Movie Review: Clayface - Celebrity Skinned

So I think we can agree a "Clayface" movie is an odd choice, especially for the third film in James Gunn's DCU. It definitely feels likes what Sony had been doing with their Spider-Man spin-offs rather than part of the larger universe plans put forth by who would be considered DC's Kevin Feige. Much like "Lanterns" though, it's a DCU project that ends up delivering.

Heavily inspired by the character's appearances in "Batman: The Animated Series", what sets "Clayface" apart from other supervillain movies is that it's an actual VILLAIN origin story. Disfigured by the mob, actor Matt Hagen undergoes an experimental procedure to repair his face that has unforeseen side effects, warping his mind as well as the rest of his body as he seeks vengeance against those who wrecked his life. While movies like "Venom" and "Morbius" stuck to the anti-hero route, "Clayface" does show Matt go after bad people for his own reasons before his selfish desires spill over into innocent people, hence keeping the character villainous. It's also focused solely on Clayface, so while some may go in expecting a surprise debut of the DCU's version of Batman, there's not even a reference to the Dark Knight like how Sony would always tease Spider-Man in their non-Spider-Man films with no payoff.

That's not to say our main character isn't sympathetic. Tom Rhys Harries leads the tragedy of Matt Hagen, from his fall from stardom to his intended comeback threatened by his unresolved trauma. At each stage of Matt's journey, Harries delivers a believable performance during the character's highs and lows and his expressed desires. His story reminds me of a mix of "Doctor Strange" and the 1986 version of "The Fly". You have one person trying whatever it takes to reclaim his passion and a scientist (in this film being Naomi Ackle as Caitlyn Corr) with noble intentions that lead to overwhelming results before horrific unintended consequences.

Speaking of "The Fly", the film leans heavily on body horror, which obviously works for a character like Clayface. As he learns to keep himself composed, Matt's powers evolve gradually over the course of the film, from shapeshifting into other people to forming weapons. It leads to some surreal moments and some inventive kills. With the film's lower budget, they had to get creative in how to present his abilities and I think they did a decent job. They save the CGI for the important moments while camera tricks are used for about half the shapeshifting parts.

Overall, if you're looking for a new tale of terror this Halloween season, "Clayface" is a worthwhile watch for comic and horror fans alike.

TV Review: Lanterns - Finding the Light

Since the critical and financial failure of the 2011 film, Green Lantern hasn't had a proper live action depiction outside of teases in the DCEU and the Arrowverse. James Gunn's DC Universe rectifies this first by introducing Guy Gardner in "Superman" and now with the "Lanterns" TV series, though it's definitely done in a way one wouldn't expect. Instead of a galaxy spanning epic, it's an Earth-bound murder mystery investigated by veteran Lantern Hal Jordan and rookie John Stewart. Despite the left turn in terms of a premise, "Lanterns" surprisingly works.

Tonally, this is the most grounded and mature project yet for the DCU. It's a shift that caught me by surprise similar to when Daredevil premiered on the Netflix. Structurally, the season is split in time between 2016 and 2026 with the overall story being centered around a Manhunter hiding in a small Nebraska town that Hal and John seek to locate. In terms of the DCU timeline, this makes Hal as Green Lantern a hero long before Superman and as such delivers a low-key "first contact" story.

Kyle Chandler and Aaron Pierre shine in their respective roles of Hal and John.
Depending on how you look at it, Chandler plays as Hal as either a showboat or an a-hole. And being a Lantern for about three decades, Hal is understandably afraid to be training his future replacement and losing his claim to fame of being the first human Green Lantern. You'd think this would lead to Hal embracing the fear and becoming Parallax with John having to stop him, but thankfully the story doesn't go that route; it would be too predictable and would just be a rehash of the "Beware My Power" animated film. But I do believe his actions during the 2016 section do come from that fear and results in the Green Lantern title becoming a pariah to some similar to what happened with Wanda in the MCU.
Similar to Ben Affleck's Batman or Margot Robbie's Harley, I thought Aaron Pierre's portrayal of John was very reminiscent of the DCAU version prominent in the Justice League series (even appearing both clean shaven and with a goatee after the time skip). He's serious and respectful to a fault but isn't infallible to making mistakes. He's also shown to have strong will, possibly even more so than Hal. There's a tease of him wearing the GL suit, but it doesn't come to fruition here, meaning we have something to look forward to in next year's Superman sequel. On a sidenote, I think it's kind of weird that the GL suit here is actually a physical outfit that needs to be put on rather than coming out of the ring. I'm not saying it needed to be computer generated again, but just a flash of light like a quick morph done on Power Rangers would deliver a little more comic accuracy and highlight the reverence of the uniform (though the lack of it from Hal is part of his arc) and urgency of the situation.

