Review – Amazing Fantasy #1
Review – Amazing Fantasy #1. Captain America, Black Widow and Spider-Man awaken in a fantasy world but all is not as it seems…
Review – Amazing Fantasy #1 Read More »
Review – Blade Runner: 2049
Review – Blade Runner: 2049 Directed by: Denis Villeneuve Written by: Hampton Fancher & Michael Green Produced by: Ridley Scott & Yale Badik Starring: Ryan Gosling & Harrison Ford Release Date: October 5th 2017 After recently revisiting the original Blade Runner, I decided to revisit its follow up; Blade Runner: 2049, for review. Revisiting this movie was a blast, as it is probably one the greatest sequels ever produced. First off, this movie is a feast for the eyeballs. I won’t go on about the visuals too much, as I’m sure at this point that you already well aware of how good looking this movie is, all I’ll say is this; the movie deserves to be viewed on the biggest screen possible. What is even better though, is unlike a certain Zack Snyder film, Blade Runner 2049 has more to it than just surface level, pretty visuals. Denis Villeneuve is one of my favourite directors working in Hollywood today. The run of movies he released between 2013 and 2017 was nothing short of astounding, beginning with Prisoners and ending with this film. Additionally, he has achieved the impossible here by managing to pull off a truly fantastic sequel to a 35 year old classic. I love almost every part of this movie. The direction is masterful to watch, with the movie being moved along at a deliberate, purposeful pace, rather than rushing through from action scene to action scene. The sets used in the film are out of this world, some props are really cool to look at and the use of mostly practical backdrops makes a huge difference as opposed to using an abundance of green screen. Rodger Deakins’ cinematography is utterly astonishing, you could honestly screen grab an image from any time stamp in this movie and it would work perfectly as a beautiful desktop background. I also think that the performances are fantastic and everyone does a great job in their respective roles. Although Ford doesn’t appear until the movie’s third act, when he does he is great. Gosling commands his leading man role as we’ve come to expect him to. Robin Wright and Dave Bautista are the other standouts for me in terms of their performances. The more technical elements of the movie work perfectly in tandem with the story being told as well. The special effects are beautifully implemented and the lighting in the movie adds a whole other layer of visual depth as well. The score also works for the tone that the movie was aiming to achieve. Additionally, the script is solid and tightly woven. The only thing I will say is; if you were to go into the film expecting a sci-fi action blockbuster, you will come out disappointed. This is a slow paced, sci-fi noir, detective story. There are a few sparse moments of action and it does feel impactful when it occurs, but it is not the focus of the movie at all. The one small element that bothers me in this movie is Jared Leto’s performance. He never fails to take me out of the movie and is the only cast member who doesn’t feel like a real character within this world. Maybe I’m just being biased, as Jared Leto has always annoyed me in general, but for me he is the one bad part of this near masterpiece. Thankfully he doesn’t get that much screen time, so it could have been worse. Also, the fact that David Bowie was originally cast in that role adds an extra sprinkle of salt in the wound. Overall I love Blade Runner: 2049, but I can see why people find it somewhat divisive. For me though, the vast majority of this movie’s parts are absolutely fantastic and come together to form a journey that you must experience for yourself. [yasr_multiset setid=2] [yasr_visitor_multiset setid=2] If you enjoyed Dan’s review of Blade Runner: 2049, check out what he thought of the original Blade Runner here. Don’t forget to like us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Discord and join our official Facebook Group. Check out our new Podcast and subscribe to the channel on Youtube, Spotify, Apple and Google. Buy tickets for BGCP Comic Con in and around Glasgow Scotland – BUY TICKETS Check out all of our Comic, Movie, Television and Videogame Reviews and News from Glasgow, Scotland, UK and the US, HERE and our Podcasts/Interviews HERE If you want to be part of the BGCP community, Join us on Discord, Twitter, Instagram etc then click HERE
Review – Blade Runner: 2049 Read More »
Review – Blade Runner
