#But by the time Jurassic World came out...they should have made it a complete reboot! | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

smokeybrand · 4 years ago

Text

Welcome Back

I am a card carrying geek. I was that nerd in grade school, reading comics, watching anime, and larping with his friends during recess. I’ve always loved things like books and film, mostly because my ma had a penchant for the sci-fi and we would share in her hobbies. I’ve been a fan of Doctor Who since i was a wee lil’ Smokey and had a particular fondness for Max Headroom’s shenanigans. My chosen proclivities lend themselves to alternate universes, divergent timeless, and the interdenominational doppelganger or two. What i am trying to convey, here, is that i am not stranger to the revisit of a franchise. For me, rebooting an established work or expanding a loved lore is not a transgression. I am a fan of narrative. If you can tell a unique story, it really doesn’t even have to be that good, but something creativity and compelling, i am totally on board. This isn't as difficult a feat as you'd think considering how well Hollywood can adapt international films. The Ring and The Departed are effectively remakes of their original Asian fare and those films are spectacular. Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy is the best example of this i can give. His deconstruction of the Batman mythos was one of the best cinematic and storytelling experiences I ever had. If you can take an established narrative, an established universe, and inject your own flavor into it, i am down for that, too. The Kelvin Star Trek timeline immediately comes to mind. Again, comic book guy, specifically a Spider-Man shill.

While i have years worth of alternate Spider-Men in the books to pull from, i think the most concise example i can give for a layman is to think Into the Spider-Verse, only with thousands more Spider-Men and Spider-Women. That’s the world I'm broaching this subject from, where there are decades worth of stories and reboots and remakes and reimagings, basically revisits, of a character that i absolutely love. Some are great like the Ultimate Spider-Man or the world of Renew Your Vows, and some are not so great, like that version Abrams’ kid came up with. That whole story was the worst. We have actually seen a little bit of this narrative reincarnation in the Spider-Man film franchise, itself, both good and bad. If we take the very first Spider-Man films, those campy, Raimi classics, as a starting point, then we had a terrible reboot in the Amazing franchise and a rather brilliant reimagining in the MCU outings. I really like the MCU retool. Tom Holland is THE onscreen Peter Parker and you can fight me about it all day.

Jurassic World and The Force Awakens are an interesting situation in the whole Revisit discourse. Both of these films are effectively reboots of the entire franchise and a whole ass remake of their initial entries. Beat for beat, theme for theme, these two films are basically the same as Jurassic Park and Episode IV, just less than they are in every conceivable fashion. Now, on paper, i should hate this but i don’t. There is a reason both of the imitations made billions for their respective franchise and that is simply nostalgia. We. as a culture, were starved for a Jurassic sequel and new Star War. When we got these movies in earnest, no one cared they were rehashes of the films that made them so important to the cultural zeitgeist. It was like seeing A New Hope and that initial outing to Isla Nublar for the first time, for a second time, but with much better effects. It had been decades since either of these movies had a proper release so we all just accepted that these were refresher courses in the lore. It was with the sequels that these things sh*t the bed so hard.

Fallen Kingdom and The Last Jedi skewed so far from what these franchises were, from the rules that had been established in the preceding films, including the first in their new trilogies, that they were offensive. Legitimately offensive. Jurassic World and The Force Awakens, as flawed as they were, left their worlds in respectable places. The narratives that could be built from those starting point were incredible. That potential was palpable. Lucas, himself, said that the stories should rhyme and you see that in his six films. Familiar yet different. Nostalgic yet original. Respectful yet original. None of that was recognized in the follow-ups and that is why these two franchises are on life support. It’s sad because there was potential there. Characters introduced were compelling and narrative threads left unties, could have become something great. Instead, expectations were subverted and the world completely sh*t on in an effort to be edgy, to distance itself from the established lore. That sh*t is whack. It’s not about being a fan of the franchise or a zealous istaphobe or whatever else the Twatter mob wants to accuse people of being. It’s about bad story telling. it’s abut a complete betrayal of a decades old franchise. It’s a bout being disingenuous with the property for personal gain.

I said at the beginning of this essay that i love a revisit. That’s why i went to see these sh*tty films. I also made very clear that i love storytelling. Fallen Kingdom and The Last Jedi lack in that fundamental aspect, that’s why they suck. They’ve done irreparable damage to the entire franchise and canon of these worlds that were so meticulously crafted by proper visionaries. Michael Crichton is rolling in his grave at what became of his Dinosaur Westworld and Lucas effectively bogarded his way into running Lucasfilm again after they sh*t on his legacy and that’s the thing; Legacy. These two franchises are part of American culture. They’re as revered as Apple Pie and Institutional Racism here. They’re not cash grabs or vehicles to push your politics. They’re modern fairy tales, myths, and should be respected as such. The thing is, though, i don’t believe there are actual creatives out there that have the vision to create like Crichton or Lucas anymore. Or, at least, Creatives that are willing to work within the constraints of this ridiculous studio system.

Modern film studios are disgustingly risk averse. That is a problem with anything making entertainment media nowadays but it’s most egregious in Hollywood. Films like Star Wars and Alien were made in a time when budgets didn’t swell to hundreds of millions of dollars so directors had to do what he could, with what they had, and that level of imagination birthed classics. It’s rare that creators get a blank check to deliver their vision nowadays, and even rarer that what they get to make if they receive that loot, is actually good. Zack Snyder and the train wreck that is Sucker Punch demonstrates my point perfectly. the new Lucases and Camerons are rare but there are a handful of directors who carry that torch. Denis Villeneuve is an incredible visual storyteller. He has a distinct vision for the grand and manages to craft proper worlds. Blade Runner 2049 is one of the best films i have ever seen in my life but it didn’t make money because people have been conditioned to ignore great storytelling for great effects. That sh*t is why people can say to me, with a straight face, that they think Batman v. Superman is better than The Dark Knight rises. That sh*t is stupid, shut the f*ck up. Deni was given the reigns to the Dune reboot and i think this might be the film that breaks him through to the mainstream.

Dune is a reboot. It looks like a revisit to the old David Lynch flick but with Deni’s penchant for the epic. This movie feels like what Jurassic World and The Force Awakens wanted to do; A respectful acknowledgment of what came before but an original take going forward. Dune is one of the greatest sci-fi novels ever written and Deni is one of the most profound visionaries in the game right now. I have no doubt the new film is going to be fantastic. This combination is a match made in heaven, similar to Alex Garland with Annihilation or, more accurately i think, Luca Guadagnino and Suspiria. Those two films are f*cking incredible and they adapt the source material in a very, specific, manner. Annihilation is a reimagining of the book and carries its own themes and tones while the new Suspiria is a complete reinterpretation of what came before, that i believe eclipses the original. Dune looks excellent but i don’t know that it will be well received. Deni has his work cut out for him because the world of revisits is riddle with the corpses of films that couldn’t care the weight of what came before or what could have been. Still, i don’t want Hollywood to stop. As unoriginal as remaking things is, i adore a fresh set of eyes on familiar fare. There are infinite ways to tell the same story and that’s the fun of revisiting an old tale.

2 notes · View notes

enixamyram · 6 years ago

Text

Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom Review

I hated it. So much.

Maisie was the ONLY good thing about it.

Spoilers bellow.

Honestly, this whole film just sucked and it’s hard to sum it up into why because there was just so much wrong but I’ll try and keep it was short as I can.

Repeating: If this was a reboot then you might get away with constant repeats, but this is meant to be a continuation so repeating the story line in the way that it did made no sense. Like, making ANOTHER new dinosaur without even addressing why the first one failed (aka, using DNA of a dino smarter than most humans) was so badly stupid. And selling dino’s after what happened in the last film has long since stopped making sense. THEY EVEN REPEATED THE EXACT SAME ROMANCE BETWEEN CLAIRE AND OWEN AS THEY DID IN THE LAST DAMN FILM! LIKE! IT WAS EXACTLY THE SAME! RIGHT DOWN TO A SINGLE RANDOM KISS AT THE MOST RANDOM F*****G TIME!!!

Never addressing the actual issue: It’s like the film wants to start the debate about whether or not they SHOULD save the dino’s... Without ever actually discussing it. Like there are genuine arguments for and against it and not a single one is offered. The most we ever hear is Claire basically using an excuse which essentially boils down to “they’re cool and your kids will get to see them”. Like, not once does anyone discuss that a) dino’s are living creatures now and we have other dangerous animals so why should we not save the dino’s the way we save other animals. Or b) they’re too dangerous to be allowed to live so we need to wipe them out before they wipe us out. Even Jeff’s two second cameo only ever talks about what the Scientists have started with bringing the dino’s back and never actually about the dino’s themselves! My god! Talk about the actual issue already! There are so many things you could say!

Too much focus on the humans: Sorry, but the dino’s are literally the films selling point. But even on the island where the dino’s are dying, we spend so much damn time focused on the humans struggling to survive than any of the dino’s! We get a single shot of one dinosaur at the very end, and then that’s it. And sorry but none of the humans (except maybe Maisie) are at all interesting enough to carry this film alone.

Still not addressing the actual issue: At the very end they almost discuss why they can’t just release dino’s into the world, but even that is barely touched and then quickly brushed aside. And the scene where Maisie releases them would have been sweeter if her cloning had been more centre stage, but again, like a lot of the deeper meanings, that was also barely touched upon. I feel like Maisie should have had a break down about not being real, and maybe Claire comforts her and confirms she is real, and then that would prompt the line “they’re real like me” later when she frees them.

Dino’s aren’t a big deal any more... Except they are?: Like, the first Jurassic World film made a big damn deal about how dino’s weren’t a big deal any more. Everyone saw them and everyone was getting bored of them now. It was the whole point of the film, which was why they made a new dino, to get everyone’s attention back. Again. This was a big damn deal! And yet, once again, in this film, all the dino’s are still treated as something magic. The female vet (who’s name I can never remember) was so stunned and Claire kind of hugged her and I was just sat wondering... Why?!?!?! Like, this is another one that could have been cleaned up in like two sentences - Claire: “why did you never come to the park?” vet: “couldn’t afford it.” there! done! Stupid scene cleaned up like that! But no, we need whimsy without actual effort so we get this instead.

Typical bad guys are bad because money!: Yeah, the villains were as bland and stupid as ever. I didn’t understand why Wu had suddenly decided to make ANOTHER new dino after what happened the last time. I mean, before it made sense cause it was his job and all but now I don’t even know what it’s about at this point. Meanwhile the other villains are all perfectly happy to sell dino’s even knowing they’re too dangerous to actually be used and such because... Money.

Some scenes made no damn sense and were dumb: Like, yeah, Claire once helped/watched blood be taken from a human so yeah, of course she can take blood from a massive dino with a completely different body structure. I mean, I once clipped my own nails so of course I can declaw a cat! So the whole, blood transfusion was really dumb/unnecessary and led to absolutely nothing and it wasn’t the only scene either. Hell, even the opening scene was utterly pointless, especially when you realise we could have focused on more interesting story details like the island blowing up.

... Okay.

I’ve ranted as much as I can remember/sum up at this moment in time. So let’s talk about the good things. Or rather, the good thing. Singular.

Maisie.

I loved her. I liked the actress and I liked the story! I guessed she was a clone about halfway through but it was still a good twist because of the hints. One scene I really liked - that no one ever seemed to notice before I pointed it out to them but when I did everyone’s been like “oh yeah!” - is when Maisie opens the locked door and peeks out. And we get this close up shot of her eye... Well, who else gets lots of close ups of their eye? Dino’s of course. So little stuff like that made the twist that she was a clone really cool/interesting. All in all her story was new and exciting and I really liked it! Sadly she couldn’t save the film but she did have good scenes at the very least.

I like what the film was trying to do, aka, build to the actual Jurassic World. I mean, they did a nice bit of world building... Or tried to. But because this film sucked so bad, it’s impossible for me to enjoy what could come next. Like the dino’s running around our world should have been a bigger deal but, again, the bigger deal has yet to be addressed and so it sucked down the ending a bit.

I also have a theory:

I like this theory and even though the new hybrid dino (whom me and my friend call Wasp btw cause I can never remember its actual name and it has a yellow streak over its side) died at the end of the film. I know it’s most likely not anything but I still like my theory anyway. I wish Wasp hadn’t died and then we could have done more with her but anyway, my theory.

They wanted Blue so as to bond her with Wasp and make Wasp easier to control. Well my theory is that Wasp bonded with Maisie instead. I dunno, the very first scene, Wasp brushes her claw through Maisie’s hair and even though she chases her a lot, we never actually see her attack. She’s always interrupted or Maisie runs and hides. So yeah, I have a theory that Wasp bonded with Maisie on that day because they’re both a clone of some sort. - Again, imagine how cool a story this would have been?

