Bridges Beneath the Surface

“Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” (2023) – movie review
Today’s film review is for the “Aquaman” sequel “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” (2023), again starring Jason Momoa as Arthur Curry / Aquaman, the somewhat reluctant monarch of Atlantis.  Momoa’s Aquaman is joined once again by Patrick Wilson as Orm, the estranged brother whose uneasy alliance forms the film’s emotional spine.  Yahya Abdul-Mateen II reprises his role as Black Manta, the vengeful human adversary wielding a deadly ancient power.  Amber Heard appears in short scenes as Mera, while Nicole Kidman’s Atlanna provides maternal gravitas (also in brief scenes).  Directed by James Wan, the film closes out the DC Extended Universe with a neon-lit spectacle of brotherhood, vengeance, and reluctant kingship.
Background:  This was my first viewing of this sequel.  It is a film I have been waiting on, but “they” just never got around to dropping it to my price point.  They finally did – and here we are.  LoL.  Released in December 2023, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is the sequel to the 2018 box office hit “Aquaman” (review here).  Unlike its predecessor, which grossed over $1 billion worldwide, this installment struggled commercially and critically.  This film did not receive / deserve Academy Award nominations, nor did it achieve historic recognition, though it holds “some” significance as the closing chapter of a decade-long cinematic universe.
Plot:  Arthur Curry, now King of Atlantis, faces a new threat when Black Manta uncovers the cursed Black Trident, a weapon tied to an ancient evil.  Driven by vengeance for his father’s death, Manta unleashes ecological devastation across the globe.  To stop him, Aquaman must ally with his imprisoned brother Orm, forging a fragile bond between them.  Their uneasy hero’s quest takes them across oceanic kingdoms, hidden temples, and perilous battles, culminating in a confrontation that tests Arthur’s philosophy: “A true king builds bridges, not walls.”
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  mixed;  dazzling but uneven;  several;  yes — with caveats.
Any good?  Yes — but uneven.  The film delivers moments of charm and spectacle, yet suffers from narrative clutter.  As the final DCEU entry, it somehow feels less than a triumphant send-off.  Still, the brotherly dynamic between Arthur and Orm provides thematic depth, elevating the otherwise formulaic plot.
Acting:  Momoa leans fully into his charismatic, wisecracking persona, balancing humor with physical gravitas.  Wilson shines as Orm, offering nuance and reluctant vulnerability.   Abdul-Mateen II’s Black Manta is menacing, though undercut by thin characterization.  Kidman lends dignity, while  Heard’s reduced role leaves Mera sidelined.  Wilson’s, Kidman’s, and Heard’s features have aged since the original and all three have had to be softened with CGI in their close-ups.  This is most noticeable when flashbacks are used to “narrate” the story-line.  The ensemble works best when Momoa and Wilson share the screen, their chemistry grounding the film’s emotional core.
Filming / FX:  James Wan’s direction favors maximalist spectacle:  sprawling underwater battles, bioluminescent landscapes, and kinetic chase sequences.  One “problem” was the underwater battle “felt” reminiscent of the underwater battle in the “G.I. Joe” film series mixed with the melee scenes from the last two “Avengers” movies thrown in for good measure.  Kinda “been there, done that…”  The production design is imaginative, blending comic‑book flamboyance with mythic grandeur.  Yet the CGI is inconsistent — at times breathtaking, at others cartoonish and distracting.  Rupert Gregson-Williams’ score adds heroic resonance but lacks the memorable punch of some other DC entries and it’s own original sound(s).
Problems:  Several and (some) kind of significant.  The film is overstuffed with subplots, from ecological allegory to family drama, all diluting it’s narrative focus.  The “worst” example was the wandering across the “dangerous” island, which felt like it was directly lifted from the “King Kong” (2005) movie.  It was dumb in that film and it was no better here.  The second “big” issue is that the “Manta” villian is just not a worthy opponent – in power-suit or not.  So, of course the film resorts to “Ancient Magic” to beef up his strength.  (But, again, it just really doesn’t work logically, although it’s fine visually.)  There are CGI inconsistencies (camera focus softening and sharpness) which continue to undermine viewer immersion, but I found them much less distracting than in the original.  Go figure…  The sidelining of Mera weakens franchise continuity and I think there must have been some off-screen explanation of which I am unaware.  As the capstone of the DCEU, it delivers a “satisfying” sense of closure.  (IMHO)  That’s not as great a compliment as it might seem as most of the DCEU films have been entertaining (enough), but mostly mediocre films, (at best).  IMHO the exception was “The Dark Knight” trilogy, which I found to be entertaining and pretty good films, too.  (Okay, number three wasn’t that good a “film”…  LoL)
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes — cautiously.  The humor, brotherly banter, and occasional visual splendor make it very watchable.  Although lacking the more direct story-line of the original, I found I enjoyed this film more than the first.  Enjoyment depends on embracing Momoa’s charisma and the film’s visual excess while forgiving structural flaws.
