#my favourite mutant characters that come to mind when i say ‘mutants in daily life’ in os

[whatudottu]

Honestly Ben 10 is probably one of the most based science fiction series out there by sheer virtue of it having the balls to showcase any alien concept it wanted to no matter how ridiculous, and whenever someone is like “there’s no way in Hell that could ever be scientifically feasible��, it dared to look them in the eyes and go “Yeah, well, this is a world where magic and superpowered mutants also exist. What are you gonna do? Cry about it? You grown ass adult who’s expecting scientific feasibility out of a cartoon meant to sell toys to preteen boys that has lore so inconsistent it’s almost impossible to tell what’s canon and what’s non-canon? LMAO loser.”

I mean OS had it all- obviously aliens but not only that, at minimum 10 of them; mutants in daily life across at least America, no doubt in other places too; magic, albeit one without a system beyond ‘there’s a spellbook and some charms’. The shift to purely alien in AF makes the wonderful nonsense sci-fi stuff into frustrating logic trees of ‘how does xenobiology get this powerful’ which I had definitely fallen into. Ben 10 is unabashedly science fantasy, so why not go the full fantasy and bring back mutants and magic, haha!

Admittedly a good implementation of magic in a series tends to follow a magic system, which I’m not especially great at coming up with, especially in comparison to speculative biology which come with pre-established rules. But hey, I don’t exactly expect it to be fleshed out, at least not as well as the alien aspect of Ben 10; even then, there’s only so much fleshed out, it’s to tease us into making lore for it lmao-

To be fair though, Ben 10 itself had to whack itself on the cheek in order to be reminded of its magic and especially mutant parts, which unfortunately in the latter case was central to major retcons so…

[comical-thoughts-blog]

Back to Basics

One of the main selling points of ResurrXion was the ‘back to basics’ approach in storytelling, a response to fans crying out for an approach to the X-Men franchise that seemed to get lost over time and between writers. But what exactly are the basics we’re getting back to, and just how far did we deviate from that particular norm?

The main component we decided was missing was the ‘element of fun’ , a nebulous concept and something which is entirely subjective. There’s no doubt the X-Men comics of yesteryear were fun, there was an energy and kinesis to the stories and characters that many would say has been missing over the last decade or two.

If we’re looking for the point when things started to change, Grant Morrison’s seminal run on New X-Men is probably a good place to begin – the X-Men’s usually large ensemble cast was whittled down to a core group, and gone were the bright, colourful costumes, replaced by the sleek leather uniforms of the on-screen X-Men. (This bit of synergy between comics and movies would be overshadowed by what would come with the inception of the MCU.)

Morrison’s New X-Men was definitely light on the fun, but it worked. It reimagined what the X-Men could be while also trying to ground our heroes in realism, a trend which continued for years after. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with bringing a little realism to a story, let’s be...realistic, these people snap mountains in half with the blink of an eye, there should be a limit to the realism. After a critically acclaimed 6 year run, the fans were starting to itch. The pendulum of change started its return journey to colourful superheroics in Joss Whedon’s Astonishing X-Men. Whedon’s first issue brought back the spandex, while still retaining a trim cast the tone was certainly lighter, but was that overall sense of fun injected back into the franchise? Not really.

After Whedon’s run it all starts to get a little more frantic and little less memorable. Claremont reappears for a few issues, then we end up dealing with most of the mutants being de-powered, moving on to a sprawling space-opera under Brubaker. There’s Deadly Genesis, Messiah Complex, the move to San Francisco/Utopia, then the whole Dark Reign thing, before we end up with Avengers fighting X-Men, then the X-Men fighting Inhumans.  Oh yes, and at some point there’s also the little scuffle between Scott and Logan which sees the X-Men split into rival factions and living on opposite ends of the country. Really, since the schism, the focus shifted away from fighting bad guys, to fighting each other – again, another trend that Marvel would run with until we could stomach it no longer.

This is the main focus of ‘back to basics’ - good guys against bad guys,  but it’s not the entire picture. For many years it was thought continuity discouraged new readers and so gradually there were less call backs to earlier storylines and characters. If you need evidence of this, compare some 90s and 00s comics to anything from say, 2005 onwards, those familiar little * --See UXM 348 notes from the editor are virtually impossible to find.

