Bring on the Meteor VI: The Resargoning

Here we go again, once again the big bad real world has spat out some shit for us to gawk at, and because I have opinions, and feel the need to get them out before it all ends, I fancy sharing some of that gawk material today. Unfortunately this one will, like the last one, be ending on a bit of doom and gloom, but on the bright sight we have Sargon having another funny confrontation, this time with the one and only Anita listen and believe, toxic masculinity, presumed straight male player Sarkeesian. And I'll jump at any excuse to talk about Wonder Woman again anyway, so let's get into the proceedings, while remaining ever vigilant for our screaming doom as it approaches from the depths of space.

Let's start with the Wonder Woman story, because it's funny. There was a recent feminist uproar about Gal Gadot, the visual masterpiece who plays Wonder Woman, apparently getting paid a slither of Henry Cavil's spoils for Man of Steel, with Gadot getting $300'000 to Cavil's $14 million. But of course, the outraged Feminists were seeing what they wanted to see, and didn't care about reality, because this inevitably got spun into a huge outrage about sexist discrimination in Hollywood, and we saw the dramatic resurgence of the good old Pay-gap myth, and like the pay-gap myth, there's more going on here that the Feminists are simply ignoring. For starters, Henry Cavil was not paid $14 million, obviously people's salaries is hard to come by, but it stands to simple reason that Warner Brothers wouldn't reboot a well known super hero franchise with a new actor, and then pay that new actor an insane amount of money. Being the first in a franchise, there's no guarantee the film will be financially successful, just ask Tom Cruise about that, so why take the risk, no doubt Warner had the same fear about Wonder Woman, a character who's never been in her own big screen solo movie before, played by an actress who was relatively unknown until she got the job of Wonder Woman. It's important to know that not every Hollywood star is Robert Downey Jr., a salary of a few hundred thousand, not including bonuses if the film is financially successful, isn't too hard to get your head around, and with Man of Steel being a few years old, and with Henry Cavil no doubt getting a juicy bonus for the film, which made $668 million worldwide according to Box Office Mojo, a huge salary suddenly doesn't sound too insane does it. Also bear in mind that that's the number from Man of Steel's 14 week run, Wonder Woman looks set to overtake that gross in its 4th week, and has already surpassed Man of Steel's total domestic gross, putting it on track to be the highest grossing DCEU film so far, meaning that it doesn't matter how juicy Cavil's bonus was, Gal Gadot's will be even juicier. So in short, as usual Feminists are looking at numbers they don't fully appreciate, and ascribing an ideologically informed reason rather than seeing the various nuances that influence those numbers. Just like you think they would , Feminists are bolting a narrative onto something because sexism, sexism everywhere, it's an evil, all encompassing patriarchal conspiracy theory, and illuminati of evil straight white men who run the world, when obviously no such thing exists. And maybe there is sexism in the world, there certainly is in areas of the Islamic world where the institutional sexism they fear so much actually exists, but that's the problem, that institutional sexism they fear so much doesn't exist in the west; which is why it's never specifics when they talk about it, it's always nebulous and wishy-washy, with the equally nebulous and wishy-washy goal of equality, they're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist, as in this case evident by Wonder Woman's insane box office numbers, something I went into much greater detail on in the previous ramble. Ironically, with a film about someone learning that the world isn't black and white, people complaining about it are only seeing black and white, and, like Diana, not seeing the world as it is; nuanced and filled with greys.

Now let's get dirty with the fiasco that struck Vidcon 2017, and let's see just how stupid and horrid Anita can make herself look in front of an audience. The Panel she was on was apparently to do with Women in online discussion, rather fitting since Anita has consistently not been taking part in any sort of discussion, not engaging with critics of her work, not doing public Q and As, and smearing everyone critical of her with the familiar brush of sexist and misogynist, going after them as individuals rather than the ideas they are challenging her with. Many of those people, including Sargon of Akkad, were in the audience for this panel, and as Mundane Matt said in his video, apparently had no intention to cause shit, but were simply there to watch. It didn't take long for Anita to notice them in the audience, a moment you can clearly see in some of the videos of this event, at which point she contacted security, and began a tirade against the group in the audience, seemingly specifically targeting Sargon, who we all know is the biggest and most evil misogynist in the world. In her tirade she called Sargon a shithead who makes dumbass videos, and then calls him a garbage human. Oh how juicy, Anita Sarkeesian being in the same room as Sargon of Akkad, and, from her position as a speaker, speaking down to Sargon, a paying guest, and called him garbage, does it honestly get any better than that? Why this event has caused so many waves is quite simple, Anita, in this case, is unquestionably the privileged one, she's the one on a stage, speaking to a large audience with a microphone, Sargon meanwhile was sitting quietly in the crowd, until Anita launched her verbal attack on him. It's very important to note that this lashing from Anita was not provoked, unless you consider his very presence to be provocative, which I suppose it kind of is, but he wasn't making a fuss, Anita shot first. Honestly, how can anyone trust Anita now when she talks about harassment and bullying, now that we have Anita singling out a member of the audience at a panel and bullying him in front of that audience, it stinks of the finest hypocrisy, because that's exactly what it is. Anita Sarkeesian was always a bully, though with all the positive coverage of her and her work, and the relentless deflection of any real criticism, it was harder to tell, now though we have it on video in no uncertain terms, Anita is a bully, the very bully she accuses Sargon and others of being, while humiliating them in front of an audience at Vidcon. And then you have all the shitheads coming out of the woodwork, applauding Anita for being 'brave', and agreeing that Sargon is garbage, never mind that in this situation, Anita Sarkeesian is the one in the wrong, never mind that Sargon just got publically humiliated in an unprovoked verbal attack, no it's just that Sargon's a snowflake who can't handle criticism. Ha fucking ha you scumbags, and I can call you that, because you're all as bad as each other, and this event proves it. Sargon was doing nothing wrong here, Sargon, as far as I know, has never done anything wrong to Anita, I've never seen a single piece of evidence to suggest that Sargon has harassed or bullied Anita or encouraged others to do so, he has consistently denied it, and I have seen no reason to not believe him. Anita meanwhile called Christopher Hitchens a racist, sexist warmonger a week after he died, blamed men and boys and 'toxic masculinity' for mass shootings, makes numerous disingenuous and nonsensical assertions about sexism in video games and movies, and has consistently ignored or mischaracterised all criticism of her, calling anyone and everyone who dares challenge those assertions misogynistic abusers, while providing no concrete evidence to support that claim, Anita Sarkeesian has repeatedly shown herself to be, to put it bluntly, a lying piece of shit.

