Michael Bay's Transformers 4 Rumored To Feature Dinobots, Galvatron, and More

Michael Bay's Transformers saga is preparing to birth a new film which is currently known as Transformers 4. Once Dark of the Moon took place, it was over, the world was saved, the villains were dead, Optimus said manly quote, the end. But in order to give the fans a little something more, a new story book is opened, revolving around Mark Walhberg's new character, a slightly B/C grade cast, explosions, robots, and Michael's Bays favorite; exotic women. Recently rumors have spread now spread on just what alien foreigners Bay wants to include in the new Transformers installment, take a look at who these characters are below. 

The first character we are hearing is set to be included is none other than the villain Galvatron, who's basically Megatron after he is "remade" by the destroyer Unicron. Then there's Lockdow; a Decpeticon bounty hunter often displayed as a muscle car, Drift; a Decepticon turned Autobot who wants to find his place among the Autobot ranks once again. There's also of course the returning lead Autobots Bumblebee and Optimus Prime. As for the Dinobot characters, we'll Grimlock, Swoop, and the rest of the Dinobot gang who are all Autobots who transform into dinosaurs. All these rumored character can lead us to assuming  Unicron will possibly be included in the film, who's pretty much the most bad-ass character to roam the saga since Megatron and Optimus themselves.

Before the movie has even begun filming, we slowly edge our way into major questions, for example:

• Why is it that the Dinobots transform into human dinosaurs even though they are aliens from a foreign planet?
• What are the chances that Unicron would just find Megatron in the deep depths of space?
• How many Decepticons are gonna become Autobots randomly?
• Is Mark Wahlberg gonna do the Shia LaBeouf mid movie squeal? 
• Is Bumblebee ever gonna talk again?
• What other of the fan favorites is gonna be killed off in a abrupt way? (RIP Ironhide)
• How many car logos will be shown throughout the course of the movie?
• Why in the hell are the Autobots going overseas again? (China) Remember the last time we went over seas with giant alien robots.
• And most importantly, will this movie take the time to model a more gritty and respectable Transformers series?

The Transformers trilogy continuation does have potential with a follow up to Dark of the Moon. If not rushed and mashed together like a preschool child's arts and craft homework, there is a possibility of getting better for the trilogy, but the way its beginning to sound is that of the dreadful sequel we know but not love as Transformers Revenge of the Fallen. So far the stars are lining up in that manner. Both include unnecessarily old characters (Dinobots in TF4/Jetfire in Revenge of the Fallen), and are located in a foreign Country (China in TF4/Eygpt in Revenge of the Fallen). In the name of Bruce Almighty I PRAY that there is no object in specific that they are looking for again such as in the previous films. The Allspark cube, the piece of the cube, the matrix, the pillars.

Transformers 4 has Mark Wahlberg (The Fighter, Ted, Pain and Gain) as the main character Flynn Vincent, a father of the film's other lead played by Nicola Peltz (The Last Airbender), which may lead up to some both funny and more serious acting moments. One of the few good moves I like by the movie is that they are rumored to be switching up character designs and with a new Camero being released soon, it is almost automatic to think that Bumblebee will be sporting a new and improved design. As for action and events to occur, it will be interesting to see what direction the series is taken, whether it be over done and unrealistic or taken a slight bit darker.

What does Michael Bay have in store for the Transformers saga, who knows? While we have yet to get a full jist of what Bay has in store for the new installment until we see a trailer, I'm trying to conjure a Transformers Armada Fan-Cast of my own.

What would you like to see in TF4, any specific events or iconic characters? Reply Below.

Read More

Review: Star Trek Into Darkness - Warp Speed, Mr Abrams.

Four years on from JJ Abrams' action packed Star Trek that redefined the franchise and, most of all, made it cool to like it again, comes the sequel, Into Darkness. Oddly named, maybe but Abrams has claimed the title lacks a colon because that colon portrays all there is people don't like about sequels. Although that doesn't actually stop it being a sequel J.J...

