Sunday, November 19, 2017
So, jumping back onto the saddle, let's talk Skeletor.
He's one of the most important choices in this movie. Maybe even more important than He-Man. Christian Bale was a good Batman. Almost everyone can agree on that. But I've never met anyone who doesn't think Heath Ledger was an amazing Joker. That's the way I see it with Skeletor.
He's He-Man's arch-rival. He's the villainous part of the story. Every good story needs a good villain and, in this one, Skeletor is it. If the movie's decision-makers choose wisely, it could take the movie up another notch.
Who to choose?
Here are a few people I've come up with:
I'm not sure what age range the rest of the cast is, but there's always a benefit to going young in movies where there's a potential to for a trilogy or a series.
The benefit is that the actor is young enough to remain in that starring role for the next decade. Just look at Hugh Jackman.
He was Wolverine for 17 years! Action movies require people to be in at least decent shape. That's a lot of fitness dedication to be in top shape for 17 years.
Radcliffe is, of course, best known for his work as Harry Potter. He's not a muscle head, but he seems to have a good build. I assume he could do some of his own stunts.
Everyone (or at least I do) pictures teenage Harry Potter when they think of Radcliffe, so it's easy to forget that he's a much more mature looking 28-year-old these days.
He's got the acting chops to get the job done and I think he'd have an interesting take on the role of Skeletor. I wouldn't mind a bit of he was chosen for the job.
Another younger actor who is primarily known for one major role is Mr. Pattinson. Thanks to the Twilight saga, he's known for pretty much one role. Although he's done other movies, none of them have elevated him past the distinction of being a sparkling vampire in the Twilight series.
Assuming that the Masters of the Universe movie is even somewhat successful, it'd at least be a chance of pace for Pattinson. Instead of being the romantic interest, he'd be a villain. He'd be evil and part of an action movie. I think it'd look good on his resume, but I'm not his agent.
In terms of what he offers to the role, he's got name recognition. He's got decent acting skills. He's also got the physique and, I assume, the athleticism to succeed in the physicality of the role.
Skeletor was never a big hand-to-hand combat villain anyway. He was more of a Loki type of villain -- a plotting trickster with magical powers and a magical staff that he used as a weapon.
Robert Pattinson could handle the role of Skeletor just fine.
Michael who? That's probably a question you're asking, even if you've seen this guy in other movies before. He was General Zod in Man of Steel. That's his biggest role to date, but he's also appeared in 8 Mile, Bad Boys II, Vanilla Sky and even Groundhog Day. Needless to say he's got the experience required to play the part.
Shannon is probably more of an 'actor's actor' than Pattinson or Radcliffe. By that I mean he's got a lot of diversity in his filmography. He's taken small roles and large roles. He's acted on TV and in movies. I don't think he'd be unprepared to handle any kind of task the director or producer threw at him.
In terms of his physicality, he proved that he could be a formidable opponent for someone with superhuman strength in Man of Steel.
He's an older choice than the other two choices I've mentioned so far, but Skeletor can be older. Skeletor doesn't really have an age, so that's OK. Shannon doesn't have the name recognition, but he'd bring some good acting to the role.
I'm not a huge fan of James Franco, but, for some reason, I could see this working. My impression of Franco is that he's a little out there. That can sometimes make for good actors.
I can't think of one performance of Franco's that I've been incredibly moved by, but he gets the job done.
He's got some name recognition to his name. I'm good with going with unknown actors or actresses to fill roles. Look at how well it turned out for Marvel with Chris Hemsworth as Thor. However, I think the new MOTU movie needs some big names if it's going to be the start of a franchise.
Franco would provide the project with a big name and some acceptable acting skills as well.
How about this as a choice? Little bit of a twist? Craig is, of course, known for being Mr. 007 in what will be at least 5 different James Bond movies, but I think he'd be really good as a villain, too.
Skeletor would be in the same realm as James Bond (action flick, big budget, kind of realistic but not really). It'd be a very distinct, different character, though.
I'd imagine he'd be happy to not be typecast as James Bond. Being a blue-skinned alien with a floating yellow head and a purple cloak would help expand how people see him, right?
Without a doubt, Craig would be fine with the physical aspects of the role. 5 James Bond movies kind of prepares you for any other action movies that come along. He's been in some other movies, of course, and there was a bit of variety in them.