The two work well off each other as you can sense the tension and feel they're being played against each other, but you're also hoping maybe they'll eventually see eye to eye. I also thought they had good chemistry with their respective love interests despite how things turn out.

If there's a theme to the series, it's generational trauma. Hal's actions are partially driven by the fates of his father and grandfather whereas John had been put through Gohan levels of rigorous training by his parents since childhood. Even the Manhunter they're looking for has a past they're running from. Given Tom King's prominent involvement in the series, his usual trope of exploring superheroes and trauma was inevitable. I've had bad experiences with King's writing in the past (see my reviews for "The Gift" and "Heroes in Crisis"), but "Lanterns" was one of his better projects. And comparing this to "Supergirl" (which also based on a King story that the movie seemed to botch), "Lanterns" being a series gives it more room to breathe.

"Lanterns" is very different from what one would expect given the source material. But on its own merits, it turned out to be a well put together story of self-exploration with drama, mystery, and some turns that will keep you guessing to the end. While it shows you the tip of the iceberg of what a full-on Green Lantern project could be in the DCU, one needs to temper those expectations and stay close to the ground before shooting for the stars.

TV Review: "Batman: Caped Crusader" Season 2 - Upping the Ante

The Dark Knight returns to Prime Video with another season of the golden age inspired "Batman: Caped Crusader." In following the escalation theory prevalent in the Batman mythos, this season ramped things up as our hero's war on crime reaches levels beyond common mobsters and murderers that test him physically and psychologically.

Much of what made the first season work carries over here, particularly the "Villain of the Week" format. Though I will point out there's more serialization involving two main villains. The first is the Riddler, who takes over Rupert Thorne's operations after the mob boss disappears. Riddler's way of running things leads to more chaos and death, especially when he goes full "Bonnie and Clyde" with who I would consider this show's version of Poison Ivy. But Riddler can be seen as a bridge between the traditional crime boss in Thorne and the super criminal best personified in the biggest enemy any Batman would face.
The Joker was teased in a post-credits scene at the end of last season and is seen throughout season two preparing his ultimate plan in the shadows before making a hell of a public debut at the start the two-part season finale. This has to be one of one the creepiest versions of the Joker put to screen. While carrying the character's anarchistic and nihilist traits, this is a much more subdued version in line with his first comic appearance. He hardly smiles and when he does it's more of a slight grin, which makes the moment we get a full-on laugh more significant. The way the Joker Venom is depicted is also unsettling as it draws out the victim's death and you can see the pain in their eyes and voice.

But there are plenty more bat-villains to enjoy this season. Much like last season, there's a mix of golden age villains, like Hugo Strange and the Mad Monk, and villains who came later like Roxy Rocket reinterpreted to fit that era (along with some other modern comic plot elements). I would say they even go further by taking villains who technically debuted in the golden age like Scarecrow and Mr. Freeze but redone in a more pulp style of the first year of Batman comics.
Along with the Scarecrow episode where Batman has to team up with Harley Quinn to stop him, another highlight episode for me was Jim Corrigan's transformation into the Spectre. Unlike the supernatural route that led to the misstep of the Gentleman Ghost last season, the Spectre comes out of a science experiment to extend one's life expectancy gone wrong. Targeting those the law failed to put away, he's essentially a ghost taking care of unfinished business; add in that the episode takes place on Christsmas Eve and it's a BTAS caliber twist on Dickens' classic.
While not a villain per se, this season introduces the character of Hattie Tetch, a gender bent version of the Mad Hatter. Unlike how they depicted the Penguin last season, Hattie shows real effort from the creators in differentiating her from her male counterpart. Instead of using hats or playing cards to control people though, she's a news personality who has some warped views on who the good guys and bad guys are. You can make your own cable news connotations there.

