Reviews

Black Panther starts off right after the events of Captain America: Civil War. King T'chaka (John Kani) is killed in a terrorist attack and his son T'challa (Chadwick Boseman) is about to take over his mantle as king of Wakanda. Everything changes when old Wakandan foe Ulysses Klaue (Andy Serkis) and newcomer Erik Killmonger (Michael B. Jordan) are threatening to steal Wakandan resources (Vibranium, the strongest metal on earth) and expose the country for what it truly is: the richest and most technologically advanced country in the world.

The movie bears the title of a Marvel movie, but it doesn't feel like a Marvel movie for the most part. In this case it works in the benefit of the movie. The thing about Marvel movies is that they are easy fun, they have a certain quality to them but are also predictable, loud and follow a certain formula that always leads to danger in the form of an apocalypse. In the introduction of the movie you get acquainted with the country and the culture of Wakanda as well as their characters, like Nakia (Lupita Nyongo'o), W'kabi (Daniel Kaluuya), M'baku (Winston Duke) Zuri, (Forrest Whitaker) standouts Okoye and Shuri (who are played wonderfully by Danai Gurira and Letitia Wright respectively) and with minor roles for Everett Ross (Martin Freeman) and N'Jobu (Sterling K. Brown).

It must be mentioned that this movie feels very complete and stands on its own without being dependent on other instalments in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It feels like a crash course about Wakanda and their leaders and culture. Every story arc begins and ends in a logical, well-told and satisfying way. The characters talk about the future of Wakanda by discussing traditions and change. It has great social commentary and talks about Black lives and culture. Family and legacy. Loyalty and betrayal.

Every scene of exposition ties into somebody's' personal story and serves a purpose. The Villain Killmonger is one of the best Marvel villains to date. He is certainly up there with Vulture from Spider-man: homecoming and maybe even Loki. The incentives for the actions of Killmonger are so clear, you feel for this character for what he has been through in his life, even rooting for him at certain times during the film. However, he doesn't get the screen time he deserves. He is introduced for a scene in the beginning of the film and disappears for maybe an hour, which gives the movie some tonal differences.

From a storytelling standpoint this movie excels, especially compared to other Marvel movies. Director Ryan Coogler once again shows us that he is here to stay. Because of him this movie just works. After Fruitvale Station and Creed, which were both very critically acclaimed, he comes with the most personal Marvel movie yet. scenes that will be remembered are the dramatic scenes, the acting, the chemistry between characters and the vibe of the movie instead of the action scenes, even though it's a superhero movie.

The action scenes are the most underwhelming parts of the movie. Some scenes look too animated and look unfinished, while other scenes have too many jump cuts and shaky cam to really know what is going on. The action scenes are just not memorable. You can clearly see where the money from the budget was spent on because the set and costume designs are top notch. Unfortunately, this led to weaker CGI heavy action/fighting scenes.

Overall, this was not just a good Marvel movie, this was a good movie, period. And even though the screenplay does not allow anything open for interpretation the movie does well by just telling a solid story. The Villain could've used more screen time, but the main and side characters are wonderful. The CGI could've been better, but the production design makes up for it.

8,5/10

Creed is a love letter to the rocky franchise as well as a beautifully crafted movie that stands on its own. Even though this seventh installment in the rocky franchise isn't as refreshing and new as the first film in the franchise, it sure feels new. The introduction of our new underdog Adonis (Michael B. Jordan) is told in a very fast pace. The narration of this film is focused keenly on the goals of Adonis to make it into the boxing world, like his father did. The style of storytelling by Ryan Coogler makes this film a pleasure to watch. Clichés in the story are told in such a playful and skillful way that it doesn't come off as comparable to the other movies in the franchise as it should have been.