I think Daniel Craig would be able to portray a complex villain (which is how Skeletor needs to be portrayed) and get the audience emotionally involved. For that reason alone, he's a good choice.
Speaking of actors with a good amount of experience, Willem Dafoe's career goes back to the 1980's. He's starred in comedies, action flicks, superhero movies, and dramas.
He was the Green Goblin in the Spider-Man trilogy from the early 2000's. He'll be Nuidis Vulko in 2018's Aquaman.
Some of his most recent credits include: Murder on the Orient Express, John Wick and The Fault in Our Stars.
Dafoe can get it done in whatever role he's given. He's one of those actors who you may not know by name, but have probably seen at some point or another. He's got a recognizable face, even if people don't know him by name.
That's, of course, due to all of his work in Hollywood.
What does he bring to the table? Good acting. Credible acting. Both of those would help the MOTU be more than just a failed effort. We saw the G.I. Joe franchise flop, despite some okay box office numbers and one of the two movies starring Channing Tatum, The Rock and Bruce Willis.
I'd like He-Man to be a nice mix of good cinematography, exciting action sequences, visually pleasing CGI (not overdone though!), impressive acting, and a script that combines drama and comedy.
Basically, I want it to be on point. Dafoe brings impressive acting to the table and a load of experience.
This is the one I want. This is my pick for Skeletor. In my dream world of fantasy casting, Cillian Murphy would be Skeletor. He's not a hugely recognizable actor, but he's got some major roles under is belt -- and a lot of them are as villains. He was the Scarecrow in Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.
He was also the creepy evil dude in Red Eye. Anyone remember that movie with Rachel McAdams? He was also the bad guy in the not-so-amazing Justin Timberlake futuristic flick In Time.
If Christopher Nolan were in charge of the MOTU movie, Murphy would be a shoe-in because Murphy also starred in Inception.
So, basically, Murphy can handle the acting. He's used to big productions. He's used to playing a bad guy. He looks to be in good shape, so I think he could handle some of the stunts, too.
I think Cillian Murphy would be a great choice. He's my number one pick.
I'm hoping someone in Hollywood has at least thought of him for the role, too!
•Casting the He-Man movie: She-Ra characters
•Casting the He-Man movie: the others
•Casting the He-Man movie: Ram Man
•Casting the He-Man movie: Orko
•Casting the He-Man movie: Trap Jaw
•Casting the He-Man movie: The Sorceress
•Casting the He-Man Movie: Evil-lyn
•Casting the He-Man movie: Mer-Man
•Casting the He-Man movie: Man-At-Arms
•Casting the He-Man movie: Beast Man
•Casting the He-Man movie: Teela
I went into Justice League the way I got into all movies that I want to see: without watching the trailers. I tried to avoid as many clips or previews or interviews or spoilers or reviews as possible.
And I wasn't disappointed.
One of my co-workers did mention to me that Joss Whedon apparently retweeted a review by Variety, which said that the villain in this movie was one of the worst villains of all time. I don't know if that's the case because I never actually took the time to find that tweet.
I did see a few months back that Diane Lane, who plays Martha Kent, mentioned on an episode of Watch What Happens Live that she didn't think Justice League would be as good as The Avengers. She released a statement later, explaining that she was saying that she couldn't reveal spoilers and that she hadn't seen The Avengers.
So, there was that. Outside of that little bit of information, I didn't know what to expect from the movie, but I was wanting big things.
I was really hoping, after the success of Wonder Woman, that this would be good. Why? Because I'm a fan of comic books and super heroes and I really want the DC Universe to do well on the big screen because that will mean even more DC projects in the future.
So how did this venture compare to some of Marvel's movies? I've got to say: it measured up. For comparison purposes, it reminded me a lot of Avengers 2 in various ways.
Just like Ultron in Avengers 2, Steppenwolf filled the need for a powerful enough villain to bring this awesome group of super heroes together against a common enemy.
It's definitely not as though this guy will go down in super hero movie history as one of the best villains of all time, though.
Unfortunately DC comics doesn't have a bunch of really interesting villains. We've got Batman's villains, but none of them pose a threat against an allegiance like the Justice League. Lex Luthor is great, but, again, he's a human. He's not a physical threat against the likes of Wonder Woman, Aquaman or Superman.