Review – Blade Runner Directed by: Ridley Scott Written by: Hampton Fancher & David Peoples Produced by: Ridley Scott & Hampton Fancher Starring: Harrison Ford, Rutger Hauer & Sean Young Release Date: September 9th 1982 I first watched Blade Runner around twenty years ago and in my dumb kid-brain, I put it into the same category as Star Wars. They were both sci-fi movies, both made in a similar era and they both starred Harrison Ford. I think that the first version I saw was the director’s cut version. I then went back to Blade Runner at the age of 12, when the ultimate cut was released in 2007 and at the time, I felt that the setting and the world were still incredible, but the plot and characters in the movie left a lot to be desired. Recently, I decided to go back and re-watch the directors cut of Blade Runner for review and then follow it up with Blade Runner: 2049. The biggest shock that I experienced during this most recent re-watch what that I realised that I had totally forgotten just how excruciatingly slow this film is. The whole thing moves at a snail’s pace and half of the run-time is spent looking at Harrison Ford’s reaction shots. I had it in my head that the pace of Blade Runner was similar to that of A New Hope, but I was way off. I get it, it’s not a sci-fi action flick, it’s a hard-boiled, contemplative detective film, but it really is a slog to sit through. And that is coming from a guy that loves a slow burn movie! I still feel the same way about this movie that I always have, the world and the setting that the story takes place in are far more interesting than the movie itself, (something else that Blade Runner has in common with Star Wars!) There is a reason that so many other movies have borrowed elements of Blade Runner’s amazing setting over the years and used them as inspiration for their own set design. To this day the sets and the majority of this almost 40-year-old film’s visuals still look great, that is an achievement not to be scoffed at. I will always appreciate Blade Runner for what it did for sci-fi movies that came after it, but if you saw this film as a kid and are thinking about going back to re-watch it again to see how well it holds up, I would actually recommend against it. This movie was so much better in my head than it was when I actually re-watched it and I somehow like it less now after re-watching it. However, this certainly should not take away from the importance and influence of this film and if you consider this a classic, it would be hard to argue that point with you. [yasr_multiset setid=2] [yasr_visitor_multiset setid=2] Speaking of things that blatantly ripped off the aesthetic of Blade Runner, you can check out our review of Cyberpunk: 2077 right here. Don’t forget to like us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Discord and join our official Facebook Group. Check out our new Podcast and subscribe to the channel on Youtube, Spotify, Apple and Google. Buy tickets for BGCP Comic Con in and around Glasgow Scotland – BUY TICKETS Check out all of our Comic, Movie, Television and Videogame Reviews and News from Glasgow, Scotland, UK and the US, HERE and our Podcasts/Interviews HERE If you want to be part of the BGCP community, Join us on Discord, Twitter, Instagram etc then click HERE
Review – Blade Runner Read More »
Review – Dune Blood of the Sardaukar #1
Review – Dune Blood of the Sardaukar #1 When the choice is vengeance or honour, which lies at the heart of Jopati Kolona, an elite Sardaukar?
Review – Dune Blood of the Sardaukar #1 Read More »
Review – Batman: The Long Halloween, Part Two
SUMMARY After the gruesome death of the forgotten son of the Falcone family, Batman finds himself back to square one in the Holiday investigation. As the festive fear continues and suspects are picked off one by one, so to does trust begin to unravel. The question isn’t who is Holiday? anymore, but who do you believe in? ART As I’ve already stated in my review for Part One, the animation style fails to capture the noir-driven aura of the original graphic novel. For those that would argue that replicating the style in animation is impossible, I point you towards the animation studios behind Batman: Gotham Knight and The Animatrix. That aside however, very little attempt was made to at least capture iconic scenes of the comic in it’s own style. Once again, the animation itself is nothing special and can be uncanny valley levels of awkward in scenes of dialogue. Little to no expression or emotional details atop actors trying their best to bring this film to life is just another reason why this adaptation fails to capture the gravitas and Sin City-esque grit of the original comic. WRITING In my previous review for part one I expressed my dislike and interest for the events of the comic being either altered or simply ripped from the script entirely. My interest leaning purely on the potential for an alternate version of The Long Halloween so to justify the changes. Thankfully, this is the case with