Posts Tagged 'sequel'

Wick-Quoting #45: Thor


Out of all the big comic book movies that came / are coming out this summer, the only one I’d honestly never heard of was Thor.  Now having watched the movie, I still don’t feel any big need to read a comic, but… I can say I know of its existence now.  Actually sorry, that’s a bit of a harsh way to frame my opinion of the movie.


Thor is about the titual thunder God pissing off his father and being cast to Earth to redeem himself.  He’s too hotheaded and war hungry, which his father disapproves of.  And since this is Hollywood, he’s going to meet a girl, who in this case happens to be played by Natalie Portman, and of course she’s pretty brainy but otherwise just runs around a lot and is often shocked by something or another.  Still, there’s a pretty strong cast of characters, and Loki and Thor’s relationship with each other as well as their father was the overall highlight of the film for me as it gave the movie a very real sense of emotion that I feel most comic book movies lack.  The battle scenes aren’t thrilling, but the special effects were pretty good.  Overall, the film is exciting and moves along at a good pace.  It’s not exactly the best comic book movie out there, or really anything super special on its own, but it’s pretty good for a one time feel good view to fit the summer blockbuster vibe.


To conclude… I actually don’t have much else to say. I don’t know anything about the Thor comic books but the ending is just begging for a sequel, so we’ll see what happens there… and I probably will go watch it, if that does happen.  Also, for those of you who may know even less than me about this movie, it really has nothing to do whatsoever with actual Norse mythology.  But you probably all knew that already (hopefully) so these few sentences are just space filler.


Quoted by Sawazz

MWP: 7.7

New Site: http://www.mrwickedproductions.com/wickquoting/?p=189

Wick-Quoting #43: The Hangover Part II



Why does Hollywood continue to make bad movies?  Not only is it because Hollywood lacks original content, but it is also because people (like you and me) pay to watch the same kinds of films in order to get the same feeling as we did last time.  The Hangover Part II is one of those movies we pay to see because we know what we will get out of it.  The Hangover Part II is pretty much the same as the first movie – the exact same “wolf pack” in stupid situations.  Only this time, the story lacks basic fundamentals of being believable and humorous.

They're back...

Zack Galianakis, Ed Helms, and Bradley Cooper are again the main stars who go through an unfortunate series of events.  You would think that after what happened last time, the gang would be more cautious of Zack Galianakis’ character, Alan, but no.  They fall for the same trick, get drugged, and do some crazy shit.  You would think that the other characters would steer clear of Alan – he is unreasonable, immature, and unpredictable.  In the first movie, Zack Galianakis is hilarious.  In Due Date, his similar persona is still very entertaining to watch.  Now, in The Hangover Part II, Galianakis’ character is difficult to put up with.  His stupidity made me cringe many times throughout the screening.

Another song

And I know making fun of minorities is a fundamental part in mainstream American comedy.  It is in stand up, movies, television shows, etc.  But I find the making-fun-of-minorities in The Hangover Part II to be overdone and slightly offensive.  From Ken Jeong’s naked fury (yes it happens again) to the awkward Asian college kid, the film plays off on the demasculinity of Asian males that Hollywood has constructed ever since its birth.  Why must the movie have the Asian college kid carrying a stupid grin on his face despite the fact that he lost a finger?  Why must Jeong carry an accent and appear naked all the time?  Why must there be nude transvestites walking around on screen?  Why must Ed Helms’ character marry a hot Asian girl (Jamie Chung) and why must she agree to marry him despite his devilish demeanor?  And most importantly, why must the father be so easily persuaded by Stu’s gibberish and all of a sudden accept Stu as his son-in-law?  Yeah, I got a tattoo on my face, and yeah, your son lost a finger while under my supervision, but fuck, I am going to marry your daughter and you are going to like it!  Oh, yes sir…

Look out, Asian driving

Despite the racially, negative connotations, the film is still funny at parts, but not throughout.  However, I must be missing the joke that everyone else sees, because the movie has made over $350 million already from a budget of only $80 million.  If you want to watch a good comedy, forget The Hangover Part II – just watch the original.  Sure, Part II is mainstream and all, but it has all been done in the prequel – replace the baby with a monkey and Las Vegas with Bangkok and voila, you got yourself a Hollywood film.


Quoted by MWP

New Site: http://www.mrwickedproductions.com/wickquoting/?p=167

Wick-Quoting #34: Kung Fu Panda

This animated feature film did very well back in 2008, making over 630 million worldwide.  It’s no wonder a sequel will be released later this year.  What made this move so successful?  For starters, it has a collection of well known actors involved.