As the DC cinematic universe continues on, they may need to consider coming up with some entirely new villains. I wouldn't mind that at all, actually. Or maybe they find some of the more obscure, yet still threatening villains and bring them to the big screen.
Or maybe they just need to work on their delivery. I didn't know anything about Steppenwolf going into this movie, but upon doing some research, I liked certain comic book depictions of him -- much more than the movie's depiction.
He gets the job done, though.
There are so many great moments in this movie, whether it's comedic one-liners or action sequences. Batman and The Flash were hilarious together. Alfred had some funny moments. Wonder Woman and Batman had a chemistry in Batman v. Superman and carried that on into this movie, too. Aquaman is freakin' hilarious! I'm anxious to see his movie next year.
The Flash should be a really good standalone movie as well. His interactions with Cyborg made both characters stand out among some big names.
Cyborg was really interesting. I think he's an interesting enough character to warrant a standalone movie down the road.
Wonder Woman was just as amazing as she was in her own movie. DC Universe has big money with Gal Gadot and if they handle the character the right way, there will be multiple success stories to come -- either in a Wonder Woman standalone film or in Justice League team-ups.
I know I mentioned how awesome Aquaman was a few paragraphs up, but it bears repeating. He is a sarcastic bad-ass who can control the water. Pretty much an under water Thor with an edge.
It's interesting that DC is following Marvel's own already winning formula.
They started with Superman in Man of Steel. Then gave us Batman v. Superman (with a Wonder Woman appearance).
After that, they went with a period piece for Wonder Woman (as Marvel did with Captain America's first movie).
Now it's the team-up in Justice League (like Marvel did with The Avengers). Next, they'll give us Aquaman and The Flash.
That's an incredible feat for such a big project. Major kudos to the writers, directors and producers for pulling that off.
Justice League was similar to Captain America 3 in that sense. Lots of underlying stories, character development and connecting plot points. Characters like Martha Kent (Diane Lane) and Lois Lane (Amy Adams) weren't forgotten.
I'd like to give a more detailed review, but I don't want to spoil anything for anyone who hasn't seen it yet. Maybe when the DVD is released, I'll do a full-on review.
Until then, go see this movie! If you enjoyed any of the other DC movies so far, you're sure to enjoy this one. If your allegiance lies with Marvel, you'll still probably enjoy it because DC is getting it right by using lots of the techniques that put Marvel on the map.
I'll end this review on this final bit of advice: if you watch the movie, stay until the end of all of the credits. You won't be disappointed that you did!
•Transformers: The Last Knight - reviewed.
•Wonder Woman - reviewed.
•Wonder Woman - reviewed.
•Logan - reviewed.
Monday, July 3, 2017
This was ... a Transformers movie. Simply put: it's what you'd expect out of a Transformers movie. It's number five in their ongoing series of movies and was, once again, directed by Michael Bay, so if you've seen any of the other movies, you probably know what to expect with this one.
A lot of people have mixed opinions on the Transformers movies and Michael Bay's big 'boom/bang' style. I don't mind it.
If it weren't for the length (that almost makes your butt numb from sitting for so long ... 3 hours including the previews), I wouldn't have much negative to say about it.
This movie included more of what fans of the previous 4 movies liked, plus some new elements. This is the only movie I can remember that had one Transformer assisting in the age of King Arthur and another battling Nazi soldiers in World War II. This movie went further into the Transformers backstory and why there are so many of them who end up on Earth.
There were a couple of quick mentions of Sam Witwicky, so I was happy to see that. I do secretly hope for a Witwicky return to the Transformers franchise, but I realize that's doubtful given how crazy Shia LaBeouf has become.
Josh Duhamel returned in his role as Lt. Col. Lennox (I did have to Google his character's name since it was never really stressed in the first 3 Transformer movies). It was good to see that. Though I may be biased since he's a Midwestern dude, just like me.
They did OK with the portrayal for a while, but then in this apparently abandoned town there's some multi-level building with a robot that looks like it's out of a Willy Wonka or Harry Potter movie. There aren't any buildings like that in South Dakota, much less in abandoned towns.
But it's a movie, so what are you going to do?
I'm not sue the little girl was really needed. She didn't necessarily hurt the movie, but by the end of the movie you realize that she didn't add much to the movie considering how much time was spent on developing her character.
Sir Anthony Hopkins was great, as usual. His bits made the movie very entertaining.