Summary:

In an hour me and my friend came up with like, seven different ideas that would have been better than the rehash they gave us. It was all a repeat - and not even in an Easter egg kind of way - and that made it boring. The only good was the new stuff (Maisie) and even that wasn’t enough and should have been developed more. All in all I was beyond let down with this film - and I wasn’t even that interested to begin with. In fact I enjoyed the new Cinema seats more than I did the actual film.

3 out of 10 from me. And those 3 points are all for Maisie.

#Anti Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom #Jurassic World #Review #Maisie Lockwood

19 notes · View notes

smokeybrandreviews · 4 years ago

Text

Welcome Back

0 notes

impurelight · 6 years ago

Text

Avengers Endgame Official Trailer - Bashing On Avengers 3 and 4 Is So Easy It's Almost Sad

So, the 'official' trailer for Avengers 4 came out. Funny, I thought the previous 2 trailers were the official trailers. Anyways. I posted something about the first trailer and something on Captain Marvel about how I think Avengers 3 ruined that movie.

I don't think I have to say that both posts are very negative on Avengers 3 and 4. I am aware of the superbowl ad for Avengers 4 but I didn't really think it was that noteworthy due to being so short. But, yes, it was an utter disgrace too. Especially compared to the Captain Marvel trailer that was also shown in the superbowl that actually showed action.

I actually posted a reddit comment on how I didn't like the Avengers 4 official trailer. It said this:

Using epic music to cover up the fact that nothing happens 90% of the time again? At least they didn't have Robert Downey Jr. monologue for the first third of the trailer this time. Now he only monologues the first fifth of the trailer. And what's with the random black and white? I know they're from previous movies, I don't need to be bashed over the head with that information. Perhaps they're trying to tone the scenes down so they look as boring as the rest of the trailer. Prepared to be even more disappointed in this movie than Infinity War.

And then I added this part:

So many downvotes. Keep them coming. 'This is not not a disagree button.' Lol.

And then I stopped getting downvotes. Probably because if I act too trollish people will just ignore me because I'm obviously craving attention. True trolling is the art of getting people to react without thinking. This actually meshes into my idea that people are lazy evaluators. If you don't make them think they just react. But if you do make them think they think, "Hmm... should I really be downvoting this?" And then they're like, "Nah, this guy is obviously trolling. Don't feed the trolls."

Because I like downvotes. It's pretty annoying if the guy you're arguing with downvotes everything you say but the absolute value of a downvote is an upvote so they're actually pretty similar. They both mean someone read what you said and reacted.

But anyways, the trailer. I'd like to take a moment and expand on my comment and what I think about the trailer. The first thing I noticed upon watching the trailer was the amount of people just staring for no reason. In the honest trailers for Agents of Shield they said it had S.T.A.R.E.S: Slowly Turning, Acting, Reacting, and Emoting Silently. And I never really noticed in Agents of Shield. But I noticed instantly in the trailer. There are just so many S.T.A.R.E.S's in this trailer. S.T.A.R.E.S's practically make up the first half of this trailer.

And I know there are some action scenes and some scenes that are supposed to mean something. Like Hawkeye training someone to shoot arrows. You know, that scene actually reminds me of Avengers 2 where they just hid out in his house for way too much time. Which is really annoying. Avengers 4 is shaping up to be my most hated parts of Avengers 2 combined with my most hated parts of Avengers 3. Now if there's a 5 minute bar scene that'll just be too much.

But the thing about the scenes are they're so disjointed. You know how sometimes trailers are edited so one scene in the trailer is actually 2 scenes that happen at different times sometimes in completely unrelated areas? Yeah, now I know why they do that. Because they want to tell some sort of story with the trailer. Even if it's as simple as the car hit the truck so the truck crashed. This trailer has no story. It's like someone vomited up a series of random events. Some of the scenes could have been interesting if they just gave me a little more like that one where they guy is being chased by fire. But no, they just drop it like they're too lazy to try to edit it in so it looks nice. This does not give me hope that they'll even try to address the fact that Avengers 3 had too many characters.

It's just so boring. Nothing is happening. OK, I should probably mention there is the black and white parts of this trailer that I will get to later. They're just so bad. But at the same time we get this blaring music which makes it feel epic even though the actual content is boring. How do I know? Because they did the same trick in the first trailer. No, I am not falling for that again. Come to think of it I don't think I even fell for it the first time. But I'm not falling for that the first time either.

So now the Robert Downey Jr. monologuing bit. This really bugged me about the first trailer. And they did it again here! In the first trailer he rambles on for roughly 50 seconds. Now he rambles for only 30. Good job Marvel you almost managed to cut it in half. This is not Iron Man 4, although it probably should be as Avengers is supposed to be Marvel's flagship not some piece of trash that all the other movie franchises dump random stuff into.

And I'm actually pretty concerned. 50 seconds of monologuing in the first trailer. 30 in the second. So that's almost one and a half minutes of monologuing. Maybe they'll just cut it in the final release but if he monologues for like 1 and a half minutes that may be even worse than the 5 minute bar scene in Avengers 2. We'll see.

Now the random white and black scenes. Like WTF Marvel. Plenty of other trailers take content from prequels and sequels and reboots. Why couldn't you do that without messing it up? It's like you're holding a giant neon sign that says: "Look everyone! This scene is different! See how different it is!"

It is just... why? What is the point? It is just annoying. It killed any enjoyment I got from the trailer. Now, I said that "Perhaps they're trying to tone the scenes down so they look as boring as the rest of the trailer." Maybe a bit harsh, it's probably not because of that. But why then? Why do you have to drag me out of the trailer to point out something I already know? Why!?!

But it could. These are the only good shots from the trailer. But these scenes actually fit. They talk about Iron Man and they show Iron Man. That's a good trailer. The flying through Asgard (Isn't that destroyed now? Why bother showing it?) is a great shot. Why mark these scenes? If you took away all the black and white shots the trailer would be even worse. Like a super long boring version of the superbowl ad.

So those are my extended thoughts on Avengers 4. I can't believe how fun it is to bash Avengers 3 and 4. Well, if the general opinion of something is really high and my opinion is really low it's fun to talk about. Especially as I'm logically right.

There are some people very vocal of their dislike of Avengers 3, myself included. I would really like to see Avengers 4 crash and burn. But it's not going to happen. I mean if Jurassic World 2 made tons of money despite being almost universally hated I doubt any Marvel movie will do bad financially. I guess the lesson here is this: Don't vote with your wallets because it doesn't work. Rant about it on the internet instead.

#Avengers 4 #avengers endgame #Avengers

0 notes

reminiscent-bells · 8 years ago

Text

RIP(?) Idle Thumbs

And now, a bunch of nerd BS about a podcast.

I went back and did the math the other day and I’ve been listening to Idle Thumbs for about 5 years. (First episode: #84, “Nineties Cockpit Freakout”.) I started listening because I lived in South San Francisco and commuted on BART/Muni to San Francisco proper every day, a trip of about 2 hours one way - I needed something to pass the time and knew that podcasts were big, and someone online suggested it.

I was hooked pretty much immediately. As the label says, it’s “a podcast about video games”, although over time the scope of that has creeped to include board games, movies (okay, mostly Jurassic Park), “live experiences” (e.g. escape rooms), and a ton of other stuff. The hosts have created/been involved in the creation of two of the most-talked-about games of the past several years, Gone Home and Firewatch, been accused by 4Chan of being the conspirators leading a vast feminist cabal dedicated to destroying video games, finally met ‘cast muse Jeff Goldblum in person, and, obviously, rebuilt their recording studio as a tribute to the secure conference room from Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

Not too surprisingly after roughly 8 years, the current core crew of the rotating stable of Thumbs have stated that last week’s episode 300(!!!) marked a stepping-down of the weekly production schedule in favor of pursuing a new project, “Important If True”, a more freewheeling discussion about science, entertainment, and technology. It’s not dead and buried (a new “bagblast” episode devoted to going through the show’s always-stuffed, always-fascinating email inbox, is slated for next week, and future episodes have not been ruled out), but it feels like there’s a smoggy orange Los Angeles sunset gel across the sky, y’know?

I’m usually not the person who writes this kind of thing, having been bred from the kind of New England family that subtly demands any display of emotion deeper than a hug be crushed, Giles Corey-like, into the earth, but the show has been a real source of peace of mind for me over the years - something to laugh about when things seemed grim, and a friend of sorts when real friends were far away. Here are some of my picks for episodes you should listen to - I mostly recommend it if you’re into video games, as that’s what most of the chatter is about, but there may be bits and pieces here you’ll enjoy even if that’s not your thing. Heck, even the episode descriptions themselves can be pretty funny, as they gradually evolve from staid descriptions of the episode contents to something more elaborate and strange.

103: A Person-Shaped Thing Is A Person: The origin(?) of Robot News, a recurring segment about the coming robot apocalypse, where the team extrapolates out the Petman robot to its logical conclusion (i.e.killing people)

107: GIANTBOMB.COM / 110: That Thing That You Needed To Say: I think (or at least I like to think) everyone has a point in life where they realize Corporations Are Not Your Friend. This duology-of-sorts, about E3 2013 and the dueling Microsoft/Sony press conferences, is a solid autopsy of several days of multimillion dollar spin.

159: Wilson’s Ghoulish Countenance: The first episode with games critic Danielle Riendeau as a regular cohost, this marks the beginning of a really great run of episodes. I wouldn’t call it a golden age, because one of the great things about the show is how there’s not really a core group of hosts and each change in the crew steers things in a different direction, but if you don’t want to start from the beginning, this is a good place to jump in.

165: KeLo. Is. Here.: The show is sometimes at its best when something completely non-game-related drives the conversation. Exhibit A is this episode, which is mostly focused around a weird dream cohost Nick Breckon had.

171: The Curious Case of the Rhode Island Reader: Strangely, I remember this being one of my favorite episodes, but I couldn’t tell you why.

172: http://malaise.ennui/: Easily one of the great lost games of this decade is Silent Hills, a sequel to the long-running horror game franchise Silent Hill by film director Guillermo del Toro, game director Hideo Kojima, and The Walking Dead actor Norman Reedus. Hills died on the vine following the collapse of publisher Konami’s video games division, but not before producing a nightmarish demo, P.T., which in turn produced this great episode discussing horror games.

196: Ode On A Grecian Hat Sale: The first(?) in a series of discussions about the weird, seedy underground world of hat trading in popular shooter Team Fortress 2. (See also 208: Buds Are Out, Keys Are In)

200: The Idle Thumbs Super Show: The first show where all cohosts to date (”the sixpack”) are present is both an absolute zoo and an absolute treat.

234: Mister Neighbor: This might be another good jumping-on point. This is technically a few episodes after Danielle left and James “Spaff” Spafford came (back) on, but it’s the first of a more introspective series of episodes, for lack of a better term.

245: Psyching Out That Bear through 248: The Bear’s Black Heart: The “bear saga”, which I can’t say anything about for fear of spoiling the ending, which is the funniest moment of maybe the whole run and had me laughing until I thought I was going to puke.

270: BIG GAME HUCKSTER$$$$: A really sharp, insightful discussion on video games and gambling.

295: Good...Bye through 299: Somebody, Somewhere, Somehow, Something: Yeah, it’s a little precious to pick the last big block of Thumbs episodes as the end of this list, but these are stuffed to the gills with what makes the show great - BSing about game interface minutiae, spinning out vast, elaborate theories about pointless game lore (see the discussion of Mario’s dark destiny in 298), and old friends hanging out. Even 299, where it becomes clear that some kind of end is nigh, is a genuine great episode.

If you made it this far, I’ll plug for some of their other shows: Important If True is hilarious, get in on the ground floor now. Danielle didn’t go far and cohosts spinoff show Idle Weekend, which has a very different pace but is very much worth your time, The Idle Book Club is a thoughtful monthly discussion of a novel that has really helped me get out of my reading comfort zone and try new things (you can start from episode 10 when they essentially rebooted the show), and Twin Peaks Rewatch is a great companion to get prepped for the show’s return in May.

The end! Fuck Nick Breckon Congrats Nick!

#video games #idle thumbs #rip

1 note · View note

furederiko · 7 years ago

Photo

My 2nd and last Random-News-Digest for the month of November!

(Images courtesy of Disney Pixar Studio, Walt Disney Pictures, Marvel Comics, Marvel Studios, and CAPCOM. Taken from Official Trailers and/or Official Sites)

Pocket Monsters

This was actually a news from earlier this month. But since I was more focused on the launch of "Pokemon Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon" on my previous R-N-D, I've decided to put this on hold.