To start off, one of the most important parts of the Star Trek universe is the characters, which have definitely  improved since the last installment. There's more depth to them, some characters have brilliant moments (Sulu has a nice one in the captain's chair) and their interactions and relationships have grown, especially between Kirk and Spock. Some characters seem to be shelved for room of new ones, but some seem integral to the plot and it's really great to see this, one of my favourite parts of Star Trek was seeing everyone in the crew doing something and working together in order to achieve something. Karl Urban and Simon Pegg of course play Bones and Scotty respectively, and these characters seem to be balanced perfectly, contributing both to the plot and providing some good comic relief. It gets to the stage after Bones' constant sayings and quips that he has to be told by Kirk to 'Stop it with the metaphors', it's just a nice touch.

Anyway the film starts out with a tense opener on a Class M planet, where the Enterprise attempts to save a primitive species by stopping a volcano explode, thus endangering Spock's life and Kirk has to make a decision, save Spock or go by the Prime Directive which honestly NO-ONE LISTENS TO. That thing gets broken so many times. There's a great moment slightly later on about their mission there, which gives some insight into the motives and whatnot of Kirk.

There's great action in this movie as well, with rarely a dull scene. However, this can possibly be conceived as a fault, as JJ Abrams (same with the previous Star Trek movie) seems to put scenes in this movie for the sake of action and tension, rather than it contributing to the plot, for example the snow dog chase in Star Trek '09 and the scene in this movie where Bones gets his hand stuck in a torpedo. Nice moments but utterly pointless.

That said there's no real problem with the plot, it's simple enough. The crew of the Enterprise go after a fugitive terrorist man and in doing so risk war with the Klingons (sadly, no Worf this time around). There's some twists and turns and fights and jumps and lasers and it's great. There may not be that much room for character development but in the small spaces that there are, it's some pretty good stuff.

Now the villain. To start off, Benedict Cumberbatch is fantastic. He's really menacing at times and you can actually fear him, opposed to the raging Eric Bana in '09. To say any more, it could kinda be a giant spoiler so if you don't want any parts of the plot hinted at, although nothing will be directly stated, READ ON.

SPOILERS

Personally I have no problem with what they did with his character. They didn't ruin him, Benedict Cumberbatch did a great job so that's fine. The only problem with that character was that his motives were kinda dumb in comparison, although it was a nice set-up for a later plot point. So that's okay.

That later plot point being that thing Kirk does. It's pretty obvious when you see it, and it's also pretty obvious what it's referencing to. I have no problem with that scene and the twist they did on it, it was a great way of showing these characters developments, showing Kirk as logical and Spock as emotional. There were a few added nice references to boot which made it good.

What I didn't like, and this will go over some people's heads but not many, what I didn't like was what Spock said directly after Kirk did the thing he just did. It was dumb. It took away the tension and the rich emotion, which to be fair there definitely was, in that scene. It's no surprise or development that Spock gets angry, hell he almost strangled Kirk in the last one before jettisoning him from the ship. It would have been great to see him cry or something, something we've barely seen Spock do. It' hardly a reference anyway, the original...thing was so brilliant because we didn't take it seriously, it was just pure Star Trek gold. So how are we meant to take it seriously now? I don't have a problem with the justification into why Spock did it, it just didn't work.

SPOILER HINTS OVER NOW

Anyways.

There's no doubt that this film was very well made, technically and dramatically. My favourite sequence was the one on the Klingon homeworld of Kronos, where we got brilliant and funny character development, then a sweet chase scene, then Klingons of course and then a great action scene. It was just brilliant. What's more, one of the reasons why it was so good was that it felt like Star Trek, it wasn't artificial sci-fi, it was these characters and these settings working together in a way we recognized. Which was very nice. 

The film looks and sounds amazing, with great sweeping shots of the Enterprise, the futuristic Earth environments and different worlds, plus some great sets and CGI. The score is an updated version of the '09 music, composed by Michael Giacchino. Enterprising Young Men was always a favourite of mine from the previous film's score, so this is the new version, which still sounds great:

Alas, the curse of the Abrams strikes again. The problem is, JJ Abrams (or JJ Abrams' damn writers more like) cannot do endings. Mission: Impossible III, great movie, ending was just Tom Cruise running to somewhere, which as great as it is, was kinda dull. Star Trek '09, great movie, ending fell apart a lot (why was Nero's shop destroyed in the black hole, surely it was just turn up somewhere else or was it already blown up? Also how did the blast jettison them away, it's a black hole, not even light can escape). Super 8, fantastic movie, as soon as we saw the alien it kinda lost its steam. The same applies to Into Darkness. The 'climax' doesn't feel right, like it's leading to something, we don't see most of the wrapping up of events and it's just explained in exposition, and they fail to mention the outcome of something pretty major. Oh wells. 