That might be a bit mean spirited of me to say, but I like many, many others, are familiar with Sarkeesian and her 'work', which is as lacking in sanity as it is in integrity, since not even once have I seen Anita address criticism, not even once, I've seen a lot of her talking about harassment and abuse, but concede she was wrong about something, nope. This paints a very monolithic portrait of Anita Sarkeesian and her videos; maybe she's just perfect and has never made a mistake, but everyone who's even slightly familiar with both her Tropes Vs Women series and the video games she attacks will know that that's not the case. The integrity of her ideas might at least hold a little bit with people who aren't rabid ideologues if she just ignored the criticism completely, but she doesn't, she instead spins the narrative that all the people being critical of her, all the Thunderf00ts and Sargons and Chris Ray Guns of the world are just evil misogynistic trolls, attacking her because she's a woman in a 'boys club', and because we live in a deepy misogynistic culture where women are second class citizens, like seriously what the fuck, it's an assertion that's just a special kind of insane isn't it. What she either doesn't know or doesn't care about is that playing the victim doesn't make you look good, at best it garners you sympathy, at worst it makes you look pathetic, but either way, the illusion of Anita being a strong, brave, independent woman is completely ruined by her constantly crying harassment and never letting her arguments be challenged. And now we see Anita's more snotty side, one she's never made a huge effort to hide in the past, but now one that we all see, clear as day. Anita, while talking about abuse and harassment on a stage, will gladly single out a paying audience member for harassment and abuse. And what's perhaps even more sickening than that hypocrisy is the support and applause she's received for this, which is why I called these people scumbags earlier, they don't care that they are harassing and abusing someone, they don't care that their favourite feminist is a raging hypocrite, all they care about is the narrative; Sargon is a serial harasser, it's ok to bully him from a stage, and it's ok to dog pile him on social media, because he's garbage. Anita has absolutely no leg to stand on, which makes the fact that she doubles down on her abuse all the more delicious. I just had a look at Anita's blog, and it's hilarious, for starters Anita, his presence was intimidation; I bet Sargon and his friends knew how provocative their attendance was, but is that the problem, or is them being in the same room as you being enough to scare you hugely telling about you, and how spineless you are. I still haven't seen any proof Sargon harasses you or anyone, but you keep saying it, frankly I think you're scared of him because you are too weak to tolerate his opposition to you. But of course, he literally makes money from harassing women, again, fuck all evidence, buts let's move on. Move on to you still playing the victim in this situation, well Anita it's not working, you make the harassment claim seriously about 15 times, but with no proof, and without proof, it's no more true the 15th time than it is the first, on a side note, you also repeatedly claim we live in a misogynistic culture, and again, there's no proof. What I find interesting is what you say in the first paragraph, the part about doubting yourself, Anita, have you ever played a little game called Bioshock, because if you did you'd know that self doubt is what stops you from becoming a monster, it's self doubt, the ability to question your own self and your own beliefs, that makes you open to criticism, but have too much of it and you end up like me, paranoid and with no confidence, not have enough and you see yourself as above criticism, someone who's perfect and who's never wrong, wait, didn't I say that before.

This rabbit hole gets even deeper when Vidcon's people get involved, because of the hideous statement they put out regarding this shitfest. First let's get it out of the way that online abuse is not a gendered thing, it's just not, we've all seen countless examples of online abuse being directed at men, to name a few, Sargon himself has been the target of a lot of abuse since that panel, Mundane Matt has been swatted, among other things, and years ago Thunderf00t's dad died of cancer and the Youtube SJW community made fun of him for it, all of these things can be classed as abuse, I'm sure people who talk about women being abused on the internet have good intentions, but making an issue that effects everyone gendered will help nothing, it will in fact do exactly what it has done here, create a privileged class, a group that can and does get special treatment, which here is women, because equality. This is something that really pisses me off about professional victims, as like I said before, it makes them look pathetic, and while I know Anita has received online abuse, I've seen it, it's nowhere near the organised assault on her that she makes it out to be, it's what most online abuse is, a few idiots on twitter saying mean words. But she then takes that and says look at me, a poor woman, being abused online, and lumps all criticism of her in with that tiny amount of harassment, but criticising Anita isn't harassment, and as she said in the UN, harassment is being called a liar and told you suck, both things that are true, this is her stating, in no uncertain terms, that criticism is harassment, it's fucking sad. Back to Vidcon, and to the thing that really pisses me off, in the statement 'Who's Harassing Whom', it reads "He [Hank Green] told her [Sarkeesian] that her comment had violated our policy, but that he understood that there was a broader context." Hank Green how about you go fuck yourself, because that is one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Picture if you will, a man in court, accused of murder, the murder was caught on camera and the evidence is irrefutable, and the judge says something to the effect of, "you did commit the murder, but I understand that that murder took place in a broader context." This hypothetical man is a murderer, why would he get any leniency, broader context or not, why the fuck is Sarkeesian not being punished for this, why is she getting special treatment. The evidence is irrefutable, she launched an unprovoked verbal attack at an audience member at Vidcon, and broke your policy, by your own admission, but no, she doesn't get booted from Vidcon, after breaking their policies, in fact she gets an apology, Green apologised to her, that fucking worm, oh sorry we didn't nurture a safe enough environment for you, the constant victim. It was Anita you dumb shits, Anita created the hostile environment, not just for her and Sargon, but for the other Panellists, she was the one making people uneasy, even Boogie2988 talked about constantly being on egg shells around her, tell me does that sound healthy; her fellow panellists being too scared to say anything that might upset her. Like I said earlier, she's a fucking bully, she doesn't deserve an apology, she deserves a ban from future Vidcon events, but that's never going to happen, because again, Anita's special, she's everyone's darling, perfect in every way, why would you punish her for, I don't know, violating your policy; harassing and bullying an audience member from the stage, and creating an uneasy environment for her fellow panellists. And because you don't grow a spine and punish her for this, she has no reason to stop being a bully, she's going to continue, because why wouldn't she, when being a bully gets her special treatment, even when she's so evidently a complete piece of shit.

God that really pissed me off, perfect then, since this last topic is probably the least ideal one to talk about while pissed off. On the 19th of June 2017, there was another terror attack in London, a vehicle ramming that killed one person and injured ten more, the third vehicle ramming in London in the last few months. This terror attack saw one significant difference however, the target wasn't the Kuffar as usual, it was Muslims, and the attacker was a man named Darren Osbourne, and what's known about his apparent terrorist is interesting. According to his family, he has problems with alcohol, was suicidal, and wasn't all that into politics, but had acquired a hatred for Muslims, apparently after the London bridge attack on the 3rd of June that killed 8 and injured 48. Which is why I see what I see here, and first I will preface, this is a terrorist attack, the fact that the attacker is white has no influence on whether it is or isn't, a point we'll get back to later. I see this as a retaliatory attack, that's my guess, and I will explain; Osbourne, a man supposedly plagued with alcoholism and suicidal tendencies, and no interest in politics, suddenly deciding to kill Muslims two weeks after an Islamic terror attack in London, there are some dots here that need linking aren't there. Another dot is the target itself, Finsbury Park Mosque, a Mosque that managed to rid itself of Islamic radicalisation after Abu Hamza, it's Imam was put away, while the Mosque is nowhere near the hotbed of Jihad it used to be, it's clear that it was chosen as the target for a reason; Osbourne drove over 100 miles to get to it, and that reason is undoubtedly Abu Hamza and its history of Islamism. As morbid as it sounds, this situation looks pretty simple, a deeply troubled individual who tried to kill himself found a new propose in life after witnessing a series of terrorist attacks on his nation, what brought him to this conclusion is still unknown, but this was, without question, a revenge attack. Which makes the response to this attack all the more sickening, because none of the Islamist apologists that spring up after every attack are here to defend Osbourne. Every time there is an Islamic terrorist attack, we are told the same thing, that it cannot divide us, that it shouldn't scare us, and you have apologists trying to distance it from the Religion on Peace, saying that this is a 'perversion' of Islam, and that it doesn't represent the faith. It's a sickening series of events that occurs every single time, and nothing is ever changed, apart from people's Facebook profile pictures. But now, this is a terror attack being committed by a white man, suddenly there is no apologia, suddenly this isn't a perversion of values, this is proof of how evil and racist we all are, this is reflective of all white people and of British society, because we're the real villains, and, like always, Muslims are the real victims. Suddenly the far right is just as dangerous as Islam, and we are told to fear the far right, we are told to hate people like Tommy Robinson, who are responsible for 'radicalising' white men to commit terror.

