You know, existing in a classification of mammals that are prone to rushing, discerning thoughts and gross, ignorant misconceptions makes me realize how valuable a simple slice of humble pie with a cherry of re-evaluation on top can be. With that said, I'd like to offer an apology to director David F. Sandberg, regarding his newest film, Shazam!
You see, The Tick may not have been the first bit of entertainment on television or on cinemas to approach the superhero genre with a more punctuated focus on comedy, but its placement is so key and unique in the 90s television cartoon renaissance and its influence has endured so prevalently that whenever I see a new bit of entertainment, utilizing a comedic bent for the superhero story, I immediately think of it trying to approach the same territory that The Tick paved. And this is coming from someone with only a base knowledge of the show.
But there's more going on here, because this is a DC property. Or, as I call it, "D-See, We're Marvel, Right? We're Marvel, Right? No, Seriously, Are We Marvel Yet?"
Whatever appraisals you wish to hurl at DC and their head brass trying embarrassingly to compete with Marvel, but having very few efforts approach that same level of commercial viability, artistic audacity, and sheer audience invigoration, I think we all observed the marketing for Shazam and had the same thought it mind: Someone really wants to be Deadpool. Of course, this is DC, so it wouldn't dare have our main character drop a F-bomb or, I dunno, sexualize his college-bound, foster sister. PG-13 for the win, y'all!
So, given how these properties are so inescapable and so indispensable, I figured that this had the potential to be a desperate, comedic disaster, affirming DC Films to be a bunch of Marvel stans and adding on another character in the DC Cinematic Universe in the line-up of DC heroes put through the most desultory, lukewarm stories. Well, to David F. Sandberg, not only do I apologize, but I also grovel at your feet.
Time for movie review mode! Shazam!
The movie revolves around Billy Batson, a child placed in a group home after repeatedly running away from foster care. While he's rapt with the pursuit of trying to find his birth mother, whom he was separated from at a very young age, he forms a bond with the foster children, particularly Freddy, a superhero enthusiast. One day, he is summoned by a wizard Shazam. He is the last surviving member of the Council of Seven Wizards, he is growing more frail, and is looking for a body to carry on his powers, someone pure of heart.
Billy is chosen and he soons embodies the powers, as well as the grown adult body, of Shazam the superhero. Everytime he says "Shazam," he can transform back and forth between a young boy and a superhero. With the help of Freddy, he discovers the extent of his powers and becomes a celebrity. However, a hero's only as good as its villian. Enter Thaddeaus Sivana, who was originally summoned by Shazam as a child, but was deemed to be unfit to inherit his powers because he wasn't pure of heart. As an adult, he manages to confront Shazam, steal the Eye of Sin, and vows to take Shazam's powers for himself.
For superhero movies, there is a bit of a template. In the 2000s, the first act was heavily dedicated to the origins of the superhero. In this current decade, we've already become familiar with these characters, so it seems that nowadays, superhero films, particularly in the MCU, set up the conflict and personalities in the first act. It's always particularly noticeable, as it should, because it's a tried-and-true way to delineate and distinguish the narrative.
With Shazam, I was surprised how differently the first act flowed. It could be attributed to the fact that I didn't pay attention to the marketing all that intently, but I liked how the film connotes the implications and connections to the plot during the first act. I didn't immediately know how everything connected until the end of the first act. For example, Thaddeus' backstory opens the film, but the conflict and the reasons for villianry are saved until about thirty minutes into the film. By this point, we actually have spent more time on Billy's development as a character, as well as his fair plight of finding his mother, an action that presents some significant and effective pathos, specifically in how that plotline wraps up.
It also doesn't leave the other children out to dry. All of the adoptive children are written appeallingly and distinctly. Eugene, portrayed by Ian Chen, manages to deliver a few spirited quips. Mary, portrayed by Grace Fulton, is not the overly-bossy eldest, but rather a vivacious, yet insecure and wistful young girl preparing for college and her character is handled with a precise tenderness. Darla, played by Faithe Herman, balances unbridled innocence and ebullient awareness, while never treading into overly-spunky grounds. Even the adoptive parents are portrayed so straightforwardly gentle and cheery, but in such a grounded manner that you can't help but like them.
Freddy, however, portrayed by Jack Dylan Grazer is not just the stand-out of the foster children, but possibly of this whole film. Maybe I was impressed by Grazer's unrelentingly hermetic comic timing, which he didn't get to utilitze too much of in It, another strong film he was in. Or maybe I just adored his character portrayal from screenwriter Henry Gayden. On one hand, Freddy's the token nerd character. On the other hand, he's the token smartass kid. The way Gayden amalgamates the two archetypes into one lively, smart-alecky, sharp character is at both times subversive of archetypes and subservient to what we expect both character types to be.