Variety reported that young actor Justice Smith has been cast as the male lead of "Detective Pikachu". Smith will be playing the human companion of the titular character, who was seemingly a brunette-haired white boy in the video game. I'm not that much familiar with Smith, but the change on the race angle is acceptable because it shows that Hollywood is being proactive in casting POC actors as lead. Of course, the main question in everyone's mind, is WHO will be voicing Detective Pikachu himself. Will Danny DeVito, the actor that seems to be on every fans' wishlist get the part? We'll see...

Disney Animation

The much awaited and demanded sequel among Pixar Studio's roster, "The Incredibles 2", delivered its first poster and official teaser. The teaser might be really brief, as it only features Craig T. Nelson's character and the little baby Jack-Jack showcasing his numerous superpowers. But it didn't stop it from snatching every attention and breaking record along the way. According to various sources, the story will focus on Holly Hunter's Elastigirl and their older kids, while Mr. Incredible is stuck babysitting. Will that be a good storypoint for a sequel? Can this one be better than the likes of... I don't know, "Monsters University", "Finding Dory", or at the very least this year's "Cars 3"? We'll see when the movie arrives in Summer 2018...

Thankfully, at the same time the studio's "Coco" also captured the Thanksgiving holiday buzz, and gained an immense positive reaction from families. The A+ Cinema Score result was a solid win, as the hispanic-themed musical easily defeated the might of DC superheroes to be the number 1 movie over the weekend. It also proved that Pixar still has what it takes to churn out original stories, and not rely on sequels. I strongly hope this movie will have a strong leg going forward, and becomes a financial success as well. Even if to encourage the studio, and other animation studios to work on more originals.

Disney Live Action

If you think the teaser for Ava DuVernay's "A Wrinkle in Time" was weird, then wait till you see its full official trailer. It doesn't look A BIT like DuVernay's previous work, "Selma", that's for sure. LOL. This feels like what you'd get if "Doctor Strange" is combined with an equal dose of bright colors and wackiness from "Thor: Ragnarok" and "Guardians of the Galaxy", with a mixture of a "Chronicles of Narnia" movies and James Cameron's "Avatar" in the story department. I might be scratching my head hearing all those pseudo-science mumbo jumbo, but I also really want to see Oprah Winfrey, Mindy Kaling, Zach Galifianakis, and particularly Michael Peña being weird deities or something like that. My only concern, is that this also reminds me of Brad Bird's "Tomorrowland". With a POC female director behind the wheels, I genuinely want this movie to succeed. So let's just hope it does NOT end up like that Disney movie. March 9th, 2018 can't come soon enough.

Niki Caro's "Mulan" reimagining has found its lead actress. Crystal Liu, or Liu Yifei has been selected over 1000 candidates to portray Fa Mulan. In case it's not obvious enough, Liu is 100% Chinese, so there's no whitewashing this one. She's a very popular name in her home country, though honestly this is the first time I have heard of her. Not surprisingly too, she has had experiences with Hollywood having been part of action movies like "The Forbidden Kingdom" and 2014's "Outcast". So... not exactly an unknown name, huh? Disney is not taking any chances, I suppose. But oh well, at least we won't be hearing whitewashing complains anytime soon. Now if only Godfrey Gao could be cast as Captain Li Shang. He IS, around the same age range to Liu, right? Mmhmmmmm *nods* *grins*

Jurassic Park

"Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom" had shared its first official image. Coming straight from writer Colin Trevorrow's twitter account, it portrayed Chris Pratt's Owen Grady with his son... er, I mean a baby Velociraptor. Hmmm... those who have seen the first "Jurassic World" and possess a logical brain, would quickly question one thing: WHY ON EARTH do these guy still mess around with the dinosaurs, instead of leaving them be?! Seriously, Owen might be a Raptor trainer, but these creatures almost killed him too!

Trevorrow's name has been painted rather 'negatively' thanks to his departure from "Star Wars", so many people have been watching this title closely whether it will get the same effect of his "Book of Henry" or not. Of course, J.A. Bayona is the director for this one, but who can really tell what kind of influence Trevorrow brings, right? "Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom" roars into theatres on June 22nd, 2018. You might want to wait a little longer to see a trailer...

DC Films

When filmmakers keep on using lame excuses like "This movie is made for fans and not critics" to explain bad reviews, then... well, that's exactly what you get. Only fans... in fact, just half of them and not all, came to see "Justice League" on opening weekend. I'm not trying to throw a shade or being sarcastic here... (or am I, you decide), but the first weekend performance for the movie? It was NOT good. It even didn't reach the minimum expectation number. Great goodness, where did all those so-called devoted DC fans go?! #SARCASM

I know this news has been reported pretty much everywhere, but let's have a quick recap of what happened. Signs of trouble were already apparent when the movie had a somewhat 'troubling' start on Thursday, November 16th. Comic book adaptations, and in particular DC properties tend to be massively frontloaded, because unlike other studios, Warner Bros usually opened their movies on the same dates worldwide. So the fact that it had a dismal Thursday night was quite a surprise. But it was still a higher number than critically received Wonder Woman, giving it a glitter of hope. Then Friday sum came along, and it was another disappointing number. Again, still better than Gal Gadot's solo movie. But then the overall weekend estimation came out, and the concern was justified. "Justice League" 'only' took $96m domestically, which was a 'disaster' for a movie featuring not one or two, but SIX of DC's iconic superheroes. Some folks were still spinning a positive point of view, saying that it at least had passed the lowest speculated number (which was $95m, by the way). Oh no, it got bett... er I mean, worse. The ACTUAL revenue wasn't even inline with those numbers, as the movie merely achieved ALMOST $94m. OUCH!!!

As I've talked about in an earlier category, last weekend the movie quickly fell down from its top spot, thanks to "Coco" dominating the Thanksgiving holiday. The movie might have passed $480m worldwide in its 2nd week, but judging from the family power of that Disney Pixar movie that has yet to open in European countries, combined with the wonders of "Wonder", and strong leg of "Thor: Ragnarok"... can we even expect "Justice League" to perform much better compared to previous titles on its kins? I doubt. The movie is still on the path of 'biggest bomb' of 2017 if not all time, and is prone to inflict loss for the studio. Of course, should we even be surprised about it, when even the underestimated "Power Rangers" fared better than this movie?

Say what you will to defend this movie, but to WB it all comes back to nothing but business. You can even call this, an unmitigated disaster. This low number would totally influences the executives' upcoming decision regarding their Movie Universe. Seriously, because this is NOT the first of its kind (already the fifth, in case you forgot), yet the opening numbers of each movies continue to decline. It's an ambitious ensemble movie that the studio boldly expected to perform as big as Marvel Studios' 2012 "The Avengers", but wasn't able to even achieve the same response to an obscure team of "Guardians of the Galaxy". Compared to WB's own DC catalogue, even the oft-ridiculed campy had "Batman Forever" opened higher! That might be acceptable in the eyes of 'fans' or average moviegoers, but for a studio as big as WB? Likely NOT. Especially when they still can focus on other more beneficial franchises like "Kong: Skull Island" or... the next category *grins*.

Could we be heading towards another Dark Universe situation here? Really though, I think I can actually agree with a reboot or some sort, so the universe can keep the good parts (like Gadot's Diana Prince) and pretty much ditch or change everything else. Ben Affleck is on his way out anyway, and Henry Cavill's prospect to continue with his version of Superman has become very dim because he has completed his obligation. "Aquaman" and "Wonder Woman 2" will still be released. "Shazam!" is set to start production early next year, but its script might be reworked to safely exclude the character from the continuity. An idea that I'm totally ALL IN! *grins*. Matt Reeves' "The Batman" will be set in an entirely different Bat-Family-verse, possibly alongside Joss Whedon's "Batgirl" (no, Whedon is NOT fired or anything like rumored. Seriously, what is wrong with you DC Fans?!). And that R-rated "Deathstroke" movie might still see the light of day, even if because its lead actor is desperate keen to have it made. But the rest of the movies planned or talked about? You might not want to get your hopes up for them too soon, to avoid disappointments. Unless... the studio decides to resort to "Flashpoint" for a soft reboot.

Anyway, back to "Justice League" for a bit before I wrap up this category. Apparently some fans are already hilariously campaigning for the studio to release a Zack Snyder 'Director's Cut' version of the movie. Not surprising, considering WB had indeed DONE that TWICE already with the garbage that were "Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice" and "Suicide Squad". Three times the charm, huh? To the point that they are desperate enough to do practically ANYTHING to get what they want... as reported by a movie critic whose name has been illegitimately used for 'the cause'. *sigh* Here we go again...

No offense to those 'over-passionate' people, but this is EXACTLY the problem with these fraction of DC fans. They are quick to act without properly thinking about things first. Why? 1) As Batman-News has pointed out, WB did NOT like Snyder's cut. He screened his unfinished version, like 10 effing months ago. So naturally, Snyder could NOT have his 'version' done considering WB immediately handed over the job to Whedon, who took over the entirety of the movie's post production. If a 'Director's Cut' these fans are asking, then that would be Whedon's and not Snyder's. 2) Despite the fact Snyder showed support in one, or how his cinematographer is dying to see one, his Director's Cut version would obviously require additional funding to finish. Don't forget that despite the worldwide response that leans towards positive, the movie's theatrical release might end up as a financial LOSS to WB. That pretty much prevents WB from spending extra money for another retool. They would be crazy to shower more money into this already-expensive movie just to please fans (for as much as they say they make movies for them, they don't actually give a damn). Unless of course, Snyder pulls a Ridley Scott and finished his version with his own money. Meaning, he probably would need to buy the movie's rights, and pay for all the visual effects, etcetera etcetera. 3) This petition proves that instead of going to the theatres to see the movie again to... I don't know, boost its revenue number, these fans would rather whine and demand for a HOME VIDEO release. No wonder the opening weekend was low! 4) I'll have to repeat my previous criticism here. If WB will indeed release an 'Ultimate' or 'Extended' home video version, then... well, the more the reason to NOT see this in theatres now, right? No kidding, why would we waste money on a half-baked product?! Just wait a few months, and we can see the whole thing with just a bit of extra money, right? That's the easy logic right there, and precisely the method I took to see these DC Films titles until now. The fact that WB had done it twice, is also the reason why some folks I know blatantly REFUSE to see the movie in theatres. After all, nobody would want to be fooled more than TWICE, right?

Fans be fans, and expecting them to change would be beyond comprehension. But at the very least, I hope on the other side of the table, both WB and DC Entertainment are learning the correct lessons from this outcome. Things as general as... don't rush into things, don't put too much stuff without proper payoffs, focus on telling a good story, or don't treat audience like they are stupid, to the most philosophical one like stay humble, be nice to others (whether its fans, critics or other studios), and stop trying to best a rival who's already waaaay ahead in their game *sigh*.

I'm not rejoicing or being rude or anything, but I believe DC direly needs to hit the reset button on the movies. And if it's possible, ditch WB completely if they want to do this right. Much of the DC Films ordeal actually have gotten to do with the studio execs meddling too much and demanding so many things that has continued damaging the properties. DC fans DESERVE better movies, and I don't think this flawed universe can hold it up anymore. Much like how Rebirth 'deleted' New 52, time to create a clean slate for the movie universe as well! If it works in the comics, why not, right? In the end, I think DC should just stick to what they do best, or better than the competitor: TELEVISION. FYI, this is what they get from not utilizing or banking in the same actors from those successful CW shows. Told ya so...

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

Bring on "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald"!

Yes, I might be the odd man out, but I'm genuinely more interested to see what the "Fantastic Beasts" franchise has to offer next instead of DC Films. I admit, my favorite part of the first movie was Eddie Redmayne's Newt Scamander Pokede... I mean Private Zoo, so I felt pretty disappointed that the sequel will focus on Johnny Depp's Gellert Grindelwald. But the words of executive producer David Heyman has made me highly intrigued. Talking to Entertainment Weekly, he said that the sequel will have "a very different feel than the first. It’s got a thriller quality. And it’s also a story about love and passion and all its forms — paternal, romantic, political. And it’s just a thrilling and very fun adventure.". That 'thriller' aspect is enough to catch my attention. Can we expect to see a darker turn, possibly involving Jude Law's young Albus Dumbledore? How will Scamander and his Scooby-gang be properly integrated into this situation without sacrificing the things that made them interesting?

Heyman also teased that the movie will look more 'dynamic' with "contemporary cinematic approach". Despite the time setting being maaaaany years prior to "Harry Potter"? Now THAT is what I'm curious to see too. I hope the end result will not mirror the issue with "Star Wars" or "The Lord of the Rings" franchise. Remember how their prequel stories look waaay more advance (in visual and also... actor's age LOL) than their original stories? "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" opens on November 16th, 2018.