On panel there was another shift - it was getting rarer to see the X-Men going about their daily lives in the mansion – Storm watering her attic garden (yes, remember that?), a training session in the Danger Room, all that fan-favourite stuff was usually interrupted by the Next Big Thing. It was during these quieter moments we got the melodrama that made the X-Men seem more like a family than even the Fantastic Four did at times.

All these little moments, these little familiarities, are what made the X-Men feel different to the Avengers or Fantastic Four. The Avengers didn’t have their own regular bar or background of supporting cast – back in the day, the Avengers defended the world against threats no single hero could, that was their schtick and there wasn’t much else to it. Over the years as these little details were forgotten, that element was lost, and we felt a slow disconnection to the characters as they started to change, and not always for the better.

As I’ve said before, the problem with superhero comics is the paradox which lies at the heart of them – they must be dynamic and static concurrently. We want fresh and new and different, but we want it to  feel old and familiar. Change too much, and those intangible details which make the X-Men, the X-Men disappear. Change in superhero comics is attached to a rubber band, it all eventually snaps back into place. From Alcatraz to the Outback, Shi’ar space to Utopia, it all comes back to Westchester.

With ResurrXion books, there’s more than just a callback in the naming – there feels like a smaller storytelling scope – which is a good thing. Not every story needs to be about reality falling apart at the seams. The X-Men have a lot more familiar faces, the Claremontisms are a nice touch, and the X-Men feel like they’re dealing with their own Rogue’s Gallery once again. It’s all new and not so different, which is probably a better balance to strike.

But there is tenet to this whole idea of ‘element of fun’ - as the stories grow and change, we grow and change. We are not the same carefree 12 year olds eagerly devouring X-Men stories, we’re world-worn and weary adults now. We all loved the X-Men cartoon as kids, it’s how must of us got into comics, but re-watching it, and well, the quality of the animation doesn’t do it any favours – but then, it was never designed to appeal to a 30 year old. Superhero comics are the same.

There are a lot of new Marvel books I don’t like, and you know what I do? I don’t read them – they’re clearly not written with a 30 year old dude in mind as the target demographic. Childish jokes, dodgy dialogue, toilet humour...it’s not aimed at us. The books need to continually juggle an appeal to younger reader, while still engaging life-long fans, no easy feat. If there’s an element of fun missing, it’s because we’re further along our journey with these characters and stories. We’re past the puppy-love-do-no-wrong-find-every-detail-out to the comfortable-with-disappointment portion of our marriage.

I still get excited with comics, but it’s just in a different way now – it’s when a writer does something clever with a character or story, like when they take a long-standing assumption and twist it. My excitement mostly comes from outside of Marvel. It’s reading Jeff Lemire’s Black Hammer and seeing all the wonderful nods to comic lore, or reading Mark Millar’s Jupiter’s Legacy and enjoying a big blockbuster of super-heroics.

Our insistence on returning the fun to the X-Men is another manifestation of our modern-day moratorium on maturing. As we get older, we need to realise these books aren’t written solely for us – that’s not to say we must stop reading them, or that we can’t critique them, we just need to accept there will be bits for us, and stuff that isn’t.

We can’t expect the books to cater to us forever.

[klstheword]

Online & featured in today’s Daily Mail magazine - see above 

“Four years have passed since Dan Stevens had the nation choking on their mince pies when, as fresh-faced Matthew Crawley, he had a fatal car crash in the Downton Abbey Christmas special. He called it a ‘terrifying, monumental decision’ to leave the hit ITV drama, but now the gamble’s paid off. He’s since upped sticks with his jazz singer wife Susie Hariet and their two young children to live in New York. Now a full-blown film star, he bulked up and perfected an American accent to play the tough guy roles of a psychopathic US Army veteran in The Guest, and a drug trafficker in A Walk Among The Tombstones. As if determined to show his range, next month he opens in the latest Disney blockbuster, Beauty And The Beast, but before then he’s back on TV in Legion, a big-budget new series based on Marvel Comics characters. It’s essentially a spin-off from the X-Men franchise, the hit superhero films that have starred Hugh Jackman, Sir Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart and taken over £3.5 billion at the box office. Dan plays David Haller, the illegitimate son of Professor X, the leader of the X-Men who’s been portrayed on the big screen by both Patrick Stewart and, more recently, James McAvoy. But David has been brought up unaware that he might have a superhero side. Or as another of the characters puts it, ‘he has the power but he doesn’t understand it or know how to control it’. So Legion is not all about the flying, fighting action heroes battling against evil villains. Instead, the eight-part show, created by Noah Hawley, the man behind Emmy and Golden Globe-winning black comedy crime drama Fargo, is more psychological. Full of gleefully quirky personalities, at its centre is the tortured character of David, who may be more than human. ‘David’s quite a troubled young man,’ Dan explains when we meet on a cool afternoon in Los Angeles. He’s looking trim and relaxed in jeans and a grey sweatshirt, and is reassuringly far from the jittery bag of nerves that is his character in Legion. ‘As a result of being the professor’s offspring he has these incredible powers. But the problem is he’s not cognisant of them at all, and therefore, as far as he sees it, his “normal” human life has been beset by these strange events invading his surroundings, which people tell him he’s imagined. So from quite a young age he’s been diagnosed as being paranoid schizophrenic. He’s grown up being told one set of truths about his condition by psychologists, and then when our story begins, his world is invaded by a group of other people who tell him something quite different – that this is not a mental illness he has, this is real. That these are powers he really has.’

