REVIEW: Wonder Woman

I think it's safe to say that the DCEU wasn't shaping up as well as anyone had hoped (least of all the executives at Warner Bros). While Marvel is pumping out three blockbusters a year (the majority of which range from excellent at best to forgettable at worst), DC's competing cinematic superhero franchise has been puttering by on a wing and a prayer ever since Green Lantern failed to get things going back in 2011. With the exception of The LEGO Batman Movie, each new film starring the iconic characters of Detective Comics has not only fallen short of expectations at the box office, but with critics as well (I even went so far as to name Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice one of the worst films of last year in my 2016 Retrospective). Even if these movies are critical disasters that fall short of projected earnings, however, they still manage to make just barely enough to keep projects like the standalone Black Adam movie alive and in the pipeline. Which brings us to this year's first release from the DCEU, Wonder Woman. I'm going to be perfectly honest; after so many disappointing entries in this series, I wasn't even entirely sure I would bother spending money to see this one, even after the improbably positive initial reception it got on Rotten Tomatoes. Keep in mind, this was a project that had been in development since the mid-90's. Even in its current state, the original director left over creative differences, the script was re-written several times, and the original cut was reported to have featured some severely lackluster editing decisions. And that's to say nothing of the exhausting, contrived, heavily-politicised squabbling that surrounded this film close to release (because God forbid we have a modern film that happens to feature a female protagonist without people trying to force it to fit their socio-political narrative). With all of this acting against it, it's nothing short of a miracle that Wonder Woman has turned out to be, without question, the best film in the DCEU so far. I understand that the bar wasn't set especially high to begin with, but trust me, this movie is a solid good time.

Told through flashback after the events of Dawn of Justice, Wonder Woman focuses on the origins of Princess Diana (Gal Gadot), heir to the throne of the Amazonian island of Themyscira. A race of proud, all-female warriors, the Amazons live a life of quiet seclusion, magically concealed from the outside world. This changes, however, after Captain Steve Trevor (an American spy played by Chris Pine) crash lands on Paradise Island while fleeing from German forces. Trevor informs the Amazons that the world is engaged in the war to end all wars (better known these days as World War I); as far as Diana is concerned, a conflict of this scale is clearly the work of Ares, the Greek god of war. Convinced that it is her duty to seek out and destroy Ares, Diana leaves her home on Themyscira to accompany Trevor to man's world, becoming the champion of peace, justice, and love known as Wonder Woman.

Part of what helps elevate this film above its peers is the unabashedly sincere tone it puts forward. Previous DCEU films have almost felt embarrassed by their source material; clearly, Superman is too stupid an idea for anyone to take seriously (despite over 75 years as a worldwide icon), so any film focused on him should become a dour slog full of ham-fisted religious allegory, lest audiences realize they're watching a movie about a spangly man who leaps tall buildings in a single bound. Even Marvel is guilty of this, to some extent; while entries like Guardians of the Galaxy manage to balance out comedy with genuine heart, too much levity can make a movie impossible to take seriously as a result (such is the case with Age of Ultron). It belays insecurity, on the filmmaker's part, in the property that is being adapted. It implies that the filmmaker isn't talented enough to maintain the tone of the source material with a straight face, making things more silly or dour in an attempt to distract from the fact that they're making movies about people who dress up as bats and talk to ants.

Wonder Woman's Patty Jenkins, as it were, has no compunctions about being sincere. While the tone ranges from serious to lighthearted, it is all played 100% straight; Wonder Woman isn't made the butt of any jokes for being a corny 70-year-old comic book hero who wears a magic tiara. At the same time, she isn't turned into a tortured soul who enjoys angstily pouting and waxing philosophic in the rain. Jenkins understands why the character has endured for so long and what makes her such an endearing, inspiring protagonist. This is Wonder Woman, champion of peace, hope, and love, teaming up with the Allied powers to put and end to the destructive conflict of World War I. It's been some time since I've seen a comic book movie that so strongly commits to that old-school superhero spirit, and boy have I missed it.