Adonis Johnson is a smart but troubled young man who has been fighting his whole life. His mother died at a young age so he gets in and out of juvenile detention centers and doesn't have a place to call home. Until his father's wife Mary Ann Creed (Phylicia Rashad) comes to take him under her wing in Los Angeles. Adonis is educated, smart and works for a big company, but he feels that working behind a desk isn't in his spirit. He decides to move to Philadelphia to start a boxing career. This story is truly about legacy. Even though Adonis does not want to take on the name of his father but wants to make it on his own, he does not want to shame the name of the late great Apollo Creed. When Rocky comes to serve him as a trainer and mentor, a new underdog story begins.

Creed steps in like an underdog should do: Nobody knows what they are going to get, but the underdog knows what he is capable of. Director Ryan Coogler tells this story with confidence and isn't afraid to tell this story his way. A story of a young man who is fighting his way (literally) to the thing he is most passionate about is highly intriguing to say the least. A story like this is however told many times before, but Coogler found a way to keep the story interesting. The craftsmanship behind this film is the main reason why this movie is so great to watch.

The acting, the script and the cinematography are the elements that are outstanding in this piece and are strongly correlated to each other. The main actors Michael B. Jordan, Tessa Thompson and Sylvester Stallone are fantastic in their roles, and their roles are greatly written. Adonis and Rocky are both characters that have endured pain and loss and it serves as their motivators.

However, this collective sentiment also brings up destructiveness upon themselves. Adonis becomes reckless and Rocky becomes world-weary. Rocky isn't a smart man, but he knows things. Life has taught him a lot and he has seen what time does to people. Everybody he loved has moved on and he stopped looking into his future, he is only looking back. He doesn't see that Adonis is there for him every day. The struggle and relationship between Adonis and Rocky is portrayed with the perfect amount of melodrama, and the natural chemistry between the actors gives a certain level of realness to it.

The way the fights in the ring are crafted is outstanding. The fighting choreography, close up shots and camera movements gives the fighting scenes a raw, brutal and real atmosphere. Add awesome sound effects and a greatly integrated score of Ludwig Göransson and the scenes become a real pleasure to watch. The score of Göransson is a perfect blend between a new euphoric score and Rocky's nostalgic score which is a great addition to this film. There is a fight scene halfway in the film that is shot in one take which is done beautifully. Subtle transitions between wide shots to experience the fight, and close-up shots to observe the fighters brooding facial expressions makes this scene an intense and a truly amazing cinematic experience.

Even though this movie is about legacy of the name Creed, one could say this is the legacy of the underdog story. Not the legacy of Apollo Creed to Adonis Creed, but the legacy of the Italian Stallion Rocky to Adonis Creed. This story is told to satisfy old fans and captivate the new ones. To continue the saga and to still stand on its own. Ryan Coogler did a phenomenal job and this legacy will certainly continue.

''Real sets, practical effect, you've been here, but you don't know this story. Nothing's changed really, I mean everything's changed but nothing's changed. That's the way you want it to be really. To see the way the technology has evolved, and yet keeping one foot in the pre-digital world.''

• Mark Hammill

There was no escape. On buildings, public transport, billboards, everywhere there was something Star Wars related. The expectations for The Force Awakens has been high since the boundless promotion for the franchise a year before release. Does it live up to its expectations? Absolutely, yes. This is the Star Wars movie fans have been waiting for since the original trilogy ended in 1983. Is it as good as the original trilogy? I would say it is better than return of the Jedi. It is a great start to a new trilogy.

Rey is a scavenger on the world of Jakku. She accidentally confronts the droid BB-8 who appears to be of significant value for the first order and the rebellion. She also crosses paths with the Stormtrooper Finn whom she goes an unplanned intergalactic adventure with. The trio meet old legends, new allies and new threats and enemies. The Star Wars universe is full of diverse interesting characters and episode VII isn't shy of introducing a handful of new ones. The main characters are introduced with care and nuance, but the introduction of some side characters can feel a little hasty. However, this is Star Wars. We know that this isn't the last thing we have seen of them.

