Patrick Wilson

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (2023): The DCEU Ends Not with a Bang, But a Whimper

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is directed by James Wan (The Conjuring, Furious 7) and stars Jason Momoa (Fast X, See), Patrick Wilson (Insidious, The Conjuring), Amber Heard (Her Smell, Drive Angry), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (The Matrix Resurrections, The Trial of the Chicago 7), Randall Park (WandaVision, Fresh Off the Boat), Dolph Lundgren (Rocky IV, The Expendables), Temuera Morrison (The Book of Boba Fett, Once Were Warriors), Martin Short (Mulaney, Only Murders in the Building), and Nicole Kidman (The Northman, Eyes Wide Shut). This film is a sequel to the 2018 film “Aquaman” where the titular character, also known by the name Arthur Curry, must balance being a father in addition to the King of Atlantis. Meanwhile, Black Manta is planning his revenge plot against the powerful superhero. With the villain’s return coming his way, it is up to Aquaman and his imprisoned brother to save the kingdom.

Of all the DCEU movies, the one that has been most likely to get a sequel based on results alone is “Aquaman.” Yes, “Wonder Woman” was a huge hit financially, critically, and has done really well with a variety of audiences, including me. But “Aquaman” is the only title in the cinematic universe to make a billion dollars, and remains the highest-grossing DC film ever. Sure, maybe the Amber Heard/Johnny Depp shenanigans in recent years, in addition to other factors, may have decreased the chances of a sequel happening, but nevertheless. In fact, I really enjoyed the film when I saw it. I will also add it was extra special to watch on the big screen as it had some of the best visuals and sound of its respective year. It was an extravaganza for the eyes and ears. The film seems to make for a proper tech demo when first using a new television or surround sound system. When it comes to my DCEU rankings, it is somewhere in the middle. I liked most of the DCEU titles. I could probably count the ones I did not like on one hand.

But I am going to be real, of all the comic book movies coming out this year, I think I was looking forward to this one the least. The marketing for most of DC’s movies this year has not been fantastic, and I admittedly liked the first trailer for this film to some degree, but I have heard more than I wanted to know about test screenings. The behind the scenes shenanigans did not boost confidence. To some degree, the film very much struck a feeling of “been there done that.” And when it comes to the higher ups at Warner Bros. and DC like David Zaslav and James Gunn, they spent significantly more time boosting promotion and awareness for “The Flash,” another problematic movie on its own. Despite that, they and others basically summarized “The Flash” as one of the best movies of its genre. Having seen the movie, it is not. It is not even the best comic book movie of the year. It is not even the best DC movie of the year. That honor so far belongs “Blue Beetle.”

According to Wikipedia, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” did not hold its official premiere until December 19th at a fan event in Los Angeles. Per Borys Kit of The Hollywood Reporter, there was no red carpet. No afterparty. And therefore, an absolute likelihood of no confidence in the film whatsoever.

But I am a trooper. I am a DC fan. I enjoy comic book movies. I am not feeling the “fatigue” some people claim to have. I think most of the comic book-based projects that came out this year were enjoyable. Yes, even “The Marvels.” Yes, even “Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania.” Not sorry. “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” has the special distinction of being the only comic book movie I have seen this year that I did not enjoy.

And I didn’t just “not enjoy” it. This is one of the most bottom of the barrel, uninspired, and inconceivably boring wastes of time I have had watching a comic book movie. This is bad.

They say it is common for sequels to be inferior to the original, but the difference in quality between 2018’s “Aquaman” and 2023’s “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is as massive as the Atlantic Ocean. I am not going to pretend the first “Aquaman” is the greatest movie ever made. But this is like going from a Nintendo Switch to a Virtual Boy. I am utterly shocked that James Wan was behind this project. I do not enjoy all of his movies. I think one of his latest films, “Malignant,” is an abhorrent waste of time. But he is one of the more prominent mainstream filmmakers working today. He has a decent reputation.

Unfortunately, when it comes to “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom,” I feel like a hypocrite judging it. Because when I first watched “Aquaman,” I praised it for being like a live action cartoon. It is sometimes out there and nonsensical, but it is done in such a way that works. You cannot go wrong with a movie where an octopus plays the drums. But when I think of the ways that “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” disappointed me, one of the first that comes to mind is that it is overly cartoony. And maybe, if I sit down and think about it, I might not be disappointed with the fact that the movie is overly cartoony and more disappointed by how it specifically handles said cartooniness. Because to some degree, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” feels like more of the same, but with less of an oomph than before. There was a certain novelty factor to that original film despite coming out at a time where comic book movies dominated the market. The film was the definition of crazy, stupid fun. Now it is just crazy and stupid.