As I mentioned before, I was admittedly a little dubious of this film walking in, partially because the part of Wonder Woman would be played by Gal Gadot. Her appearance in Dawn of Justice left me thoroughly unimpressed and I was certain that, if there was indeed a low point of this movie, it would be Wonder Woman herself. As it turns out, I'm glad to report that those fears were entirely unfounded. Patty Jenkins displays an aptitude for conjuring excellent performances out of her actors, and Gadot's turn as the titular Amazon Princess here is no exception. While she doesn't necessarily give the best performance in the movie (which is forgivable, considering the supporting cast boasts talent such as Connie Nielsen, David Thewlis, and Robin Wright), Gal Gadot definitely does a respectable job of capturing the spirit of the character, showing marked improvement from when she last appeared in the DCEU. I've no doubt that, over time, she'll continue to grow and improve as she's been doing, making the role her own and becoming a modern icon in her own right.

Personally, the highlight of the film for me was Chris Pine's portrayal of Captain Trevor. He and Gadot share a superb chemistry (despite all the groan-inducing sexual innuendos), even though he tends to outshine her from time to time. Theirs is a surprisingly balanced relationship; they both learn from one another and help out in their own, unique ways. There are no damsels or flat love interests here, everyone pulls their own weight; no where is this more evident than in the spectacular No Man's Land sequence, which was by far the highlight of the entire film (at least in terms of action). I also really quite enjoyed Steve Trevor's gang of mercenary pals (Saïd Taghmaoui, Ewen Bremner, and Eugene Brave Rock); each one of them gets their own set of personality quirks, as well as a little moment of focus for characterization and growth. These are the kind of supporting protagonists who could have easily just amounted to nothing more than set dressing (such as the Howling Commandos in Captain America: The First Avenger), yet the movie cares enough to flesh them out for the sake of a more well-rounded ensemble. I've never seen any of these actors in anything before, but would love to see them in more.

That said, for as much as I enjoyed this movie, it isn't without its flaws. Early reports had mentioned how Wonder Woman struggled both in terms of pacing and editing. While much of this has been masked in post-production, it's still easy to see the proverbial scars these problems left on the film. There are times where things can feel a little uneven and disjointed; the first act feels very rushed at times (condensing multiple flashbacks, time-skips, and exposition dumps into the first ten minutes) and there are moments where it almost feels like some parts of the story are misplaced (for example, it's never made explicitly clear whether or not Diana is especially strong for an Amazon, or if her sisters are all capable of lifting a tank above their heads as well). These are minor nitpicks, but I still found them to be a bit distracting when they came up. It's a fairly good superhero origin story, but it is still a superhero origin story.

I also enjoyed the antagonists for the most part, but they too are not free from their share of problems and setbacks. Danny Huston's General Ludendorff feels like a character directly out of a classic Indiana Jones film and fits the tone quite well, even if he's not given anything particularly interesting to do. There's also Elena Anaya as Doctor Poison, a mad scientist who concocts deadly chemical weapons for the Germans. She was actually one of my favorite aspects of the entire film, as she's given a surprising amount of characterization and vulnerability that one wouldn't immediately expect from a secondary villain. Unfortunately, our final antagonist, Ares, is responsible for the absolute weakest part of the entire movie.

I'm not going to delve into spoilers here, but Ares is by far the worst aspect of an otherwise mostly solid film. Despite all the fun action sequences and genuinely compelling character growth we've seen thus far, it all comes down to a generic, poorly-telegraphed Red Herring twist and a final fight that devolves into two CGI ragdolls smacking into each other while surrounded by fire and rubble. Out of everything this movie gives us, this is the only part of it that feels totally generic. Despite a strong buildup and some legitimate emotional beats surrounding it, the final clash between Diana and Ares ends up feeling so routine that it almost becomes boring. Don't get me wrong, the pros most definitely still outweigh the cons overall, but that doesn't change the fact that Wonder Woman's climax represents exactly what the DCEU should be desperately trying to move away from; loud, stupid action with zero emotional weight or consequence. We end up caring far more about how Steve Trevor ends up saving the day than about Diana fulfilling her destiny, and that's truly the movie's greatest sin (even if it still manages to pull out of this supremely schlocky nosedive to deliver an appropriately bittersweet payoff). 