REFERENCE TIME. There's the more obvious ones, like characters and plot points, and there's the smaller ones, the best prompting brilliant lines such as 'Bones, what are you doing with that Tribble?'. There's also little ones which I'll leave to you to find out. My point is, J.J. succeeds in putting in these little references that make the film all that better, and they are good, they do add to the film.

All in all, Into Darkness is a lot of fun, it's thrilling, emotional and action-packed. Some things will annoy some people, but even they will enjoy it. It may not be as fresh as Star Trek '09 was, but it's definitely as entertaining. As it stands, it's definitely in my top 5 Star Trek movies, maybe only just, but it's still up there. So where next? Well, if you'll remember, The Original Series was about the Enterprise's five year mission, so maybe that's where they boldly go, or maybe we'll see more of the Klingons and their skirmishes. Point is, the possibilities are endless. 

Into Darkness may not go where no man has gone before, but it sure as hell goes there boldly.

I give Star Trek Into Darkness 3.5 stars out of 5

So what did you think of Star Trek Into Darkness? Did it live up to your expectations?

Read More

X-Men: Days of Future Past New Set Photos, Character Additions, And Rumored Cameos

I think it's safe to say there's a lot of hype surrounding Bryan Singer's (The Usual Suspects, Superman Returns) latest installment to the X-Men franchise; X-Men: Days of Future Past. Set to feature both the cast of X-Men: First Class and the returning stars from the original X-Men films, Bryan Singer has now confirmed that two new characters are being added to the mix. He also has given us our first look at many of the film's X-Men with their new costumes including Ellen Page's Shadowcat, Halle Berry's Storm, James McAvoy's Charles Xavier, and Hugh Jackman's latest look as Wolverine.

The set photos released via director Bryan Singer's Twitter give us our first look at what costumes the X-Men will be sporting this time around, as well as Wolverine's look that seems to draw some comparison to his look in the Days of Future Past comic book arc. Singer has released photos of Patrick Stewart reprising his role as Professor X, along with Shawn Ashmore who plays Ice Man wearing motion capture censors, Ellen Page suit up as Kitty Pride/Shadowcat, and Halle Berry's new look as Storm. But probably the most interesting of all the character photos Singer has put up is James McAvoy's 70s era Charles Xavier, who looks very different from the last time we saw him in X-Men First Class. Take a look below:

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Now as for the rumored cameos, we now have confirmation that Famke Janssen will be reprising her role as Jean Grey in The Wolverine as seen in the most recent trailer for the film. While Singer hasn't given word on whether Jean is set to make an appearance in Days of Future Past, but given that  director James Mangold has stated the events of The Wolverine take place directly before that of Future Past, it's not too far fetched to at least assume she'll be making a cameo.

But the latest rumor is that James Marsden; best known for his role as Scott Summers/Cyclops in the original X-Men films, was seen on a plane to Montreal with Halle Berry where it just so happens she's filming Days of Future Past. While someone just saying they saw Berry and Marsden on a plane together to where they're filming Future Past may seem like complete BS, many people may recall that a cab driver had let slip that he drove Hugh Jackman to film a scene for X-Men First Class, and that turned out to be legit. Although Marsden's Cyclops did die in Brett Ratner's X-Men: The Last Stand, it isn't totally impossible to see his return here, especially with all the alternate reality stuff going on in Days of Future Past. We've already seen that Singer's bringing back Patrick Stewart Professor X who also died in The Last Stand, so maybe Singer has a specific way in mind to explain these characters return. None the less for now the Marsden cameo is still strictly rumor, but will update if there's any confirmation of it from him or Singer.

