X-MEN REVISITED - 'Night of the Sentinels' (Parts 1 & 2)

'X-Men' (1992)

With the impending release of "X-Men '97", I've decided to take a look back at its predecessor, the show that the new series promises to follow. In this review, I take a look at the two-part story that started the original animated "X-Men" show in 1992. At the time, this show became one of the prime series to watch on Saturday mornings when it aired on Fox.

Also, since this is about a group of mutants at Charles Xavier's School for Gifted Youngsters, I'm going to grade each episode as I go along through the series.

Now, I'll go ahead and get this out of the way. The animation of this original series has aged quite a bit. When compared to something like "Batman: The Animated Series", the animation just doesn't hold up as well. Physics is thrown out the window completely in this particular episode, such as the fact that nothing keeps the same proportions or follows the same rules. The Sentinels are the best example for this as they change in size and strength. At one moment, they're too strong for the X-Men to handle and in another moment, the X-Men are able to cut them down like butter.

Cyclops faces off against a Sentinel in 'Night of the Sentinels'!

In other words, it's actually a pretty good and literal adaptation of the comic books being released at the time. The design of the X-Men and their near future setting was ripped directly from the comics that were being designed and drawn by artist Jim Lee. In fact, the setting and the faithfulness to the source material is exactly what makes this series still work for me even today.

'Night of the Sentinels' chooses to follow the young Jubilee, a character that just realizes she is a mutant who can... shoot bright sparkly things out of her hands. Admittedly, her powers are weak but Jubilee is simply used as an avatar for the audience. She is new to the mutant world, so she can ask the questions that the audience may be asking and she helps set up the world that these mutants and villains occupy.

Another strong aspect of these first two episodes is that it does a great job of setting up a world where humans are afraid of mutants. While the X-Men want to co-exist peacefully with humans and help advance mutant-kind, they must also face off against dangerous humans who want them wiped off the face of the planet simply because they were born differently.

The two-parter contains two primary battles: one at a site where mutants are being registered by the evil Henry Gyrich and the other at the factory where the Sentinels are being built by a man named Trask. There is even a tragic outcome during the first battle where an X-Man is killed and one is captured, which is higher stakes than other animated shows at the time where the rule, generally, is that everyone has to make it and no one ever really gets hurt.

At the end of the day, 'Night of the Sentinels' is still a strong start to a show that became a staple of Saturday morning viewing in the '90s. The animation has admittedly aged in these initial episodes, but the world building and staying true to the source material of the time still makes this one of the stronger animated shows from its era and they were still a ton of fun to watch, which is really the only thing that matters.

GRADE: B-

MIDDLE-AGED MATINEE! #3 - 'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom'

'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' (1984)

Welcome back to "Middle-Aged Matinee!", the article where I discuss films from the year of my birth, 1984! In this review, I'm taking a look at the second film in the "Indiana Jones" series. Director Steven Spielberg and producer George Lucas returned to direct what would become the darkest entry in the series, "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom"!

When Spielberg was hired to direct "Raiders of the Lost Ark", Lucas told his friend that he would have to sign on for three movies as Lucas had ideas for two more entries. However, when Spielberg returned to develop the sequel, he soon learned that Lucas did not actually have any ideas for sequels and that they would have to develop a second entry from scratch.

The original idea involved the Monkey King as a plot device and a massive chase along the Great Wall of China. However, it soon became apparent that China would not allow them to film in the country, so they had to go back to the drawing board. At another point, Lucas suggested that Indy investigate a haunted castle but Spielberg was against this idea due to the possibility that it could be too similar to "Poltergeist".

Eventually, they came up with the idea that Indy would end up in India and would investigate a cult and have dark themes such as child slavery and a poor village with a stolen stone. It was these darker elements and tones that made original "Raiders" screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan turn down the job of writing the screenplay. Lucas then turned to Gloria Katz and Willard Huyck (whom he worked with on "American Graffiti) to pen the script and the second movie was officially off to the races.

In the final film, Indy (Harrison Ford) does end up in India alongside his kid sidekick Short Round (Ke Huy Quan) and singer Willie Scott (Kate Capshaw) after a daring escape from Shanghai. They end up in a poor village where Indy learns that their sacred stone was stolen by a nearby palace. They also learn that the kids in the village have disappeared as well.

Indy decides to travel to the palace because he thinks that the stone may be one of the five Sankara stones said to have magical properties. While he wants the stone for fortune and glory, his more heroic attributes appear when he learns the terrible truth behind why the children have disappeared.