As you can probably guess, the villains kind of overshadowed our protagonist this season. Bruce does still get some development though as he slowly accepts he doesn't have to work alone. This mostly involves forming a partnership with the Gordons, but we also get a follow-up appearance by Carrie Kelley that highlights the benefits and pitfalls of the kid sidekick.

Those who enjoyed the first season of "Batman: Caped Crusader" should have no worries going into its second and most likely last season. "Caped Crusader" was always a holdover from a previous WB regime that we were lucky still got to see the light of day. But with the announcement of the Absolute Batman animated series, the writing's on the wall. "Caped Crusader" was nonetheless a great adaptation of one of the premiere superheroes. If there's one takeaway I got particularly from this season, it's a similar feeling I had rewatching the Nolan trilogy recently, that Batman's fight against corruption and chaos is a timeless one that we should feel inspired by.

Movie Review: "Spider-Man: Brand New Day" - Welcome Back Parker

After the events of "No Way Home", Peter Parker finds himself in new territory within the Marvel Cinematic Universe. In many ways, "Brand New Day" delivers the MCU Spider-Man movie fans have been wanting to see while still carrying a divisive trope from the previous trilogy.

From beginning to end, this may be the most emotional Spider-Man film yet. With six total films (three ensembles and three solo), we're fully invested in Tom Holland's Spider-Man and his well-established spot in the MCU. After having to erase the world's memory of Peter Parker and deciding to seclude himself from those closest to him, he's been through a lot to say the least. Even Michael Giacchino's iconic Spider-Man score highlights the struggle, having a more somber tone rather than the triumphant one we're used to. This makes for some pretty heartbreaking moments, especially in his scenes with Zendaya's MJ; their chemistry remains on point, and I love how they're married in real life now. It leads to an existential crisis in the same vein as Raimi's "Spider-Man 2" (there's actually quite a few homages to that film) but inversed with Peter's powers evolving rather than disappearing. Besides the external threats, Peter's main conflict is finding the balance between the spider and the man. And if you pay attention to how much he wears the Spidey mask and when, it's a good indication of where his mind is at in the moment.

Style wise, it's for the most part a street level MCU Spidey film and there was clear influence from the PlayStation/Insomniac games. Peter's been operating for years, has a firm partnership with NYPD, and a rogue's gallery he's put behind bars (including Michael Mando finally suited up as Scorpion). The action scenes or just Spidey swinging look like they're ripped right from the games. But I think what most people will enjoy is seeing Peter left to his own devices. No longer backed up by Stark tech and mostly acting as a solo hero, Peter's had to rebuild himself from the ground up but it's still clear he's come a long way from the high school kid in baggy sweat clothes.

Of course, it's still the MCU which means we have wider connections to explore.
Filling the kind-of mentor role for Peter this time around, Jon Bernthal is back once again as Frank Castle/Punisher. It just makes sense to have the New York vigilantes cross paths and a history between the two is clearly established (and it's my headcanon Pete's had to have teamed up with Matt too at some point). If Happy was the annoyed big brother, Frank's more of an antagonistic big brother to Peter, setting him apart from past mentors. What really sells their partnership is Bernthal and Holland's own personal history, having worked together in the past and helping each other prepare to take on their Marvel roles.
Mark Ruffalo is also back as Bruce Banner, who Peter goes incognito to for advice on how to get his mutating powers under control. Unfortunately for Bruce, this puts him in the crosshairs of the film's villain, triggering a full savage Hulk transformation for the first time since "Infinity War". People who have been wanting that Hulk back will be happy to see it, and the fight between him and Spidey is an entertaining moment we can check off the Marvel movie bucket list, but I know few will absorb the tragedy of the moment. Pre and post transformation, Bruce comes across like an addict who fell off the wagon and in anguish over "his" actions. Ruffalo sells it so well, especially with how he keeps asking if he hurt anybody.