X-Men Universe

According to a very fresh report that just came in yesterday, apparently talks between Disney and FOX about the latter's movie and TV division have resurfaced. It's still rumor for now, but I'm not surprised if it's true. Other corporations, including SONY and Comcast have approached FOX for the same proposition, so it makes perfect sense that Disney will up their game and pursue the deal more rapidly. After all, FOX had some movie copyrights that would benefit Disney greatly. As I've mentioned before, there will be pros and cons if this acquisition becomes a reality. Naturally, fans everywhere are already filled with logical and occasionally pointless concerns over the fate of FOX's Marvel movies. A bit premature, if you ask me, but I guess that's what makes the internet such a fun and... crazy place. Let's just see how this turns out, okay!

Meanwhile, actress Lizzy Caplan has entered negotiations to play the lead female actress in Channing Tatum's "Gambit". It's still unclear if she will be portraying Bella Donna Boudreaux, considering actress Lea Seydoux had previously been attached to the role. Assuming the script has not gone through massive alteration, that could very well be the character Caplan has been offered. At least, that's the general notion in many people's head for the time being. Of course, things could have evolved since the movie was first promoted as a sexy thriller heist, so it's not yet a sure thing until it is confirmed. Directed by Gore Verbinski, "Gambit" will arrive on February 14th, 2019.

Marvel Studios

This here is the main reason why this R-N-D got postponed a few days to the end of November: the first trailer of "Avengers: Infinity War". Yes, OFFICIALLY available worldwide around 8,5 hours ago (following the 08.00AM EST premiere on Good Morning America), it's Marvel Studios' answer to the crazy buzzing cries of demand that got many people... uhm, emotionally riled up. It has gotten to the point that people have been shamelessly leaking actual footages from the movie itself. Not cool people, NOT cool.

I personally didn't really need to see a trailer for this movie. But I'm not gonna lie, the HYPE machine was tooo strong, that well... a not-so-strong-on-the-inside guy like yours truly would easily got swept away. I think ANY fans of the Marvel Studios release would be weak for this kind of thing. LOL. Is the trailer any good? You're kidding, right? Of course! #MINDBLOWING. It teases that the movie lives up to its somber title, and... that's all I'm going to say, as you need to see it yourself to have the full experience (I almost had a heart attack when I first saw it... Oh, Vision T_T). Beside, every entertainment sites will surely be talking about it, excessively analyzing every details that will decorate their pages. For at least two weeks ahead (if it hasn't started before... LOL) until its Disney-cousin "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" comes knocking on everyone's door. "Avengers: Infinity War" arrives on May 4th, 2018. But I'm sure you're already aware about that... XD

True to what Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige had promised, said trailer arrived in November. Timed perfectly just a few days after Vanity Fair unveiled its special coverage (published on November 27th, to be precise) to that much-talked-about exclusive photoshoot that took place in Pinewood Atlanta Studio last month. A grand celebration to the studio's 10 years of enduring success. For the record, Vanity Fair held their own separate photoshoot featuring only 32 out of 83 people involved in the event (a small percent are likely directors, writers, and producers), so the actual result of said event is still big question marks to any of us. Thankfully, the magazine's coverage is a marvelous substitute. It details the studio's journey and rise to fame from an independently-funded team into a billion dollar maker. It also pushes Feige's hidden personal story to the spotlight, exposing the key ingredient to the Marvel Cinematic Universe's success and global domination: FANBOY FEIGE himself. Go ahead and visit Vanity Fair to read the entire coverage, alongside its coupling stories about the superhero looks and look back to "Iron Man". Those are really good and highly recommended reads!

"Ant-Man and the Wasp" has officially wrapped on November 20th. This one was finally confirmed by director Peyton Reed himself and lead actress Evangeline Lilly. Lead actor Paul Rudd on the other hand, had some fun on HBO's "Night of Too Many Stars" benefit show, flaunting his latest Ant-Man suit while making a joke about his previous movie "I Love You, Man". I personally loved this comedy, so I fully understand what he's saying. The end of production also filmed a rather spoilerific scene in Hawaii, featuring Michael Douglas' Hank Pym and Michelle Pfeiffer's Janet van Dyne. You might want to avoid that link if you don't like spoilers. Anyway, with "Infinity War" trailer out on the market, the greedy question now is: When can we get one for this movie? LOL. "Ant-Man and the Wasp" opens in July 6th, 2018.

On the "Captain Marvel" side of things, the one and only Jude Law has entered talks to portray a key role: the original Captain Marvel... Dr. Walter Lawson a.k.a. Kree Warrior Mar-Vell himself. Mar-Vell is an important figure in the Marvel universe, because not only he's partially responsible for Carol Danvers' powers, he's also the father of another superhero, and a Guardians of the Galaxy member. Having this character in the MCU is inevitable, because I'm sure his involvement will bleed into the next 'Phase' paving way for new characters. And of course, if Law agrees to accept this role (which I think he will), then we'll have two pair of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson in the MCU! If there's one thing Marvel Studios' movies are always good at, it's in their choice of picture-perfect A-list casting. To think that Law wasn't even the first big name who was approached for this part...

The Hollywood Reporter coverage of the same story, seemingly confirmed that actor Ben Mendelsohn has officially become part of the movie's ensemble. Although many have speculated that he could be playing a Skrull Commander, it looks like he could be portraying another key role in Brie Larson's Carol Danvers' ascension to hero: the super villain Yon-Rogg! Not that I'm surprised, of course, regardless of the source's... uhm... lack of credibility. Lastly, a report stated that the movie's production has undergone another schedule change. Apparently, production for the movie is now expected to begin early March to mid-July. However, casting process have already begun because several key roles are expected to film earlier in January. Are they needed for "Avengers 4" then? Quite possibly. Larson herself has already been confirmed to be part of it, which also explains the swift progress the studio is taking with Mendelsohn. With the same reason, I think we can expect follow up regarding Law's status in the near future as well. "Captain Marvel" might be released on March 8th, 2019, but her buzz is already getting louder and louder everyday!

As for what's next? Well... this is where things get rather startling. In a fascinating mysterious way. In the Vanity Fair coverage, Feige confirmed that the May 3rd, 2019 "Avengers 4" will indeed bring a finale or some sort. "There will be two distinct periods. Everything before Avengers 4 and everything after. I know it will not be in ways people are expecting.", he stated. But about that 'everything after'? He revealed that the studio has already mapped not one, not two, and definitely not just three movies after the UNTITLED Avengers movie... but TWENTY COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ONES. Calling that as a 'big plan' would be a huge understatement. Okay, assuming the pattern of releasing 3 movies per year goes on, that means we'll be getting around 6 more years of MCU after 2019. Feige wasn't kidding (he's a man of his words) when he said the studio have plans until 2025. But what will they be?

We know that a sequel to "Spider-Man: Homecoming" is set to be the third 2019 release. "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" from James Gunn (who was recently generous enough to share his first draft while providing details regarding the second movie) will spearhead 2020, while paving way for more cosmic branches. Scott Derrickson probably had already signed up a directorial return to do a sequel of "Doctor Strange" in the same year, opening the portals to more multidimensional journeys. Both "Black Panther" and "Captain Marvel" will most definitely get sequels. Perhaps, we'll get another bromancing Thor and Hulk by Taika Waititi as follow-up to his "Thor: Ragnarok", while Tessa Thompson unites with the other female heroes for an "A-Force" adaptation. And then a cosmic movie featuring Adam Warlock because he might NOT be in "Vol. 3". That's EIGHT... what about the remaining DOZEN then? LOL. A solo movie for the popular Ms. Marvel, or a live action version of "Young Avengers"? Those would be DOPE. Not to mention, that number most likely does NOT include Marvel characters currently under FOX and/or SONY. Imagine what would happen if Disney ends up merging with FOX!

One thing for sure, Marvel Studios' movies are here to stay! Meaning we'll still some great fun times at the theatre for several years ahead. So what are you waiting for... celebrate the 10th year, and speculate on!!!

Marvel TV

The 5th season of Marvel's "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." will premiere in just a few days from now on Friday, December 1st 2017 08.00PM EST. In order to amp up the hype and anticipation level, Marvel TV had released an official extended trailer to give audience a glimpse of what to expect. And if that's not enough, they have also published the debut episode's first 17 minutes on Youtube. In case both clips weren't obvious enough, the setting is in space, and all but one (Fitz! Who else?) active members of Clark Gregg's Phil Coulson's team are trapped in a galactic prison or some sort. Fans of the show only need to wait a bit longer for their beloved characters' return.

As for me? That extended trailer has totally convinced me... to SKIP this season entirely. No, this is not a drill. Hmmmm.... I don't know how, but I guess because this looks... redundant? The prospect of going interstellar felt engaging and promising when the previous season ended. But things have changed in the months after, when new space-themed series like "Star Trek: Discovery" and "The Orville" debuted and gained attention. Including yours truly. I admit, in AoS' case it felt more like "Firefly" or "Star Wars", but my point remains: it's a space opera or any of its variations. And being not much of a fan to the genre, I'm already good with following just one of it this season. Care to guess which one?

Besides, good reviews and/or words of mouth don't instantly mean everyone is going to like it. Take for instance... Marvel's "Runaways". People everywhere are praising this Hulu show, yet only two episodes in, and I'm already feeling utterly... BORED by it. Many said that this show is unlike or even better than CW's "Riverdale", but I say... it's more or less the same thing (but with superpowers) or even worse. I'll give it the benefit of doubt and continue watching for a few more episodes (possibly until episode 4 or 5 out of 10), but only out of obligation to a personal quirk. Come on Hulu, just release more episodes for "The Tick" already! Anyways, the same goes for AoS. People have been saying good things about its two hours premiere, but my gut is telling me that... it's not working for me. Call me back when Mr. Lance Hunter returns, okay! *winks*

Netflix

Over on the Netflix side, Marvel's "Luke Cage" has wrapped filming. That's what the production staffs seemed to be hinting at. At the very least, it's nearing completion to pave way for other Marvel-themed shows. LOL. Considering this could be the last season for Mike Colter's Luke Cage on Netflix (with that Disney streaming service and all), this could be a bittersweet news for its fans. Oh well, let's move on...

DC Television

Speaking of dedicated streaming service, DC is already ahead of Marvel (See? DC's forte is on television, so they should just totally focus on it). Aside from the highly demanded new season for "Young Justice", and "Titans" that has gathered almost all of its core cast, a new original title has been added to its roster. Yes, coming from the producers of the short-lived "Powerless", an animated "Harley Quinn" series has already scored a 26-episodes first season! This series will be a half-hour adult action-comedy, written by the same set of guys: Justin Halpern, Patrick Schumacker, and Dean Lorey.

According to Deadline, actress Margot Robbie is the desired candidate to voice the titular character. She might not be reprising the same incarnation from the live action "Suicide Squad", but banking on her popular name would totally give benefit to DC. Of course, I personally prefer Arleen Sorkin or Tara Strong to reprise their roles from "Batman: The Animated Series", but who am I to argue. The story will focus on Harley, who after breaking up with The Joker, wants to become the criminal 'Queenpin' of Gotham. Her bestie Poison Ivy will naturally be part of the show, alongside other DC heroes and villains. Can Harley carry a whole series on her own? We'll see.

Do you want a new season for "Justice League Unlimited" in the service too? Well... keep asking DC about it, and you might get what you wish for. Hey, it worked with "Young Justice", right? Especially when voice actor Kevin Conroy himself is up to do one. Come on DC, make it happen! I just hope that it doesn't involve cancelling "Justice League Action", because it IS close to ending its first season...

Marvel vs. Capcom

Those three leaked DLC Marvel characters for "Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite" have been confirmed! Bucky Barnes / Winter Soldier, Natasha Romanova / Black Widow, and Eddie Brock / Venom will be available starting next week on December 5th, 2017. Each can be purchased separately, or directly available to those who own 2017 Character Pass. PlayStation 4 players have been given exclusive opportunity to test out these characters through a free demo during the weekend. You can check out the official announcement trailer on Youtube.

As I said last month, these characters are pretty much... redundant. However, all three have devoted fanbase thanks to the live action movies, so perhaps CAPCOM is trying to attract their attention? I must say though, seeing Bucky's cybernetic metal arm changing from left to right in between scenes is pretty disturbing. It's excusable for a 2D fighting game (because developer would refrain from creating different data for left and right sides of a character), but this is supposed to be 2,5D right? Can't they do it proportionally in this method?