Mark Wahlberg was alright, but I think his acting left a little to be desired. His attempts at humor at certain points just didn't really leave me laughing. Or chuckling.
It was more of a 'Huh. That was kind of funny' reaction than anything else. The bit in the junkyard, for example.
I realize that the new normal is living in a land of robot aliens, but his interactions with the baby Dinobots seemed a little bit silly. Considering there were some rather lame attempts at humor, I was surprised at the adult language that was used in the Transformers movie.
I'm an adult. Doesn't really bother me. But seeing as how this seemed like more of a family friendly or PG movie franchise, it was a little bit strange to hear so many, 'Shit,' 'Damn,' and 'Bitch' words used.
She had a rather unnecessary wardrobe change at one (or two?) point in the movie. In a real-life situation where time is of the essence, who doesn't go change into a new outfit? Maybe they had an advertiser they needed to appease?
Little things like that prevented this movie from being an epic, all-time great superhero movie.
Of course, Haddock was a romantic interest for Mr. Wahlberg. Gotta have a little romance in there too, I guess.
Optimus Prime's mission to find his makers was continued in this movie. I don't know exactly what happened there, in all honesty. There was an evil Transformers woman.
There were some good Knights. The Decepticons and Optimus were each trying to find a certain weapon. It was all a little confusing, so I'm not sure how great the story was.
Just as it was with the other Transformer movies, you have to go back and watch it again a couple of times before being able to appreciate the twist and the turns and how involved the storytelling is. 2 and a half hours fits a lot of content into a movie.
I'm not sure how many adventures they can come up with before the franchise jumps the shark.
I haven't read the box office results, honestly, but it was in a tough spot -- squeezed between Wonder Woman and the upcoming Spider-Man: Homecoming movie.
I'm assuming both of them will do better than The Transformers: The Last Knight.
But hopefully they can get another movie or two out of the franchise before it ends. There's still a lot to be told regarding the origins of the Transformers and their connection to Earth.
•Logan - reviewed.
•Wonder Woman - reviewed.
•Central Intelligence - reviewed.
•Nine Lives - reviewed.
Sunday, June 4, 2017
I realized that I wrote this back in March, but never published it. So, two reviews in two days:
Well, Wolverine finally got a great stand-alone movie!
With the 'R' rating, it seemed to possibly bring a darker theme and slower pace than the last couple of X-Men movies, which featured comedic, slow motion Quicksilver montages.
While Logan was darker and did have a slower pace, I think it was, by far, the best story to come out of the X-Men franchise. I
t had the storytelling that you'd find from one of the first Marvel movies -- where everyone had a role and every scene had a purpose.
There were some new characters (a couple of them being mutants) in this movie. None of them were ones I'd recognized from the animated X-Men series from the '90s or from comics I'd read. One of them was Caliban, played by the entertaining Stephen Merchant. He and Wolverine provided some comedy in a somewhat dark movie.
here was blood and guts, as you'd expect there to be with Wolverine involved.
There are F-bombs, blood and close-ups of Wolverine clawing into any and all of his enemies in this movie.
They could've probably told this story without all of that, but I don't think it would've been as effective. Wolverine has always been a violent character who deals with violent enemies in a violent way. That's just part of the character's origins.
In the previous movies, that Wolverine wasn't able to be portrayed. That all changed with Logan.
If you want to be surprised, the movie does well in explaining the story, but it does help to have a little background information.
Personally, I didn't know much about X-23. I watched the animated X-Men cartoon from the '90s, but quit by the time X-Men: Evolution came about in 2003. However, as much as I tried to avoid spoilers, I ran across a couple of headlines on Facebook, so I had a general idea as to what to expect.
The actress they got to play this character was great. She didn't have a ton of dialogue but she didn't need it. She portrayed a huge array of emotions through her facial expressions, her body language and guttural screams.
If you've read some of my previous reviews, you probably know how much I despise bad child actors. Either make them bit parts or don't write to a movie with a child actor. They didn't need to worry about that in this case.
Speaking of Patrick Stewart, this movie gives a nice closure to characters like Professor X and Wolverine, who we've seen as part of the X-Men franchise since 2000.
17 years is a long time for someone to play a character, even if they've only done it for a matter of minutes in a few ensemble films.
Whether or not there are sequels in the future or flashes to the past or prequels, this felt like a nice closure to that 17-year-long journey.