Mysteriously, the site that sources this image; TheReligionofPeace.com, has been blocked by my ISP, meaning I had to screen-cap this image from Simon Harris' YouTube Channel, but it's obviously an image of what the site calls the 'Ramadan Bombathon, and it's a very revealing image isn't it. According to this image, Islamic terrorists have killed 1595 people, and 'Islamophobic' attacks have killed 2, and you can probably see the problem here. Just in Britain in the last few months, Islamic terrorists have killed 35 innocent people, and the number of innocent Muslims killed by right wing terror, 1, these threats are not comparable, 1 lunatic killing an innocent Muslim and injuring 10, compared to 5 Jihadis who have injured 347 innocent people and killed 35, these are two very different threats, and people need to be honest about that, but they won't be, because it's racist. What's even sadder is the people in positions to do something about the Islamic threat have been seemingly doing everything in their power to ignore it, and it's got to the point where you have vigilante wannabes taking it into their own hands, because the police and Government have completely lost control of the situation, and they're now there saying we need to crackdown on right wing extremism, it's fucking disgusting, and it's only going to get worse. Just like the Manchester bombing, London Bridge won't be the last Islamic attack, and now we've had a revenge attack, which won't be the last, because again, nothing is going to be done to fix this shit, instead we see political point scoring as Islam Apologists deny the involvement of Islam in Terror attacks, while decrying all the evil white people, and saying we shouldn't be Islamophobic. But Islam is a violent religion, with bloody borders, and like Anita being a bully in our previous story, it won't stop being violent until something is done, and something has been done, after the politicians did nothing, the media did nothing, the police did nothing, one alcoholic decided to do something, and the mess he has now contributed to will only get worse, as the Islamic attacks keep happening, and we inevitably see more revenge attacks, and we descend into complete madness. And again we ask the same questions; what can be done about this, how can the problem of Islamic terrorism be stopped, because violence is never the answer, well sadly violence is an answer, and we are very quickly running out of alternatives, the police and the Government need to step in and get this under control. I say again, an exception has to be made now, we need surveillance of Mosques, the arresting and deportation of suspects, and legislation enacted in opposition to Islam. It sounds horrible, but a boot must come down on Islam in the west, wannabe Islamists must be made examples of, and the people of the faith need to be shown, not told, shown, that their values and the actions of people of their faith will not be tolerated. We need to get this bullshit about Islamophobia and racism out of our heads, and confront the problem, some bullies can only be defeated with resistance, and we need to show resistance to this bully. And let me be clear, I am not calling for violence; I don't want violence to be the solution to this, or anything, no one needs to get hurt or killed, but people are being killed, and things need to change if we truly want it to stop.

Well that was depressing, but I want to see this shit stopped, I don't want any more people to die, non-Muslim and Muslim alike, and I still want to believe that a peaceful outcome is achievable, but honesty, how can you reason with a martyr, when someone's convinced that killing themselves in a suicide bombing or kamikaze car attack will send them to paradise, how can you persuade them otherwise. The problem must be dealt with before it gets to that point, but all the people in positions to deal with it would rather ignore it, or in the case of May and the Tories, use it as a justification for draconian changes in policy. We uphold our values of freedom and secularism, but how valuable are those values if we don't defend them, which we don't, we're too busy sending love and prayers over social media, and thus wasting valuable time to stop this chaos before it's too late, and before we see more retaliatory attacks. Really makes you wonder doesn't it, all of this violence, when the meteor finally hits, how much will the universe really lose.

Better than sleeping

 Honesty is important I guess, maybe I should tell someone I love that last night I had a dream about them dying from an aneurism, but most people who know me know of my troubling dreams, and I don't know if it's just me, or if everyone has dreams about their loved ones being eaten by Gila monsters, which also happened. Or how about having a dream about my dog dying that was eerily similar to how he actually died, though I'm sure, or at least hope, that no one will be eaten by lizards, and that this particular person, who I should just admit to loving, doesn't have a brain aneurism. Given the morbidity of my subconscious, it's nice to go out and take photos of things that aren't morbid, but are in fact beautiful, examples of the peacefully chaotic ever turning wheel of nature, like a spider getting ready for the day's feast, or the affectionate care of a parental bird, now immortalised in 24 glorious mega-pixels, hey, the weather's nice, and it's better than sleeping.

The Mummy (1999) movie review

Here's what you need to know; for countless years men have hunted for Hamunaptra, a lost city of immeasurable riches, and a terrible curse, few men have ever found it, among them is American adventurer Rick O'Connell, who has no intention of going back. However when a librarian and her useless brother show up also looking for the city, he reluctantly decides to take them there. But even he has no idea what they are about to unleash, as buried beneath the sand is an evil beyond death, and beyond their comprehension.
I made no secret in the intro to my review of the new The Mummy that I have a special place in my cold, neglected and cynical heart for this film, though like many films I've grown up loving, where the story starts is a blur. But in my years one thing has never changed, this film, this and a few others, have been in my life at some point, be it on the TV at home, on TV at my old home, on TV in the caravan on holiday, on TV in the kitchen, and sitting on my VHS, then DVD, then Blu ray shelf, always in the back of my life and mind, like a curse. That sounds a bit insane come to think of it, but it's a hard thing to explain, so let's just get to the review, shall we.

