Aleksandar_Ilic Reviews

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)

In modern movies, when they make a film purely to be just a comedy, it fails, but when they insert elements of humor through some other genre like this, then it is enjoyable

[7/10 · 23 April 2023]

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves has directed by the film-making duo John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein. That is the 3rd time some movie to be directed by two people in the last month. The others are Scream 6 and 65, so this is becoming the new trend in filmography.

This film-making duo previously directed Vacation (2015) and Game Night (2018). Both movies were disappointing comedies that were humorless, so I didn't have much hope this time either. The good news is that this is not the case now. Honor Among Thieves is a hilarious movie.

They started the movie on a good foot, and from the opening scene, it became so inviting to watch. The funniest joke is at the beginning of the film during the trial, so I got optimistic from the start that the movie would be engaging.

It is basically a heist movie, and I liked how they presented the heist. Usually, in films, we see how the characters devise some plan and stick to it as if they know it will be successful beforehand. Here we see how a robbery can always go wrong. It leads to the characters needing to find multiple backup plans to pull off the venture because they don't know which one might be right. It gives another layer of realism to movies.

It is not just a robbery solely to get rich. The main character has his own personal reasons for doing it. Thanks to this, we can understand his motivations clearly. Luckily, they didn't spend much time on flashbacks to draw viewers into the story and characters as the first film in the franchises usually does.

Lead actor Chris Pine was great. He deserves more lead roles in big-budget movies. I first saw him on film in Star Trek (2009). J. J. Abrams did a great job casting him in the lead role and discovering his talent. He has become a very charismatic actor over time. It was nice to see Hugh Grant in this movie. We didn't have many opportunities to see him in big-budget films in the last ten years except when he starred in films directed by Guy Ritchie.

Michelle Rodriguez was exactly like in every movie she stars in. Fierce to the core. It comes to light, especially when the film is full of action scenes like this one. The problem appears when you have such a tough actress like Michelle Rodriguez, then the lead actor tends to get overshadowed during the action scenes. Chris Pine's character was so useless that she kept saving him constantly throughout the movie. It is becoming very offensive for men to be portrayed as weak and incapable in films. It is similar to Wonder Woman (2017) when he played the lead role with Gal Gadot. I understand that in Wonder Woman, Gal Gadot is a superhero, so she is more powerful than Chris Pine. But I don't know why in Dungeons & Dragons, he is like a sissy. They can make action scenes where they participate equally in defeating the opponent with joint forces. I understand that in the game Dungeons and Dragons, each competitor has specific abilities, so some are intelligent, and some are stronger than others. And it's good that they used it in the movie to make it resemble the game as closely as possible. Then my question is, why should a woman be the strongest in the film? It is starting to bother me a lot when the female gender has portrayed as superior, but males are like damsels in distress.

My favorite part of the movie was when they went to the Underdark. Many action scenes accompanied by witty humor make this part of the movie entertaining. In modern movies, when they make a film purely to be just a comedy, it fails, but when they insert elements of humor through some other genre like this, then it is enjoyable.

The action scenes were filmed well, but due to the over-reliance on CGI, it might not look as good in ten years. I know this is a fantasy film, and it makes sense that we have a lot of CGI, but look at how amazing the Harry Potter films look 20 years later with lots of practical effects, and you'll get the point.

They don't make movies like this anymore. A fantasy/adventure movies that are actually fun to watch.

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania (2023)

The story resembles the Rick and Morty TV show, only without humor or compelling adventures

[2/10 · 23 March 2023]

Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania is the 3rd installment in an Ant-Man movie franchise and the 31st movie in the MCU universe. This movie is the beginning of Phase Five, which belongs to the Multiverse Saga, which started after the Infinity Saga ended. A little confused? I don't blame you. It becomes so convoluted that many people who go to watch it in theaters don't know such information. Phase Four has ended with Black Panther: Wakanda Forever movie, and I honestly can say now that the whole Phase Four was underwhelming by Marvel standards. So you are wondering what the new Phase Five looks like? Disappointing again! MCU's glory days are over.

In this movie, the new antagonist of Multiverse Saga, Kang The Conqueror, has been established. A problem with the villain is that he is not nearly as strong as everyone expected. Kang should be a real threat to the universe like Thanos was in Infinity saga, but after watching the movie, I don't see him as menacing as Thanos. Kang can barely fight against Ant-Man and the Wasp, so the final fight in the third act is dissatisfying and anti-climatic.

Another problem with the movie's antagonist was the lack of motivation. We completely understood the reasons why Thanos wanted to conquer the world. Kang's motivations are simply revenge and an urge for power. That would be fine for some villain in another Marvel movie, but we are talking about the villain who will fight Avengers in the upcoming Avengers: The Kang Dynasty movie coming to theaters in 2025. One of the reasons Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame were great was thanks to the superb setup for Thanos's character in previous movies. They already failed in the introduction of the antagonist in this movie.