And the last rumor circling around does in fact involve Patrick Stewart's Professor X who like Marsden's Cyclops died in X-Men: The Last Stand.  Well according to JoBlo, director James Mangold and Hugh Jackman were filming reshoots over the weekend, and one of these was set to be a scene that would connect the end of The Wolverine with Days of Future Past. The scene is described to involve Wolverine in an airport in Montreal, returning from the events of The Wolverine in Japan. Then time freezes, and an apparently now walking Professor X (Patrick Stewart) confronting him as they walk out together. While this is still strictly rumor as of yet, some sort of connection between The Wolverine and Days of Future Past would make a lot of sense, and using an alternate reality version of Professor X confronting him seems like a fitting ending scene (Or possibly end-credit scene) to connect the two.

Now along with all the new set photos, Singer has also revealed a photo confirming the inclusion of two new X-Men in Future Past; Bishop and Warpath. Lucas Bishop is the time traveling mutant who visits the X-Men from an apocalyptic future in the comics, where as Warpath is the Apache Native American younger brother of former X-Men Thunderbird who possess superhuman strength and and speed an is a founding member of the X-Force team.  It's safe to say that these are the roles that Omar Sy (Untouchables) and Boo Boo Stewart (Twilight) were casted for. While I had predicted Omar was indeed playing Bishop in our last post, with confirmation that the character will be included and with Omar as the only African American male casted in the film, it's almost a given that he'll be taking on the role. As for Boo Boo, many had thought he'd be playing Thunderbird because of his Native American decent, but it seems he'll in fact be playing Thunderbird's younger brother Warpath.

What do you think of the latest Future Past photos? Are you excited to see Warpath and Bishop join the team?

Read More

Iron Man 3 Director Shane Black Set To Helm Doc Savage Movie Adaption For Sony

Shane Black has been making waves recently after directing and co-writing Marvel's first Phase 2 film; Iron Man 3. While the director's best known for his work writing for such action films as Lethal Weapon, Last Action Hero, and The Last Boy Scout, and his directional debut Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, it seems he'll now be continuing his streak of comic book adaptions with a film adaption of classic pulp character Doc Savage for Sony.

According to Variety Black has signed on to direct the Doc Savage film for Sony which will most likely kick off a franchise, and he's also set to co-write with Anthony Bagarozzi and Chuck Mondry. While Black has stated his interest in making a Doc Savage film in the past, it seems his recent success both critically and financially with Iron Man 3 has finally pushed Sony into kicking the project into gear with Black at the helm.

With some many comic book characters getting their own films recently, it was only a matter of time before we would begin to see studios adapt pulp comic characters too. Disney and Gore Verbinski's adaption of The Lone Ranger is a already proof that big studios are looking to classic pulp characters for blockbuster films. Other studios are already attempting to do the same with the all new reboot Zorro Reborn starring Gael Garcia Bernal set to be released next year from Fox, and David Yate's upcoming Warner Bros. Tarzan film starring Alexander Skarsgard which is still facing production issues. It still remains unknown whether Savage will be modernized or will remain as a period piece in the 1930s time period that the comics were originally published in. But given Black's track record it's pretty hard to imagine a Savage film that won't be very action or comedy based coming from his writing and direction.

For those who aren't familiar with the Doc Savage character here's his brief character bio:

Doc Savage's real name was Clark Savage, Jr. He was a physician, surgeon, scientist, adventurer, inventor, explorer, researcher, and, as revealed in The Polar Treasure, a musician. A team of scientists assembled by his father deliberately trained his mind and body to near superhuman abilities almost from birth, giving him great strength and endurance, a photographic memory, a mastery of the martial arts, and vast knowledge of the sciences. Doc is also a master of disguise and an excellent imitator of voices. "He rights wrongs and punishes evildoers." Dent described the hero as a mix of Sherlock Holmes' deductive abilities, Tarzan's outstanding physical abilities, Craig Kennedy's scientific education, and Abraham Lincoln's goodness.

It's also worth noting that the Doc Savage adventure novels served as a basis for the Indiana Jones character and his adventures. Now if Shane Black's adaption turns out to be a success, it'll be interesting to see whether it opens the door for any other pulp comic characters such as The Phantom (Who already received a pretty embarrassing adaption starring Billy Zane), The Avenger, The Shadow, Spider, or even if it can help get Fox to set David Yate's Tarzan film into production. We can probably expect Black to cast a well known leading star as Savage, and I could personally see Aaron Eckhart (Battle: Los Angeles, Olympus Has Fallen) as a good fit for the part.

