Aquaman

Dir: James Wan

2018

**

I really don’t want to start a review of a DC film by comparing it to the films made by Marvel but I find it impossible to do so. On one hand I think it is commendable that Aquaman is a standalone film whereby you don’t have to have watched the other Justice League films in order to understand it all, which I think is important, but then on the other hand the nerd inside feel a little hungry and forgotten. I was far more of a DC reader growing up, so I wanted to be thrown a tid-bits to get my chops round but there was very little here for me to chew. However, I’m going to start with the good. Jason Momoa is the perfect Aquaman. The character was always going to be a hard sell and is probably one of the hardest comic characters to bring to the screen. The MCU left Namor the Sub-Mariner out of their universe for good reason. The new look DC developed for Aquaman, is very clever and Momoa has the charm, humour and humility – as well as the muscles – to perform such a superhero. The possibilities for scope seemed endless and I’m really glad DC/Warner Bros went full on outrageous when depicting the underwater kingdom. I loved how the sea-folk rode on the backs of Seahorse and Sharks and I loved the vastness of their kingdom. The could have toned it down and I’m glad they didn’t. Everything else I liked about the film cannot be accredited to the film, but rather to the films Aquaman has copied. Everything from The Abyss to Disney’s The Little Mermaid has been copied. I’m not overlooking the fact that all these films are set under water either – many parts of the ocean of course look the same – but the design of the underwater worlds are near identical. The DC movies have been criticized a lot for being too dark but Aquaman is far too colourful at times and for a film that rips off so many nautical-themed movies, I do wonder why they didn’t take a few notes from one of the greatest aquatic films ever made: Jaws. The majority of the film takes place underwater – as it should – but the above water action came across as a poor-man’s version of an Indiana Jones movie and I don’t mean any of the first three, I’m talking a poorer version of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Aquaman could never have been made on this scale back in the 1980s or 90s because the CGI needed hadn’t been developed yet but still, in 2018 I think the effects could have been better. Some of the underwater scenes are cartoonish and some look like polished scenes from old episodes of LEXX and seaQuest DSV. Sometimes less is more, I do admire them for going all out but so many of the scenes looked utterly ridiculous that I found it too hard to take seriously. I can’t accept escapism as an excuse either, this should have filled audiences with wonder but it didn’t, it looked cheap and the comic characters just looked like uncomfortable actors in wet spandex – which is exactly what they were. Stop me if I’m wrong but aren’t Superheros meant to be super and heroic? Patrick Wilson’s Steppenwolf has to be the most two-dimensional villain of every comic book adaptation put together. His plan is as transparent as the water he breaths/drinks/pees in, and yet all of the masterful and great thinkers of the Ocean kingdom can’t see through it. Considering they can speak to all marine life, you would think that an eavesdropping pilchard would have let slip or something but no, in the DC universe the heroes are as equally dumb as the villains and strength means everything. The story is predictable and boring. The special effect technology has advanced but Aquaman is ever bit as bad as it would have been had it been made decades ago. I’m not saying DC should copy Marvel, they certainly shouldn’t, but the bar has been raised and they needed to do better. Marvel isn’t really doing anything that unique – they are using all the best elements that already exist in the comics and are weaving them together. The structure of the Marvel films is pretty formulaic, they actually use the same tricks time and time again, they’re just far more creative with it. They understand that the villain has to be just as developed as the hero at least and for me that is Aquaman’s biggest issue. That and the fact that it has two crap villains instead of one. The script was given to David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick and Will Beall to write, Johnson-McGoldrick having written the Conjuring films and Beall only having one credit to his name. Was there really no one else more qualified? I get why James Wan was offered the directional post but he really wasn’t suited to it. The big problem is the distinct lack of charm. Jason Momoa has it in spades but the script and the villain do not. Loki is one of the most popular characters in the MCU, why can’t DC understand this? This isn’t just a superhero/comic book adaptation thing either, this is a fundamental story telling thing. Marvel have made it seem like they’re breaking all the rules when they’re not, DC are just abiding by all the rules and are making boring and predictable movies that are less interesting than the stories kids come up with when playing with their action figures. There is a wealth of source material they could have used but it is clear that no one involved has ever been a fan of the comic, and for me that is a problem. Aquaman’s origins are actually quite interesting, as he was first written as an allay during the Second World War, defeating Nazi U-boats. I’m not sure how they could have re-visited that chapter of his incarnation but it would have been far more interesting than this. It was because DC insisted on copying Marvel that things went wrong. Each character should have been established first and then the Justice League film should have been made. Still, it is actually quite apt and authentic that Aquaman has stolen from so many films, after all, he was based on/created as a rival of Namor the Sub-Mariner who was sinking Nazi U-boats a good three years before him. A spectacular film, but not in a good way.