The voices of the characters match pretty well

The cast includes Jack Black, Angelina Jolie, Dustin Hoffman, Jackie Chan, Seth Rogen, Lucy Liu, and Ian McShane.  Each voice actor matches his/her character fairly well.  It even seems like most of the characters were designed to resemble their respective voice actors (the similarity between Jack Black and Po the panda is striking).  Dustin Hoffman connects very well with his character, Shifu, mainly because just like Shifi, Hoffman is a master – a master at acting.  Therefore, his character commands a similar amount of respect.

The dragon scroll

Unlike other films from DreamWorks, Kung Fu Panda lacks in pop songs and celebrity references, which are common in media for children in order to draw in adult audiences (such as Katy Perry in Sesame Street).  Even though the movie is considered to be for children, it still can entertain adult audiences as well with its engaging characters and unique idea.  In fact, the inclusion of such outside references of songs and celebrities would have only hindered the movie as a spoof instead of an original comedy.


On December 2010, DreamWorks Animation announced that there will be a total of SIX films in the Kung Fu Panda series.  Are they fucking serious?  That’s more than Shrek (even considering the sequel starring Puss in Boots).  Of course, this is DreamWorks that we are talking about, so it is only natural for successful franchises to be dragged out a lot longer than they should be.  Hopefully this franchise won’t go past the third installment.

A duck making food? What does the tiger eat?

Enjoy the movie before DreamWorks overdoses in panda fever.


Quoted by MWP

Wick-Quoting #30: The Godfather Part III



After watching the final installment to The Godfather series, one thing came to mind: Part III is substantially better than Part II.  While TG2 (The Godfather Part II) is entertaining to say the least, it lacks the obvious genius of the other two films.  TG3 (The Godfather Part III) is able to surpass TG2 by basically copying the original.  TG3 goes back to the original by including a retiring leader, ambitious new characters, and forbidden love.

1) a retiring leader

An aged Michael (played again by, of course, Al Pacino) is now highly respected, just like how his father was in the first movie.  Now, it is easy to say that the reason as to why the first movie was so successful is because of the compelling character of Don Vito Corleone.  His gestures, his accent, his personality are all very interesting to watch.  In TG3, Al Pacino is attempting to fill in the shoes of Marlon Brando.  Although he doesn’t quite pull it off, he does have his own respectable take on an old, ex-mob boss.  And with the fall of one, comes the rise of others.

2) ambitious new characters

In an attempt to hold up the family’s honor with Michael’s withdrawal, many characters all compete for the spotlight, including Connie, Mary, and Vincent.  While Connie isn’t exactly a new character, her role is drastically different than it was in the previous two movies.  In TG3, she does take action, which is positive in the view of the family.  Mary, Michael’s daughter, gets a lot more accomplished (story-wise) than her brother.  Finally, there is Vincent Mancini (Andy Garcia) who is almost like a combination of the two characters, Michael and Sonny when they were younger.  Fresh faces is exactly what sequels need in order to propel further.  Of course, too much “new” isn’t all that beneficial – just look at the third installments of Spider-Man and Shrek.

3) forbidden love

Like the first movie, TG3 contains flickering love; however, it is far more “messed.”  Vincent and Mary (cousins) end up growing feelings for one another, and it sort of gets out of hand.  Of course, if there’s anything we learned from the first, with all forbidden love comes consequence!

Building on from that, foreshadowing is huge in TG3, which I absolutely missed from TG2.  The way I see it, a film with good foreshadowing deserves great backlighting with its movie posters.  The other day I finally saw Black Swan, which also uses great foreshadowing – and I was blown away.  Foreshadowing – although can be cheesy at times – can really make a movie shine (alright, enough with the cheesy wordplay).

TG3 is not all light and glitter though, due to the fact of some out-of-place scenes and small, annoying details.  Examples of this include the helicopter shoot down and the fact that Michael becomes a saintlike character: both are not that believable.  One of the main problems I have with the movie is Sofia Coppola in general.  I do not enjoy watching her character making a mess of situations, and what I enjoy less is her big mouth.  Her mouth is pretty distracting to watch, and it reminds me of the bigmouth girl from Glee (a terrible show indeed).  I also do not like Lost in Translation, which was directed and written by Sophia Coppola.  No, I am not being biased based on a movie made by Sophia – in fact, I just learned that she is the one who directed Lost in Translation.