Indy must face off against an evil cult in 'Temple of Doom'.

So, first thing, I must talk about what I don't like about the movie. My only real complaint with the movie is Capshaw as Willie. The character is easily my least favorite of all of Indy's love interests due to the fact that I don't think she really adds anything to the movie. She mostly just runs around and screams a lot.

Also, I will go ahead and say that while the darker tone of the movie does not bother me, it is an element that has turned some fans and critics against the movie. I only point that out because I do understand how the movie would turn some people away. I mean, this is the movie where a character rips out someone else's heart.

Beyond any of that, though, I absolutely love this movie. There is plenty of action and great special-effects that harken back to the Saturday morning adventure serials that inspired this film series to begin with. It also has pretty strong performances. I mean, even Capshaw gives a strong performance in spite of the fact that I hate her character.

Quan is a scene-stealer as Short Round with plenty of funny scenes in the film that was also the actor's big screen debut. He also acts as a voice of reason for Indy at times, as well. In other words, he at least has more to add to the film's story than Willie does and I wouldn't have minded if the movie just had Indy and Short Round as our main leads.

Of course, a good hero isn't anything without a good villain. Eventually, it is revealed that the leader of the evil Thugee Cult is Mola Ram, played to devilish perfection by Amrish Puri. Ram is a truly vicious villain as he not only leads a cult but also uses child labor in order to seek out more Sankara Stones and Puri, an actor known for playing villains in Hindi films, definitely understood the assignment.

Finally, there is Ford as Indiana Jones and there is really not a lot to say here. Indy is not just one of Ford's signature roles, Indiana Jones IS Ford's signature role. In this movie, Ford is just as comfortable in Indy's fedora as he always has been. In fact, he was pretty much in his prime for this movie.

Yes, the movie is darker. Yes, the movie has the most annoying female lead. However, it also has great action and it has great performances. Most importantly, though, it is another worthy entry in the "Indiana Jones" series and if you haven't watched it, you should correct that mistake.

It may be the darkest entry, but 'Temple of Doom' is still a worthy entry.

MIDDLE-AGED MATINEE! #2 - '2010: The Year We Make Contact'

'2010: The Year We Make Contact' (1984)

Welcome back to “Middle-Aged Matinee!”, the article where I take a look at films that came out in the year of my birth, 1984. This time, I’m taking a look at the often overlooked sequel to “2001: A Space Odyssey” called “2010: The Year We Make Contact”.

In 1982, Arthur C. Clarke wrote “2010: Odyssey Two”, a sequel to the book “2001”, though he did change certain elements to match the sequel up to the film instead of the original novel. MGM quickly obtained the film rights and tried to ask Stanley Kubrick to come back and direct the film. However, Kubrick had no interest in returning to the series and passed. MGM then turned to director Peter Hyams to take on the picture.

However, before Hyams accepted, he sought out the approval of both Clarke and Kubrick. Clarke quickly accepted him as the director and when he met Kubrick, the famed director told Hyams to not be afraid and simply make his own film. Hyams then said yes to the movie.

Hyams definitely made his own film here. In the movie, it is established that the Discovery is still in orbit around Jupiter, but its orbit is decaying. Roy Scheider’s Dr. Heywood Floyd is then told that the Soviets will have a ship ready before the U.S. in order to get there and recover the ship. However, none of the Russians know the Discovery’s systems and a plan is devised for Floyd, engineer Walter Curnow (John Lithgow), and computer engineer R. Chandra (Bob Balaban) to be onboard the Leonov that is commanded by Helen Mirren’s Tanya Kirbuk.

The reason Chandra is along for the ride is due to the fact that he created HAL 9000 (voiced by Douglas Rain), the computer that went crazy and killed most of the crew of Discovery. The idea is to reboot HAL from the moment before he malfunctioned and discover why things went bad in the first place. There is also the giant Monolith that is still hovering above Jupiter that they still don’t have answers for.

Dr. Heywood Floyd seeks to find answers in '2010: The Year We Make Contact'.

The first thing to note about this movie is that it is a far more straightforward sci-fi film when compared to Kubrick’s more enigmatic masterpiece. So, for the sake of saying it, “2001” is the superior film. However, Hyams and co. do an excellent job at creating an engaging sci-fi action film with characters that you love and special-effects that still hold up pretty well after 40 years.

Scheider is great as Heywood Floyd, the scientist who authorized the mission in 2001 and feels guilty for its failure. He has an obsession to find the answers about what happened onboard the Discovery. He’s also the most level-headed scientist onboard the Leonov when relations between the U.S. and the Soviet Union sours back on Earth, causing tension with the rest of the Russian crew.