At the beginning of the show he’s trapped in a mind-numbing routine inside a psychiatric hospital, dressed in a retro tracksuit and with what he calls ‘mid-90s indie’ hair (think Noel Gallagher). But then a beautiful new patient Syd arrives (played by Fargo’s Rachel Keller). The pair feel drawn to one another, and she’s convinced he’s not schizophrenic but actually a powerful mutant. Inspired by her, he escapes and sets about trying to uncover his family history while joining forces with a group of fellow mutants to fight sinister government agents who want to control them. Dan says that, in order to prepare for the role, he embarked on a serious study of paranoid schizophrenia. ‘I had fascinating conversations with sufferers of this condition and also with one psychologist in particular in New York, who gave me a great deal of time and told me some very interesting stories. It turns out it’s not just crazy people in asylums who have this disorder – the psychologist talked about some very, very high-functioning members of society, CEOs of companies and editors of magazines, and all sorts of people who are out there trying to live a normal life in spite of it. I myself had a very good friend from college who suffered from it, and having seen it up close, it’s a terrifying condition. ‘One of the things that’s both frightening and awesome is that to people who have it, the delusions that affect them are very real. There’s not one of them who says, “OK, this part of my world is normal, and this part is crazy,” to them it all feels real. So there’s great confusion about what is actually happening and what isn’t. But having said that, it’s not without a certain humorous side as well – my college friend has quite a wry appreciation of his state sometimes, and we’ve added a comedic element to the show because if you look at it one way, it’s quite fertile ground for comedy. ‘Noah Hawley has a substantially different take on the superhero genre, and it was interesting to see the curve balls he threw in throughout the season. I guess it was to wake us up and keep us on our toes. I had to learn to play the banjo at one point, which came out of nowhere, and there are several dance numbers during the series, including a Bollywood-style routine.’ You’ll see him dance after the arrival of love interest Syd, as his emotions manifest themselves – although the scene may be just in his imagination. ‘It’s actually quite a mindbender of a show,’ he adds.