Final Recommendation:  Moderate Recommendation.  The “Problems” section of this review makes the film sound worse than it was.  “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is not a bad film, but it is not a great one either.  It holds historic significance as the final DCEU installment, yet (IMHO) it lacks the resonance of a true finale.  Watch it for Momoa’s exuberance, Wilson’s reluctant allyship, and the thematic reminder that leadership is about building bridges — especially between competing brothers.
Final Note / Thought:  All five of the main family characters are aging out of these roles, so I believe the DCEU will need to reboot them with different actors if corporate powers want to move this franchise branch forward.
.
Click here (31 December) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Goldfish Man

“Aquaman” (2018) – movie review
Today’s review is for the DC superhero spectacle “Aquaman” (2018), starring Jason Momoa as Arthur Curry / Aquaman (a half-human, half-Atlantean reluctant hero torn between two worlds), Amber Heard as Mera (a fierce Atlantean princess and warrior who becomes Arthur’s ally, partner and romantic interest), Patrick Wilson as Orm / Ocean Master (Arthur’s ambitious half-brother seeking dominion over land and sea), Willem Dafoe as Vulko (Arthur’s mentor and royal counselor), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Black Manta (a vengeful mercenary whose hatred fuels much of the surface-based conflict), Nicole Kidman as Atlanna (Arthur’s mother and exiled queen of Atlantis), and Dolph Lundgren as King Nereus (a ruler caught in the tides of political alliance and Mera’s father).  Directed by James Wan, the film creates a mythic underwater world of kingdoms, creatures, and battles that blend comic-book grandeur with blockbuster spectacle.
Background:  This film was one of the last films I saw at a theater before I stopped going to them.  I didn’t think much of it at the time and only retained the barest memory of the film:  a visually interesting, but mostly dumb comic-book action movie.  I discussed it with my younger daughter who felt it was so dumb it bordered on insulting.  She said if she hadn’t been with friends, she would have left the theater mid-movie.  Released in December 2018, “Aquaman” was the sixth installment in the DC Extended Universe (DCEU).  With a budget estimated between $160–200 million, it grossed over $1.15 billion worldwide, making it the highest-grossing DCEU film at that time.  While it did not win any Academy Awards, it received multiple Saturn Award nominations (including Best Comic-to-Film Motion Picture, Best Director for James Wan, and Best Supporting Actress for Amber Heard) and earned recognition for its visual effects and production design.  Historically, it stands as the first DC film to cross the billion-dollar mark, cementing its place as a commercial milestone in superhero cinema.
Plot:  Arthur Curry, raised on land but heir to Atlantis, is drawn into a conflict when his younger half-brother Orm seeks to unite the underwater kingdoms against the surface world.  Guided by Vulko and aided by Mera, Arthur must retrieve the legendary Trident of Atlan to prove his worth as king.  Along the way, he confronts Black Manta’s vendetta, navigates Atlantean politics, and embraces his destiny as protector of both land and sea.  The narrative blends a mythic hero quest, a family drama (almost a soap-opera), and environmental allegory, culminating in a climactic battle for Atlantis and Arthur’s acceptance of his dual heritage.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I enjoy the film?  Short answers:  Yes;  charismatic but uneven;  spectacular and immersive;  tonal shifts and overstuffed plot;  yes — with caveats.
Any good?  Yes.  “Aquaman” is a vibrant, over-the-top superhero adventure that succeeds as a visual spectacle and mythic origin story.  It’s not subtle, but it delivers energy, humor, and scale that distinguish it from somewhat darker DCEU entries like “The Dark Knight / Batman” franchise and the Snyder Justice League.