The Mummy opens, typically, with a prologue giving us a love story; as an ancient Egyptian priest is mutilated and horrifically mummified alive for his sins against the Gods, how very romantic. In all seriously though, this prologue is entirely what you'd expect, giving you the background of the titular Mummy; Imhotep, and showing off what I'm sure was mind blowing visual effects for the time, a point we'll get back to, but it is a cool prologue none the less, and it seamlessly transitions into the events of the film, which kicks off with a bang with a really cool battle. One that introduces us to one of the film's main characters, the ever badass Rick O'Connell, who spearheads the hunt for the Mummy, and is a pretty cool character. When things aren't going insane, he cracks some of the film's best laughs, and is in general a very entertaining character, and while it's fun to see the badass, reckless American hero he is at first, it's cool to see the really cute relationship he develops with Evie in this film grow, and his reintroduction in the Cairo prison pretty much sums up his character perfectly, he's cool. Speaking of Evie, she serves a dual purpose, being the smartest character in the film, coming up with all the answers, while also being the love interest or Rick, and rather putridly, Imhotep, but she too is funny from time to time, and there is a fish out of water element to her character that's somewhat amusing, as is how hopelessly she falls for Rick, it's both funny and adorable. Then of course you have the funny sidekick character, who in this film is Evie's useless brother Jonathan, and like all funny sidekicks, you'll either like him or hate him, I personally like him, he's completely useless, and is often a nuisance to Rick and Evie, but that's rather the point, and I think he's pretty funny in that regard, and I love how he calls Evie "Old Mum", much like the budding romance with her and Rick, that's just too sweet. Of course you also have a line up of supporting characters, all of whom are better than anything the 2017 remake has to offer; including a prison warden who is in all respects a fat, obnoxious, smelly ball of laughs, a mysterious and menacing secret order let by a guy with face tattoos, and a gaggle of cartoonish American treasure hunters who are serviceably entertaining on their own in their brutishness. Then there's Beni, not much needs to be said about Beni, other than he's about as cowardly a weasel as you can get, he's really pathetic, he is everything Rick is not, and he has some really funny scenes. That just leaves the Mummy; Imhotep, who is awesome, the film does a good job of conveying the power and evil of this creature, even calling him a creature, and when he's on screen, he gets shit done, sometimes it's badass, other times it's terrifying, either way he's a great villain. What's surprising about Imhotep however is how he isn't in the film for a good amount of the runtime, not appearing for a solid hour. This may be a problem for some people, who want to see some Mummy shit, but in a way I kind of like it, since despite being called The Mummy, the film is less about him and more about the band of unlikely heroes out to stop him, and that absence of the Mummy gives the film time to develop those characters, which it uses, effectively raising the peril once the Mummy is woken up. And even when the Mummy's not around, you still have the fun characters and a decently fun treasure hunting adventure, and the film as a whole has a nice pace to it, at no point is it ever really boring; there's always a cute character moment, or some comedy, or a badass action sequence, and unlike the new Mummy, this one actually has a solid ending, with a climactic showdown against Imhotep, and a classic ride into the sunset ending, good stuff.

This film holds up remarkably well for its age, but at some key points, even it can't hide the wrinkles. The opening sequence in Egypt is grand and epic, with some CG backdrops of ancient Egypt which I'm sure looked mind blowing 20 years ago, and they don't look terrible today to be honest, but they do show their age sadly, not enough to ruin the effect, but enough to be noticeable. That's just the scenic CG backdrops though, the rest of the film's visual effects vary from good to terrible. For example the effects on the Mummy minions look decent for their age, if sadly not perfect, and Imhotep himself looks amazing at times, even by today's standards, but then there's effects like the sandstorm, or an effect in the film's prologue I won't spoil, that look utterly terrible now, credit where it's due however, for 1999, this is pretty nice visual effects, and it's impressive how good it still looks. And with this now being an older film, they also used a fair amount of practical effects, which I love seeing, and the film's setting looks really nice, from the vast, sweeping dunes and mountains of the Desert, to the more civilised and modern (for the 1920's) streets of Cairo, down to the creepy and claustrophobic passageways of the lost city, it's just a nice looking film, not to mention how charming the setting is, taking place in the 1920's, it's just fun. Speaking of fun stuff, this film is fun; like I said before, it has very enjoyable characters, but something very commendable it how well the film blends all of its ideas, almost seamlessly throwing in comedy, romance, adventure, action and horror, and somehow having all of these work, it's insane. The romance is really sweet, and the comedy it at times side splitting, but the sense of adventure that's everywhere in this film is so well done, as they sneak around ancient tombs avoiding deadly traps and swarms of man eating bugs. The opening battle in Hamunaptra is a lot of fun, as is the shootout on the boat, and the showdown in Hamunaptra in the film's finale is fantastic, pitting O'Connell and company against an army of the undead, none of the film's action scenes really stand out as below average, they're all a huge amount of fun to watch, and actually better than some action scenes in films today if you ask me. But when the film isn't cute, or funny, or exciting, it goes for scary, which is the hardest one to pull off since what makes something scary is so subjective, but I think the film does a good job, even if this is the weakest element of the film in all likelihood. When the film wants to make Imhotep scary, it does it well, there's a scene in the tombs with one of the Americans, and it's shit like that that I think the film could have used more of, as Imhotep stalks him through the passageways of the city. The CG on Imhotep is easily the least dated in the film, and as I said before, actually looks really good still, and when he's in his CG rotten corpse state, it's suitably creepy to look at, but as the film goes on, and the curse is consummated, he becomes less CG rotten corpse, and in some ways becomes less scary, as his power grows, and he unleashes the plagues of Egypt, which are more spectacular than they are scary, and haven't aged as well as you'd hope, apart from Boils, that actually doesn't use a big GC effect, and makes for a pretty cool scene. Like I said before though, horror is probably the weakest element of the film, taking a backseat to the adventure and the action, while still being an at times a well done piece of this film's cocktail of genres that works way better than it should.

The Mummy is a great film; it's got a superbly enjoyable to watch line up of heroes, and a great villain, and puts them in very entertaining action and adventure scenarios that a lot of fun to watch. The film does an admirable job of playing with a bunch of genres and not being a muddled mess as a result, and is very well paced; keeping its story moving with exciting shootouts and tense crawls through ancient tombs. The horror element is the weakest of its many genres, and some of its visual effects look really bad by modern standards, but some of it still looks really great, and unlike the new Mummy, it has memorable characters, music, and an ending that isn't totally shit. Call me biased, but I love this movie, and it's definitely worth watching.

Pandering to feelings doesn't sell

I'm sure we'd all just rather forget the nightmare that was the marketing and release of Ghostbusters, since it was a complete shit show of dumb arse Sony faces and idiot Feminist journos going after movie audiences for their terrible sexism and manbabyism, only for it to blow up in their faces when, unsurprisingly, the movie tanked at the Box Office. Thankfully the film has been mostly forgotten now, and rightfully so, but with Wonder Woman kicking serious arse at the Box Office, and winning the movie going audience, I have to ask, why is it that a female led reboot of a beloved franchise failed miserably, and a female led superhero movie with a hero who's never had a big screen outing before is doing really well, it's a mystery I intend to look into today, so let's get dirty.