Jason Momoa is a likable actor. I enjoyed him as “Aquaman” in his previous portrayals in “Justice League” and this film’s predecessor. I like this universe’s take on “Aquaman” because he always felt like the cool superhero you wanted to hang out with. But when I watch this movie, he feels lame in comparison. And I do not think Momoa himself is lame. If anything, he is doing the best he can with the material given to him. Most of the time, that is. There are some scenes where he and others are kind of stiff in front of the camera. But for the scenes where Momoa stands out in a more positive way, his character is nevertheless comparatively boring when looking back at his portrayal in the original film. Does his development from one film to the next make sense? Sure. But the execution of the material following said development was tiresome. Arthur Curry is a dad now and quite a bit of the material involving that made for some lower points of the film. There is a portion of the plot involving that idea that brought some intrigue, but it was not enough to make the movie good.

Also, Momoa spends a good portion of the movie alongside Patrick Wilson. I could not have been more turned off by their chemistry. I could tell the movie was trying to go for a Thor and Loki-esque brotherly dynamic between these two, but it felt more like it was trying too hard to copy what Marvel does well to the point where it feels like exactly that. An inferior copy. Their relatonship is forced, and never once was I onboard with it.

Black Manta is the antagonist of this movie. And say what you want about Dar-Benn, the antagonist of “The Marvels,” coming off as forgettable. If I were being frank, she was not the best antagonist I have ever seen, but I liked her in the context of the film. It has been awhile since I have seen the first “Aquaman” so it would be hard for me to compare how Black Manta stands from one movie to the next. But I can say as far as this sequel is considered, Black Manta is the most one-dimensional antagonist I have seen all year. There is nothing interesting about him. The limits to his character are him getting possessed and unleashing his revenge boner for the entire movie, and the way he does it is unreal. I did not know whether to cringe, laugh, or cry. Maybe I could have done all three if I really wanted to.

Let’s talk about Amber Heard… Here we go. Now, I want to go easy on the people making this movie because I do feel bad to a certain degree. For those who don’t know, this movie ended up shooting between June 2021 and January 2022. This was all before the drama of the infamous Depp v. Heard trial. We did know some things leading up to it, but the defamation trial happened between April to June 2022. If I were in a position of power, I would have kept Amber Heard out of the movie as much as I could. Maybe write her out entirely. But that is easy for me to say when I am not dealing with millions upon millions of dollars. Speaking of which, this movie almost does not even need Amber Heard’s Mera to further the story. Yes, she is a mom now. But there is not really a ton explored there. We learn more about Arthur as a dad. We see him bonding with his dad and how he handles being a dad himself. Every scene featuring Mera could honestly be deleted with no harm done the final product. And Heard honestly sounds like she does not even want to be on screen. Her performance feels paper thin, although to be fair that precisely matches the ridiculous amount of incompetence the whole movie has.

The entire script comes off like it was written by a seven year old boy playing with his action figures and maybe borrowed a couple others that his dad was trying to keep in the box just because he was running out of ideas. Except in this case, that seven year old child is somehow obsessed with politics and meetings. This movie reeks of vibes that I must imagine most viewers must have gotten upon their initial watch of some of the “Star Wars” prequels. The dialogue is as sleep-inducing as melatonin, and as horribly delivered as a pie from Pizza Hut.

And as far as the action goes, it does not save the movie. Sure, maybe one or two moments look cool, but they don’t feel cool. It is the very definition of style over substance. Except in this case, even the style is not that great. The visual style of this movie pales in comparison to its predecessor. It has been years since I have watched the first “Aquaman,” but I remember being entranced by Atlantis and how fantastical everything looked. The movie has an intense color palette, but in such a way where the colors feel incredibly artificial. I took a television production class in high school and at the time, 4K was still growing. My teacher noted in that class that if something we shoot looks bad, then we should forget about 4K. Because it would look four times as awful. There are some scenes in this movie that look okay, but a number of them strike me as overly fake. I collect 4K Blu-rays. If I were to buy this movie on 4K Blu-ray, which judging by everything I am saying so far, I clearly have no plans to, I would be almost terrified to look at it sometimes.

The first “Aquaman” cost $160 million to make. This second film cost $205 million. I am astounded to say I think the first film looks ten times better than this one. Yes, some of the special effects are great. Yes, there is a comic book-esque look to the film in certain frames. Yes, the color grading works at times. Not all the time, but at times. Although even with these compliments, the movie is bombarded with so many drawbacks that it is almost difficult to acknowledge the positives even when they may deserve to be highlighted.