Of course, such a spirited lead character and his older self deserve spirited actors to portray them. Disney Channel actor Asher Angel is the perfect unassuming hero as Billy, portraying him with such ease and earnestness. Zachary Levi makes a welcome return to Hollywood as a leading man in probably the unlikeliest of roles. It speaks to how much a good sport Levi is to be able to dilute his masculinity, whilst maintaining his feeble everyman sensibilities, all in the name of getting a laugh, yet still spritzing charisma off the screen.
Oh, and getting a laugh? This film gets quite a bunch. In fact, the comedy is where the film truly excels, above all. I laughed so many times throughout the film that it wasn't even worth noting all the specific lines and gags. The film is definitely a modern film and it definitely wants to achieve what Deadpool did, but the movie it actually resembles more is Big, right down to a three-second homage to the piano floor bit. In fact, the alchemy between Freddy and Billy and the feel of the school scenes are reminiscent of an 80's John Hughes film. It's kind of refreshing every now and then to see a comedy that isn't gleeful in its tastelessness, but moreso gleeful in its...glee.
On the visual level, DC actually is up to par with Marvel for this movie because the imagery and CGI is alive, colorful, and spirited, shot with some surprisingly welcoming slo-mo cinematography and 3D-esque close-ups, and filmed in sumptuous, gloriously gothic set pieces. The Rock of Eternity is beautifully realized with as much richness, resonance, and mood as the Batcave, maybe even more.
I guess if I had to quibble, I'd say that the final battle went on a little too long. I'd also say that sometimes I thought the story veered breathtakingly close into absurdity. I conceal everything that need be, but despite that the Seven Deadly Sins are portrayed the same in its original comic, I personally found the whole aspect of "releasing the Seven Deadly Sins" pretty simplistic and ludicrous. Plus, the last shot is cringe-inducingly lame and irritatingly meta. However I say "veer," because during the rare occasions that made me roll my eyes, it compensated me and immediately got back on track with enough humor, splendor, and soul to win me back.
And that's what distinguishes an adored DC film from a DC film to be admonished: soul. It doesn't matter that you got to see your pedantic, fanboy wet dream put on the big screen (i.e. Batman v. Superman). It didn't matter how many villians you got together (i.e. Suicide Squad). It didn't natter how many heroes you got together (i.e. Justice Squad). Those movies were seen as turgid tranquilizers of cinema. This movie will be viewed as having portrayed Shazam's soul and having brought soul back to DC Films.
So you see kids, in the end, the black wizard's magic lived on...through a white person.
*cues Childish Gambino*
This is America!
RATING: Three-and-a-half stars out of four
You see, The Tick may not have been the first bit of entertainment on television or on cinemas to approach the superhero genre with a more punctuated focus on comedy, but its placement is so key and unique in the 90s television cartoon renaissance and its influence has endured so prevalently that whenever I see a new bit of entertainment, utilizing a comedic bent for the superhero story, I immediately think of it trying to approach the same territory that The Tick paved. And this is coming from someone with only a base knowledge of the show.
But there's more going on here, because this is a DC property. Or, as I call it, "D-See, We're Marvel, Right? We're Marvel, Right? No, Seriously, Are We Marvel Yet?"
Whatever appraisals you wish to hurl at DC and their head brass trying embarrassingly to compete with Marvel, but having very few efforts approach that same level of commercial viability, artistic audacity, and sheer audience invigoration, I think we all observed the marketing for Shazam and had the same thought it mind: Someone really wants to be Deadpool. Of course, this is DC, so it wouldn't dare have our main character drop a F-bomb or, I dunno, sexualize his college-bound, foster sister. PG-13 for the win, y'all!
So, given how these properties are so inescapable and so indispensable, I figured that this had the potential to be a desperate, comedic disaster, affirming DC Films to be a bunch of Marvel stans and adding on another character in the DC Cinematic Universe in the line-up of DC heroes put through the most desultory, lukewarm stories. Well, to David F. Sandberg, not only do I apologize, but I also grovel at your feet.
Time for movie review mode! Shazam!
The movie revolves around Billy Batson, a child placed in a group home after repeatedly running away from foster care. While he's rapt with the pursuit of trying to find his birth mother, whom he was separated from at a very young age, he forms a bond with the foster children, particularly Freddy, a superhero enthusiast. One day, he is summoned by a wizard Shazam. He is the last surviving member of the Council of Seven Wizards, he is growing more frail, and is looking for a body to carry on his powers, someone pure of heart.
Billy is chosen and he soons embodies the powers, as well as the grown adult body, of Shazam the superhero. Everytime he says "Shazam," he can transform back and forth between a young boy and a superhero. With the help of Freddy, he discovers the extent of his powers and becomes a celebrity. However, a hero's only as good as its villian. Enter Thaddeaus Sivana, who was originally summoned by Shazam as a child, but was deemed to be unfit to inherit his powers because he wasn't pure of heart. As an adult, he manages to confront Shazam, steal the Eye of Sin, and vows to take Shazam's powers for himself.