Sadie Sink plays our main villain, though I won't be spoiling who it is here. All I'll say is that her character continues to expand the mutant presence in the Sacred Timeline of the MCU and Damage Control's antagonizing nature toward it as seen in "Ms. Marvel" and "Wonder Man". That, and Sink's performance totally steals the show in the film's third act.
All that said, some of these wider connections do kind of hinder the street level aspect during the second half of the film. It's still all well put together, but it may lose viewers going in excited about the former as it plays into the belief that Sony overly relies on the MCU connections in the Spider-Man films.

"No Way Home" was always going to be a tough act to follow, but "Spider-Man: Brand New Day" proves there's still life in the web-head's film franchise. Full of action and emotion while setting up promising future developments for Peter and others within the MCU, we're given a must-see film as this year's Summer Blockbuster season starts to wind down.

Movie Review: Supergirl - Turbulence in Paradise

 

So far, James Gunn has spearheaded every project in the DCU, whether it be as writer or director. This year will be the true test of this burgeoning interconnected universe with three projects where Gunn is strictly in the producer seat. "Supergirl" is the first and unfortunately shows why Gunn may need to be a little more hands on.

We got our first look at Milly Alcock as Supergirl in a cameo at the end of "Superman" last year and it was pretty clear the direction they were going for the character, i.e. Rick Sanchez "Wubba lubba dub dub!" vibes. To be clearer though, we're seeing a Kara who has some unresolved trauma she buries in liquor and partying. Couple that with the trailers showcasing the film to be a gritty "John Wick in space" (with a touch of "True Grit"), Supergirl was definitely going to differentiate from her cousin in terms of both character and tone.

While I understand they were going for a darker story, they may have taken it too literally. One of the main problems with the movie is the lighting, specifically that they need to turn on a light! I'm not asking for Schumacher style neon, but it's hard to enjoy some of the action when I'm straining to make out what's happening half the time. Even with the climax of the film where it's set outside with natural sunlight, the shadows still seem to be overpowering, save for the final slow motion action scene set to a song in true Gunn fashion. Going off that though, while there's plenty of music in the film, it doesn't have the same impact as an actual Gunn film; even the action scene I mentioned left a little to be desired in my opinion.

So those are the technical issues. Story wise, it's kind of cliche with a hypocritical resolution. It also feels like there were some moments left on the cutting room floor, which makes character development moments feel unearned. This hurts the emotional moments as well since certain choices characters make leading up to it are, for lack of a better word, stupid.
And then there's our main villain, Krem of the Yellow Hills. Just mix the scene chewing of Ronan or Dar-Benn, give him a composite design of Yellow Bastard from "Sin City" (with a hint toward some of that character's certain proclivities) and Xerxes from "300" and you have Krem.

Now there are some silver linings to the film. Milly Alcock sells this version of Kara very well, showcasing a good person dealing with the bad hand she's been given in life. The flashbacks of her growing up are a real highlight as well and works to show the differences between her and Clark in terms of nature vs. nurture. We also have the return of our favorite chaotic good boy Krypto, but our main show stealer this time around is Jason Momoa as the DC character many say he was meant to play, Lobo. While I enjoyed his time as Aquaman, Momoa IS Lobo; the downside to that though is that you'll be wishing he was in more of the film than he is.

Overall, "Supergirl" is a surprise misstep that shows the film side of DC still has some work to do in finding steady ground.

Hush 2: Pointless and Frustrating

 

I had intended this to be a regular review of the storyline, but as the title of the post indicates, it's not worth the effort.
"Hush 2" (stupidly stylized as "H2SH") saw the creative team of writer Jeph Loeb and artist Jim Lee reunite for the sequel to their original 2002-03 Batman story. This is despite the fact the character of Hush had been a recurring villain as recent as the end of Peter Tomasi's last run on Detective Comics in 2020. And if any story was worth being a true follow-up, it would be Paul Dini's "Heart of Hush" from 2008. Regardless, the "Hush 2" we did get has been poorly received and met with numerous delays. It's basically "All Star Batman and Robin" all over again, which Lee also worked on with another acclaimed Batman writer past his prime, Frank Miller.