Naturally, the snowball didn't stop with these characters and has continued to roll. As soon as they are confirmed, talks and rumors regarding MORE characters have begun surfacing. Claims on Reddit and other outlets have brought variety of names as potential 2nd Season DLC characters. They include: Star-Lord, Ms. Marvel, Green Goblin, Wolverine, Cyclops, Psylocke, Magneto, Storm, Deadpool, Doctor Doom, and Daredevil from the Marvel side; Asura, Lady, Gill, Rashid, Captain Commando, Nina, Deis, Regina, Gene, Vergil, Akuma, and Apollo Justice from the CAPCOM side.

Many of those names have been openly thrown around, but among them are several characters who have been reported by multiple sources. According to Youtuber Maximilian, there are 5 names with a solid match between various sources, with 1 other one in question. So yeah, just like the first line of DLC, it might be 6 characters... but in an opposite pattern, as this one will contain 2 Marvel character and 4 CAPCOM ones. The Marvel side is said to herald Star-Lord and Ms. Marvel, while the CAPCOM side will bring fan-favorite Asura, "Street Fighter III" big boss Gill, and "Devil May Cry" Lady. The last character might be either "Street Fighter V" Rashid, "Dino Crisis" Regina, or "Ace Attorney" Apollo Justice, because the sources didn't seem to be in agreement about it. This report came along a potential 2 vs 2 co-op gameplay rumored to be available in Summer next year.

Just for the sake of speculation, let's talk about them! Star-Lord? Another pretty redundant Marvel character. But I understand if they want to bank on him due to his popularity on the big screen. Ms. Marvel is a fantastic choice, even if she's pretty much the Marvel version of former MvC roster, Dhalsim. Asura is also a great choice, considering the fans already went wild over that "Asura's Wrath" DLC that pitted him against Evil Ryu. Gill is an interesting addition that makes good sense, since it's pretty unlikely to see him showing up in "Street Fighter V". Rashid is similar to Ms. Marvel, because he works by adding much needed diversity to the game... aside from being a cool wind-powered fighter. Apollo Justice, and Regina will be a clone version of Phoenix Wright, and Black Widow/Jill Valentine respectively, while Lady practically serves as the female versions of Dante and/or Vergil. Personally, I would rather the last character be Rashid, but Apollo will bring his unique style that (similar to Phoenix) separates him from the other fighters.

In the end, these are just rumors with no certainty that it's going to be accurate or not. For now, let's just enjoy the three DLC characters already available in the game, as we wait for three more to arrive very soon. Don't forget that CAPCOM can always stretch the second set for almost a year after... *sigh*

Street Fighter

Yeah, you did catch the jabs I threw CAPCOM above right? Because we all know the both seasons of DLC characters for "Street Fighter V" took an entire year to release, eventhough there were only SIX each. The last one for Season 2 has only arrived last month, even if we probably have been teased about it since last year.

Of course... when the dust settles, a new wind blows. The topic of the game has since shifted towards... "Arcade Edition" and 3rd Season DLC. Inline with its half-brother in the category above, a slew of rumors regarding 6 more characters have begun dropping throughout message boards. The same leaker who posted the potential characters for "Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite", stated two things that some people have found to be... rather conflicting.

The first one headcounted Sagat, Sakura Kasugano, Cody Travers, Sodom, and two newcomers (who could either be "Final Fight" Roxy, or a Shadaloo member). This one COULD be considered credible because many other sources have been singing similar tune. For example, dataminer X-Kira claimed that Sagat, Sakura, and Neo Shadaloo (Ed's team member on his Story Mode) are three of the DLCs. Flowtron (the user who successfully leaked the entire Season 2 characters) mentioned a somewhat different set: Sagat, Sakura, Blanka, "Mayor", "Another Bae", and "President". But the user also warned, that they no longer had connection with CAPCOM, that even they couldn't be sure of their own statement. LOL. At the very least, if the Red Bull Battle Grounds was any indication, then Sakura has pretty much been officially confirmed.

The second part of the leak claimed that four characters; namely Crimson Viper, Q, Necro, and Oro; will be available as free characters for the Arcade Edition's free update. Flowtron has debunked this, saying it's not true. Youtuber VesperArcade commented that while the previous names made sense, these free ones sound rather unlikely. He argued that to pull this off, it would require CAPCOM to make all four character available when the update is launched on January 16th, 2018. And the company doesn't really have a good track record in developing things quickly. Remember when the first set of DLC mostly ran out of its initial schedules? Beside, CAPCOM would have announced this kind of update in advance, to ensure that players who have purchased the vanilla "Street Fighter V" be pleased... and not complaining. But there's no such thing about it until now.

To be honest, I'm merely talking about this because I'm excited about the probability of seeing my champ Cody back in a Street Fighter game. If he IS part of the 3rd Season, that gives me more reason to purchase the game... as soon as I get a PlayStation 4 or a strong enough PC. LOL.

Moving on from rumors, CAPCOM have also released official information. Eventhough there were some concerns about the promised secondary V-Skills and Critical Arts, the company confirmed that every character will indeed receive one among other new stuffs. And to prove that, they even released an official trailer (available in Japanese as well) to showcase them in action, with a note saying "Street Fighter V players will receive the free Arcade Edition update. In addition to an all-new Arcade Mode and new monthly challenges via Extra Battle Mode, every character will receive a second V-Trigger attack. These are but just a few to get you thinking of new possibilities for 2018 and beyond…". Here's hoping this update will boost or rekindle interest for the title among fans and gamers in general.

Meanwhile, "Puzzle Fighter" had launched for iOS and Android last week. The free for download puzzle game should be available worldwide with a new look and new features. If you ask me, it actually feels more like a "Capcom All Star" game, because of those other characters from non-"Street Fighter" titles. I guess that is expected to appeal wider demographics, huh? You can download the App game on your smartphone right away to try it, or you can watch the launch trailer on Youtube to get a visual taste.

The King of Fighters

Looks like we'll be getting another update for "The King of Fighters XIV". Following the result of a social media design contest that took place last month, SNK Corps will soon add two things. A Saudi Arabian-themed fighter named Najd, created by designer Mashael Al-Barrak from Saudi Arabia, and a modern day Masmak Fort stage, created by Oman designer Zainab Al-Lawaty. It's currently unclear when they will be added to the game, but I hope SNK will also expand the roster with more characters. Now if only SNK would hold a similar contest in my country...

Nintendo

To wrap up this month's final R-N-D, we have some happy news from Nintendo. The company's popular and highly praised "The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild", has scored several wins at the Golden Joystick Awards in UK. The open world RPG won 'Ultimate Game of the Year', as well as 'Best Audio', 'Critic's Choice Award', and 'Nintendo Game of the Year'.

While the alternate reality "Pokemon Ultra Sun & Ultra Moon" hit the market, its original titles "Pokemon Sun & Moon" also won the 'Handheld/Mobile Game of the Year'. These titles could be the reason why the game developer itself got crowned as 'Studio of the Year'. This award relied exclusively on public votes, which means Nintendo has gained a truly positive buzz this year. And that's before the equally praised and critically acclaimed "Super Mario Odyssey" could take part in. Could we see the Zelda and Mario game pit against each other in future Awards? I believe that would be the case.

0 notes

itsiotrecords-blog · 7 years ago

Link

http://ift.tt/2sv9QAQ

In the world of movies and TV shows, a character’s death can be the most compelling and talked about point in the whole story. Whether it’s tragic and sad, an action packed sacrifice, or completely over the top (we all remember Alan Rickman in Die Hard and Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves!), whatever the case, a character’s death can be the most important part of any story. Because of this, many actors have “bitten the bullet” on screen several times in a seemingly never-ending cycle of death as they are cast in a movie and then killed, cast and then killed, and so on. Some actors breakout and become the heroes of the movie screen and always save the day and never die, but until they make it to that stage in their careers, or unless they get typecast as the person who always dies, some actors are destined to be killed again and again. With this list we look at the 15 actors who have had the most on-screen deaths of anyone. The number one spot may surprise you.

#1 Val Kilmer – 15 Times The first entry on our list is an actor who made his name in 80s and 90s big action movies such as Top Gun, Heat, The Saint and of course Batman Forever. Although Val Kilmer made the transition from sidekick to leading man successfully, at least for a few years, that hasn’t stopped him dying a total of 15 times on screen. Some of his biggest movies in which he’s bitten the bullet have been: Tombstone, where he played the infamous Doc Holliday and The Doors, obviously as Kilmer plays Jim Morrison. He also died in The Island Of Dr. Moreau and MacGruber. Some people may argue that Kilmer’s greatest on screen death came when he played Batman in Batman Forever, but we feel that may be a bit harsh.

#2 Brad Pitt – 15 Times The next actor on our list is another person to hit the 15 deaths mark. Brad Pitt has been the poster boy for Hollywood for a number of years now. Starting life out as eye candy in movies like Thelma and Louise, Pitt quickly moved on to leading roles and tackled a lot of the edgier roles in Hollywood such as Seven and Fight Club. Having such a varied career in Hollywood ranging from comedy to action, drama to thriller, Pitt has done it all. His most memorable deaths come in the movies: The Devil’s Own, Legends of the Fall, Kalifornia, Burn After Reading, Troy, The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button, and yes, we count Fight Club as well.

#3 Bruce Willis – 15 Times Next we come to an actor that put the “wise cracking” tough guy on the map. Bruce Willis started life out as a private detective on the hit TV show Moonlighting opposite Cybill Shepherd. After a brief crack at a music career (he really did, go check it out!) Willis moved onto the action movies and took the world by storm in the late 1980s by portraying John McClane in Die Hard and its sequels. Since then, Willis has gone on to be one of the biggest names in Hollywood for the past few decades. Not just playing the tough guy, Willis has tackled other roles too and a lot of them end up dead. Some of these movies are: Twelve Monkeys, The Jackal, Death Becomes Her, Sin City, Looper, Armageddon and of course, his most famous screen death of all, The Sixth Sense.

#4 Bill Paxton – 15 Times Next we come to the final actor to make up our 15 on screen deaths club. Bill Paxton is often referred to as being the nice guy of Hollywood. More often than not, the late great Paxton has portrayed the nice or sensible guy in the movies. However, that hasn’t stopped him from branching out from time to time to play nasty and just plain evil. The versatile actor has gotten his teeth into a variety of characters both on the big screen and the small over his career and he was an actor that will be missed by many. Over the course of his career, Paxton is one of the few actors that has been killed by everything that Hollywood has had to throw at him; he’s been killed by a Terminator in Terminator, an Avenger in the TV show Agents of SHIELD, an alien in Aliens, by a Predator in Predator 2, and Nazis in U-571. It’s fair to say that if there was a monster in a movie then Paxton would be killed by it.

#5 Gary Oldman – 16 Times The next entry on our list is an actor that has a bit of a career change with in the movie business. The talented British actor first made a name for himself as an over the top bad guy in movies such as The Fifth Element and Leon. Gary Oldman became known as the scene stealing bad guy that every movie director wanted. As well as that, Oldman has played some of the biggest characters in movies, from Dracula to Sid Vicious. Over the years, however, Oldman has become more of an older statesman of Hollywood and has taken on roles more fitting to his status such as Commissioner Gordon in the Dark Knight trilogy and his roles in The Planet of the Apes reboot movies. With such a long career, Oldman has died many times. Some of his death movies are: The Fifth Element, Leon, Air Force One, Lost In Space, The Firm, Dracula and Harry Potter and the Order of Phoenix.

#6 Nicolas Cage – 17 Times Nicolas Cage is an actor that has become synonymous with all things crazy and over the top. The nephew of famous movie director Francis Ford Coppola, Cage wanted nothing more than to make a name for himself in Hollywood without the use of his famous family name. We think that whether you love Cage or hate him, he’s definitely achieved his goal. The eccentric actor has starred in some of the biggest movies in the last twenty years or so. More famous for his action roles, Cage does branch out from time to time to do different movies, such as the family series National Treasure and The Sorcerer’s Apprentice. Cage’s movie deaths include: Face Off, Leaving Las Vegas, The Wicker Man, Kick-Ass, Season of The Witch and Cotton Club.

#7 Samuel L. Jackson – 18 Next we come to “Mr. Cool” himself and an actor that has seemingly been in every movie that has been made in the last twenty years. Samuel L. Jackson made his name by starring in a few of Quentin Tarantino’s early movies such as Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. The ultimate cool guy, Jackson soon branched out to star in a number of movies and crossing all the genres. It must also be noted that Jackson is one of the few stars to have major parts in two of the biggest movie franchises in history: Star Wars, playing Jedi master Mace Windu, and Nick Fury in the MCU. Jackson has had a long and varied career and has starred in so many movies that many people out there would think that he should have died more, but 18 is all he gets. Some of his death scenes include: Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, Deep Blue Sea, Kingsman, Jackie Brown, Django Unchained, Jurassic Park and Kill Bill Volume 2.