Let's cast our minds back a few years, The Force Awakens was coming, and people were getting their Star Wars on in eager anticipation for this theatrical event. When the trailer dropped in October 2015, it was met with overwhelmingly positive reactions, and as of June 2017 is sitting handsomely at 688'000 likes to 20'000 dislikes, that's admirable. It's important to note that The Force Awakens has a female lead, Daisy Ridley, who wasn't all that big a name, and is now one of the most recognisable actors in film at the moment. It's also important to note that despite having a female lead, the approval rating of that trailer is insanely high, the film is currently sitting at an 89% audience approval on Rotten Tomatoes and grossed a mind blowing $2 billion in the Box Office. Maybe it's not the best example of where I'm going with this, since it's a Star Wars movie, and Star Wars is doomed to never fail, even the more divisive Rogue One, which also had a female lead, still topped $1 Billion. I knew comparing it to Ghostbusters wasn't fair when I made this argument during the Ghostbusters marketing shit show, sure they're both beloved franchises recognised as significant pieces of film history, but the difference in significance is substantial, and while Star Wars has been kept alive through the Prequel trilogy and TV shows, the most recent anything Ghostbusters of note was the 2009 video game, and the last movie was released nearly 30 years ago. The reason I'm waffling about The Force Awakens however is simple, it's success, both critical and financial, is staggering, despite having a female lead, which completely destroys the bullshit about Ghostbusters being hated because of sexism. Evidently The Force Awakens didn't fail, even with its female lead, and as I will again demonstrate later with Wonder Woman, sexism really doesn't play a part in the failure of Ghostbusters. Well, it kind of does, just not in the way you'd think. One thing I did see that was odd was the claim that Rey is a Mary Sue, which is something I never understood, since a Mary Sue is supposed to be a perfect, infallible character, and Rey isn't that, in fact in that claim I saw people who couldn't tell the difference between a competent character and a Mary Sue. Rey has lived her entire life on a shithole desert planet, rummaging for scrap around Imperial ship graveyards and being paid for her labour in food rations, not a very comfortable life then, being realistic, if in the years she hadn't acquired at least some basic knowledge in self defence, she'd be completely useless. Her being a capable fighter, as well as strong with the Force, doesn't take into account the emotional issues she has from being abandoned on Jakku, the emotional issues that bring her to see a parental figure in Han Solo, why would a perfect character like Rey live such a miserable life and still be a Mary Sue, quite simply, she's not, it's simply that the difference between a perfect character and a competent, capable one was being ignored.

Anyway, let's get back to the meat; things didn't kick into high gear with Ghostbusters until March 2016, when the first trailer dropped, a trailer currently sitting at an Abysmal 298'000 likes to over 1 million dislikes. Unlike Daisy Ridley, the cast of Ghostbusters was already well known; Melissa McCarthy had already starred in Spy, The Heat, and Bridesmaids, all three were directed by Paul Feig, and were decently critically and financially successful, meanwhile Kristin Wiig was in Bridesmaids also, as well as the hugely successful The Martian, and animated successes like Despicable Me 2. Both of these were established actresses before they were even cast in Ghostbusters, and Paul Feig had become a note worthy comedy director. But people were sceptical of his ability to write and direct a reboot to Ghostbusters, for good reason in my opinion, especially when Ghostbusters 3 had died such a tragic death, both with Sony's stupidity, and the loss of Harold Ramis. What I saw however was just that, scepticism, not outright rejection, right up until the release of that trailer people were still trying to stay positive and hopeful, until those hopes were so horrifically dashed. You may already know my thoughts on the trailer, but to summarise, it was fucking shit, first pulling the nostalgia card, and fucking that up somehow, before showing us the hammy looking ghosts, and giving us a taste of the dry, flavourless and vapid humour the film was riddled with, not to mention strikingly ironic racial stereotypes, and on the nose subversions of gender stereotypes. It's as if the film had a series of quotas, since all the oppressed minority classes are here; you have a fat girl, a black girl, and a lesbian, and given the political leanings of the director, that's hardly a surprise. It was also a very poorly edited trailer, but that's excusable given that the finished product didn't exactly give the editors a lot to sell the film with. The claim was made that the gender swap was just a gimmick, I'd actually argue it wasn't, I'd instead claim it was something far more insidious; studio politics. Ghostbusters 3 had been in development hell for years until 2014, with a stalemate between Ivan Reitman and Sony heads, mainly, Amy Pascal, preventing the film from beginning production. When Harold Ramis passed away, and Ivan Reitman stepped down, Amy Pascal brought in Paul Feig to direct, after the failure of The Amazing Spider-Man, and thus Amy's dream of a Paul Feig directed all female spinoff, she still wanted her Go-girl superhero movie. Now might be a good time to mention that I'm getting this stuff from a YouTube channel called Midnight's Edge, who made a fantastic series detailing the rumours and controversies behind the film that I highly recommend you watch, it's as fascinating as it is depressing.

When Ghostbusters got it's trailer, and the trailer was disastrously received, Sony and Feig and the Feminist journos did the worst thing they could possibly have done; render the film effectively above criticism by conflating all criticism, regardless of validity, with a backlash against the all female cast, a backlash that was completely artificial. In reality there was no huge sexist backlash against Ghostbusters; there was instead a trailer that sucked, and a studio and director so arrogant that they thought people would still see the movie after being called Misogynists and bigots for simply not finding the trailer funny, which it wasn't. That shit show of all criticism of the film being because of misogyny continued right up until the film's release, and long after, but the film's release definitely put some things in perspective. First up we'll start with the licensing deals Sony made, FireForge Games, the studio that developed a rushed tie-in game for the movie, went bankrupt not long after its release; they were already in a financial hole, and like Sony, thought cashing in on Ghostbusters would get them out, but the game was rushed through development in just a few months, received terrible reviews upon release, and sold abysmally. Sony also had a juicy deal with Mattel, who made a series of toys based on the film, which, like the game, sold abysmally. Before we get to the juiciest part, let's talk about Rotten Tomatoes, where the film sits pretty at 73%, Rotten Tomatoes sucks though, and just looking at the top reviews will give away why it's rating is that high, with such gems as 'oestrogen-packed' and 'daringly progressive,' it's easy to tell the mindset of a lot of the authors of these positive reviews. Now let's look at the Box office, which is where I start laughing my arse off. According to Box Office Mojo the film had a production budget of $144 million, marketing and licensing numbers are hard to find, but at a guess that puts the film's total cost at around $300 million. Also according to Box Office Mojo, the film opened at number two behind Secret Life of Pets and grossed $46 million on it's opening weekend domestically, not terrible, but that number halved with every weekend that went by, until it's seventh week, when it had dropped to 20th place in the charts, and made a pathetic $553'000. In its theatrical run the film only made $128 million domestically, not even making back its production budget, foreign markets didn't help much either, where it grossed another $100 million, still putting Sony at a loss of about $70 million, there's no nice way of saying it, the film flopped. Despite loving the original Ghostbusters, I'm glad this film failed, Amy Pascal and Paul Feig got their delusional dream of a go-girl empowerment movie, and it tanked, and there are many reasons for this. First up, the film is a cash-grab; after Spider-Man failed, Sony needed a big release to stop their string of terminally underperforming movies, and with Ghostbusters now right for plundering, they didn't hesitate. Amy Pascal had a passion project she wanted to see manifested, and it ended up being Ghostbusters, Paul Feig wrote the script, inhabiting it with insultingly pandering female leads, insultingly stupid male characters, and a fundamental lack of understanding and respect for the original film. And when people inevitably reacted poorly to this, they tried to make themselves immune from criticism, and in the process did the one thing you should never do in a marketing campaign, insult your audience; tell them they're bad people simply for not thinking your shit stain of a movie looked good. The film ultimately failed because Sony and the feminist journos got petty and malicious, and insulted everyone rather than handling the criticism they were rightfully receiving, and when the film tanked, that hopefully sent them a message, lazy pandering, greed and agenda does not a good movie make, and audiences won't stand for being called bad names by people who want their money.