"Hush 2" was meant to run from March 2025 to August 2025 to conclude that current volume of the main Batman book before it was relaunched in September with Matt Fraction taking over as the writer. Yes, ending and immediately restarting a book with a new issue one is still a frustrating practice of the big two, but I give DC credit that they're more restrained compared to Marvel in recent years. To mark the occasion, we would see Bruce don an updated batsuit (with Tim and Damian getting new Robin suits too) which would also appear in the rest of the Bat-books and the broader DC universe. Couple that with the fact that variant covers of the final and first issues of their respective volumes were meant to connect, this implied "Hush 2" would have major ramifications.

As I mentioned though, delays started to occur with the release schedule of "Hush 2". Now normally, if a book was behind schedule, particularly one with line-wide implications, it would in turn delay what's meant to come in the aftermath. I don't know if reviews had played a factor, but when September came around, DC went as scheduled with Matt Fraction's new Batman #1 despite the fact "Hush 2" only reached part four of its six issue run. By the time part six finally arrived this May, Fraction's run had reached issue nine.

Fraction's run and the other Batbooks by September were meant to take place after "Hush 2". Throw in the fact that none of those books have made any reference to that story and it begs the question of what the point of it even is. DC obviously didn't even care enough to make sure it was finished before moving on to what came after. If it weren't for completionists like myself, especially since it was part of the main Batman book, many more would have dropped this story without a second thought.

But here's the real kicker. After fourteen months to get these six issues out, the story STILL isn't over! Part six not only has no plot resolutions but ends on a cliffhanger with a tease for "H2SH 2", which read out loud would be "Hush 2 2" (do you see what I mean now with that stylization?). Despite the plan to lead into Fraction's run, this was apparently always meant to be a twelve-issue story like the original. Artist Jim Lee has said the second half will be its own miniseries and will have a consistent release schedule once everything's completed. But again, what is the point? Considering the time it took for the first half to come out, who knows how long it will take for the second and how far ahead the Batman books will be when its finished? And I don't see many readers eagerly waiting for it considering how the story's gone so far. This is why I'm not giving "Hush 2" a full review. I can't take waiting on a story that so far has been nonsensical and ultimately doesn't matter. Though if it's anything like "All Star", I would be surprised if a promised continuation to wrap up the story actually materializes.

However, there is one plot point of "Hush 2" that warrants discussion. A plot point I've been boiling over for about a year that I am not letting off the hook just because I'm not giving the story full attention.
In one of the many inversions of the original "Hush", Hush leaves the Joker for dead with Batman being the only one who can save him, as opposed to nearly killing him like before. And apparently, this pisses off the entire Bat-family who act like this is the worst thing Bruce has ever done. By the way, all the Bat-books post "Hush 2" show everyone on good terms so again, no point. So what is the reason Batman would save the Joker? Simple: because he's Batman.
Despite not being part of his inception and the movies playing fast and loose with it, Batman's no-kill rule is a fundamental part of the character. Now people point out he'll do everything to criminals just short of killing, the exaggerated takedowns from the Arkham games being a prime example. That's not to say Bruce won't lose his composure if pushed too far; it's part of the humanity that makes the character relatable. But as much as he was born from violence, Batman was also born from compassion. Bruce's crusade is about preventing anyone from suffering a loss like him due to crime and that those who would commit those crimes have justice served against them. That's part of why he deals with the revolving doors of Blackgate and Arkham; despite all evidence to the contrary, he hopes to all hell that his enemies, even someone like the Joker, can find repentance. As for letting someone die from something you weren't responsible for, that doesn't matter to Bruce. In his mind, the blood would be just as much on his hands.
There's a flashback scene from the first issue of Tom Taylor's current Detective Comics run where Bruce's father Thomas performed surgery on a man (who we learn would turn out to be Joe Chill) after a car accident despite seeing evidence he was physically abusive to his pregnant girlfriend. Some of Thomas' colleagues and his wife question his decision to save him. A young Bruce overhears the conversation between his parents and is also curious about his father's actions. Thomas responds "We don't know how a life will be lived. We don't know it's value. And if we can save a life, and we don't, what would that make us? You save the life, Bruce. No matter what." As a doctor, Thomas took the Hippocratic oath. Bruce lives by that in his own way. It's something he's also passed down to Dick. In another flashback scene from Taylor in his prior run on Nightwing, a young Dick gets heated during a training session with Bruce, who needs to bring him back down. He tells his ward that they don't know the circumstances that brought someone to crime and that their job is to stop criminals, not punish them; "We can't hurt people because our parents died."