While it's not exactly perfect, Wonder Woman is still a thoroughly enjoyable comic book film; a shining example of what DC should strive for in future installations. Sure, movies like Supergirl, Punisher: War Zone, and Tank Girl have since stolen any "first female anything"-type accolades, but Wonder Woman holds the distinction of being the first theatrically-released, female-led, female-directed superhero film that is actually any good. Despite all of the nonsensical political turmoil that was whipped up before the film's release, the movie focuses on being a quality film first and foremost. It's a story that champions ideals such as hope, love, peace, and equality; while some painfully stupid individuals are sure to take issue with this, it doesn't change the fact that Wonder Woman is a movie that sets out to elevate itself above the petty squabbling of the internet. Wonder Woman hears you crying about clean-shaven armpits and women-only screenings and it doesn't care. There's a world that needs saving.

REVIEW: Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates

I was originally not going to even bother with a formal review of this movie. Seeing as how I'm a tremendous fan of the main cast, it seemed like a natural move to check it out, even though I really didn't know what to expect quality-wise as I bought my ticket. What followed was a pure and simple screwball comedy; subtle and nuanced it was most certainly not, but damned if I wasn't laughing like an idiot for most of the runtime.

The premise is just the kind of Hollywood absurd to perfectly compliment the personalities of our main characters. Twenty-something bros Mike and Dave Stangle (Adam Devine and Zac Efron) have a history of ruining family gatherings with their fratboy antics. In a desperate plea to keep them in line, their parents demand that they each bring a date to their sister's upcoming wedding in Hawaii (the logic here being that some nice, well-spoken ladies should keep the terrible twosome preoccupied so the event can go off without a hitch, rather than devolve into liquor-fueled debauchery). The brothers decide to create an ad on Craigslist, which attracts the attention of similarly immature gal pals Alice and Tatiana (Anna Kendrick and Aubrey Plaza); recently unemployed and looking for something fun to do, they decide to take on the guise of "good girls" in hopes of accompanying these two naive dopes on an all expenses paid trip to a tropical paradise. Naturally, they end up being chosen and hilarity ensues.

Really, the main reason I'd decided to write this review was because of an article in the New York Times by critic Manohla Dargis. Far be it from me, a humble blogger who makes minimum wage, to think that I have the expertise or experience to question the New York Times, but I found myself disagreeing pretty strongly with Ms. Dargis' review. It criticizes the plot (which is fair; it's as predictable as they come), but also cites the humor as being a series of "thuddingly leaden, patchily strung together bits in service to the underlying theme: Mike and Dave’s fear of sexualized women." The article goes on to state that the film is sexist in its depiction of women, though it doesn't really go into much detail how it does so. While there are a number of gags based around the immature bros' reactions to women embracing their sexuality (such as Mike's fairly justified horror at witnessing his little sister receive a particularly blissful massage from Kumail Nanjiani), I feel as though this is ignoring the greater themes of the movie; namely themes of insecurity and immaturity, and how these traits go hand-in-hand, regardless of one's gender.

Mike and Dave are not positive characters. Neither are Alice and Tatiana. They're impulsive, manipulative, excessively bohemian twenty-somethings with no real direction in their lives. Mike is subconsciously holding Dave back, insisting that he go into the liquor business with him under the guise of "bros sticking together" and Dave complies out of a sense of duty and gratitude towards his older sibling (despite his true passions lying in the realm of drawing and illustration). It's a similar situation with Kendrick and Plaza; Alice was left at the altar and Tatiana has assumed the role of her "you need to get your mind off him and have some fun" gal pal. Alice stays with Tatiana because living it up with her best friend keeps her mind off of the comically-painful ghosts of her past; meanwhile Tatiana subconsciously feeds off of Alice's vulnerability out of a desire to feel needed. The film shows two common examples of well-intentioned but toxic cycles that can emerge from the "bro/gal pal" dichotomy; in order to grow as people, it is sometimes necessary to break free from our comfort zones and take a long, hard look at ourselves. 

As horrible and selfish as these characters appear, this is of course a redemption arc (much like Scott Pilgrim); our protagonists start out wholly misguided, justifying their actions through a series of mental gymnastics, shifting the blame on everyone and everything but themselves. As immature as the humor is, the underlying theme shows that literally anyone can be a manipulative jerk, no matter how innocent or pure their intentions may be. Despite how transparently selfish their actions are, the main quartet all share the same flaw; at their core, they're wholly insecure and choose to cover up these insecurities with a litany of bombastic antics meant to enchant and delight those around them. In reality, these antics have exactly the opposite effect, but admitting that would mean coming to terms with ones own faults and flaws, which is something that these four simply cannot bring themselves to do. Truthfully, I feel as though the message of this movie is actually quite progressive, considering all the raunchy bro-humor found within; this is a movie that says that anyone can feel insecure and act immature as a result, regardless of gender. Toxic behaviors are not exclusive to guys OR gals; everyone has the potential to be a misguided jerk. It even ducks the Hollywood cliché of having our formerly fun-loving simpletons become bland, responsible adults in the end; by the time the credits roll, all four of our protagonists are still the goofball party animals we've come to know thus far, just with a much stronger sense of empathy and understanding for both themselves and those around them. It adopts an almost Cat in the Hat-esque message of "it's alright to have fun, so long as you aren't hurting anyone". The plot is predictable and pedestrian, but the message behind it is anything but.