The rest of the performances are rock solid as well. Mirren is great as the no-nonsense Soviet commander of the Leonov. Lithgow is great for some comedic relief (alongside Elya Baskin’s Maxim Brailovsky) in an otherwise serious story, and Balaban is fantastic as Chandra, a character that is more machine-like than the AI programs that he’s created. He seems to have more love for HAL than he does his human companions.

The special-effects are great, though I must admit that the Leonov looks like a ship that would be more at home in “Alien” than it would in this sequel to “2001”. One thing about the original film is that Kubrick had all the sets for the Discovery destroyed after filming was complete. Therefore, the production designers had to completely recreate the ship from scratch, using the film and set photos as references.

They did an excellent job recreating the sets and suits from the original film. Down to the last detail, I wouldn’t have been able to tell you that this was a completely different set from the ones used in “2001”.

Another aspect of the film is the mystery of the Monolith and why it’s even there at Jupiter in the first place. There are answers, but whether or not you’ll care about those answers depends on whether you wanted the mysteries of “2001” to be solved or not. I personally like the twist of why it’s there and why it is using an evolved version of David Bowman (Keir Duella) to communicate with Earth.

I also like the tension that was built around the reactivation of HAL. After all, his menacing actions in “2001” made the machine one of the biggest villains in film history! Now, they want to turn him back on and see what happens. The film does a good job developing this side-plot with both Floyd and Curnow concerned that HAL may go crazy again.

At the end of the day, this is a pretty solid sci-fi film if you can get past the fact that it is a sequel to “2001”, one of the greatest sci-fi films ever made. For those who wanted more answers out of the original film, you get them along with some pretty solid performances and special-effects.

It may be an inferior film to the original, but '2010' is still a solid sci-fi film.

MIDDLE-AGED MATINEE! #1 - 'The Terminator'

'The Terminator' (1984)

Welcome to my new article, “MIDDLE-AGE MATINEE”! In this article, I’m taking a look at films that came out during the year of my birth, 1984! I’m turning 40 this year and I’m deciding to celebrate some films that are also hitting the big four-oh.

I’m beginning this article with a film that launched Arnold Schwarzenegger into superstardom and made director James Cameron a household name. Of course, I’m talking about “The Terminator”!

The origins for “The Terminator” began when Cameron was sick in Rome during the release of his feature-film debut, “Piranha II: The Spawning”. He had a terrible fever dream and in the nightmare, he was being stalked by a terrible killing machine with a knife. When he woke up, he sketched it down and it looked not too dissimilar from the titular character.

The screenplay was done in collaboration with William Wisher Jr., though producer Gale Ann Hurd got a co-writer credit while Wisher only got an “additional dialogue” credit. In reality, Hurd only made suggestions for the script and according to Cameron, she didn’t write a single word of the finished screenplay.

Originally, Cameron wanted Schwarzenegger to play the role of Kyle Reese, the film’s hero. However, after reading the script, Schwarzenegger wanted to play the Terminator as he thought he was better suited for the role. Cameron originally envisioned an actor that looked like an average person that you would never assume would be a killing machine.

Kyle Reese must protect Sarah Connor from the Terminator!

Cameron even wanted his friend Lance Henrickson to play the part originally. However, after having a meeting with Schwarzenegger and befriending him, Cameron understood how he could make the concept work with someone the size of Schwarzenegger. Henrickson was given a smaller role in the film and eventually Michael Biehn was cast as Reese.

While several actresses were considered for the role of the movie’s heroine, Sarah Connor, Cameron chose Linda Hamilton after she had finished filming “Children of the Corn”. He liked that she had a more “girl next door” look rather than that of a glamorous star. Cameron also thought she could believably turn Sarah from a helpless victim to someone who could actually face off against the Terminator by the film’s climax.

The movie, for anyone who has lived under a rock these past 40 years, follows Sarah Connor, a young waitress without a care in the world beyond the usual mundane problems everyone else faces such as balancing her own checkbook. One night, though, she learns that two other women also named Sarah Connor have been murdered and that she’s being followed.

She ducks away into a club when another, bigger man comes in and tries to kill her. The man following her fends off the other person and tells her that she had better come with him if she wanted to live. While being chased by the seemingly unstoppable menace, the man who saves Sarah lets her in on a terrible truth.