With the failure of Ghostbusters slowly being forgotten, there has been an event, the release of a film I was cautiously optimistic for, for a reason I can now explain. I was scared Wonder Woman would fall prey to the same toxic mentality that ruined Ghostbusters; being the first high profile female led super hero movie in nearly 15 years, a time period in which feminism has truly come into its own as a narcissistic, entitled and socially corrosive ideology with power. Yet despite how easy it would have been to go the route of Ghostbusters, Wonder Woman displays a stunning amount of integrity in not doing any of that shit. In fact it's got a lot of feminists pissed off that Wonder Woman, played by Gal Gadot, is a conventionally attractive, slim, fit, straight woman who encounters hardship in her own movie. Never mind for a second how sad and petty that complaint is, yes, Gal Gadot is conventionally attractive, and holy shit is she attractive, and as much as it pisses feminists off, movie audiences like hot women, they just do, it might not be a selling point for a movie, but it's some nice icing. Where Wonder Woman truly demolishes the ideology behind Ghostbusters is in its representation for Men and Women; in Ghostbusters, Women were portrayed as the only competent people in the world, while all the men were just stupid meat heads or villainous to some degree. Rey in Star Wars may have been competent, but Poe was a badass pilot, and Finn was prevented from committing evil by his own morality, these are interesting traits in characters, Kevin from Ghostbusters is a useless idiot, whose stupidity is so stupid that it's not remotely charming or funny. In Wonder Woman however, Diana is the best fighter in the room, hands down, but what makes her character so interesting and engaging is her learning that evil isn't black and white, that everyone has a duality of good and evil in them, Diana is naïve, and is forced to learn the truth, and it's cool. Unlike Kevin or Rowan in Ghostbusters, Trevor is a smart, competent character; when Wonder Woman's fucking up Germans with her sword and magic lasso, Trevor's right next to her with his shotgun, on the beach when the Germans attack Themyscira, he picks up a rifle and starts shooting Germans, and he disobeys a direct order to go and stop the manufacturing of the super mustard gas, ultimately killing himself to stop the gas from killing millions of people, all acts of heroism no male character in Ghostbusters even come close to. Smaller characters like Charlie and Sameer are given layers that no Ghostbusters character gets, and one of the villains is a woman, shacuse. Even the whole island inhabited solely by Women thing is handled well, with Diana's mother telling her that Man is good, but was turned evil by Ares, when Trevor arrives, at no point do any of the Amazons make out that he's inferior to them, and the really funny scene when him and Diana are talking about sex, in addition to being really funny and really sweet, shows Diana acknowledging the value of men from a biological perspective, unlike Erin sexually objectifying Kevin in Ghostbusters, yeah, I went there.

Like I said in my review of Wonder Woman, it could have been so much worse than it was, being a female super hero movie, but rather than going for go-girl empowerment and pandering, Wonder Woman went for telling a fun story, with developed and interesting characters, and showed both its characters, and its audience, a great amount of respect. Unlike Ghostbusters, it had a very good marketing campaign, and here is where things get juicy again. According to Box Office Mojo, Wonder Woman had a production budget of $149 million, again guessing for licensing and marketing, that again puts the film's total burden on the studio at about $300 million. it opened at number one domestically and grossed $103 million on it's opening weekend, and since its release two weeks ago, it's grossed a mind bending $453 million worldwide, beating out The Mummy on it's opening weekend, despite a drop in ticket sales of 43%, that's nuts. Wonder Woman has, in less than two weeks, almost doubled Ghostbusters' total worldwide gross for its entire four month theatrical run. Purely on the numbers, Wonder Woman is the single biggest fuck you to Sony and Ghostbusters conceivably possible, this is exactly the kind of movie Amy Pascal and Paul Feig wanted, a female led blockbuster super hero film, and you know that if Paul Feig or Amy Pascal or actually a fair few Hollywood people had their fingers in this movie, it'd become the same train wreck Ghostbusters became. I can't stress how stunned and happy I am to see this, it's not even about Feminism at this point, it's about respect, Ghostbusters had no shame; it took a shit the license, it took a shit on the fans, it took a shit on good writing, and then it took a shit on Paul Feig's career and Sony's bottom line, because people simply weren't interested in a film like that. Wonder Woman treats it's material with a great amount of respect, clearly, but more over it treats its characters with respect, and most importantly, it's audience. There was no sexist backlash against this film, just as there wasn't with Ghostbusters, but no one felt the need to engineer a contrived outrage to boost publicity, which is one of the reasons Ghostbusters tanked. And in the end, Wonder Woman is a good movie; it's fun, it's got good characters, it has funny moments, good feels, and some insane badassery, Ghostbusters sucked, a difference noticeable in both the Rotten Tomatoes numbers, as shit as Rotten Tomatoes is, and far more importantly in the huge disparity in the Box Office figures. In fact, far from a backlash against the film by sexist man-children, you're getting a backlash by Feminists, who are mad that Gal Gadot, a fit, sexy woman, is playing Wonder Woman, and complaining that Wonder Woman isn't fat, black and lesbian, which is a real article by Stephanie Abraham on MS..

In conclusion, my argument that Star Wars renders the Ghostbusters sexism defence null still isn't entirely fair, since it's Star Wars, but Wonder Woman certainly does. After a series of hit-and-miss Super hero films from DC, Wonder Woman had no reason to be as successful as it's become, short of being a good movie that audiences love, which it absolutely is, in fact I'm watching it for a fourth time in a few days. So where is the army of sexists hating on this female led movie? why, it's where it was with Ghostbusters, in the imaginations of Sony people and feminist journos, because they still can't admit whose fault Ghostbusters was. It was theirs; it was them making a shitty movie, and fabricating a desperate and pathetic defence, one that they thought would shield them from criticism, but that instead pushed away the general movie going audience, who weren't fans of be called monsters simply for thinking that shit trailer was shit. Maybe Wonder Woman's team learnt from that mistake, or maybe they weren't stupid to begin with, and instead made a good movie, one audiences love, one I love, and one I hope Amy Pascal and Paul Feig fucking hate, because not only is this the female super hero movie that Pascal always wanted, but it's a movie that fucks her and Paul Feig's deformed creature of a movie into the dirt with it's incredible Box Office success. It hopefully sends a message that the gender of the lead role doesn't matter to the vast majority of cinema goers, that they value quality over feels, and that pandering to feelings doesn't work. And that's my case, as ever, feel free to agree or disagree, if you liked Ghostbusters, I'm glad that you get something out of it that I can't, but I'm sure this won't the last I talk about Ghostbusters, like Herpes, it will just keep coming back, and hopefully I'll be ready.