#8 Robert De Niro – 18 Times Our next entry is another big actor who is tied with Samuel L. Jackson for 18 screen deaths. The legendary Oscar-winning actor has had a movie career which has spanned more than most and has been involved in some of the biggest, and widely regarded as the best, movies of all times, such as Goodfellas, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and Casino to name just a few. Robert De Niro is arguably one of the most prolific and greatest actors of a generation. Because of the length of De Niro’s career, and his love of violent crime movies, it’s no surprise that we find him here on our list. Although De Niro has survived many movies, there has also been a few movies in which his characters have had to take a dirt nap. These movies include: Brazil, Cape Fear, Heat, Jackie Brown, Hide and Seek, and The Mission.

#9 Liam Neeson – 20 Times The next entry on our list is the first actor to break the 20 on-screen death mark. Liam Neeson has already had a long and successful movie career. The Irish actor was known for taking on big character roles and tackling historical giants such as Schindler’s List, Rob Roy, and Michael Collins. Of course nowadays, Neeson is known for his action roles, in particular in the violent Taken series in which he uses his “skill set” in order to kick some serious bad guy butt across Europe. Neeson’s movie deaths include: Star Wars: Phantom Menace, Batman Begins, Schindler’s List, Michael Collins, Gangs of New York, A Million Ways To Die In The West, The Grey, and The Mission.

#10 Mickey Rourke – 22 Times Not many actors in Hollywood have had such an “up and down” career as Mickey Rourke has had. Starting out as a leading man in 80s movies such as 9 And a Half Weeks and Angel Heart, Rourke turned his back on acting in the 90s and returned to the boxing ring, where he had trained as a boxer in his youth. Although Rourke’s boxing career could be called a success (he had 8 professional fights, winning 6 and drawing 2), his boxing career left him battered and beaten to the point where Rourke need some serious plastic surgery to reconstruct his face. Putting his boxing career behind him, Rourke returned to the movie screen with some big movies such as Sin City and The Wrestler. Over the years, Rourke has died in 22 movies. It could actually be more, but some of his characters either died off screen or were damned to hell like in Angel Heart. But some of his death scenes include: Sin City, Iron Man 2, Once Upon a Time in Mexico, Man on Fire, and Double Team.

#11 Gary Busey – 22 Times Already on this list we have mentioned big, eccentric and even crazy actors such as Nicolas Cage and Mickey Rourke, however, in recent years the crown for the most eccentric actor in Hollywood has to go to Gary Busey. Starting his movie career slowly with bit parts in 70s movies, until his big break came playing Buddy Holly in the hugely acclaimed movie The Buddy Holly Story. Since then, Busey has been a prominent force in Hollywood over the last few decades and starred in some of the biggest movies. However, in 1988 Busey had a major motorcycle crash which left him with some serious brain damage which have caused some mental issues for Busey, and his off-screen antics have overshadowed his movie career. Over his career, Busey has died in movies such as Lethal Weapon, Predator 2, The Buddy Holly Story, Point Break, Under Siege, Straight Time, and Let’s Get Harry.

#12 Sean Bean – 25 Times Next we come to the man himself and the actor that inspired this list. Many people out there will be surprised to see that Sean Bean isn’t top of the list of actors that have died most on screen. After all, it seems like every time Bean appears on screen, whether it’s in the movies or on TV, he will die at some point. However, the British actor has only died a total of 25 times, which is a lot less than our top three. It must be noted, though, that although Bean hasn’t had the most on screen deaths, that’s probably only because he hasn’t made as many movies as others on our list. But his death ratio is more than any other actor. In other words, with the amount of screen time he has had against the number of death scenes, Bean would come out as clear winner. Some of his screen deaths include: Goldeneye, Patriot games, The Island, Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, and of course, Game of Thrones.

#13 Vincent Price – 32 Times The #3 entry on our list of actors that have died the most on screen comes in the form of horror legend Vincent Price. Although Price did venture into other movie genres such as drama, mystery, and even comedy, with his distinctive look and even more distinctive voice, Price will always be remembered for his horror movies, although most people today will remember him most for being the voice over on Michael Jackson‘s “Thriller” or playing the inventor in Edward Scissorhands. As Price had such a long movie career, which actually ran from 1935 – 1993, and of course his love of all things horror, it’s not surprising that Price is high on the list of on screen deaths. A few of his memorable deaths include: Pit and the Pendulum, House of Usher, Witchfinder General, Tales of Terror, Edward Scissorhands, and Theatre of Blood.

#14 Christopher Lee – 42 Times Our number two entry is the man that made Count Dracula a movie icon. Becoming the face of the British Hammer horror scene in the 1960s, Lee, with his tall frame, piercing eyes, and booming voice, made the role of the villain his own and charmed fans as the iconic Dracula for years. Every now and then Lee would step out of his villain persona but then he would soon come charging back in and we all love him for it. As well as portraying Dracula, Lee has also been the villain in two major movie franchises: The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit franchise and, of course, in the Star Wars prequel trilogy. Over a career that spanned nearly 70 years, Lee has a long list of movie credits to his name and a long list of movie deaths too. Some of his movie deaths include his many outings as Dracula, as well as Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King, Alice in Wonderland, The Man with the Golden Gun, Gremlins 2: The New Batch, and Treasure Island, to name just a few.

#15 John Hurt – 45 Times The number one entry on our list of actors who have died the most on screen goes to the late great actor John Hurt. The British acting legend has been lighting up the screen for more than 50 years and in some of the biggest movies around. Of course, most of us remember him as the guy who had the alien burst out of his stomach in Alien, to which Hurt actually re-enacted the scene for the comedy movie Spaceballs. Although Hurt was never really considered a Hollywood leading man, he was often described as one of the best and subtlest actors working in Hollywood and appeared in more movies than we could list. A few of his death movies are: The Elephant Man, V For Vendetta, Outlander, Hellboy, Only Lovers Left Behind, and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

Source: TheRichest

#IoTRecords

0 notes

furederiko · 8 years ago

Photo

Tis the Ides of March, and thus a Random-News-Digest is on hand...

Disney Live Action

To be frank, the idea of Tim Burton doing a "Dumbo" live action adaptation, is enough to make people scratch their heads and well, probably question their sanity. But it gets even more weirder. Thanks to the first two actors who are being courted for the movie.

Ever since he put a pause in his partnership with Johnny Depp and ex-wife Helena Bonham-Carter, there is one actress that Burtons continuously runs to. Eva Green! Yep, after their collaborations in "Dark Shadows", and "Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children", Burton wants Green for "Dumbo". She is currently in talks to play Colette, a French trapeze artist who works for Vandemere. Who is Vandemere? Was he in the original animated movie too? I believe said character hasn't been cast yet. But apparently, he's an evil big top circus villain, who loves to take over smaller circus. One of said 'smaller circus' owner is Medici. And guess who's being approached to play Medici? Burton's previous collaborator in "Batman Returns", the iconic Penguin himself, Danny DeVito.

As I said, the thought of Burton doing "Dumbo" alone already sounds surreal. I can't even imagine how it would look, considering the director has penchants for the weird and whimsical. And now it will have "Penny Dreadful" very own Vanessa Ives and a former Batman villain as the possible leads. Do let those sink slowly into your brains...

DC Films

With negative rumors swirling around the movie's post production, and the bad press already looming on it thanks to its two previous titles, it's safe to say the concerns for "Wonder Woman" aren't so baseless. It seems Warner Bros might have realized this as well, as they have taken a different approach to ensure that this movie will not repeat the same mistake(s). That's probably (yes, subjectively speaking) the reason why they have invited several members of the press to check out some parts of the movie beforehand.

According to Birth.Movies.Death, they were given accomodations and privilege to see around 20 minutes of the movie in London. The footage that were shown were not continuous, and were taken from various moments of the movies itself. Director Patty Jenkins was also present to share her thoughts on the matter. You can read detailed description of all three scenes on B.M.D, but I have to warn you that it might be a little spoilery. So read it on your own risk. This friendly warning goes for the site's follow-up editorial as well, that talked about the overall plot and movie's antagonist. But of course... if you're perfectly fine with being a little or completely spoiled, then do go ahead and enjoy the fun read.

The important thing about the viewing was, Jenkins managed to assure the press that her Wonder Woman would be... simply speaking, 'special'. She will HAVE personalities, unlike the blank one that everyone oddly praised on "Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice". She will have chemistry with Chris Pine's Steve Trevor, so not just a random eyecandy moving around from one place to another, like the one on... yes "Bvs", a.k.a this year's Razzie Awards winner (for "Worst Sequel", "Screenplay", and "Screen Combo"). But more importantly, "She CAN’T be dark and nasty", Jenkins promised. Why? Because Gal Gadot's Diana Prince will be "the HERO the world’s been waiting for". Of course, she didn't say them with CAP-SLOCK on, that's just my way of emphasizing the context. But seriously, if you ask me, those words alone are enough to serve as a harsh wake-up slap towards fellow DC Films directors who have only painted the DC heroes in a truly bad light. Dark and gritty, my as*! LOL.

So much is riding on Jenkins' shoulder, to be honest. This will be WB's first female-led superhero movie. Not to mention, one that comes after a long period of absence due to really bad ones in form of WB's own "Catwoman" or FOX's "Elektra". This movie is directed by a female director, whose presence in Hollywood is still being looked down and can even be counted with human fingers. And unlike the well-oiled-machine that is Marvel Studios, DC Films hasn't had a 'great' movie so far. All divisive, and disappointing in their own ways. Thus everyone, especially real DC Fans are counting on this one to be at least 'good', making up for the disasters that came before it. The good news is, Jenkins showed the exact enthusiasm, confidence, and respect for her character that both critics and audience are seeking. The positive side effect is already shown, as many of the press members invited have already begun comparing her movie to Richard Donner's iconic "Superman". You know, the one that doesn't turn Clark Kent into a mopey bastard? So yeah, looks like WB might FINALLY have a DC Film title that is worth-watching for after all! At least until Zack Snyder and his "Justice League" arrive to ruin it all over again, right? I'm kidding! Ahahaha. Or am I? Hmmmm... *sigh*.

Admittedly, I'm personally NOT feeling any of the movie's trailers so far. And that includes the latest one that debuted on this year's Kids Choice Awards. It's unclear whether that's because it's exactly a mirror reflection of what to expect from the movie, or simply because the marketing department has seriously been failing me so far. The chance of me seeing this directly on theatre is very slim. Close to zero, in fact! Not even that new poster that everyone seems to be praising for is able to convince me otherwise (really, I think it's just 'okay'). After all, WB might always release an Extended/Ultimate version for the home video, right? They did exactly that not once, but TWICE already with their previous releases. So why even bother seeing this on the theatre when you can spend a bit more dollars to get the FULL and generally better version?

Regardless of that, it would be a shameful crime for me to shun and curse the movie, hoping it will fail miserably. Please don't ever associate me with those so-called 'devoted DC fans' who continue to wish Marvel movies to fail, with a stupid 'just because' as its foundation. Yes, there was a time when Jenkins praised "Suicide Squad" by calling that movie 'GREAT' (wait, seriously?!), eventhough that's hardly the case. Making many including yours truly questions her ability to deliver something that would be A LOT better. But let's not let that cloud our judgement, shall we? Let's pay attention towards the bigger picture. As I've said before, the success of "Wonder Woman" will have consequences and after effects for others that follow. Not just for WB itself, but for other studios, and the specific genre in particular. In that regards, I obviously want it to at least be good, pleasing both critically and financially, but also enjoyable enough to please its fans and general audience. I'm not and never will be a fan to Wonder Woman, but I would love to see other studios getting their confidence to create a female-led superhero movies thanks to this. That's the long-term target I'm counting on this movie to live up to.

And seriously, the future is not set in stone. "Wonder Woman" can end up becoming a much better origin story than "Man of Steel". Hmm... what did you say? That Superman movie was already okay? Well, I totally beg to differ. I mean, even WB seems to think they've made a mistake with it. If not, why on earth would they bother themselves to approach Matthew Vaughn to reboot the character? Yes, that's the recent development buzzing around the planned sequel right now. Although, it's not even clear if he'll take the offer or not. But before you argue that Vaughn's work so far has been bloody R-rated movies, do remember one solid fact. Despite being very gruesome in nature, both "Kick-Ass" and "Kingsman" had very likeable and charming lead characters (played by the equally charming Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Taron Egerton respectively). Characters that actually felt like real people, not some cold-blooded killers disguised under the mantle of superheroes. Vaughn seems to have the correct point of view about Superman too! So at the very least, I'm sure his version won't be worse than Snyder's angsty sociopath mother-complex alien...