some additions and focus that in hindsight make sense for the story it’s going for but it was an unusual and frustrating route to take us there. Like The Riddler? Me too! Too bad he’s omitted from the story here. Hope you like Oxford and half assed paternal and maternal issues instead! I wish I could say that the story had some positives to it, perhaps in time when I rewatch it it will stand up. I will say that there are neutral additions to the story, in that they aren’t comparatively good but they aren’t bad either. The film here takes a lot of influence from the Nolan trilogy, to the point where scenes play out like an animated adaptation of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight and they are heartpoundingly thrilling! Ironically, both films were based on the original The Long Halloween comic. My issue with this though is that it distracts from the story to the point where some holidays are simply montaged over; missing out crucial plot details of the Holiday killings and even the mystery of the Holiday Killer itself! OVERALL In conclusion, Batman: The Long Halloween, Part Two is a thrilling adaptation of the original comic with the potential for cult success, overshadowed by the fact that it isn’t a faithful adaptation. Now and as a whole, this should have been called Batman: A Long Halloween as this is not THE Long Halloween we all know and love. With generic animation, pacing issues and pointless omissions on top of a new twist, you’ll enjoy this film best with no context of the original comic or at the very most as a lesser version of the story with the promise of what’s to come… [yasr_multiset setid=4] [yasr_visitor_multiset setid=4] Let us know in the comments your thoughts on Batman: The Long Halloween, Part Two, your thoughts on the adaptation as a whole and be sure to check out my review for Batman: The Long Halloween, Part One and Dan’s review of Batman: The Long Halloween comic! Buy tickets for BGCP Comic Con in and around Glasgow Scotland – BUY TICKETS Check out all of our Comic, Movie, Television and Videogame Reviews HERE and our Podcasts/Interviews HERE If you want to be part of the BGCP community, Join us on Discord, Twitter, Instagram etc then click HERE
Review – Batman: The Long Halloween, Part Two Read More »
Thor (2011) Review: Does the God of Thunder’s Origin Story Still Hold Up?
Revisit the beginning of the Asgardian saga. We review Thor (2011), analyzing Kenneth Branagh’s Shakespearean direction, the debut of Tom Hiddleston’s Loki, and whether the Phase 1 classic stands the test of time. The Verdict at a Glance Introduction: The MCU’s First Big Gamble Before 2011, the Marvel Cinematic Universe was grounded in the tech-based reality of Iron Man. Thor was the franchise’s first leap of faith into high fantasy, magic, and cosmic gods. Directed by Kenneth Branagh, the film attempts to blend Shakespearean family drama with modern superhero tropes. Looking back more than a decade later, Thor feels distinct from the rest of the MCU. It lacks the improv-heavy comedy of Ragnarok, opting instead for a sincere, theatrical tone. But is it a classic, or just a stepping stone? The Plot: A Tale of Two Realms Thor (Chris Hemsworth), the arrogant but powerful prince of Asgard, reignites an ancient war with the Frost Giants. As punishment, his father Odin (Anthony Hopkins) strips him of his powers and banishes him to Earth—specifically, a small town in New Mexico. While Thor learns humility among humans (and falls for astrophysicist Jane Foster), his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) uncovers his own dark origins and plots to seize the throne of Asgard. What Works (The Worthy) The Perfect Casting It is impossible to imagine anyone else in these roles. Chris Hemsworth nails the transition from arrogant warmonger to humble hero, bringing a physicality that sells the character immediately. However, the real star is Tom Hiddleston. His nuanced performance as Loki provides the MCU with its first genuinely tragic villain, setting the stage for his dominance in The Avengers. The Shakespearean Drama Kenneth Branagh brings a level of gravitas to the Asgard scenes that elevates the material. The conflict isn’t just about punching bad guys; it’s about fathers, sons, and the burden of legacy. The dialogue in the throne room feels weighty and significant, giving the film a unique flavor compared to the quip-heavy scripts of later Marvel movies. Fish-Out-of-Water Humor The film is at its best when Thor is struggling with earthly customs. The famous “Another!” scene, where he smashes a coffee mug in a diner, remains one of the most charming moments in Phase 1. What Doesn’t Work (The Unworthy) The “Small Town” Problem For a movie about space gods, a surprising amount of the runtime is spent