Above everything else wrong with it, I think that's the main reason I reject "Hush 2". In any other story, Bruce's friends and family would understand without question why he would save the Joker's life. He's even done it before like in 2001's "Last Laugh" event where Bruce had to resuscitate the Joker after Dick beat him to death believing he had Tim killed (though if anything it was about keeping blood off Dick's hands). Or even in the original "Hush" where Bruce nearly took it himself, Gordon appeared to talk him down. Considering the Joker crippled his daughter in "The Killing Joke" and killed his wife at the end of "No Man's Land", Gordon would have every right to want the Joker dead but didn't want to see Batman cross the line. Like many superheroes, Batman is supposed to represent the best of humanity and stir that goodness in others, fictional or otherwise. In these days where it's a fight to keep that belief alive, we need stories and symbols that remind us of that.

TV Review: Spider-Noir - Uncaged

If you're familiar with my blog, you'd know I'm a big fan of Spider-Man Noir, having covered the character's original story and its sequel. So you can imagine my level excitement when a live-action series was announced. But given Sony's recent track record of live-action Spider-Man properties outside the MCU, there was also legitimate concern. But it was getting a touch from the "Spider-Verse" films with Phil Lord and Christopher Miller producing and Nicolas Cage jumping mediums to play the character (albeit a different version using the Ben Reilly name and his alias simply "The Spider") so there was hope to be had. I thought if anything, Cage's involvement guaranteed some entertainment either way. Thankfully the final product swung (pun intended) in the right direction.

Since the character's appearance in "Into the Spider-Verse", creators in the comics have leaned somewhat into that private investigator depiction though not as exaggerated. "Spider-Noir" continues that trend while trying to keep it as gritty and grounded as the original comics. That being said, the show isn't shy about having superpowered villains for the Spider to face, including Sandman (Jack Huston), Tombstone (Abraham Popoola), and lesser-known villain Megawatt; I guess they couldn't use Electro, but in any case, Andrew Lewis Caldwell steals the show whenever he's on screen. The interesting part though is that superpowers can be seen as a metaphor for PTSD for soldiers (in this case post-World War I), just one of many themes explored in the series in addition to political corruption and gatekeeping.

Since the series does its own thing compared to the comics, the best way to describe it is that we take the Spider-Man mythos and filter it through the lens of classic film noir. The experience is greatly enhanced in the black and white setting (especially with the classic horror aspects of episode 6); I may still watch the colorized version since it's supposed to be as vibrant as the films of the time, but it felt right to lean into the noir of Spider-Noir. Many of the characters represent the tropes one would see in a noir film. You have the grizzled detective with a tortured past in Ben, the femme fatale in Cat Hardy (Li Jun Li), the sassy secretary in Janet (Karen Rodriguez), the crime boss with an iron grip on the city in Silvermane (Brendan Gleeson), the reporter best friend in Robbie Robertston (Lamorne Morris), and the streetwise kid in Frankie (Cary Christopher, another show stealer).

While much of the cast is entertaining, this is of course Nicolas Cage's show. As the Spider, he brings his own style of quippage one would expect from the web-slinger. Mix that with the personal flair Cage is known to bring to his performances and there's no shortage of fun to be had. I also enjoyed his chemistry with Li Jun Li's Cat Hardy. Along with the "will they/won't they" plotline, their banter is right at home in the film noir setting.

The suit is absolutely perfect. Though if I had to nitpick, I feel they could have gotten a better stuntman to match Cage's body. Like, I don't expect Cage to do the big action scenes (though lord knows he could try), my suspension of disbelief is hard to maintain when it feels like someone other than Ben is in the suit, entertaining as they are.

Overall, "Spider-Noir" is a bet that paid off. Cage leads a well-rounded cast in a series meant to throw back to a classic era of cinema mixed with the modern aspects of the superhero genre.