I know I've said very little about the comedy in this comedy movie, but that's because there's honestly not much to say. Laughs came hard and consistently and I had a fantastic time with it. It feels as though at least half of the dialog was improvised to some degree (to the point that I could probably point out which scenes were scripted and which ones weren't), so if you're a fan of anyone in the main cast, you'll likely enjoy yourself. Comedy is a very hit-or-miss genre, depending on the viewer, but I found everyone here to have superb chemistry, bouncing an infinite number of quotable lines off one another at a rapid-fire pace. While the quartet of Devine, Efron, Kendrick, and Plaza definitely made this movie for me, I must also compliment Sugar Lyn Beard and Alice Wetterlund (who played Mike and Dave's sister Jeanie and cousin Terry, respectively); I'd never seen these actresses in anything before, but their hilarious performances definitely captured my attention here. Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates is hardly groundbreaking or original, but at the end of the day, the default goal of a comedy is to illicit laughter from an audience. I can only speak for myself, but I found that it completely and utterly accomplished that goal. It's ribald and silly and I had a smile on my face the whole time, check it out.

REVIEW: The Sandlot 2

I want to start this by saying that The Sandlot is one of my personal favorite movies of all time. While some may see it as just another kids sports movie about a ragtag bunch of misfits, I feel as though it captures the childlike nostalgia of summertime the way A Christmas Story captures the feeling of the holidays. Like A Christmas Story, The Sandlot is a great little film with something for just about everyone to latch on to. Like A Christmas Story, The Sandlot in no way needed a sequel. And, like A Christmas Story, The Sandlot got one anyway.

This would be the point in which I relay the plot, but I'd just be recounting the plot to the first Sandlot; it's seriously at least 75% the same exact movie. A wimpy kid with the last name of Smalls stumbles upon the titular Sandlot, a vacant field where a group of neighborhood kids (fat one, black one, one with some kind of speech-related quirk, quiet one who's actually good at sports, and the rest) all play baseball in the summer. After the plot meanders around for a bit and you begin to wonder if this is actually going to be an original film instead of a cheap rehash meant to cash-in on early 90's nostalgia, Smalls loses a very valuable possession in the yard of his neighbor, James Earl Jones. This valuable item is now made unattainable, due to James Earl Jones' gigantic, man-eating dog, The Beas-I mean, "The Great Fear". Change the characters' names around some and replace the autographed Babe Ruth ball with a model of a NASA space shuttle and you've got the plot to The Sandlot 2. 

It's really shameless just how much of a rehash this movie is. It's so bad that James Earl Jones' character has an entire bit of dialog at the end that highlights how everything that happened in this movie is just like the things that happened years ago in the first movie, pointing out a little too accurately how the film you just watched amounted to absolutely nothing. Entire scenes and moments from the first movie are just reenacted without a hint of irony or hesistation; they go to a carnival, one kid steals a kiss from an older girl, there's a patriotic "fireworks on Fourth of July" montage, the story of the killer dog is told through a dramatic reenactment shot in black-and-white, the fat kid gets into a name-calling contest with the preppy little league team (and of course someone says "you play ball like A GIRL"), the athletic kid puts on some new shoes and outruns the dog (who SURPRISE, isn't so bad after all), they try to retrieve the lost item with an Erector Set, and James Earl Jones acts like a kinda-spooky-but-still-cool old man who gets a bad rap despite one of the main characters being directly related to one of the main characters from the first Sandlot, so naturally he would know all about James Earl Jones and his dog, thus making this entire thing utterly pointless, but I digress. "Utterly pointless" is a good way to sum up this entire thing, really. Hell, even when the space shuttle is retrieved, we learn that it was pretty much inconsequential. In the first movie, there was some modicum of closure; Smalls had to come clean and admit what he did, while still making up for it. It made for some good character development and added to the overall film; here, the primary conflict is based entirely around misunderstandings, half of which the audience already knows about.