So what do you think of Shane Black directing the Doc Savage film? Who do you think should play Savage?

Read More

Luke Evans Officially Signs On As The New Eric Draven In The Crow Reboot

Today Alex Proyas' 1994 adaption of The Crow comic starring Brandon Lee; the late son of Bruce Lee, is considered a cult classic to both horror and comic book fans. But now, as has been happening with many of these classic favorites, The Crow is indeed getting a reboot from Spanish director F. Javier Gutiérrez (Before The Fall). While many names have come up as to who would replace Lee including Bradley Cooper (Silver Linings Playbook), James McAvoy (Trance), Alexander Skarsgard (True Blood), and most recently Tom Hiddleston (The Avengers). Now news has hit that Immortal's and Fast and the Furious 6 star Luke Evans has now signed to headline the reboot.

After weeks of rumored names being up for the gig, Deadline has now confirmed that Luke Evans, who has starred in such roles as Zeus in Tarsem Singh's Immortals and as the villain in the upcoming Fast and the Furious 6, is officially our all new Eric Draven aka The Crow.  Evans comes as the more surprising choice out of the other names brought up for the role, and his schedule isn't exactly empty as he's just signed on for to play the lead in a new Dracula origin film and is set to begins filming some time this year.

While numerous people have been linked to the part including most notably Bradley Cooper; who's likeness was even used in concept art for the film, reportedly Evans had always been the first choice for the job. Apparently he wasn't able to sign on due to scheduling conflicts, presumably with Dracula, but now it seems The Crow reboot will be delayed to give Evans the time he needs. Evans resumé may not be as impressive as that of other people brought up for the role such as Hiddleston or McAvoy, but it seems that director F. Javier Gutiérrez really had his sights set on Evans if he's willing to adjust things and delay the film.

The original Alex Proyas 1994 Crow film followed the story of guitarist Eric Draven who (Along with his girlfriend Shelly) is murdered the night before his wedding on Halloween. But a year later is brought back from the dead as The Crow to seek vengeance on the people responsible for the deaths of both him and Shelly. The film's now considered a cult classic, but is probably best known for the tragic death of it's main star Brandon Lee due to an on set accident. While many fans aren't exactly thrilled with the idea of replacing Lee as Eric and completely remaking the film, fans can at least be assured that the film will be close in plot to the original. According to Luke Evans:

"I'm Eric Draven. I'm the same character. Obviously, he's been refreshed and brought up to date. We're reimagining it to a certain extent, but the story and the plot is mostly the same"

Evans casting along with the other actors considered seems to hint at some modifications to the original character, and maybe even his trademark make-up as seen in the concept art. Heath Ledger's Joker in The Dark Knight has constantly been compared to Brandon Lee's Crow, so many fans would agree that he would've been the best fit to replace Lee. But sadly and coincidentally Ledger too died before the release of his blockbuster film like Lee. I personally have always seen Joseph Gordon-Levitt as a pretty great fit for a more Brandon Lee-esque version of The Crow, but I guess any chances of seeing that are nonexistent.

So what do you think of Luke Evans playing The Crow? Would you have preferred someone else?

Read More

Michael B. Jordan And Allison Williams Rumored To Be Joining Josh Trank's Fantastic Four Reboot

Just last month we reported that Fox (Who owns the rights to Marvel's X-Men and Fantastic Four) were beginning plans to create their own cinematic universe managed by comic book writer Mark Millar, not dissimilar to the one Marvel Studios has created themselves. This new shared universe would be made up of the Bryan Singer's popular X-Men series which includes the upcoming X-Men: Days of Future Past, as well as Josh Trank's new Fantastic Four reboot. While we haven't heard much of the reboot, today we have to casting rumors circulating which are that of Allison Williams (The Girls) as Sue Storm/Invisible Woman, and Michael B. Jordan (Chronicle) as Johnny Storm/Human Torch.

