scottishgeekguy

Expectations for this one were pretty low.

Trailer didn't do much for me.

I was still not ready to let go of Henry Cavil as Superman.....

But I'm happy to say, my low expectations were surpassed with James Gunns SUPERMAN.

Written and directed by James Gunn, Superman stars David Cornswet as the main man, Clark Kent, Kal El.... SUPERMAN

The Movie opens with some expositional text that takes care of both superman's origin story as well as meta humans in general, so it gets that stuff out of the way literally in the first minute. That allows this movie to hit the ground running

Superman exists, the world knows about him.

The movie starts mid battle and , off we go.

Plot wise theres Nicholas Holt's Lex Luthor and his plan to take care of Supes (with the help of his 2 super powered goons)

There's an ongoing plot thread about one fictional country invading another and whether or not superman should get involved. (And what should the US government do about superman?)

Clark and Lois (played by Rachel Brosnahan) are dating in secret but she knows he's superman.

There's 'justice gang' (green lantern hawk girl and mr terrific) are staples of every day life in metropolis.

Throw all these things together and....you've got James Gunns Superman.

Story wise we'll leave it there I think. So Let's talk about the good and the bad of this latest iteration of Superman.

Script wise, it's a bit on the nose at times, some expositiony dialogue heavy especially in the first act..

But the story makes sense and characters do and say believable things (more or less).

Cornswet is really brilliant in the role, he makes it his own.

Theres a shot towards the end of the movie, hero style shot during or just post battle....the lighting the costume, the framing... The actor... In that moment I did think to myself 'damn, he IS Superman'

The scene in the trailer where lois interviews Clark / Superman, is actually the best scene in the movie.

Even though it's in the trailer, seeing the full scene play out, in context, it's brilliant. So well written, so well acted.

Cornswet really does do a good job as both Clark Kent and Superman ( although there's not much Clark Kent tbf)

Let me know in the comments below how you thought Cornswet did as Superman.

Holt as Lex, I'm more look warm towards his Lex, I think he's given some clunky dialogue at times to chew through but there was something about his Lex that just felt like he was in a different movie , borderline cartoonish portrayal. Can't quite put my finger on it.

Don't get me wrong I think Holt is a good actor , but is Lex wasn't quite for me.

Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane, quite like her portrayal she seemed to be more 'in the know' and less naive than other Lois lanes.

Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardiner Green Lantern almost steels the movie.

The suit. When I saw the first pics of the suit I was a hit like 'ooohh don't think I like that , looks a bit goofy' but honestly watching the movie the suit fits the tone perfectly.

Score is REALLY good also..

I had a feeling I was gonna like the score as soon as heard snippets of it in the first teaser and motion poster..

John Murphy ( who's been on score duties for James Gunn in the Guardians movies) does a VERY VERY good job of paying respect to John Williams original theme, but making it something of his own also.

It's a little on the nose at times....but just go with it and let yourself enjoy it.

And speaking of just goin with it.... Why not go ahead and sub to the channel....that would....ahem....super....man.... 👀

Tonally this one skewes quite heavily on lighter side (both figuratively and literally). Other than world politics plot thread it's fairly light and mass audience friendly.

Krypto the dog. Dog lovers will LOVE this. Me....not so much. Felt like they went back to that particular well a little too often in the movie

My 8 year old however, the dog was her favourite part BY FAR.

So on the one hand, the movie seems to cater for and aim for a fairly young audience. But on the other, the geopolitical element is quite well done and well written (again goin back to the interview scene from the trailer)

Cinematography

It's a very bright and colourful movie. Can be a little cgi heavy at times (some scenes it feels like 2 video game characters battling it out) but it's not TOO distracting

Some of the flying scenes either that close up wide lens that distorts his face.... Yeah. It's a little distracting. But I can only assume Gunn was goin for that specific look.

Sound Design stood out as Well, blending the real world sounds with the more fantastical elements.

It's well paced, clock in at 2 hours and 9 mins, so if you remove the credits ite probably a sub 2 hour superhero movie, and that is a welcome change of pace.

Let's talk about the elephant in the room.

An elephant in the shape of Henry Cavil.