in a dusty parking lot in New Mexico. The budget constraints of Phase 1 are visible here. The Destroyer armor battle in the climax feels less like a planetary threat and more like a small skirmish in a cul-de-sac. The Romance While Hemsworth and Portman are both talented, their romance feels rushed. They fall in love over the course of a long weekend, largely based on Thor being attractive and polite. It lacks the spark that Tony Stark and Pepper Potts had. Overuse of Dutch Angles A common critique of the film is the cinematography. Branagh loves a “Dutch angle” (tilting the camera to the side). Once you notice that almost every shot in the movie is tilted, it becomes distracting. Final Thoughts: A Solid Foundation Thor (2011) is a charming, if slightly uneven, entry in the Marvel canon. It did the heavy lifting of introducing magic to the MCU, paving the way for Doctor Strange and Guardians of the Galaxy. While it may feel small compared to the cosmic epics that followed, the emotional core of the Thor/Loki relationship makes it essential viewing. Pros: Hiddleston’s debut; Asgardian production design; Sincere emotional stakes. Cons: The bleached eyebrows on Thor; Forgettable action set pieces on Earth; Forced Hawkeye cameo. Where to Buy & Watch To witness the start of the Odinson’s journey, check out the links below [Stream on Amazon Prime Video] [Buy Thor (2011) 4K Ultra HD + Blu-ray on Amazon] [Buy Thor (2011) Standard DVD on Amazon]
Thor (2011) Review: Does the God of Thunder’s Origin Story Still Hold Up? Read More »
Review – 1922
Review – 1922 Directed by: Zak Hilditch Written by: Zak Hilditch (Screenplay) Stephen King (Novella) Produced by: Zak Hilditch & Sammie Astaneh Starring: Thomas Jane, Molly Parker & Dylan Schmid Release Date: October 20th 2017 Earlier in the year, I wrote a review for the Netflix adaption of Gerald’s Game by Mike Flanagan. 1922 was another Stephen King story adapted for Netflix, released just a month after the surprisingly phenomenal Gerald’s Game adaption. This meant that although 1922 is a very different movie to Gerald’s Game it was inevitably compared to Mike Flanagan’s surprise triumph upon its release. Going back to revisit 1922 for review four years later, it is in no way a bad film and it is unfortunate that it was released in the shadow of Gerald’s Game. The movie is set up nicely, showing an older, shaken man writing out his confession in hopes of appeasing the guilt that has plagued him since he murdered his wife Arlette. We then see a younger version of the man. His name is Wilfred and we learn that he is very protective of the three things that he feels, ‘belong,’ to him; his son, his wife and his land. Arlette professes a desire to sell the farm and move to the city, an idea that Wilfred outright refuses to go along with. The land that the farm is on belonged to Arlette’s father and so it is now in her name, meaning she has the final say officially on selling the land. Wilfred tries to bargain with her, saying that he will buy the land from her in instalments, but Arlette knows that she can get a better price elsewhere and won’t have to wait years to receive the payment. This leads Wilfred to start planning his wife’s murder. Wilfred knows that his son wants to stay on the farm as well and so he manipulates him into helping him carry out and cover up the murder. From this point on we have our ghost story. I’m actually rather hesitant to call it a ghost story, even though strictly speaking, it is one. This is more a tale of how guilt haunts a man beyond carrying out the heinous deed and how no bad deed goes unpunished. I don’t want to spoil too much here for those who reading who still have yet to see the film, but what follows is a relentless and depressing tale of regret and loss. The cast in this film are great, Thomas Jane does a great job in the lead role of a man willing to go to any morbid lengths in order to retain what he believes belongs to him. Molly Parker and Dylan Schmid also do well in their roles as Arlette and Henry, respectively. The supporting cast is also solid. The other stand out thing in the movie for me was the set design. I found the farmhouses and barns to be extremely believable and felt that the sets really added to the overall tone that the movie was going for and sold the era effectively as well. My main complaint of the movie is the lack of any significant scares. The movie sets up a fairly creepy atmosphere at times, but never capitalises on it. A Stephen King ghost story that released the week before Halloween should be way scarier than this. Back when the film first dropped in late 2017, I thought I was getting a truly chilling movie to sink my teeth into. Instead I got a movie showing a desperate man’s fractured psyche and the guilt he has to