The Mummy (2017) movie review

Here's what you need to know; soldier-of-fortune Nick Morton is out doing his duty, stopping terrorists and sniffing out priceless riches, but while on mission in Iraq, he and his friend unearth something far more significant than their usual trinkets, something far more evil. When he unwittingly unleashes this evil, he finds himself stricken with an ancient curse, one that renders him immortal, and makes him the eternal prey of this evil; the ruthless Princess Ahmanet, back from the dead to spread chaos throughout the globe.
Something many people have now learned about me recently; I fucking adore the 1999 The Mummy staring Brendan Fraser, I have for most of my life, even if Imhotep scared me as a kid, and probably in the near future I'll be reviewing that film. While that's nice, it did mean my expectations for this remake were exceptionally low, especially since this remake is the first chapter in a cinematic universe, and would inevitably be plagued with the same problems as Batman V Superman and Kong: Skull Island. Over the years I've learned that low expectations can sometimes be beneficial to a film, but is this one of those times? let's see.

The Mummy, of course, opens with a prologue to set things up, giving us some Crusaders, an important looking Stone, and some classic Mummy stuff with gods and mystical daggers and a Mummification, which is far less nasty than the Imhotep mummification scene, but I'll try to keep comparisons to a minimum. Let's get to characters, and we'll start in the middle; Nick, who's fine, but really nothing special. The soldier-of-fortune thing is cool at first, as he runs around an Iraqi village doing his best Nathan Drake impression, and there's a dynamic with him and Ahmanet that looks like it's going to go somewhere, until the film just drops it. The problem with his character is he's just not that interesting, he seemingly forgets his Nathan Drake impressions after getting out of Iraq, and his character loses a lot of the fun that that brought with it, literally becoming little more than a plot device, he's still Tom Cruise, but he's no Ethan Hunt, by any stretch. An even less interesting character is Jenny, who really does nothing for the plot, she slaps him, which was funny, but her character is just so flat and weak, and even more uninteresting than Nick. Meanwhile Nick's friend, who makes semi regular appearances, is the comedic relief character, which means he'll either be harmless and good for the odd chuckle, or an infuriating on screen presence, which one you see in him is subjective. A higher point in this film is Russell Crowe's Dr. Jekyll, the cool leader of the cool secret organisation that is straight up Monarch from Godzilla, I think it has a name like Prodigium or something. Jekyll was actually a pretty cool character, wanting what's best for mankind, while not being as kind hearted as you'd expect, and having plans for Nick just as Ahmanet does, and his first scene with Nick, when he tells him a story, is one of my favourite scenes in the film. Getting Jekyll means you do also get Hyde, and when you eventfully get to see him, it's badass, and it makes Jekyll/Hyde easily the best character in the film, and I actually kind of like Prodigium, if that's what it's called, which is good since there's so much of that in this film that it might as well have been called that instead of The Mummy. In that it does fall into the same trap as Batman V Superman and Kong: Skull Island, that of wanting to be a movie, while seemingly needing to be a prequel to other movies, only problem here is the film makes no effort to keep secrets; literally putting "Dark Universe" at the beginning of the movie, and that kind of ruins this film being about a Mummy, since now it's also about this 'Dark Universe' and the film needs to put energy to that, and therefore take it away from the Mummy stuff. Speaking of the Mummy stuff, Ahmanet, surprisingly, is awesome, her backstory is essentially the same as Imhotep's, only way more evil and fucked up, and in some ways she subverts Imhotep, being evil and merciless, turning everyone she meets into zombie slaves, while going full Succubus on Nick, no surprise, Sofia Boutella kicks arse as both the evil demon bitch, and the convincingly sympathetic Succubus, even if an interesting conflict her seduction could create isn't capitalised upon and expanded upon, and that seduction is, like Nick's Nathan Drakeisms, forgotten at a point. What I do like is that they actually tried to make Ahmanet scary; at least at first, even if the film has a problem I'll get to later. Right now though we have another problem; the film's ending, it's shit, obviously I can't explain why I think that without ruining the film, but, being part one in the 'Dark Universe,' the film is left very open by the end, and is painfully lacking in finality, it literally has a 'just the beginning' ending, and it sucks.

There's some cool action scenes in this film, but that's to be expected with Tom Cruise in the lead role, the plane crash scene in the trailer is probably the coolest scene in the film, and is really cool, while the chase through the Iraqi town is also pretty fun, and there's a forest chase that's a lot of fun too, but the slower moments do little to add substance to the film with the weak characters, making this film very janky in its pacing, even with the only occasionally funny funny parts. Then there's a scene that is ripped straight out of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol, and while one thing about this scene is cool, the scene itself is bizarre, like they thought the scene from the '99 Mummy was cool, and they thought they could make it cooler, they didn't. The film's inevitable final showdown against the Mummy is anticlimactic, it's not terrible, but there's just too much payoff for not enough build up, and the film's ending sucks, and that doesn't help. This is going to sound weird, but bear with me, the Mummies in this film look like something out of The Mummy; the scenic CGI, i.e. the CGI that looked good in Alien: Covenant, is good here, but when shit starts going down, and the Mummy starts doing her evil thing, the CGI actually doesn't look all that much better than the '99 Mummy, it's weird. Maybe it's a good thing, since the CG in the '99 Mummy actually doesn't look all that bad for the most part, but that film's nearly 20 years old, I suppose it's a lot like Jurassic Park, the technology has improved massively, but the idea itself hasn't changed, and despite having better effects, it still looks the same. A friend of mine also noticed what she called a continuity error in the film; I think that 'error' is quite minor however when you consider how deeply flawed the rest of the film is. Like I said earlier, the pacing is off, there's some cool action scenes, but the rest of the film is either boring or really heavily expository; when it's Russell Crowe being expository, that's fine, but when it's Nick girlfriend or zombie buddy, it doesn't come across even remotely interesting, and when Nick and his girlfriend need to do some bonding, it just reminds you that the romance subplot quota is something that should die. Something that did just come to mind is the music; the trailer features Paint it Black by Rolling Stones, a great music choice, but it's not in the film, and the film's soundtrack is forgettable, I know it's a minor thing given what I complain about in movies, but this film's soundtrack isn't that impressive, I say that because I can't remember a single beat of it. I do have another problem with the film, I know, shocker; jumpscares, films like The Conjuring have proved that jumpscares can be done right, but this film's opening act is so overly reliant on them that it isn't fun, it's just the easiest way to get a reaction out of people, and it completely deflates the tension, but tension takes effort, so lets have every sudden scare accompanied by a loud noise, that'll scare 'em.

The Mummy at least has two things going for it; a really cool Mummy, and a really cool Jekyll, and they do save this otherwise flat and forgettable action movie from being completely worthless. Its lead characters are mechanically serviceable, and largely lacking in any real meaning or personality, the supporting line up is a graveyard, and the film's pacing is all over the place. It has some cool action scenes, mainly a fun opening battle in a village, a cool plane crash, and an enjoyable chase through a forest, but the characters do little to propel the film past those scenes. And when all is said and done, the final show down is anticlimactic, and the ending is terrible, at least there's no post credit scene. The Mummy also tries to bend other elements like horror in with its action, and it's over reliance on tired horror tactics ruins that too. Again, Ahmanet and Jekyll are the film's saving graces, and if you've seen the original Mummy or the '99 Mummy, this might be worth checking out, but if you haven't, there are a  few Mummy movies out there at do what they do better than this.