I started talking about the villain first cause I considered it to be the main issue. Another antagonist called M. O. D. O. K. Was a fiasco too. The design for this character was awful to the point you can't keep watching him without laughing at him. Even the characters in the movie were cracking jokes about his appearance. Ant-Man movies are known for weak villains, but this is another level. It is becoming ridiculous. Even though CGI is captivating, M. O. D. O. K.'s CGI face is atrocious and unfinished.

Special effects for landscapes and backgrounds left a great impression on me. Unfortunately, this looks very familiar within the MCU universe as it reminds me of Guardians of the Galaxy style. A movie needs to be more distinctive. Especially the monster's design resembles a lot of Star Wars characters. It even has the cantina scene. As long as they play it safe, creativity is in danger here.

Don't get me wrong, Jonathan Majors as Kang The Conqueror is a great actor and a welcomed addition to the cast. The problem is the poor writing of his character. Evangeline Lilly, who portrays the Wasp, has considerably less screen time comparing it to the previous movies. At least we see more of Michelle Pfeiffer's character Janet Van Dyne. Michael Peña as Luis doesn't act in this movie which is a big mistake. He is probably one of the funniest characters in the MCU. On the bright side, they added Bill Murray to the cast. He is there just for a few scenes, but it was freshening to see him in the movie.

It is an action-packed story, and it feels like they cut all the scenes that felt like it slows the pace. It is a wrong formula. I had the same problem last year with Doctor Strange: Multiverse of Madness. There is no time to breathe. It is just one action scene after another. The only thing between various action scenes is exposition, which makes it even worse. There are a few long exposition scenes throughout the movie as a way to reveal important information about the plot to the audience. Some characters even withhold the information unnecessarily, only to have a big reveal in a second act. It is lazy writing, and I am concerned cause the writer of this movie, Jeff Loveness, will write Avengers: The Kang Dynasty.

I am also anxious about the director Peyton Reed. Besides Spider-Man movies, this is the second trilogy in the MCU to have the same director for all movies. I hope there will be a change of director cause, with every subsequent film, Ant-Man movies are getting worse to the point that it is the worst MCU movie alongside Eternals.

The story resembles the Rick and Morty TV show, only without humor or compelling adventures. This movie isn't funny comparing it to the previous ones. Even in that regard, writers failed.

Avatar: The Way of Water (2022)

Not every movie needs to have complex storytelling in order to be great

[9/10 · 20 December 2022]

One of the most anticipated movies ever finally arrived in cinemas, but it was worth the wait! Avatar (2009) was the highest-grossing movie of all time, and the sequel was supposed to be released in December 2015, alongside Star Wars: The Force Awakens. It has been postponed many times since then. Those are the two main reasons Avatar: The Way of Water was such a highly anticipated movie. The third reason is that it's a new James Cameron movie. Think about how awesome that is. This is only his second movie in the 21st century, so it's a must-see.

Many years have passed since the first movie, so Avatar: The Way of Water opens with a brief exposition to bridge these two movies. I don't usually appreciate it when a movie starts like that, considering it is poor storytelling, but it was a much-needed exposition. From the opening shot, we see Floating Mountains that are captivating as always, and immediately you are transported to the magical world of Pandora. Frankly, I wouldn't mind listening to a weather report while these immersive shots emerge on the screen, let alone exposition.

After the exposition, we see military people arriving on Pandora, and that scene has a powerful message. When human spaceships land on Pandora, as a result, they burn an enormous part of the forest with the spaceship engines and wreak havoc on wildlife. Obviously, they don't even care about it at all. They were only looking for a convenient place to land without even thinking about the environmental consequences. This scene says a lot about human nature. Wherever they go, they bring destruction with them.

The good thing about a sequel is that we don't spend time with humans like in the previous movie except for a new character called Spider and just a few others. An even better than that is the fact that Sam Worthington only stars like a motion capture character. He doesn't portray his human character anymore. I consider his acting as a critical flaw in the first Avatar movie.

From the start, we follow Jake and his family members. Throughout the film, we can see his struggle as a parent and his attempts to protect them from danger. There is also a struggle among his kids. They want to be seen as adults, hunt with their tribe, and fight by their side. As time passes by, Jake becomes overprotective, although it backfires on him. His kids want more independence, which leads to more disobedience, in an attempt to prove themselves as brave warriors. This story is a recycling of many movies in the past, so that part became too familiar and tedious.

Numerous characters died at the end of the last movie, so we have the opportunity to meet plenty of new ones. As for the Spider, a new human character, we only learn that he is wild and unpredictable, especially towards the end of the movie when he makes some very unnecessary decisions.

As we saw in the trailer, Jake has four children now, but Cameron doesn't dedicate screentime to all equally. We spend most of the time with his oldest daughter Kiri and his youngest son Lo'ak who somehow oddly resembles a lot like Robert Pattinson. Of course, it's not him, but once you realize it, you can't help but look at him that way. The audience will probably like these two the most. I think Kiri has the most compelling character arc development. She is a young shy Na'vi girl who has difficulties fitting in with a new tribe. She is different and sees it as a negative because the other kids see her as a freak. Countless teens can relate to her character as they try to find their place in this big modern world.