In the future, there is a nuclear war where humans face off against deadly machines. One of these machines is a Terminator, made to look like a human and infiltrate human bases. However, the central AI system known as Skynet has lost the war thanks to the leadership of a man who united everyone together to fight the machines.

The Terminator coldly sets his sights on Sarah Connor.

That man’s name is John Connor, Sarah’s future son. As a last ditch effort to win the war, Skynet sends a Terminator back in time to kill Sarah before John is born. The man who saved Sarah is Kyle Reese, a member of the Resistance who volunteered to travel back in time and protect Sarah.

From there on, it’s a non-stop chase as the Terminator doesn’t stop hunting Sarah. Even in a police station full of cops, Sarah learns that the Terminator cannot seemingly be stopped by conventional means. Eventually, both Kyle and Sarah will have to find a way to confront the deadly killing machine.

This movie is a bang-for-your-buck thrill ride. It’s a chase movie that, once started, never lets up until the end. Even Kyle’s exposition about the future and why Sarah is important is told while they are on the run. The chemistry between the two leads, Biehn and Hamilton, is definitely there and they are a part of why the movie works.

Another part that makes the movie work is that Cameron took what should have essentially been a low budget B sci-fi movie and made it look like a million bucks. This is only Cameron’s second film and his talents are already on full display. He has an eye that knows how to make any scene work no matter the budgetary constraints.

The music is also another piece of the puzzle that makes this movie’s success. Brad Fiedel’s synthesizer infused score adds to the mechanical tone of the movie and its titular character. The main theme is one of those classic themes that you recognize no matter where you hear it after you’ve seen the movie.

Of course, the biggest (and I do mean biggest) reason that this movie works is due to Arnold Schwarzenegger. This was the role that he was born to play. He also does a great job in the role, giving the Terminator unique and mechanical-like movements. 

For example, when he turns his head while looking for his target, he moves his eyes first before the head follows. When using weapons, he makes sure to have precise movements without using any excessive energy because a machine would want to be as precise as possible. Watching the movie time and time again, I can see why this was the film that solidified his status as a leading man, especially in action films.

“The Terminator” is a haunting sci-fi movie with plenty of fun action and a great villain at the center of it. Even after 40 years, the special-effects still hold up for the most part despite some unavoidable aging. The acting is solid and Cameron’s skill as a director are on full display here. If you haven’t seen it before, you need to rectify that and if you haven’t seen it in awhile, it’s time for a revisit!

I think this goes without saying, but 'The Terminator' is one of the best sci-fi movies ever made!

FROM THE PHYSICAL COLLECTION - 'The Man in the Iron Mask' (1998)

When I bought “The Man in the Iron Mask”, I had to admit to myself that I had not actually remembered much about the movie. Before watching it for this review, I only remembered a few things such as this being one of the several films that dad and I rented when I was growing up, that it was Leonardo DiCaprio’s next major film after the hugely successful “Titanic” in 1997, and that dad and I had really enjoyed the movie.

For those who haven’t seen it before, the movie follows the aging Musketeers Athos, Porthos, Aremis, and D’Artagnan. Athos is dedicated to his son who is about to become engaged, Porthos is a retired wino who loves his drink and women, Aremis has become a priest, and D’Artagnan is the only one still serving as the Captain of the king’s guard. Unfortunately, the king is Louis XIV, a tyrannical shithead who feeds his people with rotten food while saving the best for his soldiers who are fighting an unnecessary war.

One day, Louis XIV becomes infatuated with Christine, the fiance of Athos’ son Raoul. The king sends Raoul to the frontlines of the war in order to get him out of the way so that the king can seduce Christine. Raoul is soon killed which sends Athos on a revenge course towards the king.

John Malkovich, Gerard Depardieu, and Jeremy Irons as the original Three Musketeers in 'The Man in the Iron Mask'.

However, Aremis has a secret involving a mysterious and imprisoned man whose identity is hidden behind an iron mask. The man is eventually revealed to be the long lost identical twin to Louis XIV and the question remains as to whether or not he will be willing to take the throne from Louis XIV and whether or not he would be a better king.

I’ll refrain from spoiling any more of the plot than I already have. Rewatching the movie today, I can say that while I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, it does have some balancing issues. The movie is at one point a farcical comedy before it suddenly shifts into scenes of extreme romantic melodrama. The inconsistent tone doesn’t ruin the film by any measure, but it is there and worth noting.

Beyond the wibbly wobbly tone of the picture, there is a lot to like here if you’re a fan of romantic adventure films. Gabriel Byrne, Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich, and Gerard Depardieu are great as the aging musketeers. Not only that, but they all have more complicated lives… except, maybe, for Depardieu’s Porthos who is mostly upset just because he doesn’t have enough adventure in his life anymore.

