailers it seems that this film is giving us that little bit that was missing from Stranger Tides, finally revealing that plot element that will potentially guide the next few films in the series.
So how did it do?
THE PLOT
Henry Turner, the son of Will and Elizabeth, has now grown into his twenties. Henry has made it his mission to find a way to free his father from the curse of the Flying Dutchman. All his searching has pointed him towards the mythical Trident of Poseidon. On his quest he comes upon a brilliant young woman on a quest of her own, to unlock the secret of her heritage. What Henry discovers is that she alone holds the key to finding the Trident. Intertwined with all of this is Captain Jack Sparrow. Jack, at an all-time low, trades his mystical compass for a bottle of rum. Betraying the compass unwittingly opens the gates of the Devil's Triangle unleashing another undead threat upon the seas, the cursed Captain Salazar. Only the Trident can stop Salazar from killing every pirates on the high seas. The hunt is on!
WHAT I LIKED
The Expansion. By the fifth film in a franchise you better hope there's some major character and plot development going on. As much as I love the great horror franchises of the 1980's, nowadays one needs a bit more forward progress. We can't wait around for seven sequels to see Jason finally leave Crystal Lake. I truly love every Friday the 13th film but that was a different era (although the Marvel Studios films seem to be doing quite well making copies of Iron Man again and again).
Spoilers Ahead
Will Turner and Elizabeth Swan return to the story and instead of taking part in the narrative themselves it is through their son, Henry, that their story finally comes to a close. And while Henry throws in with the pirates, unlike his father and mother, he doesn't become one for a change. It is quite refreshing to see a central character in these films not actually become a pirate. And it was nice to see a story that started in 2003 come to a close.
More Spoilers
Captain Barbossa is arguably the unsung hero of this franchise and he is definitely one of the best parts of this film. And it wouldn't be a Pirates film without him. Barbossa's character is finally given a whole new dimension and motivation in this film, the first in the entire franchise. Geoffrey Rush takes Barbossa from one archetype to another showing a rare instance where a character in a big blockbuster franchise is allowed to grow and change. It is perhaps the biggest turn of the film and maybe the most interesting development. Along with the changing elements, Kaya Scodelario adds freshness to the atmosphere portraying a decidedly different character not seen in the previous films, that of a stubborn and strikingly intelligent astronomer.
Then There's Captain Salazar played the talented Javier Bardem. The look and design of Salazar and his accompanying ship and crew... and SHARKS... is reminiscent of the Black Pearl marauders from the original film yet new and terrifying. Many elements come into Salazar's story that I find incredibly interesting, such as being trapped and subsequently cursed when entering the Devil's Triangle (Bermuda Triangle). Then we finally are privy to a piece of Captain Jack's backstory within Salazar's backstory, when Captain Jack was just "Jack" and even before the Sparrow was added to the name. We actually see how Jack becomes captain, first acquires his effects, and earns the name Sparrow. It's my favorite scene of Johnny Depp's in the film.
NITPICKS
First of all, one of the aspects of this franchise that I greatly admire is the storytelling. I couldn't begin to assemble such an intricate, twisting, and convoluted (I mean that in the best way) story such as the Pirates of the Caribbean saga. So take what I am about to say as words from a guy who probably doesn't know what he's talking about. Nevertheless Captain Jack Sparrow, for about 90% of the film, feels heavily diluted or heavily baked. What has made these films so endearing are the performances by Johnny Depp, giving his all, and creating a character few have ever seen before.
Here it feels very much like Depp is phoning it in most of the time or actually drunk on Rum. What I love about Captain Jack Sparrow is that he plays the fool but in actuality is the only person aware of what's really going on, weaving other characters into his plot and playing them perfectly into his endgame. Here he actually is the fool with no grandiose plot in the works and no glimpses of intelligence to make us wonder "Just what is Captain Jack up to?" This is biggest disappointment of the film for me and I'm not sure if it's a fault of the writers or directors (I doubt it) or more a fault of the actor's.
Yet More Spoilers
Then there are a few plotholes which don't quite jive with previous films. During the great flashback sequence we see Jack's Captain die in front of him, his last dying gesture bestowing the fabled Compass unto Jack and saying, "Don't ever betray it." Tia Dalma a.k.a. Calypso said in the second film that Captain Jack bartered the compass from her. Now this could easily be explained away in a simple sentence in a future movie but as of now it is a major continuity error. And while it closes the chapter on the Swans and Turners it also raises some rather ponderous questions... like how is Davy Jones back? And why is Will covered in barnacles? I thought if you're doing the job of the Flying Dutchman then you weren't becoming one with the sea? That doesn't seem to be the case here.
THE VERDICT
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales is another great exploration of the myths and adventures of the high seas. The creative teams behind the franchise continue to find new and inventive ways to further the story and the characters. And while some characters' chapters are brought to a definitive close, a whole mess of new chapters begin. The only significant drawback to this film versus the previous four is a seeming lack of conviction on the part of Johnny Depp. It's sad that the character we all come to see in this film is the one character who can hardly see at all let alone stand or deliver lines or do anything except convince us that what's really in those bottles of rum is in fact rum.
Overall Ranking: 6 out of 10
I still really enjoyed it in spite of the disappointing performance
For more 2017 blockbuster films check out these links below!