X-Men Universe

Yes, "Logan" is still going strong despite the rampage of an overperforming "Kong: Skull Island", making it the highest grossing movie of the year so far. But should we even be surprised, when critics are loving it, and giving glowing reviews? If you ask me, it's the other X-Men movie that's making the bigger news.

Via his personal Twitter account, Ryan Reynolds himself has unveiled the actress who would be playing the mutant mercenary Domino in the tentatively titled "Deadpool 2". This began when he tweeted a rather cryptic image of domino cards that immediately made the internet buzzing. Why? Because it didn't take long before keen-eyed fans noticed that the dots were forming a particular name: Zazie Beets. Beets is an actress who gains popularity thanks to being a breakout in Donald Glover's critically acclaimed hit comedy series "Atlanta". Mind you, I haven't seen it yet (don't even ask me the reason why), so I can't really say I'm familiar with her. Nor whether she's the right actress for the role, since I'm not even that much familiar with the character Domino. But people seems to be singing praises for this casting decision, including Deadpool's creator himself. So that's like a solid seal of approval, right?

Considering Beets is African-American, that means we will be getting a racebent Domino, because as far as I recall, she's a white caucassian female in the comics. Apparently, FOX were consciously testing for Black or Latina actress for the role. Looks like the studio is joining the 'racebending bandwagon' with this, after Marvel Studios and DC Films did the same with Valkyrie and Iris West. Not that it really matters though. What's more important is ghzg she's the right actress for the role, am I right?

Jurassic Park

Sequel to the successful bombastic abomination "Jurassic World" has begun production since February 23rd, 2017. The tentatively called "Jurassic World 2" (perhaps it's going to be renamed into "Jurassic Universe"? LOL) has moved forward with J.A. Bayona to direct. Universal had set a release date for it on June 22nd, 2018. Lead actors Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard, alongside B.D. Wong are returning, while the new cast consists of Toby Jones, Rafe Spall, Justice Smith, Daniella Pineda, Ted Levine, James Cromwell, and Geraldine Chapline. But it's producer Frank Marshall that gave us the first taste of the sequel, confirming that it IS in production. Yes, he did so via an unexpected tweet last week. But did that tweet confirmed which new species we might see on the sequel? Because frankly, aside from the kid, those are just fossils and not actual dinosaurs! Oh well, I'm sure we'll hear more about this movie pretty soon...

Marvel Studios

I almost always have this category in every R-N-D. Yet there are two future titles that are often absent: "Ant-Man and the Wasp" and "Captain Marvel". That shouldn't be a surprise, considering they won't come out until at least July 2018. And my attention is pretty occupied with the 2017 to early 2018 releases instead, especially the massive title that is "Avengers: Infinity War". You know what it is, right? The highly anticipated movie that might have Terry Notary confirmed as a mysterious new character, and might be filming on a 1000 years old landmark in Durham, England.

So let's talk briefly about them now. And why is that? Because Production Weekly (via MCU Exchange) has revealed that the sequel to "Ant-Man" will begin pre-production this very month in Atlanta. Official photography itself will then commence on July 6, which is precisely a year prior to its release on July 6th, 2018. All three of the main cast, Paul Rudd's Scott Lang, Evangeline Lilly's Hope van Dyne, and Michael Douglas' Hank Pym, have all been confirmed to return. Michael Pena's scene-stealing Luis will be in it too. The other cast has yet to be confirmed for the time being, but I'm sure we'll know about that in the coming months.

The working title for the movie is called "Cherry Blue", which might or might not works as a nod to a particular story arc. It's currently unclear what the story this sequel will have, aside from the confirmation from director Peyton Reed that it will be stand-alone, just like the first one. Perhaps it will focus on Hank's attempt to locate his missing wife Janet van Dyne in the Quantum Realm? That's certainly the highest possibility so far. The biggest question on my head about it though, is HOW Scott will be able to freely operate as Ant-Man, considering his fate at the end of "Captain America: Civil War". Lest we forget, this sequel arrives just 2 months after "Infinity War". Surely that movie will have additional ripple effects for Scott. Could he still be serving as a rogue vigilante when the time comes? And how will Hank and Hope even respond to said development. Could Hope take the mantle of the Wasp, in order to take over his place, then? So many questions, so little answers. But one thing for sure, we won't be seeing the Pym Tech Building anymore.

"Captain Marvel" will then arrive following a looong 8 months gap after that. According to My Entertainment World (via MCU Exchange as well), the current plan is for the production to begin in January 2018. With a release date of March 8th, 2019, that frankly makes a whole lot of sense, since most Marvel Studios' production took around 1 year to produce (similar case to "Ant-Man and the Wasp"). As of writing, only lead actress Brie Larson is confirmed for the movie. Marvel Studios has yet to announce the director for the job (although I suspect they already have one. Perhaps Niki Caro after she completes "Mulan"?), and casting for supporting characters will not take place until close to production. So apart from an official concept art (costumed action pose!) shown on Disney's regular shareholder meeting, which we might not see until this year's San Diego Comic Con or Disney's D23, this is the best news we get for the Studios' first completely female-led movie. Still crossing my fingers that the movie will include several other superheroines though! Perhaps, Monica Rambeau, or even better, Jessica Drew's Spider Woman. After all, the movie needs some diversity, right?

Now let's get back to 2017, with a title only months away from release! Entertainment Weekly debuted official images from "Thor: Ragnarok" last week, and obviously, it easily took the world by storm. Aside from spotlighting the Son of Odin himself to grace the upcoming edition's cover, we got to see the first official and also closeup looks for Cate Blanchett's Hela, Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie, Mark Ruffalo's returning character Bruce Banner, and more importantly Jeff Goldblum's The Grandmaster. Karl Urban's Skurge is the only new character absent on it.

Thor has a haircut as rumored!!! Which might, or might not be inspired by the character's particular story arc in the comics. Lead actor Chris Hemsworth felt more comfortable with this change, as it didn't require him to sit on the makeup chair before filming now. If you're a fan of the punching chemistry between Hulk and Thor in "The Avengers", then that reunion image between Thor and Ruffalo's Banner would make one grins with joy. After all, Banner was missing in action following the aftermath of "Avengers: Age of Ultron", so it's great seeing him in good shape. And rather well-groomed! Meanwhile, The Grandmaster's appearance seems to be inline with Benicio del Toro's The Collector. Which makes a lot of sense since he has been depicted as Taneleer Tivan's older brother in recent Marvel animated shows. He looks original, but still rocking all the familiar signatures of his comic book counterpart (the gray weird-shaped hair, color-tone of his costume). Also worth noted, is the exciting bright and vibrant COLORS that easily stand out in those images. It's as if, we're seeing another "Guardians of the Galaxy" of the year. Who knows, perhaps that IS indeed the case.

Some plot points were also openly shared by the cast and creators to the magazine. Blanchett revealed that there's a valid reason why her Hela hasn't shown up in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. "She’s been locked away for millennia getting more and more cross, and then, with a mistake, she gets unleashed and she ain’t getting back in that box", she said. This is all made possible due to the careless reign of Tom Hiddleston's Loki, who has been spoofing as Anthony Hopkins' Odin since the ending of "Thor: The Dark World". Thanks to this grudge, Thor will get to see Hela's bad side, and well, gets sent away without his powers to a galactic wasteland, which is the Planet Sakaar. But that's where he will meet Valkyrie, who is an elite warrior in the Grandmaster's world. Confirming that she will have a reimagined backstory in the MCU. It seems this new character might be poised to take over Jane Foster's position as romantic interest (since Natalie Portman isn't involved in the movie), but even that's still everyone's question. Not just Valkyrie, Thor will also encounter 'old friend' Hulk once again, who for some unknown reason has ended up in the planet as a Gladiator. This will set off the two Avengers on a cosmic road-trip, as has been promised in the synopsis. Meaning, probably not so much of Stephen Strange despite fans' speculations.

Despite the rather serious Asgardian 'doomsday' storyline (that might play a heavylifting role towards "Infinity War") however, the appointing of Taika Waititi as the director also brought many questions to practically everyone. Considering he's a director best known for comedic chops, as proven by the irresistibly charming but also powerfully endearing "Hunt for the Wilderpeople". In form of Marvel-style, that mockumentary "Team THOR" that could be seen online and as part of the "Doctor Strange" Bluray is an easy example to 'his style'. Hemsworth revealed, that with Waititi as the lead, "all the characters and the tone of the whole story to head in a new direction". As in, having more FUN that they should have, properly utilizing Hemsworth's natural talent for comedy. Even Hiddleston has confirmed that the director WILL leave his signature fingerprints on it, with Blanchett supporting the same idea. If you're already taken aback by the amount of comedy in the second movie, then you might want to be worried to hear this. But if you're like me, who never saw that as a problem, then you'll rest assured that it will be vastly entertaining. Even Waititi himself added with confidence, "We want people to care what happens and care that the hero succeeds. I think tonally it’s like a slight shift. I don’t feel nervous — I feel good about it". Fair point! Once again, his "Hunt of the Wilderpeople" is a solid proof of his talent to balance heart, comedy, and action just fine. Mark your date, "Hunt of the Wilder-Avengers" is definitely going to be an intriguing title when it opens on November 3rd, 2017.

With "Spider-Man: Homecoming" going on regular official reshoot, "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" releasing new trailer while tracking to a massive opening weekend, and "Infinity War" expanding its antagonistic cast, things are moving along smoothly for Disney's Marvel properties. Fans of Marvel Studios and the MCU in general can rest at ease that their favorite Cinematic Universe isn't going anywhere soon. At least, not until 2019...

Netflix

Unfortunately, things aren't shining bright in the other medium. Critics have been given the opportunity to screen the first 6 episodes of Marvel's "Iron Fist", and they have begun posting their thoughts online. How did it go? It pains me a bit to say this, because I've been looking forward to it the most, but the response... is mostly NOT good. Although critics' opinions obviously don't necessarily reflect audience's reception when it comes out (with Marvel's "Luke Cage" being a good example), this is a bit disheartening to hear (and/or read). Many of what have been said as the show's problems, are surprisingly in sync with the concerns lingering on my head for a good while now. Especially after showrunner Scott Buck's discouraging statement regarding the lack of costume for the titular character. Looks like the Marvel-Netflix 'grounded' approach has taken its toll this time, because many are saying that "Iron Fist" feels more like repeating previous series, something 'more of the same'. But unfortunately, in a relatively lower value, which simply means... NOT in a good way.

Allow me to use the first two reviews I read as the example. Mind you, neither are talking about how Iron Fist should be played by Asian actor, so they aren't giving bad rep because of said issue. CNET called this a 'misstep' because it focuses more on corporate intrigue, rather than martial arts. While Finn Jones does show a naive swagger, he shows 'awkwardness' in physical movements which shouldn't be the case for a kung fu master. In fact, it's easily Jessica Henwick's Colleen Wing who's stealing the show during this first half. The site did however, point out that things are moving in the right direction toward the end. As in probably a better second half, even if they likened the show to be taking the story "a little too seriously". FanBoy Nation called this the weakest collaboration between Marvel and Netflix so far. Even called it "a bland rehash of the weakest parts of Daredevil", and "a show without its own identity". The site pointed out that the Marvel-Netflix series pacing issue, have reached a breaking point here. But the important thing I quickly noticed in their review, is the bland and weak characterization and writing. Eventhough the actors tried their best to give more despite the weak material, it's still apparent. THAT sounds seriously concerning, because that means the fault comes from the creators, and NOT the choice of actors.

So yeah. The general consensus is that this show (for the first 6 episodes, at least) just couldn't live up to the 'greatness' of previous shows, whether in story nor action sequences. So far, it feels like a 'Been There Done That' situation. How it falls victim to the Marvel-Netflix formula of taking itself too seriously, thus losing all the wuxia fantasy and mysticism that should've naturally come with the package. Heck, when it can't even compare to "Doctor Strange" that embraced its weirdness effectively while still kicking plenty of mystic fanatics' behind in a thrilling way... that's saying much. Not to mention, it once again repeats, or worse, enhances the major issue that the Netflix shows had often been called out before: awkward pacing. Yes, arguably speaking, 13 episodes have been proven to be too long for these shows. And such negative sentiment seems even more visible in this one. It falls victim to excessive running time and episode obligations, that it's hard for it to not resort to obvious filler plots. A complete opposite to Marvel TV's claim, that this show will have more episodical villains. Is it probable, that Marvel TV might have rushed this just to clear the way for Marvel's "The Defenders", hence the trepid receptions? Fulfilling obligations for its promised fourth member? That COULD be the case, although it's pure speculatory from my part.

