CabbageCustard

I have been a fan of Superman ever since I was in a kid and George Reeves donned the cape and did a great job in the role, despite the special effects limitations of the time and low budget. All TV versions of Superman pale in comparison to him. I loved Christopher Reeve in Superman I and II. I thought Brandon Routh was great and very underrated in the role. I even liked the Henry Cavill interpretation and the darker tone to his movies. Up until now, I thought Superman III and IV were the nadir of the Superman films. I could forgive them (sort of) because they were just someone trying to squeeze a few more dollars out of a completed franchise and doing a really bad and misdirected job of it. Now, however, we have a new candidate for the worst Superman movie ever. And I say worst, because this movie is not just the last flickering embers of a once successful series. No, this movie is supposed to be the first in a new imagining of the Superman story. If this wimpy, social media age Superman is where the franchise is headed then I will wait for the next reimagining - the one after this one. Shame on James Gunn for what he has done to an iconic hero. I winced every time I heard the iconic John Williams theme being played or when this movie attempted to play tribute to older much loved versions (Great Caesar's Ghost!). This movie is unworthy of them. This movie actually made me angry with its boring story, dull characters and lame attempts at humor. I hope the DC head honchos think again, sack James Gunn and give us a Superman we can cheer for. Give this one a miss.

There have been countless screen versions of the famous Mark Twain novel on which this movie is based. I have even seen musicals, television series and a Russian version, to name a few. They have been of variable quality. I suspect, if you are not a Mark Twain fan and have never seen one of the classic movies based on this book, then you may find this movie acceptable. To be honest though, this has to be one of the worst versions of the book ever made.

That's hardly surprising, because it is obvious that this was chiefly made, not to bring the famous book to a new generation, but to cash in on the popularity of the two young stars. As a consequence, many liberties are taken with the plot - the most nauseating being the attempt to depict a romance between Tom Sawyer and Becky Thatcher, something that didn't exist in the book and which would have been unthinkable for the 'real' Tom. The makers are none-too-careful about keeping the dialogue correct for the time. Tom and Huck constantly refer to each other as 'buddies' and Tom constantly calls his friend 'Hucky'.

And then there is the acting. Joel Courtney is appealing as Tom and Jake T Austin is a bit wooden but acceptable as Huck. Both are miscast though. It is in the adults, however, that the most egregiously bad acting is seen. In fact, I will go so far as to say that there is not one good actor in the bunch. The only one you will have heard of is Val Kilmer who, under many layers of make-up, plays Mark Twain. The chap who plays Injun Joe sounds like a New York Gangster. The man who plays Tom's teacher is just awful!

One red flag I didn't see till the credits rolled was that this movie was written, directed and produced by the one person. That's often a danger sign, only exceeded by having the family members of this person in the case. It was certainly a danger sign in this case.

Like I said, if you've never read Tom Sawyer, if you have never seen any of the many, many better movies then you may find this acceptable. If you're not in that group, give this a miss.

I was quite disappointed by this movie. That's maybe a bit harsh because, taken on it's own merits, this is a quite adequate, perhaps even superior, family film. The trouble is that it really falls far short of the whimsy, the subtle humor, the cleverness of the previous two previous superlative Paddington movies.

It's hard to say why this is. I suspect it's because this is the first Paddington movie to take the story out of London and away from all those quirky British characters and backgrounds that enriched the previous movies and made them sparkle. Instead of finding adventure and excitement in the ordinary things that surround us, this movie puts Paddington and the Brown family into a already existing exotic adventure location. Jim Broadbent gets a few minutes of screen time and Hugh Grant makes a welcome appearance, but neither of them are given anything to do that could add a touch of magic, though I suspect they were included to do just that.

The actors do a good job. Antonio Banderas is great in his role. Olivia Colman is a great actress and adept at comedy, but she's pretty bland here. The young lady who plays Banderas' daughter also fails to sparkle, but that's more a fault with her dull character more than her acting.

There is one musical number towards the beginning that could have been left out and there is far too much maudlin sentimentality in the movie as a whole.

Family groups will enjoy this movie I have no doubt. If you're looking for the magic that made the first two Paddington movies so special, however, you will be disappointed.