Then again, Wolverine was probably the most problematic 'problem child' a mentor or caretaker could end up with.
It was fun to see their relationship portrayed in a different way than it had in the previous movies. Additionally, their dynamic changed the moment X-23 was involved in the story.
I felt bad for Logan in a somewhat comedic way. He had to care for an elderly, mutant with failing health and failing mutant abilities along with a wild, emotionally distraught young girl.
As we all know, Wolverine isn't exactly the best caretaker to anyone, much less these two people and under stressful circumstances.
They really did well with this movie. Whether you liked some of the decisions made with the characters or not, there were no loose ends. There were minimal issues that I had with believability or continuity.
There was one moment --- involving a hunter in the woods -- that I kind of groaned about. Though this review is late, I don't want to spoil anything if you haven't seen the movie yet, so I'll just say this: he must have been deaf not to hear the noise going on that was so close to him. I guess his dog was deaf too.
Oh, that and the the scene with the perfectly framed and filmed cell phone video. When someone is secretly filming something on their cell phone in a whistleblower capacity, things aren't close up and framed appropriately.
Minor complaints overall, but so minor that I can't even take half a star off of this stellar movie.
•Wonder Woman - reviewed.
•Central Intelligence - reviewed.
•Nine Lives - reviewed.
•The Jungle Book - reviewed.
Saturday, June 3, 2017
So it finally happened. Wonder Woman made it to the big screen in her very own movie.
If you haven't seen it, I'll leave most of this blog spoiler-free (spoilers at the very bottom).
While I was a fan of Man of Steel, I really liked the extended cut of Batman v. Superman, and I liked Suicide Squad, they all had mixed reviews. None were as well-received as some of the Avenger movies or Captain America 3 (which was basically another Avengers movie) though.
If Wonder Woman does well, then DC does well, which means Justice League may do well. That means Aquaman may do well. And the Batman movie. And the Batgirl movie. And Cyborg. And Flash. As a comic book fan, I'm a fan of that.
Meanwhile, with DC going all-out on their female heroes and villains (Wonder Woman, Batgirl and Gotham City Sirens), it's possible that Marvel may take notice and finally pull the trigger on a Black Widow movie. That's a character that really should be given it's own movie -- even if it's just a stand-alone movie and not one with several sequels.
So, how was it? Will this be a boost for DC? I think so. The movie was definitely a success.
And that's saying something because it had a lot to accomplish. While Wonder Woman was first briefly introduced in Batman v. Superman and she's been in the trailers for the upcoming Justice League movie, this was the first time we saw her on her own. No help from the more established Superman or Batman.
Additionally, the movie had to help set up the Justice League movie that comes out in November.
So, basically, not much room for messing up.
The flirtations between the two characters began almost immediately, but Wonder Woman wasn't depicted as a giggling little schoolgirl. It was more of a instant connection.
Chris Pine did well with the comedic bits and banter with Wonder Woman.
It wasn't the sarcastic quips that you'd get out of a Tony Stark or the slapstick that you'd get from Peter Quill, but Pine provided some subdued levity throughout most of the movie and was a good love interest / balance to Wonder Woman.
Diana knows multiple languages (there's a funny scene that showcases that!) and has knowledge of combat, literature and even pleasures of the flesh ( there's another funny scene that references that).
Having never been to London before, however, she's certainly not accustom to the modern way of life or the limited power that women had in that day and age.
Once we get to London, we get introduced to Steve Trevor's secretary, who was absolutely hilarious in every single scene she was in! She seriously stole those scenes.
Unfortunately it was almost as though she was acting with herself. There weren't a lot of responses to her comments.
I think she could've been even funnier if there was a little more back-and-forth with the other characters who she was sharing the screen with.
Instead, she was basically there for a quick one-liner and it was onto the next bit of dialogue -- without leaving enough time to laugh or react to the one-liner that was just delivered.
Instead of being laugh out loud funny, as she could've been (the actress really did nail every single facial expression and line she was given), it was more of a chuckle moment. There wasn't enough time for those moments to breathe before moving onto what was next. I know that's a small timing / pacing complaint, but it took just a little bit away from the movie being incredible.
Nonetheless, she was a great character to add to the dynamic.
They also helped to tell the overall story of people --- who they are and if they are worth saving.