I can't help but wonder if having a flashy suit instead of delaying one for 13 episodes, would've given the show a better boost? Hmmm... Or perhaps, we're going to get some surprise in the later episodes after all? Yep, speaking of that, I can't help but also wonder if Marvel TV is deliberately saving all the good parts for the second half. I mean, if we pay attention to previous series, this does seem to be the likeliest scenario. "Luke Cage" and the second season of Marvel's "Daredevil" are the quick examples I can point out, because they seem to have a dual arc that is separated halfway through. Cage was initially focused on Cottonmouth, but in the second half, changed shift towards a more personal-intentioned Diamondback. While Daredevil spent the first half with The Punisher, and migrated towards The Hand in the latter half. Will "Iron Fist" be treated the same way? Personally, I don't think 'saving the best for last' is a WISE decision when it comes to TV shows. Because forcing anyone to sit through 6 hours of 'intro' to get to the good part, is like one really bad marketing strategy. Sure, it's still better than having the show fizzles out halfway through its run (like "Luke Cage"?). But really, who can even assure the creators that audience would NOT drop the show early on out of boredom? Which was precisely the problem with Netflix's own "Sense8", by the way. Yes, slow-burn storytelling style have often works, but that format teases great things from the very beginning. Not filling them with fillers!

Personal ranting aside, if we take Jones and Henwick's interview with Yahoo UK as any indications, then YES, the real story for their show might at least get more interesting (if not stronger) from episode 7 onwards. Why? According to them, "There are two characters who come into the second half of Iron Fist season one who hasn't been announced yet". TWO? I wonder who it is, and could it be, the mysterious character that Ramon Rodriguez is playing? What about David Sakurai? His character has been mysteriously noted 'to-be-confirmed' as well. Popular opinion easily points towards two particular characters: Davos the Steel Serpent, and Shang-Chi the Master of Kung Fu. We know that Davos' symbol has been hinted since the first "Daredevil", so he's the surest bet. Shang-Chi? He has been reported as a rumor by several sites before, eventhough Jeph Loeb seemed to have shot that down. This character could be whom Henwick was referring to as "a comic book character who’s not been seen before and at the end of Iron Fist they set him up in a really interesting way".

It's unclear which actor will portray who. IMO, Sakurai would be a perfect actor for Davos, even if Rodriguez is currently the one being speculated as one. But what if, and this is just another fan speculation, that the second character is instead Hector Ayala the White Tiger, and not Shang-Chi? Some fans have brought up his name, and well, it does ring a bell. It would make a lot of sense for Rodriguez to play him, since he's a Latino. Not to mention, his niece Angela del Toro has been namedropped in Marvel's "Jessica Jones" before, and Netfix had indeed expressed interest for a series with Mexican/Hispanic lead. That can't be a coincidence, right? For the Marvel uninformed, White Tiger is also a superpowered character that gained his power thanks to mysticism. And one related to Iron Fist! This is definitely an intriguing possiblity. One that leaves us to a more important question: Could this two characters shake up the show and change critics' current perception of the series? Hmmmmmm...

Of course, the bigger problem is... the building concern for "Iron Fist" doesn't stays on one spot, because it leads towards another big one. Buck, is also serving as the showrunner of Marvel's "The Inhumans"! Which is the reason why I'm putting the Marvel TV category below this one, rather than the opposite like I always do. "Iron Fist" is just a few days away from release, and it is then that we can finally judge with our very own eyes, whether it is as bad as the critics' said, or becomes a truly powerful dragon-conqueror in the second half as many expected. But really, if Buck couldn't even do justice with Iron Fist, a character that should have been practically easy and outlandish enough to explore, CAN he do better with Inhumans? I honestly doubt it.

Marvel TV

Eventhough my hype for Marvel's "The Inhumans" is still high, I really can't ignore the concern of having Scott Buck as the showrunner. Seriously, I wonder why or how Marvel TV was able to trust him for two projects at the same time? It's a different scenario with "The Defenders" showrunners. Because not only they were involved with the first season, they were appointed to do "The Defenders" AFTER the positive response of "Daredevil" Season 2. So it's speaking out of success, right?

But the show must go on, and that's precisely what's happening. Filming continues in Hawaii, and every public sighting is continuously reported by Reel News Hawaii via Twitter. One of their early report, confirmed that the production took place in Diamond Head crater. Since I haven't been fortunate enough to visit Hawaii, I have no clue what place that is. Apparently, it's a volcanic crater with tunnels, and a pretty massive one too in terms of scale. Could it represent the halls of Attilan then? Hmmm.

More intriguingly, the filming takes place in city area that literally has "Oahu Service" on its taxi. Does this mean Attilan will be located on Earth, in Hawaii, rather than on the Moon? In the comics, there were stories that depicted the Inhuman City to take place in the Himalayan, and even the Atlantic Ocean. But my issue is, shouldn't this be a problem, then? I mean, those who are watching Marvel's "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D." should be aware by now that they are tracking down Inhumans, and registrating them with the Sokovia Accords. How could a city this massive in scale escape the knowledge of governments around the world, then? It could easily be visible through satelitte's tracking, and all. It's enough that people are questioning why the Avengers never appear in the show, and vice versa. Doesn't having Attilan and the Royal Family on Earth only makes it a more strenuous affair?

This is where it gets more interesting. MCU Exchange reached out to Reel News Hawaii about the scene that featured Anson Mount's Black Bolt and Lockjaw. Turns out, it was filmed as some sort of "grand entrance for Black Bolt to the public eye". Apparently, Bolt's arrival caused a commotion, as local Honolulu (confirming it DOES take place in actual Hawaii) enforcement arrive on the scene, and public begins taking photos with their smartphones. Once again, cue the S.H.I.E.L.D. connection concern, because a huge event like this would be too big NOT to be noticed by governments. As for why Bolt is on Earth, the site speculated that the Inhuman King is having an urgent matter, forcing him to visit Earth for the first time (noted by his poor knowledge of technology).

Rest assured though, Reel News Hawaii also revealed that Attilan itself will consist of non-human looking citizens. Which is the way it should be, since unlike mutants, Inhumans come in different size, shapes, and forms. In addition to that, the Statue of Saint Damien of Molokai at the Hawaii State Capitol, has been replaced by a giant black-colored Monolith. Fans of "AoS" should be very familiar with this, as it was the exact macguffin that became the focus in Season 2. I could've sworn it has a different symbols compared to the ones messing around with Phil Coulson's head though. Which might be intentional, because that was in fact the symbol to a deserted ancient Inhumans city that accidentally caused Daisy Johnson to gain her natural power. Spotted on the same location, was actress Isabelle Cornish in costume as Crystal. Complete with her signature comic book style. Does this mean, the State Capitol is being used as the Inhumans Palace? Thus far, we have seen how Black Bolt, and Crystal look. I wonder how soon we'll see the rest of the cast too? Hmmm...

Kamen Rider

TOEI has officially released the trailer for the much anticipated 2nd season of "Kamen Rider Amazons". This successful web-series took the tokusatsu fanbase by storm when it was released last year. Eventhough I didn't enjoy it as much as everyone else, I'm still curious to see what they are going to pull off with the new season. Which by the way, will begin streaming on April 7th, 2017, ONLY via Amazon Prime Video. Turns out, and much to the surprise of many, the season will star a new Protagonist! Well... not really a shocking thing when you see it storytelling-wise, due to how the first season ended. After all, Tom Fujita's Haruka Misuzawa (Amazon Omega), and Masashi Taniguchi's Jin Takayama (Amazon Alpha) were left in rather... conclusive condition/situation.

Fear not though, those two characters, alongside many others (whom you could see flashing here and there in the trailer) have been confirmed to return. They will cannonically be involved in the drama between You Maejima's Chihiro, and Ayana Shiramoto's Iyu. Chihiro is our new protagonist, who will transform into Kamen Rider Amazon Neo (using the new Driver, Neo Amazons Driver), while Iyu is the Crow Amazon, who has been killed by the Amazons. Why the focus on this pair? Because the theme of this season is rather startling! This time, it's going to be about 'boys and girls'. HUH? Yeah, try to digest that new information slowly, okay!

Persona

Wow, it has been a while since I talk about "Persona 5", huh? Admittedly, my enthusiasm for the game has dropped as soon as the Japan version was released. That, alongside the repetitive delay for the English-language version, had basically made me forget about it. No kidding, life happens.

Anyways, the English version will be released very soon, precisely on April 4th, 2017. Pre-orders will include additional bonus materials, such as DLCs, themes, and avatars. In an attempt to remind fans that they aren't delaying this game any futher (Duh? The video is titled "The Phantom Thieves Are Ready to Roll on April 4"!), Atlus US has released a new 'Sizzle Reel Trailer' that showcased characters, gameplays, and a general plot of the game. If you prefer a more Velvet-y Room one, you could also see the introduction video for Caroline and Justine.

The King of Fighters

The first out of three (yeah, looks like there's only three characters instead of four) new paid DLC characters for "The King of Fighters XIV" has been announced. And it's not members of the Orochi clan as I predicted. This one's even better though, because it's Whip! Her inclusion as DLC didn't completely feel like a surprise, considering she does appear in the Team Endings for "Team K'" and "Team IKARI". Doing what she's good at too, bickering with Ralf Jones! LOL. Whoops? Is that, spoiler alert? Then again, even I had been wondering why she was left out from the original roster. I mean, with her unique fighting style and that famous whip attacks, she'd make a fine character that would stand out on her own. Look no more for the proof, but her official reveal trailer.

Of course, the big question now is, whether these 3 new characters form a Team, instead of being individual fighters. Speculation gets a little, difficult if they are. After all, in the past, Whip has been associated with the two major teams I've mentioned above. So the other possible character who might pair up with him would logically be Heidern, who is Leona's father / Commander and only showed up in "The King of Fighters 94". Problem is, the other silhouettes (since Whip is the one crouching on the left) don't look like Heidern. The middle one looks like a person wearing jacket, or a cape. Perhaps it is Adelheid Bernstein, who debuted on "The King of Fighter 2003"? Or Ash Crimson, judging from the hairstyle. But it could also be Blue Mary, who shows up in the ending for "Team Women Fighters". The right one, looks like a tall guy hunching, so obviously he reminds me of... Ryuji Yamazaki. This is just speculation though, because any of the others could simply be a totally new character.

Wait a sec! This is probably just me, but I'm STILL seeing 4 people in the silhouette. If you simply count the number of legs, ignoring the crouching Whip, then there are 5 feet visible! Have these reports that boldly state 'Three Characters' been mistaken, then? Or I'm just getting caught by optical illusion? Whip will be released on April 5th, 2017 for $4.99. That's pretty soon, so I guess we only need to wait a little longer to see how this turns out...

Final Fantasy

Lastly, or should I say, finally... we have brief news for "Final Fantasy XV". Official trailer for the first DLC episode has been released, and a release date has been announced as well. "Episode Gladiolus" is set to be released on March 28th, 2017, and will reported take two or three hours to complete. Under the guidance of Cor Leonis, looks like Gladioulus Amicitia will need to deal with Gilgamesh in order to gain stronger. That's the climax, I guess. For now, you can watch a gameplay video of the first 11 minutes, courtesy of Famitsu.

I happen to catch the full story cutscenes for the game over the weekend (thanks to a Youtube user, who else?), and I just realized that it had a rather... shall I say, somber conclusion. Which apparently is confusing if not disappointing many fans? Well, I thought that despite being super poignant, it was quite well done. Beside, this IS a "Final Fantasy" game, so why should one even expect a completely 'happy ending'? I just hope Square Enix won't disrupt this melancholic ending with unnecessary sequels. You know, like what they did with "Final Fantasy XIII"? Anyway, having seen the cutscenes, I now have a strong hint on when these DLCs will take place. My common sense is, they will take place during the 10 years gap/time jump, precisely between Chapter 13 - "Redemption", and 14 - "Homecoming". That means right before Noctis' long awaited return (as a Jesus Christ-esque figure?) to reclaim the throne in the final battle.

Since I haven't played the game myself, I'm curious if this is the Chapter 13 that many people have been complaining about. Also, I wonder if these DLCs are initially meant to be part of the game, but was scrapped to focus on Noctis' adventure? Hmmmm. Nevertheless, fans of Gladio will have the opportunity to play him as a main character, and not just an arguably passive support. Episodes that will feature Ignis Scientia and Prompto Argentum will then arrive one by one after this. So far both don't have a fixed release date, but we can expect them to arrive this year.

0 notes