New-ish Releases, Spoiler-Free Reviews: Justice League (2017); It (2017)

Justice League (2017)

No Spoilers!

Director: Zack Snyder

This one was OK, which actually qualifies as a pleasant surprise to me.

Justice League was the fifth film in the "DC Extended Universe" (DCEU). After paying to see the underwhelming Man of Steel in 2013 and then the utter mess that was Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice a couple of years ago, I swore off paying theater prices to see any of the DCEU flicks. While I broke that vow to see Wonder Woman, after all of that movie's mostly-deserved high praise, that initial boycotting paid off by my avoiding the sloppy Suicide Squad. While I am glad that I didn't shell out theater price for Justice League, I have to say that it was a reasonably satisfying at-home rental.

The story picks up several of the ostentatiously dangling and flapping threads left over from Batman v. Superman. With Clark Kent/Superman's apparent death at the hands of the Doomsday monster, the alien conqueror Steppenwolf sees his chance to lead an assault on Earth and take over the planet. It's an attempt which he had made in the past, only to be rebuffed by the collective forces of several of earth's mythically powerful races. Now that Steppenwolf is back with a massive army of fear-feasting insectoids, Batman recruits one known ally, Diana Prince/Wonder Woman, to enlist the aid of other people with apparent superpowers. These lead them to band together a group that includes Barry "The Flash" Allen, Arthur "Aquaman" Curry, and Victor "Cyborg" Stone.

In most ways, the movie is fairly paint-by-numbers. I will admit that I suspect Joss Whedon, who was brought in to take over as writer/director after Snyder had a family tragedy to deal with, probably was responsible for some of the more intriguing and clever narrative ties in the film. I also wouldn't be surprised if he had a hand in writing some of the more engaging fight sequences. The one which I found most entertaining seemed very much like something we would have seen in The Avengers. Whether it was Whedon or co-writer Chris Terrio, this movie definitely had the lighter tone and funnier gags that Batman v. Superman was painfully lacking. It still wasn't nearly on par with the best MCU or even X-Men flicks, but it was a clear improvement.

Jason Momoa certainly cuts a striking figure as Aquaman, but
the outline and dialogue never came together for me. Most of
the other characters were handled more deftly.

The core characters are a mixed bag. The villain Steppenwolf is dull - a typically one-dimensional warmonger who wants to crush everything in his path. The voice acting by Northern Irish acting veteran Ciaran Hinds is powerful, though. In terms of "The League," I found it hit-and-miss. I've personally never had a problem with Ben Affleck as Batman, and he continues to be fine here. Gal Gadot continues to be great as Wonder Woman, as well. Ezra Miller was rightfully hailed as maybe the biggest revelation in this one, as he plays the iconic Flash exceptionally well, lightening things up nicely. Cyborg, however, I found extremely dull, and this particular vision of Aquaman felt completely off to me. As a group, though, the good outweighed the bad, and the dynamics work well enough.

I can't say that Justice League won me back over to the DCEU, but it did give me an enjoyable two hours. Looking ahead, the film franchise's next movie is Aquaman, headed up by James Wan, known for recent "Fast...Furious" films and the recent Star Trek Beyond. Given my feelings for how Aquaman was handled in Justice League, and my apathy towards the Fast and Furious movies, I don't anticipate that I'll be seeing that one. I do hope that the powers behind the DCEU take some note of what worked in Justice League, though, as they really are sitting on a wealth of great fantasy characters whom they could use to make some wildly entertaining movies.

Spoilers!! You've Been Warned!

Great intro sequences with Wonder Woman. While her solo movie last year had some solid action scenes, her rescue at the bank was top-notch. And the sequence with the Amazons trying to defend the Mother Box from Steppenwolf's attack has some really fun visuals, too.

It was a brief moment, but I absolutely loved the moment when the Flash is running up on a still-deranged Superman, thinking his he has the jump on him, only to have the Man of Steel's eyes turn directly towards him, well aware of the Scarlet Speedster's approach. I have to think that that was a Joss Whedon addition, as it seems like just the type of subtle-but-awesome moment that Whedon has a knack for.