Having never been exposed to anyone outside of the Amazons she was raised by, Wonder Woman did a lot of people watching in this movie.
She was inquisitive and perceptive.
The writers tied some of those moments into the overall story very well.
Eventually, there was a nice little team assembled to try to fight the Nazi soldiers, the evil General Ludendorff and Dr. Poison (a mad scientist whose only objective was to create more lethal versions of deadly gas).
There were a couple of 'unexpected' turns (though I saw them coming). I didn't expect the turns to be so well executed, however.
I won't spoil what those moments are, but you'll know them when you see them.
The cinematography was great throughout the movie.
It was somewhat Matrix-like, but the slow motion twists and turns and punches made it seem almost ballet-like.
There were a couple of somewhat cringeworthy CGI moments, but they were literally split seconds long. The golden lasso of truth? It didn't just look good, but it looked convincing as a weapon.
The costuming (whether it was in Diana's homeland or in London) was on point, too. There was even a humorous mini-costume change montage!
While there was some comedy in this movie, there were also a moments of great hope and triumph.
Wonder Woman truly was every bit the hero in this movie that Superman or Batman or Iron Man or Thor are in their solo movies.
She displayed courage, conviction, superhuman abilities and she looked good while doing it.
Steve Trevor (and some of the other mortals) were the 'damsels in distress' in this movie.
On the opposite side of the emotional spectrum, there were some dramatic moments that could almost bring a tear to your eye.
It was a multi-layered script with story A) Diana's introduction to humans and the modern world, story B) Diana's quest to save the world from evil, story C) Steve and Diana's relationship. By the end of the movie, each of those stories had a conclusion.
There were a few stereotypical superhero movie moments. There were also a couple of cheesy romantic moments. Not many, but I do have a list of a few changes I'd make to make the movie that much better.
It was just that little bit of pacing issues that takes away from the movie. A couple of mis-placed comments that didn't fit in a World War II setting.
At the end of the day, it's not much to complain about, but Marvel has spoiled us by perfecting the super hero / action movie that has comedy and drama and suspense all in one 2+ hr showing.
If DC can continue down this road, Marvel had better watch out because the competition is here.
Overall, Wonder Woman tells a decent story, was a good effort, has very good production and is a really good movie -- thanks, in large part, due to an exceptional performance by Gal Gadot, which overshadowed any minor complaints I had.
DC better hope Gadot stays healthy and willing because she can be a huge part of their cinematic universe.
Her facial expressions, mannerisms and delivery were all extremely good here. Wonderful, you could say (speaking of cheesy... ).
Now ... onto a few random reactions --- SPOILERS INCLUDED:
..... did you scroll far enough?
- I want to live on that secret island Diana grew up on ... talk about a Mediterranean paradise!
- Chris Pine was pretty brave to do that nearly nude scene
- that line where Diana's mom said 'You were always my greatest treasure. Today you are my greatest sorrow' was pretty powerful
- it was kind of disappointing to see Wonder Woman have that brief moment of gushing over a baby (very womanly of her)
- I was expecting Wonder Woman to help those horses stuck in the mud before she jumped up and crossed No Man's Land
- the dancing scene with the snowfall was nice ... though I half expected Wonder Woman to break out into some kind of dance (glad she didn't!)
- the bit where Wonder Woman was sizing that rich woman up, seeing if she would fit into her dress --- that was pretty good
- it was a powerful moment when Wonder Woman was in the gas-filled village ... they didn't need to show much of the deceased for it to be powerful
- I knew that Sir Patrick was a bad guy, but I didn't anticipate him being Ares (I figured Ares wouldn't even show up in this movie)
- when it was clear that Sir Patrick was Ares, I was skeptical s to how they'd pull it off, but he seemed pretty legit as a bad-ass God of war
- the most powerful moment of the movie, without question, was when Steve was saying goodbye but Wonder Woman couldn't hear what he was saying (due to the recent explosion that left a ringing in her ears) ... they should've left it at that -- without her knowing what he said
- the speech at the end with 'love triumphing over hate' was a little too simplistic seeing as how the real world just doesn't work like that ... it would've been more realistic to say something like 'For all the bad there is in people, there is a good and hope that will always triumph over hate' -- or something like that
•Central Intelligence - reviewed.
•Nine Lives - reviewed.
•The Jungle Book - reviewed.