Wonder Woman movie review

Here's what you need to know; on her beautiful island home of Themyscira, Diana dreams of one day bursting forth into the world of man and fulfilling her people's destiny. Her opportunity comes when an American pilot crashes on their shores, telling of the war to end all wars, and she becomes convinced of the involvement of Ares, the God of War, and sets out to stop him. But Diana is about to learn some hard truths about the world of man, and about herself, truths she was never prepared for.
Despite my opinion of Alien: Covenant getting lower and lower with more reflection, I put Wonder Woman on hold to see it with my sister; that fell through, but at least I eventually got to see Wonder Woman, a film I was very cautiously optimistic for, and that, I'll be honest, is not the movie I was expecting. Usually that's a bad thing, but I'll again be honest, now is not one of those times.

Following our obligatory friendly reminder that this is a DCEU movie, we get a surprisingly good introduction to Diana, as she watches the other Amazons training and is told a story by her mother, which serves as our heavily expository back story to the Amazons and prelude to the fight with Ares. The film then rushes through a few years of training, also establishing that something is special about Diana, without being super in your face about it. Diana AKA Wonder Woman in this film makes for a very engaging and enjoyable character; unlike Batman and Superman, Wonder Woman has an immense amount of optimism about the world, and while we all know how wrong she is, it's just warming to see a  hero who only sees the good in people. But when Diana's world starts coming apart in this film, you really feel that sense of disbelief and horror, and it's really well done, it hits you where you live. Steve Trevor is in a lot of ways an equally interesting character, as both of them have to help each other adapt to the new world they're experiencing, and for a good amount of the movie his mission to stop Ludendorff and his mad doctor girlfriend actually takes prominence over Wonder Woman's crusade against Ares. You'd think this would make the film very jumbled, but I thought the whole Ares plot was really well handled, and I was enjoying their adventure through World War I with the really scary super mustard gas anyway. Which is to say this film is fun, Trevor and his band are some great comedic relief, and every now and again the film hints at a deeper struggle in their characters, which is a nice touch, as it fits perfectly into the film's greater conflict. Seeing Wonder Woman's world crumbling doesn't feel forced, rather it feels earned, and it gives the film a good amount of emotional weight, and makes Diana a fantastic character to watch. Something I actually like more than I should is the villains of the film; it's fun to watch the evil Garman and his mad Scientist plot their evil scheme, even if their villainy at first appears very cut and dried, but it's where the film goes with its villains that I really love, and what I wasn't expecting to see in Wonder Woman. Without going into specifics, one of the film's primary conflicts is the idea that the world is not black and white, while it's warming to see the hope in Diana, she is foolishly naive about the world of man, and goes for the typical moustache twirling villains, while not seeing malevolence elsewhere, it's a surprisingly heavy character ark, as she is forced to learn that the world isn't simply good and evil, and that everything has a shade of grey in it. Where it counts, Trevor and Diana really deliver the feels, as you see the horror in Diana, and the depressing weariness in Trevor, who came to know this truth years ago. My only real problem with the film's story is that at the end, it can get a bit cheesy, though how is obviously a spoiler, but overall I had a lot of fun with the story, and found it's themes surprisingly heavy and well handled, and I love it, I genuinely do. And because I'm politically minded, I'll just quickly address the Elephant in the Room. This film doesn't even bother with that shit, which is simply amazing, since that would have been so easy, unlike other films I can think of *cough* Ghostbusters *cough*, this film approaches it's empowerment angle very mutually, far from being a complete idiot, Trevor is in a lot of ways just as badass as Diana is, taking out Germans along side her and doing things to further the plot. Again, the film could so easily have taken the route of Ghostbusters, but it didn't, a stunning amount of integrity from this major studio production.

Wonder Woman is very nice to look at, and no, I'm not just on about Diana, but seriously holy shit, every time someone comments on how beautiful it is, you seriously can't not nod in agreement. But the film itself is very nice to look at, the opening scenes on Themyscira look like Jason and the Argonauts if it was made today and had a budget, very pretty, and I love the colour contrast between Themyscira and the world of man, not only are they very visually distinct, but it reflects the film's primary conflict, as Themyscira is a very bright, colourful, hopeful place, while the world is much more dull and grey and morally ambiguous. The visual effects are very nice to look at for sure, but it does suffer from the same problem I have with Man of Steel and Batman V Superman, that being that the fighting is entertaining, but seeing these people who are gods throwing each other around just looks off. I've always had a less is more mentality when it comes to these films, and I liked Suicide Squad's action for that reason, since they weren't unconvincingly launching themselves and their enemies across entire city blocks, like Wonder Woman does in this film's action scenes, I'd actually prefer a sword or fist fight, which this film does have, when she's storming a building and just wiping out Germans, but CG people never look perfect, and the more unnaturally they move, the less perfect they look. Regardless of that fault, the action scenes are very entertaining, the first big fight on the beach is stupidly fun to watch, a great example of bows and arrows against the lightning, or more literally, Gewehrs. But by far my favourite fight is the fight on the front, the scene in all the trailers where she's walking across the No Man's Land deflecting bullets and mortar shells is fucking badass, as is watching them liberate the town, and seeing Wonder Woman tearing the Germans to pieces, it's easily the best action scene in the film. But weirdly they're not the most memorable scenes in the film, this film has a bunch of much slower, quieter scenes, and they're weirdly fantastic. It's just little dumb things like Trevor teaching Diana how to dance or the hysterical conversation they have on the boat, that help these characters grow, and give the film that emotional weight it exploits brilliantly in its final act, there's one scene in particular that I really love, and I can't say what it is, which sucks, because the fact they made the decision they did in that scene really speaks to the integrity of the film, and of the characters. More than that the film also has some really good laughs, Trevor and Diana have some really good scenes, Trevor's band are good comedic relief, and the fish out of water scenario that plays out in the film's opening act is really funny, as Trevor first has to get to grips with Diana's world, and then Diana has to get to grip with Trevor's. And in a striking move, the film has no post credits scene, how weird is that, a shared universe film, a superhero film in fact, that doesn't have a post credit scene. Shit, even Kong: Skull Island had one, and Godzilla: King of the Monsters isn't even being filmed yet, yet with Justice League just a few months away, Wonder Woman seems more occupied with being a film than the set up for another film, bold.

I think everyone can agree that the DC films have been very hit and miss, but Wonder Woman is easily the best of the bunch so far, and it's even more than that, it's just a solid, immensely enjoyable film. The film's leads; Diana and Trevor are excellent, and have some fantastic moments together, the film's supporting line-up is great also, with good laughs and some solid emotional undertones, and while it's villains at first seem very flat, where it takes it's villains is something I genuinely didn't expect, and something I genuinely loved. The film also has some kick arse action and is stunning to look at, and makes sure to build it's characters with some great quieter moments. I still think the film has flaws, and I know one of my biggest problems with it is subjective, but there's no getting around it, Wonder Woman is a great movie, I loved it, and it's definitely worth watching.