Both casting rumors support earlier theories that Josh Trank is looking for a younger adaption of the Fantastic Four characters unlike those in Tim Story's old FF series. Allison Williams has gone a long way from just being the daughter of NBC Nightly New host Brian Williams as she's recently had a starring role int the critically acclaimed TV series Girls. Williams is much younger then Jessica Alba was when she played the part of Sue Storm, but given Josh Trank's track record with younger superhero characters (See Chronicle) this could be a positive change from the usual more motherly figure type Invisible Woman of the comics.

Michael B. Jordan's casting rumors as Johnny Storm aka The Human Torch come off much less surprising as he's already worked with Trank before on Chronicle where he played a similar role, and he's recently been praised by numerous critics for his performance in the upcoming film Fruitvale Station. Jordan's Chronicle costar Dane DeHaan has already been casted in a blockbuster superhero movie as Harry Osborn in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, so it was only a matter of time before Jordan got his break as well. The casting choice though has already been met with controversy as Johnny Storm in the comics is a white blonde haired male and brother of Sue Storm, and Jordan being an African-American actor seems like an odd choice to be playing the brother of Allison Williams.

This definitely isn't the first time we've seen a characters race changed from what it originally was in the source material, such casting Samuel L. Jackson as S.H.I.E.L.D. leader Nick Fury in The Avengers, and more recently the casting of Jamie Foxx as villain Maxwell Dillon/Electro in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. I personally don't believe changing the race of the actor playing the part has a negative effect on the character's adaption as long as the person in the role fits them personality wise, and Jordan has proven time and time again that he's capable of bringing real intensity to his performances, as well as the humor and charisma needed for a character like Johnny Storm.

As many people may remember, the role of Johnny Storm was original played by Chris Evans in the Fantastic Four series, who is currently Marvel's Captain America/Steve Rogers. While Evan's cocky attitude and banter with Michael Chiklis' Ben Grimm was a major highlight of the original Tim Story FF series, it'll be very interesting to see a different variation of the character this time around through Jordan. The real question right now is if Williams and Jordan end up being casted, how will Trank explain the two being siblings of different races. Will one of them be adopted? Or maybe their parents are just a biracial couple? Only time will tell if Williams or Jordan even land the part, but it'll be very interesting to see how this plays out and just who they're eyeing to play the roles of Mr. Fantastic/Reed Richards and The Thing/Ben Grimm.

So how would you feel about Allison Williams as Invisible Woman and Michael B. Jordan as Human Torch? The Fantastic Four reboot is set to hit theaters March 6, 2015

Read More

Review: Iron Man 3 - The World Will Be Watching

It's here. One year on from one of the highest grossing movies of all time, here comes the follow-up, and the first film in Phase Two of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Yes, Avengers Assemble (or Marvel's The Avengers for the rest of the world) stunned comic book fans and average cinema-goers alike with it's humour, action and stunning visuals, and stands as one of the best comic book movies of all time. As the billions of dollars poured in wave after wave Marvel Studios was already well underway with the third film centered around everyone's favourite genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist, Tony Stark himself.

A follow up to Avengers Assemble isn't exactly the easiest thing on the planet. As mentioned above, to some it's the best superhero movie ever made. What direction should they go, the excitement and fun of Avengers or the raw self-discovery/revenge story worn thin by the previous two Iron Man movies? Neither of these would be very good, the reason Avengers Assemble worked despite the generic bad guys and thin plot was the characters were fantastic. In Iron Man 3 there's just him. It wouldn't work. Neither would the direction the other Iron Man movies went, Iron Man 2 showed that repeating it gets you nowhere. So they needed a fresh start. And fresh is exactly what they got.

To start off, Iron Man 3 is undoubtedly the funniest out of all the Marvel Cinematic Universe films. There's just joke after joke, most of which actually cause large amounts of laughter. It can be argued that in some places the jokes rob the tension from a scene or give it a different tone that the scene is meant to be giving, but on the whole it really works.

Finally after four movies have they finally perfected the character of Tony Stark. After all his womanizing and self-discovery of Iron Man followed by the egotism of Iron Man 2 then with all the self-sacrifice teamwork stuff in Avengers Assemble, it's only now we can see the full potential of Downey Jr's acting capabilities in capturing this character. He's as witty as ever, although he actually get to see anger, trauma and sadness throughout this movie, and although a variety of emotions are expected from a movie, this is above Downey Jr's natural charisma as Tony, meaning the performance benefits hugely.