It’s certainly a far cry from playing Downton’s ever-upright Matthew Crawley, a role that followed on from appearances in TV period dramas Sense And Sensibility and The Turn Of The Screw. ‘Well, gosh, Downton and Legion are quite different shows, aren’t they?’ says Cambridge-educated Dan. ‘I suppose they’re similar in that in both there’s an amazing ensemble of actors to play against. But one is the story of a house in England at the beginning of the 20th century, and the other is a tale of mental disorder and a young man in a fictional universe, so there are really not huge amounts of intersection between the two. ‘The only castle we’re in in Legion is the castle of David’s mind! One place where I really noticed the difference between the two sets is the food we’re offered. The catering on American shoots is superb – it beats the Highclere biscuit tin, that’s for sure!’ Having played a drug trafficker and a gun-toting psycho in two Hollywood films, he says, with relief, that he thinks now, at 34, he’s escaped the trap of being seen only as the actor who played Matthew Crawley. ‘Although it’s not a bad thing to be considered a refined man with good manners,’ he adds. ‘But I also think typecasting comes from your own acting choices, and I pride myself in slipping into different modes for different roles. I think that since I left Downton I’ve been taking on such a range of stuff that it’s not a concern of mine.’ It helps that he’s undergone quite a physical transformation since his days on Downton – he’s lost a couple of stone in weight and allowed Matthew’s blond hair to darken to his own natural brown. ‘I actually put on a bit of weight for Downton because it seemed right for the period, and when it was over I lost it quite easily – I just stopped eating lots of bad things and started eating lots of good things, and it went away! The hair colour had actually been Julian Fellowes’s choice. If you remember in the beginning of Downton, Matthew didn’t come in until the very, very end of the first episode after he gets the letter from Lord Grantham. I’d been cast in the role, but they’d already been shooting for two and a half weeks before I came in, and during that time the producers had realised that almost all the male cast members had dark hair. So I had a call from Julian at the last moment, saying, “We’ve got too many brown-haired boys, would you mind being blond?” I said, “OK, fine,” because I was just pleased they’d asked me to dye it instead of re-casting, and as far as I knew the show was only going to last for one series. And then I ended up being blond for three years, although I must say I had a great time as a blond.’ His final Downton scene in 2012 was the crash that killed Matthew while he was returning from visiting his wife and newborn son in hospital. ‘It was strange lying under a car thinking about the past three years and the family of actors I’d be leaving. But it was time to go, although it was a show I’d been proud to be a part of. ‘I’d had to keep the death a secret because we’d been told there were to be no plot spoilers, so that was a little bit weird in the weeks running up. Obviously I knew, my wife knew, and my mum and dad knew, but we all had to sit on the secret. And the way Matthew went was quite shocking, which did upset some people. I actually watched it with my mum because she said she didn’t want to watch it on her own, she wanted me there to hold her hand! She was OK in the end, but I’m glad I was with her.’ It wasn’t only Dan’s mother who was horrified. Matthew’s death caused heartbreak among fans across the world. ‘I was apologising to people for months!’ Dan says. ‘First after Christmas in the UK, and then when it aired in America three months later, so there was a double whammy of grief. But I’ve had other things come out since, and people are starting to see what I’ve been up to, and beginning to understand why I did it.’ While being involved with the X-Men might in years to come impress his son Aubrey, who’s four, Dan says his upcoming role in Disney’s Beauty And the Beast has won him considerable clout with his seven-year-old daughter Willow. In the live-action remake, in which he sings and – once again – dances, he plays the arrogant young prince who’s punished by being transformed into the Beast. ‘Our family watch a lot of Disney movies but that’s a particular favourite. My daughter loves books, and I think the character of Belle appeals to bookish, wordy young girls, and she’s no exception. I brought her on set on the day we did the ball sequence at the beginning of the film – the prince is dancing with 60 princesses in big meringue dresses and beautiful jewel-encrusted wigs and she almost lost her mind with excitement!’ Willow’s reaction was less enthusiastic when it came to Dad’s transformation into the Beast. ‘She said I look like a hippo! I’m in a giant muscle suit covered with grey lycra, and I wear stilts that take me about 10in taller than I am, to 6ft 10in. I had to work hard to get my body into the right shape to walk around on those stilts – I wish I could have had feet that just screwed on and off but that wasn’t possible, so it was quite a physical challenge.’ Luckily his co-star Emma Watson was used to characters in strange costumes from her time on Harry Potter. ‘There are few actresses in the world who’ve worked with this kind of technology as much as Emma; she’s grown up with it, so it’s second nature to her. It also helped that she was very nice, very intelligent and engaged with the story.’ When Dan’s not working, he’s relaxing in the home in Brooklyn he shares with his family. ‘Upping sticks has been a great adventure,’ he says. ‘I’ve loved New York since I first visited years ago when I was in a play. I stayed with a friend on the Upper West Side, and I fell in love with New York so much I’d walk from his apartment to Brooklyn just to be part of it. It was a wonderful experience. I always dreamed of living there, and I’m very excited to have made that happen.’ And he can safely say he’s finally moved on from poor old Matthew Crawley.   Legion starts on Thursday at 9pm on Fox.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4187644/From-Matthew-Crawley-awesome-superhero.html#ixzz4XhmIlOAb 

Good to read - so much to appreciate in Dan’s intelligent and thoughtful approach to his roles....and... that hand-hold would have been welcome here too!

[randomrichards]

MOVIES (THAT MIGHT BE) WORTH CHECKING OUT IN JUNE 2019:

June 7:

DARK PHOENIX

We begin with the last part of the X-Men prequel series.