Speaking of Superman, it was probably the least surprising "twist" to bring him back in this one. It was handled fine, if not exactly in a compelling or creative way. The iconic superhero does serve as a half-decent deus ex machina, but he does raise the eternal concern with such a powerful character - how do you find a villain strong enough and interesting enough to contend with him, let alone him and his super-powered buddies?

It (2017)

Director: Andy Muschietti

A solid horror movie, if one that is drawing from several wells that have been heavily tapped by earlier scare flicks.

Based on the hit 1986 novel by popular horror master Stephen King, It follows a group of young kids in their pre- and early teens in the fictional town of Derry, Maine, a seemingly quaint little area that has a history of disturbingly high rate of missing children and horrific disasters. This tale begins in the summer of 1988, when a little boy, Georgie, is apparently sucked into a drainage opening by a monster masquerading as a circus clown. We fast forward a year, with Georgie's older brother, Bill, and his friends wrapping up the school year and looking forward to a summer of freedom. Soon, however, other children start to disappear, and Bill and his friends start to have terrifying hallucinations embodying their worst fears. Wrapped up with these fears isthe same clown, which calls itself Pennywise, that took Bill's kid brother Georgie. Sure that Pennywise means to take and devour them all, Bill and his friends must decide what to do in order to survive and possibly find any of the other children whom Pennywise has already taken.

The movie is a very solid horror movie that I put in the same box as recent horror hits like The Conjuring - it's not really doing anything new, but it uses tried-and-true horror movie techniques extremely well. You get the creepy piano music, a scary clown, creaky doors, dark basements, a spooky and dilapidated house, and almost every other trope you can imagine from such films from the past. Fortunately, director Andy Muschietti executes everything effectively, and he does implement some creative visual scares with sharp editing and a few truly startling moments. On the whole, though, I wasn't dazzled by any wealth of novelty here.

Although this movie is based on a much earlier novel, which had previously been adapted for TV in 1990, it's almost impossible to ignore its similarities with recent nostalgia-laden smash hit TV show Stranger Things, which itself is a bit of a love letter to fiction creators like Stephen King. If the 1980s setting, small town, and gang of 12- and 13-year old misfits isn't enough to make the comparison clear, It even features Finn Wolfhard, one of the young stars of Stranger Things. It doesn't do quite as good a job as the Netflix TV show of invoking the sense of fun and camaraderie, but the bond between the young kids - who dub themselves "The Losers' Club" - is effective enough.

Dank, shadowy sewers are only one of many well-known horror
tropes here. We also get eerie old houses, creaky doors, and
more, to go right along with the scary clown at the center.

The movie isn't one for subtlety, beyond even the standard horror elements already covered. The secondary characters leave no scrap of doubt as to their roles. The bullies are sneering, cackling, jackal-like predators whose every actions are despicable. The single, sleazy father of female Loser's Club member Emily simply oozes lecherousness. The shut-in mom of hypochondriac Eddie seems to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. And on it goes, with anyone who is not a Loser's Club member being no more than two-dimensional, and basically of no help to the kids. This is an overly convenient narrative device, as it is about the only way that the kids are left to fend for themselves. It's not a fatal flaw, as the movie does need to keep its focus on the kids themselves, but I would have appreciated seeing one or two adults who actually seemed to care about their kids suffering through hellacious trauma.

Though It didn't stun me with anything exceptionally novel, it was a decent enough horror flick. It was always meant as the first of a two-part film series, with the sequel It: Chapter 2 set for a September 2019 release. I doubt that I'll bother seeing it in theaters, but I'll check it out eventually. The concept of a horror movie flashing forward 27 years to see the adult versions of the first movie's children protagonists deal with the returning horror is an interesting concept. 

Wonder Woman (2017) [Spoiler-Free]

Director: Patty Jenkins

It's not exactly the greatest movie you'll ever see, but Wonder Woman proves that the people behind DC's extended film universe might actually know how to allow a decent movie to be made.

Wonder Woman is the fourth in DC and Warner Brothers's "Extended Universe" (DCEU) of movies featuring characters from popular comic books. Anyone who has happened to read my reviews of the first three films - Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman, and Suicide Squad - knows that I found all three of those films either mediocre or just plain bad. Arguably the worst of the three, Batman v. Superman, had very few saving graces, one of them being the introduction of Gal Gadot (pronounced "gah-dote," by the way) as Diana Prince, or Wonder Woman. Her screen time in that film was relatively limited, but memorable, and it seemed to present Gadot as a good casting choice for the Amazonian heroine.

