PG-13 for superhero violence. But I'm going to give it to the movie for swearing. Man, there's a lot of swearing in this movie and it feels like it is aimed at kids. Shazam kind of pulled the same card. Maybe the use of language is simply to give it a sense of authenticity, but it really was excessive. There's some violence that gets a little dark in the movie as well, but it mostly is a family-friendly fun superhero movie with a lot of swearing.
DIRECTOR: Angel Manuel Soto I'm not going to watch a ton of the Oscar picks with the kids. They saw all of the ones that they're allowed to see. It's actually a crime that it took me this long to see Blue Beetle. I know. I've not been a DC guy. Blue Beetle is this liminal film. In some ways, it's the death knell of the DCeU. But it also is the birth of James Gunn's DCU. I mean, we know that James Gunn probably had little to do with this movie, if anything. But I'd like to think that I was rooting for things to succeed. But honestly, I've always kind of wanted the DCeU to die a horrible death so we'd get the kind of rebrand that we're getting right now. It's the occasional good film like Shazam or Wonder Woman that kept a dying IP on life support for a long time. So I have no reason to not want Blue Beetle from being amazing. Reviews seemed pretty pleased with Blue Beetle. I get it. It's a really fun movie that has great hispanic representation. It's got decent effects. People were comparing it to Spider-Man: Homecoming. By the way, that's the worst thing you can say to me. It is DC's Spider-Man: Homecoming? Man, that's a pretty high bar to meet. Here's the deal. It's not. It's a very good stand alone movie that has probably more in common with Shazam than it does with any of the MCU films. That's not a bad thing. It just means that I need to refocus my expectations to match those feelings. I'll say this, Blue Beetle does so much right that I'd consider it overall incredibly successful. This will be the dumbest thing that I'll write today. I hate me for not being more astute to what I want to say, but my tea is still steeping, so I'm running on sleepiness and stress. For all of the things that Blue Beetle does right, it kind of lacks that magic. Maybe it's because I'm full on Marvel fanboy at this time, defending movies that are way better than fairweather fans (yup, I heard me say it too) are saying about the new movies. Perhaps the problem lies in the origin story elements of Blue Beetle. Origin stories are rough in an era where we have so many good superhero movies out there. I mean, as much as I leer at Marvel haters nowadays, we have been in a glut of origin stories all over again. It's often the price of admission for these new characters. It's why we're not going to get a Superman origin story in the James Gunn film. We've got it. But these smaller characters? They need to have these origin tales. Part of the price of the origin story is a lame villain. In this case, which is really hurting the story, is the two-lame villain problem. Okay, OMAC could be awesome. When they droped OMAC, I was flummoxed. DC has been telling me that OMAC is awesome for a while now. I don't believe it. I've been trying to read DC books with OMAC in it. This OMAC didn't even have the mohawk. Give me something. But OMAC in this was just Iron Monger. If anything, that's what's hurting me a bit in this movie as a whole. Blue Beetle is just a not-as-polished Iron Man, a superhero movie from 2008. The villain, Susan Sarandon --I mean, Victoria Kord, --is Ezekiel Stane. She's trying to unlock this super suit that is out of her hands so she can keep her weapon's manufacturing corporation financially flush. It's the same plot, but Jaime didn't make the suit in this one. I love the idea of Jamie. He should be the Miles Morales of the DC Universe. He's a guy who adopted a mantle of an established hero, only he made it his own. The distance between Jamie Reyes and Ted Kord is night and day. Ted Kord is the less successful Tony Stark, by the way. The issue is that Jamie is a reactionary character. There has to be something in the character that seems like he's actively seeking to be the best version of himself. To the movie's credit, the movie introduces Jamie as a character who is going to school and working hard to solve problems in his life. But when it comes to the Scarab that gives him his powers, he's mostly along for the ride. To continue playing both sides, that's the message of the film. It's only when Jamie takes ownership of the gift that he is given does he actually start becoming an effective superhero. But for a movie where I have to invest in this guy from moment one, Jamie seems like the entire film is a burden on him. That's a bummer. I'm brewing an idea behind the motivation of a character in superhero tales. Some characters, like Superman or Batman, are completely self-motivated. They see this injustice in the world and they are able to sacrifice whatever needed to end injustice. With Batman, he has to give himself powers (through a glut of money that pay for inventions). Superman has powers from the word "go", but he chooses to abandon the relative safety of living on a farm to save the world. Then we have characters like Peter Parker or Miles Morales. Something happens to them outside of their control. But both of those characters are motivated to be the best versions of themselves. With Peter, he learned what it meant to reject the call and the consequences that ensue. He lost his uncle. As such, he discovered what other characters came to naturally. Miles understands the "great power, great responsibility" thing almost immediately, seeking out a mentor to help him become the best Spider-Man ever. Jamie has more in common with Peter. But the jump between Jamie and Peter is that Jamie sees the whole thing as a burden. So much of the movie is the rejection of the call. But that is Jamie's character. That's fine. What makes Blue Beetle something that is actually worth watching is the surrounding characters. I am a little torn about Jamie's family. They're the funny part of the movie. They're pretty effective when it comes to being the comic relief for the film. The line might be crossed a few times though. The involvement of the family all the way through the movie somtimes diverts attention away from Jamie's growth as a character. George Lopez's Rudy probably dances that line the best, though. Rudy is...a lot. But that's okay. Originally, I thought that Rudy was pulling a lot of attention from the scenes that needed a moment. After all, when Jamie first turns into the Blue Beetle, he's the one who has all of the commentary that grounds what should be a larger than life moment. But the reason that I give Rudy a pass, besides being the funniest in the movie, is that he grows as a character. Rudy initially just comes across as a crazy person. But the fact that Rudy is brilliant makes him almost the ideal man-in-the-chair character. I do like the idea of an older man-in-the-chair. We've seen Ned / Ganke for far too long now. Rudy also isn't an Alfred. Rudy is almost dismissive of Jamie. It's almost his adventure and Jamie just happens to be the guy in the suit. That's a fascinating dynamic. I mean, I don't know how long that can last as a character, especially if we see more of these movies. I actually don't quite understand what James Gunn is going to do with Jamie Reyes and the rest of the Reyes family. I want him to do something. This movie, for all of my complaints, is a good "open-the-door" for the characters. I need to see more of this character. If that's the goal of the film, mission accomplished. It's just that, as a standalone movie, it's just kind of mid. I liked it. I didn't love it. |
Film is great. It can challenge us. It can entertain us. It can puzzle us. It can awaken us.
AuthorMr. H has watched an upsetting amount of movies. They bring him a level of joy that few things have achieved. Archives
October 2024
Categories |