It never really dawned on me just how big an issue that is until I watched this film; probably because no film I've seen prior to this is incompetent enough to present a mystery that the audience is given the answer to while the characters are left in the dark. Normally, interest and tension are created by characters knowing something the viewer does not, but here, we know everything already. We know that James Earl Jones is really nice, we know that the dog isn't a giant monster, we know that the athletic kid is the one who got bit by the dog in New Smalls' story; all of this information is presented to us early on, yet the characters treat it like some great revelation when THEY finally catch up to the audience and learn the truth. It's an objectively wrong way to make a film; all it does is make the characters seem slow-witted and idiotic while bogging down the plot with unnecessary nonsense and annoying the audience to boot. Imagine if The Princess Bride opened up by explaining who the Dread Pirate Roberts was, or if Alien began by informing the audience of the company's true intentions for the crew of the Nostromo. It's such a simple, blunt way to kill any and all interest in a movie, to the point that it's almost fascinating. One must wonder, what was the mission statement here? What goal could director David M. Evans possibly have had in mind when he made the decision to return to direct a straight-to-DVD sequel to a film he directed over a decade prior? How could someone consciously make the same exact film so shamelessly? It's not like money was a huge draw here; The Sandlot was a modest success in 1993 and went on to garner a cult following over the years. Did someone really expect to make a fortune off of a direct-to-video sequel to a cult classic, released in an era when kids' sports flicks were all but extinct? The Sandlot 2 fascinates me with its mere existence, simply because it has no reason to exist. At least, none that I can find.

The Sandlot 2 is a complete and utter nothing of a movie. It's actually something of a shame, considering the first 20 minutes or so are actually not an exact carbon-copy of the first movie. I went in expecting something irredeemably bad, only to get something that felt as if it was almost about to be something original. But then it just became The Sandlot, but again and with much, much worse child actors. If you ever wanted to see what The Sandlot would be like if everyone who isn't James Earl Jones struggled to stutter out every line, then by all means, check out this pointless, insipid sequel. Nobody asked for it, and nobody will remember it. That is the legacy of The Sandlot 2. Well, that and a THIRD one that exists for some reason. A third one that involves time travel, apparently. So there's a point in The Sandlot 2's favor; it may be a terrible rehash of the first movie, but at least it doesn't have time travel.

REVIEW: Mad Max- Fury Road

Having never seen any of the original Mad Max films, I had little interest in seeing Fury Road for the longest time. The trailers dropped, received limitless praise, and I figured this would be one of those summer movies that I get around to seeing eventually. What I didn't expect was for my introduction to the world of Mad Max to be one of the most technically and visually impressive films I'd ever seen. The fact that this film also contains absolutely stellar performances, writing, and direction is just the icing on an already delectable cake.

The story concerns the lone road warrior, Max (Tom Hardy). Haunted by visions of his deceased daughter, he wanders the post-apocalyptic wastelands of Australia, managing to do little more than survive. After being captured by the automobile-themed cult known as the War Boys, Max finds himself wrapped up in the plans of Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron); the one-armed official has gone rogue, commandeering a war rig in an attempt to usher the Five Wives of King Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne) to freedom. What follows is a two-hour long chase through an arid wasteland as our protagonists flee the massive army of weaponized vehicles that pursues them in search of revenge. The plot is simplistic, but this is the kind of film that is moved forward by compelling characters rather than a compelling story. The entire thing can be summed up as a chase through the desert, but such an oversimplification of what occurs throughout the film's runtime is an injustice to the final product. The performances, characters, and action all take center stage here; while the effects are some of the most astounding I've seen in any movie before, they never take precedence over the characters. A visual or action sequence can be as cool as it wants to be (and by god are the visuals and action sequences in this movie cool), but there isn't any tension behind the events on screen if we don't care about the people involved. Luckily, the main cast of this film manages to be truly interesting despite how wild and out-there the situation they're in happens to be.