The thing that bothered me the most was the villain of the movie. We already knew it would be the same antagonist as the last time. Quaritch is coming back, and I think it is a wrong decision. There is no good reason why he is returning after he died in the first movie. Even worse is that the final battle in Avatar (2009) loses its significance now. The only reason I can find for the revival of the Quaritch ties to the main plot.

In fact, the plot is simple. Humans want revenge for being banished from Pandora at the end of the last movie. They come again, and they fight with Jake. That's it, the whole story. The fact is that there is no good reason for the continuation of the story. Villian lacks motivation, and the entire movie wouldn't exist if the "Sky People" haven't returned to Pandora to seek revenge. But there are some advantages and disadvantages when a movie has a thin plot.

Cameron dedicated time to enriching his characters, and I liked how he developed them throughout the film. Certain characters need to make tough decisions towards the end, so we learn a lot about the other side of them that we didn't know existed. Look at it this way, movies like Raid (2011) or Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) have simple plots, yet they were one of the best action movies in recent memories. Those movies know what they are and what they are trying to accomplish. So not every movie needs to have complex storytelling in order to be great.

Hayao Miyazaki, the greatest Japanese animation director, once explained a term called "Ma" which we can translate as emptiness. Miyazaki said, when you clap a few times with your hands, that's just unnecessary noise. Miyazaki further explains: "The time in between my clapping is Ma. If you have just non-stop action with no breathing space at all, it's just busyness. But if you take a moment, then the tension building in the film can grow into a wider dimension. What really matters is the underlying emotions..."

This is exactly what James Cameron tries to do in the second act of Avatar: The Way of Water. It takes time away from the action to explore the majestic underwater world. Nothing crucial happens to the plot in this part of the movie, yet we see a series of the most magnificent shots in cinema history. During this sequence, at least four people left the movie theater and didn't return. It is evident that the audience only seems to care about action in a movie nowadays and nothing else.

The funny thing is when Lo'ak is swimming with a whale, it was actually my favorite scene in the entire film, and that tells a lot, considering it lasts for 3 hours. We need more scenes like these cause while I was watching Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, I got overwhelmed with action sequences, hence I got bored. It had the opposite effect on me, and I don't believe I am the only one who feels this way.

There are also an abundance of awe-inspiring action sequences in the first and especially the third act of the film. Despite that, I felt partly disappointed with the final battle as it lacked scope and grandeur compared to the first Avatar movie. It's done on a smaller scale however it is intended in that way to become more personal for the characters, which is not necessarily a bad thing. I didn't expect it, although I believe I will appreciate it more on consecutive viewings.

Avatar: The Way of Water is an excellent movie, but I don't think it will be as impactful as the previous one. When the first movie came out, it was leagues above every other sci-fi/fantasy movie in terms of CGI. It was a massive leap forward regarding special effects and motion capture improvements. I respect James Cameron, as he chose to film numerous close-up shots with actors wearing motion capture suits and bravely demonstrate what he was doing in the last five years with his talented VFX team. He doesn't shy away from it as we see in other movies, trying to cover up special effects with overly dark scenes and hoping audiences won't notice how terrible CGI actually is.

Visually it's an astonishing achievement. But a problem I have is that Cameron overuses blue color combined with purple, which means the movie has a limited color palette. I think I saw all shades of blue in this movie, but it reminds me a lot of a first movie, and it is hard to distinguish visually one film from the other. When they go underwater, it is appropriate for the screen to explode with blue color, but he uses this color literally in every scene.

I adore the decision to shoot this movie at a higher frame rate because you can see movement more clearly. Many people don't like it, since they are used to movies filmed in 24 frames per second. We only need time for our eyes to get accustomed to 48 fps. If we get more movies with higher frame rates, we won't notice anything strange with quick movements, as we sometimes do now.

Another essential technical improvement, compared to other movies, is the stunning utilization of 3D. I can't remember the last time I said that about a movie. Honestly, I've avoided watching films in 3D for years, but Cameron really knows what he is doing when he shoots in 3D. One of the few directors who can seamlessly incorporate 3D technology in the right way, so I definitely recommend watching it in 3D and, of course, in an IMAX theater to experience it in the best possible way.

What I value the most in the film is the message that shows us that we should protect and preserve the marine world and, in general, the entire nature on our planet. Even in the last film, he left a strong message about the importance of preserving the rainforests. I respect that he tries to leave a clear message to the younger generations of how important it is not only for our future but also for the future of our planet.

Avatar: The Way of Water is an immersive experience, so I didn't mind a 3-hour runtime. Unfortunately, the majority of the audience today can't hold their attention for that long, but that shouldn't prevent directors from having shorter runtimes. As James Cameron said recently in an interview: "They can see the scene they missed when they come to see it again."