Led by a young Professor Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), a small group of young mutants have grown from students to superheroes. They can even travel to space to rescue astronauts. But one interstellar mission goes wrong when telekinetic psychic Jean Grey (Sophia Turner) absorbs a mysterious energy. She not only survives, but she’s become more powerful. But this power begins to corrupt her mind, which attracts the attention of a mysterious woman (Jessica Chastain). Soon she becomes the destructive force known as the Dark Phoenix. Now her friends and mentors must decide how to stop her. Charles and Jean’s boyfriend Scott “Cyclops” Summers (Tye Sheridan) try to save her from the corrupt energy. Metal-bending holocaust survivor Erik “Magneto” Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender) believes the world can only be saved by killing Jean. We also see the return of fan favourites including Peter “Quicksilver” Maximoff (Evan Peters), Raven aka Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence), Hank “Beast” McCoy (Nicholas Hoult) and Ororo “Storm” Munroe (Alexandra Shipp).

Dark Phoenix saga is considered one of the most beloved X-Men stories of all time. It was the story that made Jean both a complex character and one of the most powerful characters in the Marvel Universe. Fox Studios tried their hand at the story in X-Men: The Last Stand. The results were less than stellar. If they fail the second time, there will be hell to pay from the fans.

That’s where Simon Kinberg comes in. This will be his directorial debut after writing previous X-Men movies. This is a mixed bag. On one hand, he wrote one of the best X-Men films; Days of Future Past. But he also wrote the Last Stand as well as the underwhelming X-Men: Apocalypse. It also doesn’t help that he wrote Fan4Stic and This is War. So, we’re just going to have to wait and see if it will live up to the legendary story.

LATE NIGHT

Mindy Kaling draws inspiration from her early years as a TV writer for Saturday Night Live and The Office for this career-driven comedy.

It looks like Molly Patel (Kaling) is on her way to becoming a tv writer when she gets her first writing gig as staff writer for “Tonight with Katherine Newberry.” But she already feels out of place as the token hire in a room full of white male Harvard grads. It doesn’t help that the host(Emma Thompson) is a real hard ass. Unfortunately, Katherine has her own problems. She’s plummeting in the ratings and if she doesn’t turn it around, she will be gone in a year. In desperation, Katherine seeks advice from her writers to spruce up her image. It looks like the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

Many will notice parallels between Late Night and the Devil Wears Prada. Like the later, Late Night centres on a naïve young woman dealing with an over demanding boss in their attempt to achieve her dream job. As you may already know, The Devil Wears Prada was a surprise hit thanks to Streep’s unique portrayal of feared fashion magazine mogul Miranda Priestly and there were a few attempts to replicate it. The result is hit and miss at best.

For this to succeed, both the writing and the performances must click. The script needs to have a clear understanding of the business it’s portraying. With this in mind, Kaling has an advantage with her experience as both a tv writer of The Office and the creator of The Mindy Project. But writing for a weekly sitcom is a little different from writing for a daily late-night show.

The most important character to get right is the boss. The writing must make this character entertaining, with many hilarious lines for the actor to deliver. Plus, the audience must buy that this character has earned respect in the business. As for the actor, she not only have to deliver a hilarious performance, but must also bring some humanity into this archetype. Not only did Streep provide a unique spin to the Boss from Hell with Priestly, but she also made the character human. If anyone can provide the same quality, it’s Thompson.

THE SECRET LIFE OF PETS 2

Illumination takes us back to their surprise hit about what pets do when the humans aren’t allowed.

While the first film centres on one storyline, this one seems to be divided the film into multiple stories. The first plot centres on canine protagonist Max (Patton Oswalt replacing Louis C.K.). He has gotten used to new dog Duke (Eric Stonestreet), but now he faces the idea of his owner Katie (Ellie Kemper) getting married and having a kid. But on the plus side, they get to go on a road trip to the countryside. But that goes downhill when Max gets terrorized by a turkey. In desperation, he seeks guidance from stern top dog Rooster (Harrison Ford) to overcome his fears.

Meanwhile, Max’s friends are having their own adventures. Max’s toy is left in a cat lady’s room and Max’s love Gidget (Jenny Slate) disguises herself as a cat to get it back.  At the same time, deranged bunny Snowball (Kevin Hart) has gone from freeing pets to playing superhero for a little girl. But he seizes the opportunity to be a real superhero when a dog named Daisy (Tiffany Haddish) calls on him to rescue a white tiger named Hu from a circus.