I was a BIG fan of both Man of Steel and Cavil ( and the Snyder verse in general)

After the black adam cameo I was looking forward to seeing Cavil return....then that got swiped from us and the news that Gunn was rebooting the dc cinematic universe..

A LOT of people had the knives out for this superman due to that fact.

I'm not one of those people.

I'll admit my expectations were low for Gunns Superman man, but I wasn't pre judging it.

I'm happy to say my low expectations were surpassed

James Gunns Superman is a perfectly enjoyable movie.

Much like Snyder's Man of Steel, this superman is launching the cinematic universe in which it belongs.

Where that universe goes... Where it ends up, I'm keen to see. There's a couple of blink and you'll miss them character cameos that hint at things in this new dcu , but I'm not gonna spoiler them here.

Younger audiences (kids under 12) will probably enjoy this much more than they would man of Steel.

It's ok to like both Zack Snyder's Man of Steel and also like James Gunns SUPERMAN.

7/10 for Superman. Perfectly enjoyable movie

(My 11 year old gave it an 8/10 and my 8 year old gave it an oddly specific 8.9/10 ( i suspect the extra 0.9 was for the dog )

There is a mid credits scene and an end credits scene

Both are pretty throwaway they don't set up future movies or anything, so don't let fomo get the better of you if you need to go pee

There's some superman related videos linked at the side there if you wanna check em out, and I'll catch you in the next video

Jimmy

Scottish Geek Guy.

28 years later, the sequel to 28 days later from 2002 (and 28 weeks later from 2007, but less so that... more on that later) takes place, well, 28 years later.

The UK has been quarantined from the rest of the world, (cough, brexit) the virus has been contained to our fair land and the rest of the world (as far we can tell) has gone on as normal

The story follows a family from an island community, their island (Holy Island I think) is somewhat protected from the mainland in that there's a causeway thats only passable during low tide.

We follow the son (Spike, played by Alfie Williams), his Dad (played by Aaron Taylor Johnson) and the mum played by Jodie Comer)

Alfie has come of age, its time for him to make his first trip to the mainland and get his first Zombie Kill.

Thats pretty much the setup for the story, won't say much more on that for spoiler protection. Ralph Feinnes shows up as an important character but I can't really say anything about his character as

Right off the bat, I'll say I think this movie is going to be pretty divisive, both in where it takes its own lore, and the ending.

I actiually held off for a few days before I wrote this review as I wasn't really sure how much I liked or disliked it.... (I did like it, but its NOT what I expected it to be).

For example, there are some super emotional moments in this, that really got me in the feels, but the zombie action wasn't as zombie ish or actiony as I thought / wanted it to be.

This is both a blessing and a curse , as , on the one hand, it's a very well acted,well written scene that got me in the feels. On the other's hand, I want my zombie movie to be more zombie movie!

It's also very much a movie of 2 distinct halves, but those 2 halves feel like act 1 and act 2, and it almost feels like it's missing an act 3 (there is a sequel, 'The Bone Temple' that's already been shot in comes out in January, with a 3rd '28 years later movie planned but not shot yet). So that might account for the lack of a 3rd act.

There's a melancholic atmosphere throughout the movie that, at times, slows the pace, but is needed for the (very good) emotional scenes

KES with zombies I think James Dyer from the Empire Podcast said, yeah that's actually a pretty accurate description.

Cinematography

iPhones are the camcorders of the modern age

Anthony Dod Mantle returns as cinematographer and carries on the tradition of down and dirty low fi visuals by using iPhones to shoot this movie. While that might be headline grabbing , it's kinda irrelevant?

It works for it's intended purpose, keeping the low fi aesthetic of the first one but modernising it so it didn't look BAD

Speaking of lore, it kinda felt like they retconned a bit of their own lore when it comes to the specifics, like they ignored some of the lore from 28 weeks, they don't follow on from weeks at all in that regard

Unlike 28 days later, the best parts of 28 years are the scenes that don't involve the infected/ zombies.

Definitely suffers from the whole 'it's the first of a new trilogy' , as a standalone movie it feels incomplete in that way ( but I am excited to see the next one , so maybe that's VERY intentional by the filmmakers)

Good to see Taylor Johnson post Kraven, hopefully he'll do more projects like this.