The feature film gives us Diana's full back story, starting with her life as a young girl on the paradisical island Themyscira, a place populated by the warrior women Amazons. The Amazons all seem to have supernaturally long life and physical strength, owing to their heritage as descendents of the ancient Greek gods. They remain isolated and cloaked from the rest of the world, however, as they are meant to serve as a line of last defense against an ancient foe of humankind. By unfortunate coincidence, the outside world eventually encroaches on Themyscira, during the final days of World War I. Upon learning of the horrible war happening outside of her safe cocoon, Diana leaves her home in order to track down the ancient Greek god whom she believes is responsible for the massive carnage of "The War to End All Wars."

The movie does a nice job of weaving a classic origin story within a larger framework of commentary about mankind's predilections for violence. The presentation of "Paradise Island" is just as visually stunning as you would hope of a big-budget, summer blockbuster, and the unfolding of Diana's backstory is handled well enough, even if there is nothing especially novel about it. The warrior women of the Amazon are presented as a considerable force, without being too heavy handed, or particularly creative, about showing it. As it should be, the fact that they are women is mostly coincidental, and more emphasis is placed on their abilities and unique place in the larger world. Diana's transition into a grimy, real world in the grips of a brutal war is conveyed well, with the contrast in color tones and costumes accentuating her shift from her idyllic, vibrant, and isolated home island into the chaotic and stark real world. However, the movie avoids a glaring flaw of its predecessors...

A major problem with the previous DCEU movies has been an overly dark tone that overwhelms nearly everything else about the pictures. Especially in Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman, the grim seriousness sucked nearly every last ounce of fun out of the movies. Wonder Woman deftly avoids this issue. While it does include the deeper themes of war, violence, and human compassion, the movie never loses sight of the fact that it is a superhero fantasy, and that fantasies are meant to be more than a little fun. Striking the balance between having a serious message and providing some entertainment isn't easy, but director Patty Jenkins pulls it off admirably.

Diana looks on in horror and rising fury at the carnage of
the first World War. Gadot brings highly credible emotion to
the picture, making her arguably the one element of the
movie that is truly standout.

Then there's Gal Gadot. It is difficult to imagine a better person to have played the single most famous female superhero in comic book history than Gadot. Obviously, she's gorgeous. Let's just agree that stunning looks don't hurt. But even more than that, she strikes just the correct tones that the story requires. Diana Prince is meant to be innately tough, capable, and trained as a warrior. Gadot conveys all of these characteristics and skills very convincingly (it came as little surprise for my wife and I to learn that she was a combat instructor in the Israeli army for two years). Just as important is how she portrays Diana as an idealistic, compassionate defender of the weak. This could easily have devolved into sentimentality or sappiness in the movie, but it never does. Instead, it all feels about as organic as a superhero fantasy can feel. This leads to more than a few moving sequences wherein the action on screen bears some legitimate emotional heft, even if the action itself hardly every rises above being passably entertaining.

I've alluded to a few less-than-oustanding elements of the film, but I can't say that I found anything to be a serious flaw. No, the dialogue isn't as crisp or clever as it probably could have been, but it's fine, even offering some solid chuckles along the way. The action isn't as engaging or kinetic as what we've seen in Marvel's last two Captain America movies, but it's mildly captivating at points. The overall story does, while offering some thoughtful themes, essentially become a fairly standard mano-a-mano punchout between Wonder Woman and the main adversary. All of these aspects fell short of being excellent, but they also never sunk to the sometimes-laughable shortcomings of the first three DCEU movies.

For popcorn movies like this, I gauge my enjoyment of them by asking myself whether I will ever watch it again. For Wonder Woman, my answer is that I probably will, but most likely not in the theater. While I did really enjoy seeing it for the first time, I don't see it as being a movie that offers the same entertainment returns upon repeat viewings. Whatever the case, it's great to see an action/adventure movie about a female character done right and strike a real chord with audiences.