deal with in the aftermath of a despicable deed. Sure, all of that still makes for an interesting idea for a movie, it just isn’t exactly what I wanted out of this movie. Overall though, 1922 is a very well made movie and for what it is it is great. Although it didn’t quite meet my personal expectations that I had for it back when it released that is my own problem rather than the movie’s. Four years separated from the trailers and build up to this film’s release, I actually feel like I can appreciate the film more and would even go as far as to say it is a hidden gem. As with any Stephen King story, the plot of 1922 makes for an interesting adaption and takes you on a dark journey and leaves you wondering about you own moral decisions in life. The film is no doubt successful in what it sets out to do. I just wish that it had scared me slightly more. [yasr_multiset setid=2] [yasr_visitor_multiset setid=2] If you enjoyed Dan’s review of 1922 and are into your Stephen King stories, you can check out our review of It: Chapter One here. Don’t forget to like us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Discord and join our official Facebook Group. Check out our new Podcast and subscribe to the channel on Youtube, Spotify, Apple and Google. Buy tickets for BGCP Comic Con in and around Glasgow Scotland – BUY TICKETS Check out all of our Comic, Movie, Television and Videogame Reviews and News from Glasgow, Scotland, UK and the US, HERE and our Podcasts/Interviews HERE If you want to be part of the BGCP community, Join us on Discord, Twitter, Instagram etc then click HERE
Review – Stray Dogs #1
Review – Stray Dogs #1. Lady and the Tramp meet Silence of the Lambs. It’s scary being the new dog and Sophie can’t remember how she got there.
Review – Stray Dogs #1 Read More »
Review – Dracula Motherf**ker
Review – Dracula Motherf**ker Creators – Alex De Campi & Erica Henderson Publisher – Image Comics First Released – 14th Oct 2020 Intro Vienna, 1889: Dracula’s brides nail him to the bottom of his coffin. Los Angeles, 1974: an aging starlet decides to raise the stakes. Crime scene photographer Quincy Harker is the only man who knows it happened, but will anyone believe him before he gets his own chalk outline? And are Dracula’s three brides there to help him…or use him as bait? A pulpy, pulse-pounding graphic novel of California psych-horror from acclaimed creators ALEX DE CAMPI and ERICA HENDERSON. Writing It’s always interesting to see how writers can adapt a classic storyline into a modern day imagining. Or in this case, a 70’s thriller. Alex De Campi brings a Grindhouse feel to the book and given the subject matter, it was only fitting that the protagonist has the surname ‘Harker’. With how many times De Campi has been nominated for an Eisner award I was hopeful that this story would be a fitting sequel to Stoker’s masterful tale. But sadly, I felt more could have been done with character development and storyline and both were underdeveloped. Artwork The artwork certainly is eye catching and is thankfully a positive for this book. Erica Henderson has a fantastic colour palette which she utilises to great effect and I think she may have used every colour in the spectrum at some point. I have to mention her portrayal of the vampires in the book as this really captures the imagination. And had it not been for her artwork, I don’t think this book would have been as enjoyable. Overall Image Comics bring their own take on the Dracula mythos in the form of a 70’s thriller, with help from acclaimed creators Alex De Campi and Erica Henderson. I didn’t know what to expect reading this as I’m a massive fan of the original material from Bram Stoker. Could De Campi and Henderson bring a fresh outlook whilst remaining true to the source material? Unfortunately I was left disappointed by the storyline. It just felt like it didn’t have enough body to sink your teeth into (pun intended). But thankfully the artwork was a positive and I found Erica Henderson’s to be both, vibrant and enticing. If you enjoyed our review of Dracula Motherf**ker then leave a comment or rating below. [yasr_multiset setid=1] [yasr_visitor_multiset setid=1] Don’t forget to like us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Discord and join our official Facebook Group. Buy tickets for BGCP Comic Con in and around Glasgow Scotland – BUY TICKETS Check out all of our Comic, Movie, Television and Videogame Reviews and News from Glasgow, Scotland, UK and the US, HERE and our Podcasts/Interviews HERE www.bigglasgowcomicpage.com
Review – Dracula Motherf**ker Read More »
Review – Moon Knight #1
Review – Moon Knight #1. The mysterious Mr Knight has opened his Midnight Mission, protecting his people from the weird and horrible.
Review – Moon Knight #1 Read More »