For superhero movies, there is a bit of a template. In the 2000s, the first act was heavily dedicated to the origins of the superhero. In this current decade, we've already become familiar with these characters, so it seems that nowadays, superhero films, particularly in the MCU, set up the conflict and personalities in the first act. It's always particularly noticeable, as it should, because it's a tried-and-true way to delineate and distinguish the narrative.
With Shazam, I was surprised how differently the first act flowed. It could be attributed to the fact that I didn't pay attention to the marketing all that intently, but I liked how the film connotes the implications and connections to the plot during the first act. I didn't immediately know how everything connected until the end of the first act. For example, Thaddeus' backstory opens the film, but the conflict and the reasons for villianry are saved until about thirty minutes into the film. By this point, we actually have spent more time on Billy's development as a character, as well as his fair plight of finding his mother, an action that presents some significant and effective pathos, specifically in how that plotline wraps up.
It also doesn't leave the other children out to dry. All of the adoptive children are written appeallingly and distinctly. Eugene, portrayed by Ian Chen, manages to deliver a few spirited quips. Mary, portrayed by Grace Fulton, is not the overly-bossy eldest, but rather a vivacious, yet insecure and wistful young girl preparing for college and her character is handled with a precise tenderness. Darla, played by Faithe Herman, balances unbridled innocence and ebullient awareness, while never treading into overly-spunky grounds. Even the adoptive parents are portrayed so straightforwardly gentle and cheery, but in such a grounded manner that you can't help but like them.
Freddy, however, portrayed by Jack Dylan Grazer is not just the stand-out of the foster children, but possibly of this whole film. Maybe I was impressed by Grazer's unrelentingly hermetic comic timing, which he didn't get to utilitze too much of in It, another strong film he was in. Or maybe I just adored his character portrayal from screenwriter Henry Gayden. On one hand, Freddy's the token nerd character. On the other hand, he's the token smartass kid. The way Gayden amalgamates the two archetypes into one lively, smart-alecky, sharp character is at both times subversive of archetypes and subservient to what we expect both character types to be.
Of course, such a spirited lead character and his older self deserve spirited actors to portray them. Disney Channel actor Asher Angel is the perfect unassuming hero as Billy, portraying him with such ease and earnestness. Zachary Levi makes a welcome return to Hollywood as a leading man in probably the unlikeliest of roles. It speaks to how much a good sport Levi is to be able to dilute his masculinity, whilst maintaining his feeble everyman sensibilities, all in the name of getting a laugh, yet still spritzing charisma off the screen.
Oh, and getting a laugh? This film gets quite a bunch. In fact, the comedy is where the film truly excels, above all. I laughed so many times throughout the film that it wasn't even worth noting all the specific lines and gags. The film is definitely a modern film and it definitely wants to achieve what Deadpool did, but the movie it actually resembles more is Big, right down to a three-second homage to the piano floor bit. In fact, the alchemy between Freddy and Billy and the feel of the school scenes are reminiscent of an 80's John Hughes film. It's kind of refreshing every now and then to see a comedy that isn't gleeful in its tastelessness, but moreso gleeful in its...glee.
On the visual level, DC actually is up to par with Marvel for this movie because the imagery and CGI is alive, colorful, and spirited, shot with some surprisingly welcoming slo-mo cinematography and 3D-esque close-ups, and filmed in sumptuous, gloriously gothic set pieces. The Rock of Eternity is beautifully realized with as much richness, resonance, and mood as the Batcave, maybe even more.
I guess if I had to quibble, I'd say that the final battle went on a little too long. I'd also say that sometimes I thought the story veered breathtakingly close into absurdity. I conceal everything that need be, but despite that the Seven Deadly Sins are portrayed the same in its original comic, I personally found the whole aspect of "releasing the Seven Deadly Sins" pretty simplistic and ludicrous. Plus, the last shot is cringe-inducingly lame and irritatingly meta. However I say "veer," because during the rare occasions that made me roll my eyes, it compensated me and immediately got back on track with enough humor, splendor, and soul to win me back.
And that's what distinguishes an adored DC film from a DC film to be admonished: soul. It doesn't matter that you got to see your pedantic, fanboy wet dream put on the big screen (i.e. Batman v. Superman). It didn't matter how many villians you got together (i.e. Suicide Squad). It didn't natter how many heroes you got together (i.e. Justice Squad). Those movies were seen as turgid tranquilizers of cinema. This movie will be viewed as having portrayed Shazam's soul and having brought soul back to DC Films.
So you see kids, in the end, the black wizard's magic lived on...through a white person.
*cues Childish Gambino*
This is America!
RATING: Three-and-a-half stars out of four
No comments:
Post a Comment