When Illumination introduced the world to Gru and his Minions with Despicable Me, it felt like the animation world has a new voice. With a collection of memorable characters, fast-paced visual gags and a unique, hipster-esque look, the film seemed like a breath of fresh air, especially compared to the similar film Megamind. Since then, the film has presented one hit film after another, especially the Secret Life of Pets. Then audience members began losing patience for Illumination for two reasons. First reason was the Minions. At first, they became fan favorites of Despicable Me.[1] But then they were everywhere, from carnival prizes to memes. Overexposure set in and no one could stand them anymore.

Another problem was that Illumination played it too safe with their movies. They play it too safe with their budget, creating each film with a much lower budget than most animated movies. While it’s miracle for an animated film to be made on a low budget, the result is less impressive animation and more rehashed character designs. Just as unimpressive is the storytelling, which most often uses tired tropes with little refreshing spin on it. The Secret Life of Pets itself was accused of being a Toy Story rip off. Apart from the Despicable Me movies, Illumination Movies are considered mediocre at best.

It’s important for filmmakers to grow as artists to avoid becoming stale and complacent. But I’m not holding my breath in this case. I will say this film may serve as a good afternoon out for the family.

June 12:

ROLLING THUNDER REVIEW: A BOB DYLAN STORY

Coming to Netflix is this rockumentary from Martin Scorsese. Need I say more?

Scorsese had already made a documentary about Bob Dylan with No Direction Home. Now he narrows his focus to Dylan’s 1975 Rolling Thunder tour.

As if I need to defend interest in this movie. It’s Martin Scorsese after all.

June 14:

AMERICAN WOMAN

Sienna Miller plays Deb, a blue-collar woman struggling to make ends meet in a small Pennsylvanian town. She faces her worst nightmare when her teenage daughter goes missing, leaving Deb with her grandson. The film takes place over 11 years as Deb raises the baby and tries to find closure with her daughters’ disappearance.

American Woman’s already garnering acclaim from its premier at last year’s Toronto International Film Festival, especially from Miller’s performance as a desperate mother. It looks like the film will hook us into the desperation of a woman trying to keep a roof over her head. We may also see a realistic look at the struggle of living in poverty. In these moments, we may also see the strength that allows people like Deb to survive in such environments.

Sadly, it looks like this one will be swept under the radar unless Miller gains awards consideration.

THE DEAD DON’T DIE

Jim Jarmusch takes an unexpected turn into Zombie comedy with The Dead Don’t Die.

The little town of Centreville finds its peaceful existence threatened when zombies rise from the grave. That’s the plot in a nutshell. What could make this film stand out is the quirky characters including Bill Murray as Police Chief Cliff Robertson, Tilda Swinton as katana-wielding mortician Zelda Winston and Iggy Pop as a coffee-loving Punk Zombie. Also, among the cast are Adam Driver, Steve Buscemi, Danny Glover, Selena Gomez, Carol Kane, Rosie Perez, RZA, Chloe Sevigny and Tom Waits.

This is probably the least likely film for Jarmusch to make. He’s usually known for droll character studies. His films do have humor, but it’s usually low key. The trailers make this film seem like a broad comedy. I suspect this could be a trick by the trailer considering I see a few of Jarmusch’s trademarks; droll acting, eccentric characters and roles played by musicians.

I suspect that Jarmusch loved how George A. Romero inserted satirical commentary into the Zombie Genre because you can see similar elements in this film. Both films have zombies copying activities they’ve done in life. In this case, we see zombies holding cell phones and drinking coffee. It would be interesting to see what satire Jarmusch puts into the film.

MEN IN BLACK: INTERNATIONAL

We return to the intergalactic secret agency, though without Agents J and K.

A young woman (Tessa Thompson) has found the MIB Agency after decades of searching. This impossible accomplishment impresses Agent O (Emma Thompson) so much that O recruits her under the name Agent M. Her first assignment takes her to London, where she’s teamed up with leader High T (Liam Neeson) and fellow Agent H (Chris Hemsworth). Their case brings him face to face with the Hive, a gang of shape-shifting aliens. Cue an array of giant laser guns, flying cars and noisy crickets.