The style of this movie is a perfect blend between the retro and post-modern eras. It tells the story in a modern way, but has some winks to the old fashioned 70's. The mix between the well-crafted practical effects and the stunning, breathtaking CGI in the action scenes are a big factor in to what makes this film a Star Wars film. A big positive adjustment to the franchise is that the Stormtroopers have new designs and are more humanized which gives the battle scenes a more hazardous responsiveness. However, some CGI character designs are however notably derivative of some characters. Something that could've been handled with more nuisance.

Before pre-production began, director J.J. Abrams announced that he wanted to use practical effects whenever he could. The practical effects are a great addition to the quality of the story telling. The real explosions, the costumes and the physical sets give the milieu and atmosphere of the film something unique. The reaction of the actors to these appearances has a natural flavor. Like there is something at stake. The actors are most likely not even acting but are naturally reacting. The dialogue is written in a natural way and the movie is more fast-paced and good-humored than you would think. The natural tone gives the two leads (and the rest of the ensemble of course) Daisy Ridley (Rey) and John Boyega (Finn) some space to shine. After watching this movie, the only thing I can say about this couple is that they are superstars in the making. One could say this is the best acting a Star Wars film ever had.

Although the new cast is a great addition to the franchise, the original cast is still in the game, and they are playing a really good game this time. They all do a great job but Harrison Ford deserves a special mention because he is 100% back as Han Solo. Not the Han Solo that we know, but the Han Solo that had a rough 30 years after the events of Return of the Jedi. It is great to see him back on the big screen again. Revisiting the original cast is a good thing because it gives the audience some sense of closure. Mix it with a new cast and you'll be satisfied with the end product: Closing one chapter and opening another in this epic saga.

Some will say that the storytelling looks like the Episode I: A New Hope. I couldn't agree more with that. The archetypal story structure is basically the same. Is this a problem? No, because even though the beats of the movie are the same, it has a new fresh feeling to it. The events in this movie are comparable with the original Star Wars, but the characters are new and so are their motivations and decisions. The quote of Mark Hamill above this review is exactly what this movie is. We've been here, but we don't know the story. Everything's changed, but nothing's changed.

I can conclusively say that this movie met its expectations. Maybe even exceeded it. It is a familiar story with new, fleshed out characters and has a high entertainment value. Even though we see a lot of well-known faces, it doesn't rely too much on the nostalgia of the original trilogy. The majority of the CGI and the practical effects look impressive and the acting is excellent. Is this a perfect movie? No, but what film is? This is however perfect endless entertainment and it surely lives up to its expectations. General movie goers? they will really like this movie. The fans? The fans will love it.

This movie is about arguably the most controversial psychological experiments ever done, which generated a lot of attention in the media in that time. It is a dramatized version of the experiment that has a thought provoking aspect to it. This horrifying drama/thriller is a heart breaker and is told with a slow pace which gives you enough time to absorb the events that happen in the movie.

The movie starts with three professors who interview a few student to participate on their 2 week experiment. The professors rented a few rooms and a hallway at Stanford University to simulate a prison. The selected group of student are chosen based on their mental history and their ability to endure mental setbacks. Half of the students were chosen to be guards and half were chosen to be prisoners. The professors behind the experiment have had a camera installed in the hallway so they can monitor everything that is happening. At the beginning everything seems under control. But it doesn't take long before everything begins to escalate.

The movies goes straight to the point fast. The students are getting paid so they are doing what they are told to do. The guards must present authority and the prisoners must be obedient. However, the students playing the guards want more and are creating their own bully characters during the experiment. The guards are careless and are humiliating the prisoners most of the time, which make this movie hard to watch. The first and second act are done with great subtlety. The mental torturing of the prisoners serves a purpose and isn't just for shock value. The professors who are watching the proceedings are all having different opinions about the proceedings that are happening and are starting discussions about morality, motivation, behavior and boundaries. The transition from different perspectives on this experiment is done really well by director Kyle Patrick Alvarez.

Tim Talbott does a great job with his writing. The thought provoking aspect in his writing is one of the strongest points in this film. The second act of the film builds up really slow to compensate for the small first act. It is unsettling to watch the guards in their mistreating behavior, while the professors don't interfere. There is no motivation for the guards to act the way they are behaving, except for the fact that they can.