Malkovich’s Arthos is dealing with his son’s death while trying to raise Louise’s brother Phlippe to become the king and Irons’ Aremis is seeking forgiveness for a deep sin he committed in the past. Meanwhile, Byrne’s D’Artagnan is feeling conflicted about serving a king that has not lived up to his expectations.

A great performance, though, is by DiCaprio as Louis XIV and as his twin brother, Philippe. The actor knows how to play both roles perfectly. You hate Louis XIV almost immediately while you have nothing but sympathy for Philippe. DiCaprio managed to create two different people that I believed in and gave them their best and worst qualities as well.

The action in the movie is pretty good as well, though it is a bit of a slow burn as we reach our way to the film’s most climactic and best action sequences. Let me just say that there is nothing better than watching legendary Musketeers charge into battle!

There’s not really much more that I can say beyond that. The movie is not the best action adventure film, but it is also far from the worst. The performances and the action more than make up for slower pacing. If you’re a fan of swashbuckling adventure movies, then “The Man in the Iron Mask” may be right up your alley!

An unbalanced yet still fun swashbuckling affair!

REVIEW! - 'The Creator' (2023)

'The Creator' (2023)

In an alternate history future, AI robots were developed to help mankind through the decades. Unfortunately, the AI robots seemingly destroyed Los Angeles in a nuclear blast. Years later, the U.S. has been at war with AI “Simulants” that are still being developed in New Asia. They are on the hunt for “Nirmata”, aka the Creator of these new AI robots. The US uses a devastating ship known as the U.S.S. Nomad to carry out devastating strikes against supposed AI bases.

Undercover operative Joshua Taylor (John David Washington) has been undercover and married to Maya who does not know his true allegiances. One day, there is a strike and his wife is seemingly killed after she flees with other Simulants during one of Nomad’s strikes. Five years later, Joshua is recruited to carry on his search for the elusive Nirmata and to take out a terrible weapon that Nirmata has supposedly created and the U.S. has used evidence that Maya may still be alive in order to entice Joshua to take the mission.

When Joshua finds out that the “weapon” is a Simulant child named Alpha O (Madeline Yuna Voyles), he decides to keep her alive so that he can try and find Nirmata. Over time, he inevitably begins to grow closer to the child and he begins to understand the world of Simulants and that they might not be so bad after all.

If you’re worried that I spoiled too much there, don’t worry. That’s just the tip of the iceberg from director Gareth Edwards who developed the story for this movie and co-wrote the screenplay alongside Chris Weitz. So, to the biggest flaw of the movie first.

If you’re looking for wholly original sci-fi content here, you need not apply. At various points in the movie, I felt the echoes of “Star Wars”, “District 9”, “The Terminator”, “Blade Runner”, and even “Avatar” running through this film’s veins. However, I don’t care if I recognize formula within a movie, the only true detriment would be in the execution if not handled correctly.

In this regard, Edwards mostly succeeds in giving us a pretty good sci-fi action experience. Yes, there are times where I feel this movie takes itself a little too seriously, but that’s okay. Afterall, its timely commentary on AI is a welcome one. I’m actually surprised that with the rise of recent AI technology that more films haven’t commented on it already.

The movie is also bolstered by the performances. Washington is a lead that I don’t mind following and he gives a pretty good performance here. Voyles as the innocent Simulant that Joshua eventually names Alphie is also great. Finally, Allison Janney, an actress I almost always love to see, is a great villain in this piece as the dastardly Colonel Howell, the person behind the hunt for Joshua that definitely gives off the same vibes as Stephen Lang as Miles Quaritch from the “Avatar” films.

Another thing that succeeds in this film’s favor are the special-effects. Even if someone happens to not like this movie, you’ll definitely like the movie’s effects because throughout the whole affair, I was never distracted by bad effects because they were so well done. Sitting here writing this review, I can’t think of a single scene where I sat there and thought, “That doesn’t look right.”

At the end of the day, the movie is not that original. It doesn’t set out to change the sci-fi formula and it even embraces plenty of its tropes, but again it’s not about recognizing the formula. It’s about seeing if the formula is executed well and for the most part, “The Creator” is a fun sci-fi film that I can ultimately recommend due to strong performances, astounding special-effects, and good direction from Edwards. I say check it out!

'The Creator' may not be the most original sci-fi film, but it is still an entertaining ride nonetheless.