Comer is great as always, and Alfie Williams does a VERY GOOD job as he is essentially the lead job, but Ralph Fienes steals the movie imho

He's not in it much, but when his character shows up, let's just say it's not what you might expect and he plays it brilliantly.

The score this time isn't John Murphy but by Young Fathers, a Scottish progressive hip hop group. It's an interesting choice for the score, and while they do good job, you definitely miss that iconic John Murphy 28 Days theme.

Essentially, this is a coming of age movie about a 12 year old, coming of age in a post apocalypse zombie infested world (well, island). And that's where this movie shines brightest. There's a genuinely gut wrenching emotional scene half way through the movie that's got nothing to do with the infected or the way of this new world.

7.5/10 for 28 years later

It doesn't come close to the visceral shock and awe of 28 Days , its not a 'mainstream' as 28 weeks, it stands alone in the franchise, which is both a good thing, and a bad thing.

But as I said..... I am very much looking forward to the next instalment

Let me know in the comments what you thought of 28 years later, and I'll cacth you in the next video.

The Ugly Stepsister is A dark, twisted re telling of the Cinderella story..... with A LOT of added gore.

The film tells the story of Elvira, who is essentailly, the Ugly Stepsister of the classic fairytale, the movie ios from her point of view.

The movie opens with Elvira her mum and younger sister moving in with another family (just the dad and the 'pretty daughter')

Some stuff happens, there's financial worries and.... news comes that the Prince will be having a ball and there he will chose his bride... so every young girl in the area sets off on a mission to... be the lucky lady.

So it is the classic fairytale ...to an extent.

Both Elvira and her Stepsister are after the Princes 'love' (in fact the movie opens with Elvira reading the princes published poems, and she has regular daydream fanatasies about being swept of her feet by him)

But the movie is really about the lengths that Elvira (and her mum) will go to, in order to become 'beautiful' and therefore worthy of the Prince

Thats more or less the plot

The early hype around this has been focusing on the gore element... And while it is VERY gorey at times... I think focusing on that does the film a bit of a disservice....

Yes... Its gorey, but it's much more internal and more of a psychological horror....(in a good way)

(Actress) in the lead role is BRILLIANT. You can see the struggles shes goin through internally on her face.... Its s brilliant, genre topping performance.

The supporting cast, specifically the mum, are also top tier.

I'm going to assume it was a low budget... But it didn't look or FEEL low budget.

The period costumes look great, the makeup snd physical effects dont look cheap....

The Cinematography (especially the fantasy sequences) and more specifically the sound design, it doesn't look OR sound lime a cheap movie.

So it seems they've spent their money wisely.

Score has stranger things vibes, interesting juxtaposition to the period drama setting

Then there's almost a spaghetti western vibe to the score... so, when it works, it works really well, but it did feel a little disjointed at times

It's written and directed by a woman, and I think that's partly what gives this such a unique feel at times. There's elements to the movie about the female gaze, that, lets face it, would probably have been handled differently if directed by a man

The pressure, young women in particular are put under to look a certain way...

The methods used in the movie might be more barbaric than today's.... But the underlying societal issue is the same.

The moral, the theme... while at times can feel a little on the nose (pun intended) is still, sadly relevant in today's society.

There's a line in the movie that stuck out to me "you're changing the outside to fit what you know is on the inside... Its what's inside that counts"

In an effort to make herself beautiful on the outside she becomes ugly on the inside.... (then ugly on the outside)

Now, even though I've kinda down played the goriness.... Its definitely an 18 rated movie

But none of the sex, nudity or violence feels gratuitous.... It all serves the story and the characters, it's not gore for the sake of gore (lookin at you Terrifier!)

Oh, and there is a an ed credits scene so stick around for that

7/10 for the ugly step sister.

I was very pleasenlty surprised by this. I went in expecting a fairly mindless gore fest, what i got was a well thought out, well paced psychological body horror (with a fair amount of gore) that Cronenberg fans would be proud of.

Would make a good double bill with THE SUBSTANCE

Thanks to shudder and strike media for giving me an early look at this, it's in select uk cinemas as of April 25th and I believe it's already in US cinemas.

Thats us folks, I'll catch you ijnthe next video

✌🏻