The real protagonist of the film is, oddly enough, not Mad Max himself. Tom Hardy feels much more like a supporting character, which is honestly one of the only gripes I've got with the film; while what we get is really genuinely good, I would have loved to have seen more of Max. As it turns out, Charlize Theron's Furiosa is the real star of the show. Both protagonists are interesting and enjoyable to watch on screen, but Theron simply does more in regards to the plot; Max is just sort of along for the ride. It says a lot about the quality of the film when the biggest complaint is "the already great protagonist isn't quite as great as the really great secondary protagonist". For me personally, however, the highlight of the cast was Nicholas Hoult as Nux, one of Immortan Joe's War Boys. Like all War Boys, the character is a fanatical follower of Joe, convinced that if he serves his great purpose, he will one day join the heroes of legend in the afterlife of Valhalla. All his life, he's been indoctrinated with Joe's ideology; this kind of insane outlook is literally all he knows. I don't want to say anything more for sake of spoilers, but the character ends up being easily the most interesting facet of an already truly interesting movie. The villains are really quite enjoyable as well; they don't have much more depth beyond "evil bourgeoisie dictators of the wasteland", but they don't really need to be anything more than that for the film to work like it does. Their motivation is clear and understandable; they're kings of the end of the world and want to keep things that way. This is a movie in which really compelling protagonists rise up against really awesome-looking antagonists and it all works flawlessly because, at the end of the day, it's not about the villains. They are simply yet another source of death and misery in an already desolate, unforgiving environment. It's about our protagonists and how the journey they've embarked upon affects and changes them as things progress.

Of course, a monumental amount of praise needs to be given to everyone responsible for the visuals in this movie. From the artists who designed each manic vehicle, to the effects coordinators who made everything explode properly, to the stuntmen who risked life and limb, this movie is the absolute epitome of the phrase "a feast for the eyes". The film uses mostly practical effects, giving everything a very organic feeling of grit and danger; when CGI is employed, it meshes with the actors seamlessly. Filmmakers everywhere take note; this is how you make an action movie. Every bit of machinery, architecture, and gear employed in this universe is just so absurd and strange, yet it all makes perfect sense within the film's own logic. One might look at some of the trailers and promotional images and wonder "what purpose could a mobile amp carrying a guitar-playing lunatic possibly serve? What is the point of those goons on the sway-poles brandishing chainsaws?"; believe me when I say, it all makes perfect sense within the movie's own logic. It's all completely ridiculous, but it's not unreasonable to imagine a scenario where this could actually happen; the culture surrounding this post-apocalyptic wasteland is strange, yet familiar at the same time. It all feels like a world that, long ago, was once like the one we're living in now.

Mad Max: Fury Road feels like a breath of fresh air in the realm of modern action flicks. Where it seems nowadays that everything attempts to crank the spectacle up to eleven with nothing more than absurd amounts of lifeless CGI, this is a film that manages to be truly imaginative, confidently securing the wow-factor with breathtaking effects, interesting characters, and strong direction. Word is that there's more Mad Max in the pipeline if this film proves successful; if Fury Road is a sign of things to come, then I sincerely hope these films never stop coming.

REVIEW: Heavenly Sword

Heavenly Sword is amazing. Not amazing in a good way. Amazing in the same way as an atomic blast, or a cockroach that simply won't die no matter how hard you stomp on it. People who know me know how I have a very high tolerance for bad movies; even the worst piece of garbage can be entertaining. At long last, I have found my limit, and it's name is Heavenly Sword.

For those unaware, 2014's Heavenly Sword is an adaptation of the forgettable PS3 game of the same name, or as the opening credits inform us, "BASED ON THE HEAVENLY SWORD VIDEO GAME FRANCHISE FROM SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT". In my humble opinion, a single game over half a decade ago (followed up with an appearance in Playstation All-Stars) is hardly a franchise, but what do I know? It's difficult where to begin with this, seeing as how everything is just so godawful; I suppose I could start with the plot. As we are told through SEVERAL plodding narrations, there's some ancient artifact known as the Heavenly Sword. It's cursed or was wielded by a god or some such legendary nonsense (maybe it was a combination of the two) and the evil King Bohan (voiced by Alfred Molina, who must have really needed to eat that weekend) wants to get his big, gauntlet-y hands on it so that he can... do something evil, I'm sure. He doesn't really have a clearly defined plan outside of getting this sword.