Acting:  Jason Momoa embodies Aquaman with swagger and humor, turning Arthur into a likable rogue-turned-hero.  Amber Heard brings strength and elegance as Mera, though their chemistry occasionally feels pretty forced.  Patrick Wilson’s Orm is operatic in ambition, while Yahya Abdul-Mateen II’s Black Manta adds surface / land-based menace.  Nicole Kidman lends gravitas to Atlanna, and Willem Dafoe provides steady mentorship.  The ensemble is strong, but Momoa’s charisma clearly dominates.
Filming / FX:  James Wan’s direction embraces spectacle:  neon-lit Atlantis, colossal sea creatures, and kinetic underwater battles.  Don Burgess’s cinematography and Rupert Gregson-Williams’s score amplify the grandeur.  The visual effects, particularly the rendering of Atlantis and its creatures, are immersive and imaginative, though occasionally overwhelming (unrealistic)  in their excess.  The film shifts between extremely sharp focus and extremely air-brushed – which I found to be frequently more distracting than appropriate / helpful.  While the CGI is visually entertaining, almost none of it makes ANY sense and the viewer really has to set logic aside and just say:  “Okay. It’s a comic-book movie…“
Problems:  The film suffers from tonal inconsistency — flipping between campy humor and epic gravitas.  Like most “super-hero” / comic movies (and comic books, too) the film can’t decide how strong or how invulnerable Aquaman is.  One minute he’s trying to avoid getting hit by bullets and the next he’s taking rocket and plasma blasts to the chest.  The plot is overstuffed, with multiple villains and kingdoms competing for attention.  Some dialogue leans toward cliché, and pacing issues arise in the middle act.  There is a mandatory visual introduction to Atlantis which is more or less an underwater version of “Coruscant” (the StarWars Emprire) and 23rd century New York City from “The Fifth Element“.  Still, these flaws are offset by the visual energy of the production.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes — for what it is – a comic-book adaptation.  “Aquaman” is fun, colorful, and unapologetically grandiose / mythic / operatic.  It’s best enjoyed as a visual ride rather than a tightly woven narrative (watch it;  don’t over-think it).  Momoa’s performance and Wan’s spectacle make it memorable, even if it lacks the depth of other superhero films.
Final Recommendation:  Moderate recommendation.  “Aquaman” is a landmark in the DCEU for its billion-dollar success and its embrace of mythic spectacle.  Watch it for Jason Momoa’s charismatic Aquaman, the dazzling underwater visuals, and James Wan’s operatic direction.  It’s not an “Oscars” type of film, but it has carved out historic significance as one of DCEU’s most commercially successful films to date.  Basically, it’s a dumb movie, but I was entertained.
.
Click here (30 December) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

Fathers, Bubbles And Spaghetti Logic

“The Flash” (2023) – movie review
Today’s review is for the multiverse-hopping, comic-book adaptation / superhero action flick:  “The Flash”  (2023), starring Ezra Miller as Barry Allen (a forensic scientist turned speedster who breaks time to attempt to save his mother), Michael Keaton as Bruce Wayne (retired Batman from an alternate timeline), Sasha Calle as Kara Zor-El (a Kryptonian refugee held captive in Siberia), Michael Shannon as General Zod (returning villain with genocidal ambitions), Ron Livingston as Henry Allen (Barry’s wrongly imprisoned father), Maribel Verdú as Nora Allen (Barry’s mother whose death sets the plot in motion), Kiersey Clemons as Iris West (Barry’s journalist friend and potential love interest), and Antje Traue as Faora-Ul (Zod’s ruthless second-in-command).
Background:  I heard this was a terrible movie, so I was not particularly interested in getting it nearer it’s release date or its streaming date.  I’m not thrilled by the idea of a “multi-verse” in either the DCU or the MCEU, but I thought I’d give this a chance.  I watched it over a year ago streaming on cable, but never got around to reviewing it.  I wasn’t impressed on the first viewing, but the film dropped down to my price range several months ago, so I decided to pick it up and give it a second viewing.  Clarification:  I “like” the concept of a multi-verse.  I’m just not satisfied with any of the comic-book / superhero depictions of it (so far).
