For those of you who do not know me, I am a major movie buff. I sometimes like to play the role of a critic as I sit or lie down to “inspect” a movie for either its flaws or delicacies. Because I am beginning to go deeper into the movie culture by watching classics, underrated films, and ones necessary to see in order to stay with the times (cough, Marvel, cough), I am no stranger to film ratings before I see them. Am I happy about this? No. I would rather judge the movie myself. I like building my own expectations of the film before I “inspect” it. However, the following films are special cases where either I knew the rating and decided to give it a chance, or I was so excited to see it that I avoided all news about it. In either case, these cinematic experiences delivered less than whatever I expected from them.
Hercules
With Dwayne on screen, it could have gone either way. With Brett Ratner behind the camera, you could probably tell which way it was going to go. I originally went to watch this after seeing it advertised everywhere (even on my table at a Red Robin). I then wanted to know what the hype was all about. Well ... I still want to know. This mess had visual flaws one could clearly see during a first viewing, generic CGI effects, out of place actors, and a story line that was quite confusing in the sense that you do not know how the characters did not know the answer. While the trailers hide the unique twist the film puts to the Hercules legend, the twist itself -- revealed at the beginning of the first act -- poses a question that is frustratingly easy to answer. I went in with curiosity and I came out enraged.
Man of Steel
I was actually pretty excited for this movie. I had never seen a "Superman" film before -- be it the Christopher Reeve or Brandon Routh eras -- and Zack Snyder did a great job on "300." The only original worries I had with the film was that it looked a little like Zack Snyder was taking the "Sucker Punch" direction, which was a movie with a pretty interesting story yet strange visual style combat and directing decisions. Unfortunately, there were many flaws in "Man of Steel" to the point where I did not really care for Superman’s story or really what happened in the film. Visually, it was pretty well done -- with just a bit too much CGI -- and the serious tone of the film flowed well. However, according to the movie, you can get thrown through buildings, punched in the face by an alien who could take out the whole world if he wanted to, and hit by laser beams by that same alien, and come out 100 percent unscathed! I do not care if you are the man of steel! Mess up your hair or something!
Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice
Sound familiar? This being my most recent disappointment, I have to side with the critics on this one, even though general audiences enjoyed it. The entire movie felt like the tire was just spinning in the air without ever really touching the ground. Ben Affleck did a fine job as Batman, but what was Jesse Eisenberg doing as Lex Luthor? He was fine acting-wise, but he just seemed like an out-of-place villain in a gladiator match between two superhero gods. He also was not very intimidating -- more creepy than scary. Where was Bryan Cranston? Can I get an "Amen"? But more on the film as a whole, it seemed to want to set up the Justice League more than be its own story. And the actual Batman-Superman hatred is unjustified and shooooort. Nice try, DC.
The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death
What I needed from this film was another horror experience. "The Woman in Black," with Daniel Radcliffe, was actually my first full horror movie experience, and it scared the stomach acid out of me (I was only 14 at the time). I wanted the same from its sequel! Is that too much to ask? Well, apparently it was, because what I got was a film whose best moments are shown in the trailer, completely ruining the movie as a whole, and the lack of charisma -- probably caused by the absence of Daniel Radcliffe -- made me not care what happened to the characters. I almost cheered for the ghost.
The Hobbit Trilogy
These are the movies that nearly made me weep … and not in the good way. The prime examples of my movie disappointment, as I am huge fan of "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy films, "The Hobbit" trilogy did not deliver. Fans expected a return to Middle Earth with its realistic fantasy landscapes, deep and rich histories, and magical adventures. Instead, what they were given were unrealistic fight scenes, CGI landscapes and characters -- the biggest sin of which was the CGI orcs -- and a story that most people did not mind ending. We cried our eyes out at the end of "The Return of the King," but because "The Hobbit" trilogy was so bloated and fake, I barely knew or cared it was the end. Let me be clear though, these are actually good movies. They are decently well-made and deserve some praise. However, it was doomed from the start with much less source material than the original film trilogy, while having to fill the same run time, the need to introduce new audiences to the story, and having to follow up one of the most brilliant film trilogies ever made. Unfortunately, it did not give me what I had hoped it would and I was left shrugging and thinking, “At least I still have the original.” On a side note, my best friends and I went to the midnight showing off all three of these films, and I mark those nights as incredibly memorable experiences. So thank you, Peter Jackson!
What movies disappointed you? Do you think I am wrong? Comment below! There is a whole world of film out there and everyone has a different opinion. Let it be known!