A big reason why the film is hard to watch is because of the solid acting of the whole cast. The young actors portray their characters in such a convincing way, that it feels real. This movie has a lot of heating emotional moments where the actors can show their full potential. This film will be a great addition to their resume. Ezra Miller and Tye Sheridan get special mentions because both get a lot of screen time, and they show that they can carry a movie. They show why they are one of the Hollywood's biggest talents.

Even though the first and second act are solid in every aspect of filmmaking, the movie loses its touch in the last act. I won't go in to what specifically happens, but the subtlety of the storytelling disappears and the slow pace kills the momentum of the climax. The last act relies too much on shock value and the suspense is diminished because of the repetitive scene transitions in the last moments of the film.

Overall, this is a solid movie that creates discussion between groups with different standpoints of this subject. The acting is phenomenal by the talented cast and there is a clear direction. The slow pace is a tool well used in the first two acts and adds to the suspense the director wants to communicate. Even though the film falls apart in the last act, I would recommend this movie to watch. But only to the ones with a strong stomach.

This is a rare movie that has an unlikable character and an unorthodox structured plot where nothing really happens, but you just can't keep your eyes of the screen. Steve Jobs has an all-star cast, Danny Boyle as director in one of his best films and has Aaron Sorkin with one of his best writing. This is certainly one of this years' best movies.

The movie is about Steve Jobs and his crew and family behind the scenes of 3 major product launches, which will alter the course of Steve Jobs' career. Personally and professionally. On a professional level he interacts with people like his ''work wife'' Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet), former Apple CEO John Sculley (Jeff Daniels) and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak (Seth Rogen). The family business behind the scenes are between him and his daughter (Makenzie Moss, Ripley Sobo, Perla Haney-Jardine) and her mother (Katherine Waterston). The movie is told in three segments and each segment contains the release of another product: The Macintosh computer in 1984, the NeXT computer in 1988 and the iMac in 1998.

Can a great man be a good man? Steve Jobs is a movie which has a strong focused direction towards this question without really giving the answer. Steve Jobs is portrayed as narcissistic, stubborn and careless but also stoic, focused and passionate. He doesn't care about how much a person makes (in fact he doesn't care about almost anything or anyone really), but what the person makes. The film studies such a complex character in a 2 hour film while keeping it entertaining with sophisticated, top notch craftsmanship.

Writing unlikable characters in hectic moments of their lives is something Aaron Sorkin excels at. We have seen that he can pull it off in films like The Social Network and Moneyball and in the HBO series The Newsroom. His dialogue is unrealistically fast, witty, smart, and playful but also very satisfying to observe given the right timing and pacing. The writing in this film is typical Sorkin: it gives a lot of insight into the characters while keeping the audience informed about the events that are happening surrounding the characters in a fast pace, without being convoluted or too serious (yes, the laughing muscle will be triggered).

The star is this movie is undoubtedly Michael Fassbender, who gives the character many layers. Reckless and careless when it comes to work ethics but progressively emotional and caring when it comes to family matters. Kate Winslet, Jeff Daniels and Seth Rogen add value by being challenging for Michael Fassbender in a dialogue. They are the ones that make Steve Jobs, as a character, stronger and they are the ones that complete this ensemble piece.

Everything the characters say add something to their character or to the story. Some elements however, are forced. Elements that could've had more impact if it was explained earlier or were explained at all. There are characters that are cramped in the story just for character-motivation and exposition purposes. This could've worked if the film was longer or if there was given more attention to that particular element in the story.

All in all, Steve Jobs is a great film with a killer script, world class acting and an interesting perspective on Steve Jobs as a character. Portraying him as a mastermind and a caring father but also as a first class douchebag and a flawed character who is, as he says himself, poorly made. Fortunately, what isn't poorly made is this film. It is one of the best films of this year and it will generate attention come awards season.