Furious 7 (AKA Fast & Furious 7)

Dir: James Wan

2015

***

The seventh film of the Fast & Furious franchise sees a new director in the shape of James Wan and is all the better for it in my opinion. The story suffers from all the same things the previous films suffered from; poor acting, unbelievable story, misogynistic imagery, an overbearing feeling of smugness and the unfinished Thunderbirds doll that is Vin Diesel, but they have also upped their game somewhat. The audience is graced with all new action sequences never before seen in the franchise including skydiving cars, exploding car parks and a gloriously over the top stunt that sees a super-car driving through Dubai's Etihad towers in mid-air. Not a tank in sight I'm pleased to say. The family has been streamlined somewhat but the core members are present. Honorary family member Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson has a smaller part to play, probably because he had other commitments but I can't help but think they didn't want to feature him too much as he is easily the most interesting character of the series and not an original 'family' member. Number 7 can also boast the best bad-guy of the franchise so far but this is almost detrimental to the desired effect of the writers as Jason Statham is far more likable than any of the other actors put together. This seems to have been addressed by simply removing any dialogue from Statham's character. He is essentially a face in a car. It's another stupid addition to the franchise, one that should have finished after one film, let alone seven. So why do I keep returning to watch the next instalment? Apart from the fact I simply review movies I'm not really sure. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do next, I guess familiarity works. I also can't wait to see what stupid stunt they will try to pull next, sadly I think the next big trick they will have to pull off doesn't involve cars though. Paul Walker died before the film was completed and many of the scenes were re-written and filmed using his two brothers as stand-ins. The last segment of the film is actually a well-crafted and tender tribute to the actor that the cast and crew should be proud of. How the franchise will continue without him is uncertain but like everyone else, I'll be watching it. I have no idea how Furious 7 has become one of the highest grossing films of all time but well done to them, seventh attempts a charm and all that. At least the one thing that has always bothered me has now been corrected. It wasn't clear what The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift was about and how it fit into the other films, but now that it has been explained that Fast and Furious, Fast Five and Fast & Furious 6 all happened before and only Furious 7 has happened after, it finally makes sense. I feel I can move on and enjoy the other films more so now. It is nice to know that Lucas Black is back in the series and although the addition of Kurt Russel was odd and somewhat pointless, it was very welcome all the same. The best of the franchise so far.

Insidious: Chapter 2

Dir: James Wan

2013

***

I thought James Wan's 2010 Insidious was a somewhat original take on the classic haunted house scenario with a few cliches but mainly exploring new ideas. His 2013 follow up is, as you'd expect from a continuing story, more of the same. The impact of the first film is lost but the suspense, thrills and fun had in the first chapter is still present, as is the pesky ghost, who just can't seem to let the Lambert family go. This time however, the ghost in question has an extra dimension. Wan furthers ideas explored in the first film and comes up with some very clever ideas that cross time, space and the other place rather brilliantly. The big scares aren't as big however in the follow up and we do cover a lot of old ground. The humour doesn't always work either but the characters delivering the funnies are likable and so get away with it just. The real heart of the film's success is still Lin Shaye's Elise Rainer. How they worked her character back into the film here is fantastic and if the franchise is to remain, it will now always have to feature her for me to be interested. A solid, and above all, fun haunted house movie.

Saw
Dir: James Wan
2004
****
James Wan's original 2004 film Saw truly was an original horror/thriller with a new bad guy who's up there with Freddy and Jason but is actually much scarier. It had been some time since a great film like this had come along and shaken up the genre and it remained unbeaten for quite a few years after. The inventiveness of the story is at the core of its success. It's a puzzle, a 'who done it', a murder mystery, a suspenseful thriller and a gory horror. It also had some depth to it, there is never a good reason for murder but our villain wasn't your typical indiscriminate knife welding monster, he had a plan and people were chosen for a reason. This makes the story even more chilling and delectably entertaining.

Insidious
Dir: James Wan
2010
***
This review includes Spoilers. Considering the Haunted House genre has been done to death, Insidious doesn't do too bad a job. It was a brave move by it's makers that paid off but it's not brilliant. The first half is a case of 'It's what you don't see' that scares you and this works - better than Paranormal Activity in my opinion. It's the second half that really lets it down though, when you begin to see the Insidious ones the scares become somewhat sparse. It's a little cliched too, you wait an hour to see a Ghost and when you do it's just a bunch of pale looking people in Victorian clothing. Boo indeed. Actually, the 'Red face in Kitchen scene was good but it was the only 'Jump out of your seat' scene which there should have been more of. The fantasy end comes very close to cheesy 80's horror storyline-wise but without it being as fun as that was back then and by the end you're really not that bothered about how it ends because chances are you've already worked it out (not that it makes much sense anyway). Nice to see Lin Shaye in a good role though, she's earned it after all the crap she's been given all these years. I've seen better but I've seen a hell of a lot worse, it's worth a watch horror fans.

The Conjuring
Dir: James Wan
2013
**
The Conjuring is a mix of similar horror sub-genres which works well as far as story goes but it's nothing we haven't seen before. Horror films are remembered for the fright scenes, the real talent comes in making the most of the scenes in-between. The Conjuring goes so far in doing this successfully but doesn't go far enough. What is nice to see for a change is some proper character development, both Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson as the Warrens adding an extra element to the dimensions of the classic haunted house story. The fright scenes aren't really worth the wait though unfortunately and there are so many cliches its just not funny (or scary, obviously).