A spin off to such a successful franchise is a huge gamble. The chances of success are very slim[2], especially when the original films starred one of the most charismatic actors of all time. Yes, Hemsworth, Neeson and the Thompsons have a lot of charm, but filling the shoes of Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones is a daunting task. The film seems to have potential with a variety of environments, creative weapons and creative alien designs. Plus, it looks like the little alien Pawny (Kumail Nanjiani) could be a potential scene stealer.

There is hope in the form of Director F. Gary Gray. He’s proven his skills as an action director with The Fate of the Furious as well as underrated gems like The Italian Job and Set it Off. He’s also proved he can direct comedy via Friday. With this resume, it seems fitting for him to direct a movie like this. It may not hold a candle to the original, but at least this film looks like it will be entertaining.

June 21:

ANNA

Luc Besson really loves himself some lady killers, doesn’t he?

This time the lady killer is Anna Poliatova (Sasha Luss), a former Russian model turned Government assassin. There’s not much known about the plot beyond her boss (Helen Mirren) sending her to a job in Paris. It’s certain to involve Luke Evan’s character. It also looks like the film will be structured around an interrogation between Anna and Cilian’ Murphy’s agent.

But let’s be honest, you don’t really watch a Luc Besson film for the plots. You watch it for the badass action scenes and eye-catching visuals. The trailer certainly delivers on these, with one standout fight scene in a dining room, cultivating in Anna killing bodyguards using broken plates..

The question is if the plot is engaging enough for us to sit through two hours? Or should we just wait for the dining room fight scene to appear on YouTube? Unfortunately, his films have been lacking in quality in recent years. This one could turn it around, but I suspect this is another example of a director letting his style run amok at the expense of storytelling.

CHILD’S PLAY

Chucky returns to the big screen after a couple straight to video sequels.

Many of you know the story like the back of your hand. Single mother Karen Barclay (Aubrey Plaza) buys her son Andy (Gabriel Bateman) a Chucky toy. Then one night, Andy’s babysitter’s found dead outside of her home. And as everyone knows by now, it turns out the Chucky Doll (now voiced by Mark Hamill) is possessed by a serial killer who’s determined to pass his soul into Andy.

Like many horror fans, I’m tired of all the remakes of horror classics. Everyone knows they are lazy cash grabs. They are especially unnecessary we are seeing a growing number of original horror movies.

I will admit I find the idea of Chucky connected to the technology ala Alexa interesting. To think of him manipulating the environment present opportunities for more original kills.

This film will mark the first time Chucky’s not voiced by Brad Dourif. I have high hopes for Hamill, but like Freddy Krueger, you can’t imagine anyone else playing these characters because the original actors made the characters their own. You only hear Chucky’s voice at the end of the latest trailer, and it sounds a lot like Dourif’s. But it’s not enough to judge Hamill’s performance. I’m still not holding my breath.

THE COMMAND (or KURSK)

On one Saturday morning of August 2000, an explosion sends the 2000 K-141 Kursk to the bottom of the sea. Now Mikhail Averin (Matthias Schoenaerts) and fellow German sailors fight for survival. Meanwhile, Mikhail’s wife Tanya (Lea Seydoux) fights to get the Government to save her husband. British Commodore David Russell (Colin Firth) offers his men and equipment to rescue them but the bureaucracy led by Vladimir Petrenko (Max Von Sydow) prevent them from doing so.

Drawing from Robert Moore’s non-fiction book A Time to Die, The Command brings an unflinching portrayal of Government negligence putting innocent lives at risk and average people putting up a fight for those they love.

Director Thomas Vinterberg has had a fascinating career. He’s started out as one of the founding members of Dogme95, a film movement that involves making films as realistically as possible. Not only were you required to shoot improvised and on location, but you couldn’t even move the set pieces or use film lighting. This led to his most acclaimed film Festen (or the Celebration), an unflinching drama about a party where the staff helps a man reveal that his father molested his sister and drove her to suicide. But in recent years, he has flipped between sticking to his roots with the recent film the Commune and his Oscar-nominated film the Hunt and period dramas like Far from the Madding Crowd and this film. He’s proven himself just as skills with conventional films as he is with his Dogma.

This film has a better chance of gaining attention since it’s an English-speaking film. But this may be another film only show in arthouse theatres.

TOY STORY 4

Pixar returns to the film that jump started the revolution of CGI animated classics.