The sword is kept in a small village by a clan of vaguely Asian warriors. With the exception of the protagonist's jerkass father (one of the three characters voiced by Nolan North, who does his hardest "I'm a white guy voicing an ancient Asian man" voice), all of these people speak with that generic English accent that all ancient people all around the world seemed to have. Once Doc Ock attacks the clan, the sword is entrusted to Nariko (Anna Torv, managing to conjure less emotion than a bowl of Rice Krispies); she's the most perfect, talented warrior that the clan has ever seen, but all of this is completely invalidated because she's a woman. So everyone respects and reveres her, but they also mock and look down on her. Sometimes at the same time. It's difficult to have a character be utterly perfect AND an underdog all at once; usually it just cancels everything out and makes them boring and uninteresting. If you need any evidence of my theory in action, just watch Heavenly Sword. She's accompanied by Kai (Ashleigh Bell), a horribly annoying piece of work who could only be more of a ripoff of Edward from Cowboy Bebop if she wore goggles and hung out with a corgi. Her voice is comparable to nails on a chalkboard during teatime at a dodgy South London brothel and I utterly loathed every second that she was on screen. One of the few times I smiled during this movie is when I believed she had been brutally murdered onscreen; because Heavenly Sword refuses to let those who view it experience any modicum of joy, she of course gets better, despite being stabbed through the stomach and hung for a solid five minutes at least.

There's a few other characters who show up and do very little; Thomas Jane of all people voices Loki, a character who apparently wasn't in the video game. As you may have guessed, he has about two minutes of screentime and then promptly dies (a shame, considering how much one would think the addition of The Punisher would spice this picture up). As I mentioned, Nolan North voices a few people, my favorite of which being Roach, King Bohan's morbidly obese son. He's the only entertaining part of this entire movie and that's because he's the stupidest thing I've ever seen. Imagine if Sloth from the Goonies weighed five-hundred pounds and attacked people by rolling into a ball like an armadillo on pep pills. His slurred reading of "I'm gunna kill you now" is the only moment in the movie where I genuinely smiled at something I think was meant to be funny. Honestly, everything in this movie was put together with such staggering incompetence, from the writing to the action to the animation (that looks to be straight out of a high-end PS2 cutscene), I'm honestly not sure what I was supposed to think of any of this. Fifteen minutes in, I checked to see if it was almost over.

While watching the horror unfold, I devised a drinking game, thinking that perhaps alcohol will dull the horrible pain inflicted by this movie on any poor fool (like yours truly) who willingly decides to watch it.

The Official Drinking Game of Heavenly Sword: The Official Movie of the Game
Take a drink whenever:
-the words "Sony Computer Entertainment" or "Playstation" are on screen
-the film cuts away to expository narration with a flashback animated in a 2-D style
-a character or object clips through part of the scenery
-someone says "Heavenly Sword" (if you really wanna fly, drink whenever someone just says "sword")
-you hear "prophecy" or "chosen one"
-there's an audio glitch or someone's dialog is noticeably chopped together from different takes
-you hear a stock sound effect or scream
-you notice that the sound the bird-guy makes when he laughs is totally just Kazooie's voice from Banjo Kazooie
-someone lets out a "NOOOOOOO"
-someone makes a really stupid, uncanny valley face
-Nariko or Kai totally should have been killed, but the identical henchmen just stood there and didn't make any effort to attack them
-you check the time to see how much longer is left
-and finally, when Kai "dies", finish your glass; this is both in celebration and to build up tolerance to the reveal that she's totally still alive

I considered adding "whenever Kai is insufferable" to that list, but that would basically just result in nonstop chugging whenever she's on screen. Not only would this probably kill people, it would also cost them a fair amount of booze; I don't want to be responsible for either of those outcomes.

"YES! THEY HAVE FOUND HIM! AND THEY HAVE THEIR ORDERS! TO KILL HIM! NOW! HA!"- actual line of dialog delivered by Alfred Molina, actor

Incidentally, you might be wondering why there are so many spoilers in this review. It's because I want to spoil this movie. I don't want anyone to get curious and go watch this. Heavenly Sword is the Pet Semetary and I am the old groundskeeper. I never played Heavenly Sword on my PS3; I just remember hearing a collective "it's not bad" amongst all the obvious God of War comparisons. If you really loved the game and you simply MUST see what it's like adapted as a hour and a half long direct-to-video movie (or if you're just a humongous glutton for punishment), then you're going to do what you want to do. But don't say I didn't warn you.