Plot Summary:  Barry Allen (Miller) discovers he can run fast enough to travel backwards through time.  Haunted by his mother’s murder and father’s wrongful conviction for the crime, he decides to change the past — saving his mom and creating a world where she lives.  But in doing so, he “fractures” the timeline and ends up in an alternate 2013 where “some” meta-humans don’t exist, and Earth faces annihilation from General Zod’s forces.  Barry meets his younger self (also played by Miller), who hasn’t yet gained his speed powers, and together they seek help from the only hero left — Keaton’s “Batman”.  They rescue Kara Zor-El (Calle), who’s been imprisoned by humans, hoping she can stop Zod.  But the battle goes sideways (multiple times).  Kara dies.  Batman dies.  Barry keeps trying to fix it — again and again — until he realizes some events are fixed points in time.  Ultimately, he restores the timeline, but not quite:  the film ends with a new Bruce Wayne (George Clooney) greeting Barry, implying he’s still in an altered reality.
So, is this movie any good?  How’s the acting?  How about the filming / FX?  Are there any problems?  And, did I like the film?  Short answers:  Yes-ish;  mixed bag;  visually impressive to a fault;  multiverse logic fatigue;  mostly, yes.
Any good?  It’s ambitious.  It’s messy.  It’s emotionally resonant in parts and bloated in others (most others).  The “Flashpoint” story-line is inherently interesting (to me) — what would you sacrifice to save someone you love?  The film leans into that, but also tries to juggle fan service, cameos, franchise resets and to set up a sequel.  It doesn’t always succeed, but it’s not a total misfire either.
Acting:  Miller plays dual Barrys with surprising nuance — one mature (but geeky), one naïve / silly.  Keaton slips back into the cape like he never left (but he looks ancient, not “just” geriatric), delivering dry wit and weary gravitas.  Calle’s Supergirl is fierce but underused.  She’s the best part of the movie (IMHO).  Shannon’s Zod is… Zod.  He glowers.  He threatens.  He dies (sometimes).  Clemons is okay as Iris, but the romance subplot feels like an add-on.  Livingston and Verdú bring warmth to Barry’s family dynamic, establishing the film’s emotional core.
Filming / FX:  The time-travel sequences are poorly done in CGI but try to be visually inventive — Barry runs through a chrono-bubble that sometimes resembles a digital coliseum and other times a spherical Rubic’s Cube of memories.  The multiverse cameos (some controversial) are hit-or-miss – lacking explanation and (again) with poorly done CGI.  The final battle is chaotic, but well choreographed.  The FX are required, but most are poorly done in CGI.  Most cameos look more animation than live action.
Problems:  Let’s start with tone.  The film swings between heartfelt drama and borderline slapstick comedy and back again.  The younger Barry is borderline annoying until he matures.  The multiverse logic is convoluted — fixed points, alternate selves, collapsing timelines — it’s a lot and it doesn’t follow it’s own internal logic, whether realistic or not.  Some of the cameos are fun, but they made me pause to think (particularly Nicolas Cage), so they risk interrupting / overshadowing the story.  Also, the ending twist (Clooney) is clever but confusing — are we resetting the DCEU or just winking at it?  MY biggest issue with the movie is that EVERY one of Zod’s soldiers is a Kryptonian “superman”.  Not a single one of them would have been impacted, let alone injured by any weapon the human army threw at them – let alone Batman or the Flash.  And they would not have needed shuttles and attack ships to fly as that is a “given” power for all Kryptonians on Earth.  In other words, the big battle looked good, but was complete BS.
Did I enjoy the film?  Yes.  Despite its flaws, I found myself emotionally invested in the characters / story and intellectually interested in what CGI could make seem real.  Barry’s arc — learning to let go, to accept loss, to grow — is a compelling story.  The film doesn’t quite earn all its big swings, but it tries.  And sometimes, trying is enough.  I’ve not read much of “The Flash”  comics in many years (except one compendium book my son loaned me) and I never considered him an interesting superhero growing up, so I have no personal idea how close this story is to the comics.  My son says the movie is “crap” and misinterprets both the story and the character from the actual comics.