Woody (Tom Hanks), Buzz (Tim Allen) and their friends are enjoying their new roles as Bonnie’s toys. Now Emily’s new toy includes Forky (Toby Hale), a neurotic toy made from a spork, popsicle sticks and googly eyes. Woody makes it his duty to protect Bonnie’s new favourite toy. But Forky would rather be a disposable utensil than a toy. During a road trip, Forky hops out the window to freedom and Woody jumps out to get him back. Of course, they end up lost and need to talk a long journey back. Their long walk leads them to Grand Basin, a small town where a carnival’s taking place. That’s where he reunites with his old flame Bo Peep (Annie Potts), who enjoys an independent life alongside other antique toy. He also encounters arrogant Canadian stunt toy Duke Caboom (Keanu Reeves) and a creepy doll Gabby (Christina Hendricks), who’s determined to keep Woody at an old antique shop alongside her creepy Dummy henchman.

Meanwhile, Buzz is at Grand Basin to look for Woody. His attempts are undermined by the carnival, especially two hostile plushies Bunny (Jordan Peele) and Ducky (Keegan-Michael Key).

When Toy Story came out, it revolutionized the animation industry. Not only was it the first CGI-animated film, but it put Pixar on the map as a force to be reckon with. It also set a standard in storytelling for the later films to reach, which it kept surpassing with each sequel. Then it hit its highest peak with the third movie, which served as the perfect send off.[3] It’s exciting to return to the series. Albeit, there are some reservations about making a fourth movie, especially with how perfect Toy Story 3’s ending was. But with Andrew Stanton (co-writer of the original trilogy and the Director of Finding Nemo and Wall-E) co-writing the script alongside Stephany Folsom, I have a lot of hope for this one. And many want this to succeed.

WILD ROSE

A Scottish woman becomes a Nashville country singer. A feel-good premise like this is sure to make audiences curious.

The singer in question is Rose-Lynn Harland (Jessie Buckley), a troubled ex-con struggling to feed her family in Glasgow. Now she faces many struggles to get back on her feet and achieve her dream. Considering the fact many country singers were ex-cons, it looks like she’s off to a good start.

Audience members love themselves an underdog story and this one seems like an entertaining one. Plus, Buckley’s garnering acclaim for her performance. If this film gets enough attention, this could be a sleeper hit.

June 28:

OPHELIA

Based on the novel by Lisa Klein, Ophelia retells the story of Hamlet from Ophelia’s point of view. This can either be compelling or blah. It depends on whether the writing can go beyond just being “Hamlet...but with Ophelia” and present a whole new perspective on the tragedy and bring new dimension to the characters. There have been successful attempts with Paula Vogel’s Desdemona: A Play about a Handkerchief and especially Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.

The question is, does Semi Chellas have what it takes to pull this off? The only real standouts in her resume are writing for Mad Men and the Romanoffs, which fit into the character-oriented drama like Ophelia. Director Claire McCarthy seems to do a lot of films of people traveling to foreign countries. Beyond that, nothing really stands out about her work.

What she does have going for her is an astounding cast including Clive Owen, Naomi Watts and Daisy Ridley taking on the title role.

YESTERDAY

What if you woke up one morning and found you were the only person who remembered the Beatles? That is what happens to struggling musician Jack Malik (Himesh Patel) when he goes through the classic trope of getting knocked upside the head and waking up in a world where weird shit like this happens. He takes advantage of this opportunity to claim credit for the songs and garner worldwide fame.

What does concern me is the premise can fill two hours of screen time. To me, this seems like it could fill a half-hour short film. It all depends on how engaging the characters are, especially Jack. If we can’t relate to him, it’s all over. There is hope with co-writer Richard Curtis, whose created classic romantic comedies including Four Weddings and a Funeral and Bridget Jones Diary as well as co-creating Blackadder and Mr. Bean. But he’s also written mediocre romantic comedies like About Time, so there’s no guarantee.

And then there’s director Danny Boyle, the man whose energetic directing style has provided such modern classics in every genre, whether they be anti-drug dramas (Trainspotting), biopics (127 Hours) or even an underdog story from India (Slumdog Millionaire). But his films have become more hit and miss lately, with no real standout since Steve Jobs.

There’s strong credibility but no guarantee.

[1] Most of this is because unlike other sidekicks, they contributed more to the plot beyond random gags.

[2] There are a few spin offs that succeeded both critically and commercially. Among them are Creed, Deadpool and Finding Dory.

[3] Plus, it’s the only sequel to win the Oscar for Best Animated Feature.