After being pretty much pointless in Iron Man 2 (I mean from a character development point of view) Don Cheadle's Rhodey has won me over. The Iron Patriot is pretty cool and his character is more involved, witty and well, likable. It seems odd that one of the movies positives is likable characters that can show emotions, but then we were stripped of that in Iron Man 2, so a return to form is gladly accepted.

The suits are used I think better in this movie, with them hardly being used for large amounts of time. This way we're not bored of them the way we were in Iron Man 2 and they're not being printing out in a couple of seconds. It really makes us focus on Tony Stark, which only benefits this film. It also means that when they are used there's a certain freshness, they provide excitement and laughs, while also sometimes contributing to the depth of the characters, like Stark's resort to them in his psychological state.

Shane Black provides punchy, hilarious dialogue in the screenplay matched only by the fast-paced direction he provides as well. It really is his show, and he never misses an opportunity to demonstrate that and his capabilities. I think, like the Mission: Impossible movies, it would be good to get a different director for each Marvel movie made, it would really make each of them uniquely different.

The score matches the high standard set by Alan Silvestri's Avengers Assemble OST, with Brian Tyler doing a fantastic job, especially on the main theme (as with Avengers Assemble) It provides the epic comic book feeling of this movie along side the uplifting motivation stuff that everyone loves in soundtracks. I certainly do anyway.

The performances are great across the board, with Gwyneth Paltrow probably giving her best Pepper Potts so far, Guy Pearce (Memento, LA Confidential) performing excellently as the sinister Aldrich Killian. There's even a kid, now before you grab the pitchforks, relax, it's fine, this one can a act and b isn't annoying. And if he is, Tony's in there with a joke against him, they never take it that seriously. However, before I even address Ben Kingsley's Mandarin I'm just gonna put this here.

OK I'M SORRY I DON'T WANT TO SPOIL ANYTHING BUT PLEASE DON'T READ THE NEXT SECTION IF YOU DON'T WANT ANY HINTS OF ANY PART OF THE PLOT.

Ok, so the Mandarin. Watching the trailers I thought we were going to get a familiar, yet awesome rendition of a very powerful and sinister character. I mean, was I the only one who was eagerly awaiting the 'Youuu'll neverrr seeeee meeee coming.' or the 'Do you want an empty life or a meaningful death?' or even the 'Lesson number one.' And...that's not what we get. Ben Kingsley is still brilliant though, it's just...completely different to what we all thought. Seriously, after seeing the film look at all the videos or posts about people's speculations for the Mandarin in this movie, it's hilarious. However I think what we get is better. And funnier. You could argue the big reveal is bad or destroys the character of the Mandarin, which in a sense it does, but ignoring the comics it's a very good plot device. It also puts more attention on Guy Pearce's character, who definitely shines because of it. So, it was good. I can see why some people may not like it, and unfortunately it may detract from the viewing process if you don't like it. I mean, this movie is still good if you don't like the twist, but definitely not as good. Just accept what they've done with the film and movie on. Enjoy. 

ALRIGHT, SPOILER OVER.

I went to see this movie with a few friends, which I would definitely recommend doing if you're gonna see this. Everyone enjoyed themselves, and one of my friends, who doesn't really like comic book films, when asked his opinion gave a slow appreciative nod, later stating 'It was a nice film.' My point is, it's a very enjoyable movie, for not just fans, and one of Marvel's best yet. You could argue it's not as good as Avengers Assemble but you wouldn't be wrong if you said it is.

This movie is a lot of fun, but not just that, a lot of clever fun. You could argue that there's a lack of depth or point to the Marvel movies, and maybe you'd be right. But this movie isn't trying for depth. It's trying to be enjoyed. Something which it most definitely achieves. There's a certain editorial on this page saying that Marvel's losing their touch, that they need something big in Iron Man 3 to ensure they won't lose their thrill which was so vivid in the earlier films. Well, there's no fear of that happening, that's for damn sure.

I give Iron Man 3 4.5 stars out of 5

So what did you think of Iron Man 3? Would you say it's a great start for Marvel's Phase 2?

Read More