Lost in Translation had a budget of only 4 million, yet has made way more than it should have

TG3 has made 136 million, paying off quite reasonably well for itself.  With interesting foreshadowing, Al Pacino, and some nice scenes (especially the ending scene when Michael yells) TG3 is not a film you should miss, especially if you have already seen the first two.


(I didn’t quite plan for this post to be so long…)

Quoted by MWP

Double-Quoting #26-27: The Godfather & The Godfather Part II



While The Godfather (1972) and The Godfather Part II (1974) are both films from the same franchise, there is a clear difference between the two, in both quality and character development (there may obviously be a connection between the two).  Even though The Godfather Part II is longer by 25 mins (The Godfather is 2 hr & 55 mins while The Godfather Part II is 3 hr & 20 mins) The Godfather seems to include so much more characters, story, excitement, and twists than its sequel.

Marlon Brando as "The Godfather"

One of the main, apparent reason as to why The Godfather is at a higher caliber than TG2 (The Godfather Part II) is because of Marlon Brando’s performance as “The Godfather.”  He created a unique character who appears gentle and reasonable, yet commands respect from not only his family, but from his enemies as well.  “The Godfather,” also known as Don Vito Corleone, has an unforgettable way of speech, which makes you wish he was your grandfather.  Through Vito Corleone, the sons can be easily compared, bringing out their unique and different personalities.

... and they never come back

Even though The Godfather can be very predictable at times, such as when certain characters will die, it still has a solid foundation of character development.  At first, it may seem as though Vito Corleone is the main character of the story, but later, it becomes very clear that the film revolves around the life of the youngest son, Michael Corleone, played by Al Pacino.  This is done in a similar fashion as in Star Wars, where the whole series revolves around Anakin Skywalker instead of the teacher, Obi-Won Kenobi.  As events pass by, including the attempted assassination of his father, Michael can be seen to change as a character, from an unreliable, indifferent son, to a quick thinking, criminal mastermind.  Our attachment to Michael at the beginning, due to his life as a normal person, grants us a ride through a legacy of killing for respect.  While Michael does not become exactly like his father, he obtains qualities as a mob king which makes him awesome in his own way.  This includes his cold, calculating mind, his smooth hair, and his icy stare.

He looks like he was made for the part

The Godfather has it all, love, betrayal, murder, payback, and cool lines.  What TG2 lacks is not one of the qualities mentioned in the previous sentence, but the character development of  the main character in both films. In The Godfather, Michael’s love life is shown, with him and Kay (Diane Keaton) going through much hardship to be together in the end.  Also, his rise of power is depicted, starting from his position as the youngest son, to the strongest mafia head in the country.  In TG2, Michael is already at his peak as the powerful mafia boss.  He could go no higher; in fact, he narrowly escapes losing everything by almost being held responsible for his crimes.  The movie contains no romance; he kicks Kay out after learning the truth behind the miscarriage.  TG2 is more focused on comparing the past to the present.  The film is literally made up of half flashback scenes, which mainly involve Vito Corleone’s younger days.  Most of the flashback scenes don’t do much for the overall film.  After just the first flashback, we get the idea – the business which Vito Corleone started back in the day is now falling apart.

The stare of death

TG2 follows a technique which many bad films adopt, which is the art of introducing random characters/story plots in order to keep the story moving.  The example I’m talking about here is when Michael brings in the older brother of Frank Pentangeli with him to court.  This character is some random character with assumed fame and respect and so happens has the ability to shut Frank up.  Now, I am not saying that TG2 is a terrible film; I am saying it is a terrible film compared to its prequel.  However, the film still holds up on its own with the returning cast including, Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, Diane Keaton, Talia Shire, and John Cazale.  Not to forget to mention, the musical background in both is riveting.

My favorite scene in Part II

The difference of both films can be told in numbers.  The Godfather had a production budget of only 6.5 million but raked in a total of 245 million, while TG2 had a production budget of 13 million but only scored 193 million (the word “only” is used to emphasis the comparison).  Even though these films are oldies, they are by far better than the majority of films being made nowadays.  The Godfather series is turning up to be one of my favorite series.  Hopefully the third installment can live up to the first (not just the second).  I will find out soon enough.

The Godfather: 9.5

The Godfather Part II: 8.0




Join 3 other followers

RSS MrWickedProductions


RSS Wick-Quoting




Top Posts

Blog Stats

  • 54,631 hits