Final Recommendation:  Moderate to strong.  “The Flash” is a film that tries to blend heart, humor, and high-speed heroics.  It’s not perfect, but it’s better than most of DC’s (and Marvel’s) recent outings.  If you’re a fan of time travel, alternate realities, or just want to see Keaton back in the cowl, it’s worth a watch.  Just don’t expect all the timelines to make sense — and try not to blink during the cameos.  I didn’t expect a full-on nostalgia trip with Keaton’s Batman, nor a surprisingly poignant meditation on grief, choice, and the consequences of rewriting history.
Final thoughts:  I am always interested in Hollywood’s interpretation of “timelines” and “multi-universes”.  I particularly liked this film’s depiction of them being like a plate of spaghetti.  My own thoughts lean more to a multi-verse of chaotic fractals where the image (timeline) keeps repeating regardless of whether you focus in or pan out on any particular multi-verse.  I don’t think this would make for a very good superhero movie, though.  LoL
.
Click here (5 September) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »

An Over-Muscled Super Antihero In A Not-So-Super Film

“Black Adam”   (2022)   —   movie review
Before I begin the “actual” review of this film, I need to say I have no prior knowledge of the “Justice Society of America“, its origin or its members.  I grew up reading about the “Justice League” – Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, etc.  Basically, I’m approaching this film as a Sci-Fi, superhero, animation fan walking straight off the street…
Today’s review is for the DC superhero film:  “Black Adam”  (2022), starring Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as Teth-Adam (a resurrected antihero from the ancient fictional nation of Kahndaq), Aldis Hodge as Hawkman / Carter Hall (the leader of the Justice Society of America.  He is a noble and principled hero [like Captain America] who believes in non-lethal force [like Batman] and becomes the main antagonist to Black Adam’s more violent methods), Pierce Brosnan as Doctor Fate / Kent Nelson (a founding member of the Justice Society, an older and wiser hero who can see the future and whose powers come from a “mystical” golden helmet), Noah Centineo as Atom Smasher / Albert Rothstein (a new, naive member of the Justice Society who can grow to immense size [like Giant-Man in the Avengers]), Quintessa Swindell as Cyclone / Maxine Hunkel (a wind-controlling technology genius), Sarah Shahi as Adrianna Tomaz (a freedom fighter / linguist / archaeologist who awakens Adam), Bodhi Sabongui as Amon Tomaz (Adrianna’s son), Maxine Hunkelas Karim (Adrianna’s brother), and Marwan Kenzari as Marwan Kenzari / Sabbac (the main villain and a leader of the “Intergang” mercenaries who seeks to claim the Crown of Sabbac to gain godlike power).
Background:  Like most folks who are into comic-book heroes and bigger-than-life media personalities, I’ve been waiting for “The Rock” to finally get a shot at playing a “meta-human” / super-person.  This movie was fairly poorly received except by “wraslin’ and ‘Da Rock‘” die hard fans – like my brother.  I saw the film back in ’23, when it first streamed, but it was forgettable, so I never reviewed it.  This makes up for that…
Plot Summary:  An evil king is forcing his people to mine for a rare element which will supposed give a person great power and eternal life.  By a strange coincidence it is called:  “Eternium”.  (Seriously…)  A “hero” arises to overthrow the king, but he (the hero) is somehow trapped for 5,000 years – until modern day.  The hero’s name is “Teth-Adam” but needs to say the word “Shazam” (Shazam is an acronym for six ancient gods who give power to the human host).  They are: “S” – Shu who has superhuman stamina, “H” – Heru who has enhanced speed and flight, “A” – Amon who has immense strength, “Z” – Zehuti who has wisdom and strategic intellect, “A” – Anpu who has magical resistance and durability, and “M” – Menthu who has courage and combat prowess) to alternate between a normal human and the “hero” with powers.  Fast forward 5,000 years:  modern-day Kahndaq is occupied by mercenaries still mining the ore and looking for the old king’s crown.  Adrianna, a local rebel, awakens Teth-Adam / Black Adam from his tomb / prison.   He proceeds to electrocute, pulverize, and dismember the invaders with lightning and super-strength.  Enter the Justice Society — Hawkman, Fate, Cyclone, and Atom Smasher — who arrive to “contain / detain / restrain” Adam and restore order.  They quibble.  They fight.  They argue.  They team up.  Meanwhile, a demon named Sabbac (like “Shazam”, this is an acronym for six demons who take over the human host.  They are:  Satan, Aym, Belial, Beelzebub, Asmodeus, and Crateis) rises from hell to threaten the world.  Adam must choose between destruction and heroism.  Spoiler:  he chooses both.  The main morality conflict of the film revolves around the philosophical / ideological clash between the JSA’s heroic code (do good and don’t kill) and Black Adam’s brutal brand of justice / revenge (killing is optional when convenient).
So, is this film any good?  How’s the acting?  The filming / FX?  Any problems?  And, did I like / enjoy it?  Short answers:  So-so;  mostly wooden (at best);  although lifelike, it’s more cartoon-ish / comic-bookie than cinematic;  let’s not go there;  as a “movie”, forgettable – as a comic-book adaptation, not bad.
Any good:  Only if you are into special effects and want just enough dialogue to get you from one explosion (or fight) to the next.
Acting:  Johnson glowers.  Hodge snarls and threatens.  Centineo and Swindell are comic relief and (I guess) meant to draw a youth audience.  Shahi yells.  Sabongui skateboards and tries to encourage Teth-Adam to be a hero.  Kenzari tries his best to be a threatening (CGI) bad-guy / demon.  The Rock’s performance as Black Adam is pretty much what I expected from the actor – and disappointing.  He is physically “just” a body builder – not a superhero.  He is more Hulk than Superman.  The “best” performance comes from Pierce Brosnan as Doctor Fate, who brings a sense of weary grace and wisdom (maybe it’s British colonialism) to the role.  Brosnan is the closest to rising to the occasion here.
Filming /  FX:  This film has the look of the “Dark Knight” trilogy.  If you like that – I did – the “filming” isn’t that bad.  The visual spectacle of the action sequences are arguably the main (only) strength of the film.  Semi-chaotic destruction looks good on film, but it fails to make up for a poor story and mostly weak dialogue.
Problems:  Loads…!  This film has the look of the “Dark Knight” trilogy.  If you don’t like that, you probably won’t like this film.  The film wants to be a parallel universe of “The Dark Knight” (feel) and “Zack Snyder’s Justice League” (team building for sequels) but just doesn’t get there.  To someone off-the-street, with no background, the Justice Society is introduced with zero backstory to the characters or their powers.  The bad-guys are trivial for 95% of the movie.  The film presents multiple notable continuity issues with other DCEU films, particularly with “Shazam!” In “Shazam!”, the wizard states that his previous champion, Black Adam, was imprisoned for releasing the Seven Deadly Sins, but this is never mentioned or shown in “Black Adam”.  For me, as a comic-book fan, I don’t understand the limits of any of the characters’ powers.  And why is this lady from the “Suicide Squad” in this movie at all?  Honestly, none of this bares much consideration…
Like / Enjoy:  I hoped for more.  It didn’t deliver.  It is what it is – fights, explosions and special effects.  Forty years ago, I might have loved this film for being just what it is.
Final Recommendation:  Low to moderate.  The story, and hence the movie, are bad – so “Low“.  If you REALLY like Dwayne Johnson and want to see him glare, flex, float and quick fry / fricazzi people for two hours, it’s watchable and maybe “moderate“.  If you enjoy superhero tropes, ancient curses, and poorly landed “humor” dialogue, you might enjoy it more than I did.  I wanted it to be mythic, heroic AND have great F/X.  I think one out of three rates a “Low“…  While it is an action-packed spectacle with some truly impressive visual effects and a reasonable performance from Pierce Brosnan, the film’s narrative is weak and its characters are underdeveloped.  For a fun, mindless action flick, it’s worth a watch, but if you’re looking for a compelling story, you have to look at the other DCEU parallel universe – or maybe even Marvel’s (MCEU).
Final Thought:  By the way, in the alternate “Shazam!” film, the letters stand for: “S” Solomon who grants wisdom, “H” Hercules who grants strength, “A” Atlas who grants stamina, “Z” Zeus who grants power (lightning), “A” Achilles who grants courage, and, “M” Mercury who grants speed and flight.  So now you know…  LoL
.
Click here (25 August) to see the posts of prior years.  I started this blog in late 2009.  Daily posting began in late January 2011.  Not all of the days in the early years (2009-2010) will have posts.

Read Full Post »