This movie has a couple instances of brief, almost blink you’ll miss it slo-mo. I know movies like “The Matrix Reloaded” and “The Legend of Hercules” may be notorious for their overuse of slow motion, but “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” may nevertheless have the single worst use of slow motion I have ever seen. At least those movies, despite how bad or unneeded the slow motion may be in them, feel like they are put there because someone committed to having them there. The slow motion sequences in “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” are so cheesy, so forced, so abrupt, and so unnecessary. They took a movie that was already bad and just made it slightly worse. Just like that. It is almost like I was in an editing class at a college or film school or something where someone was given a project and didn’t care about the quality other than filling the basic checkmarks. The professor is just gonna look at it and go, “Oh, slo mo! They get a point!” Not here.

Prior to seeing “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom,” my least favorite movie in the DCEU was “Wonder Woman 1984.” The dip in quality from “Aquaman” to “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is not quite as drastic as the dip from “Wonder Woman” to “Wonder Woman 1984,” but the dip feels pretty familiar. But when it comes to these sequels, looking back at “Wonder Woman 1984,” I found it to be flawed, but it still had a genuine spark to it that felt as if Patty Jenkins was putting her heart and soul into it. I do not fully doubt that James Wan tried his best with “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom,” but as I watched the movie, I could not help but imagine what was going on in Wan’s head as this was being made. This comes off less as a passion project and more as an obligation. Every choice in “Wonder Woman 1984” feels like something Patty Jenkins intended from the getgo. Almost every other scene in “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” feels haphazardly slapped together and spruced up with duct tape just to keep everything from falling apart. Oh my gosh, even the score in “Wonder Woman 1984” was memorable. Sure, there are good themes in “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom,” but come on. It’s a second class citizen compared to “Wonder Woman 1984.” To put a long story short, given everything I mentioned so far, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” has officially dethroned “Wonder Woman 1984” as my least favorite movie in the DCEU. There was a point in this movie, in the first act by the way, that I desperately wanted to fall asleep. That is probably the most glowing compliment I can give this movie, because on the bright side, I at least know if I am tired and need something to put me right out, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” makes for a dynamite option.

In the end, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” closes out the DCEU not with a bang, but a whimper. In my mind, I really want to call “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” the most watered down movie of 2023, but that would be too easy. I could say the movie was so bad I wanted to drown. But that’s also too easy. Instead, I am going to say this. “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” has the incompetence of “Batman & Robin” and the mundaneness of 2015’s “Fantastic 4.” It is so poorly made that I imagine if Martin Scorsese saw it with his own two eyes, he would set fire to every theme park on the planet. It is so boring that I would rather watch paint dry while tied to a chair in a windowless room. It is so mind-numbing that I would rather be stuck in an elevator with no phone, no working alarm, no lights on, and no sanity left to keep myself from screaming at the ceiling! “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is what happens when you take the DNA of a bad “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie, infuse it with the DNA of a bad “Indiana Jones” movie, and blend them together with a snoozefest of an underwater fantasy adventure created by a mastermind of idiocy. This is a cannibalization of cinema in every capacity. This. Movie. Blows.

Jason Momoa’s likability and charm cannot save this movie. He was somehow more interesting this year as a “Fast and Furious” villain and I have no idea how we have come to this reality. I know playing the bad guy is fun and all, but do you guys remember my thoughts on that movie? It is just about as bad as this!

“Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is one of the worst movies of the year. It is not worth your time. It is not worth your money. It is not worth your IQ points. It really hurts to know that the absolute highlight of the film for me is the mid-credits scene. It is not only the best part of the movie, it might also be the funniest. Speaking of which, “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is a complete joke and I am going to give it a 2/10.

“Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom” is now playing theaters everywhere, unfortunately. Tickets are available now, not that I recommend you buy them.

Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Poor Things,” the brand new film from Yorgos Lanthimos. I just had a chance to see it this Friday and I will have it up very soon. Also coming soon, I will be sharing my best and worst movies of 2023! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom?” What did you think about it? Or, now that the universe has come to an end, what are your best and worst movies from the DCEU? For my favorite, I would have to say it is “The Suicide Squad,” and judging by this review, you could probably guess what my least favorite happens to be. But let me know your picks down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Moonfall (2022): A Small, Lifeless Step for All

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Moonfall” is directed by Roland Emmerich (Independence Day, Godzilla) and stars Halle Berry (Catwoman, Extant), Patrick Wilson (The Phantom of the Opera, Watchmen), John Bradley (Game of Thrones, The Brothers Grimsby), Michael Peña (Tower Heist, Ant-Man), Charlie Plummer (Looking for Alaska, Words on Bathroom Walls), Kelly Yu Wenwen (Young Pea, Lost Promise), and Donald Sutherland (The Hunger Games, The Undoing). This film is exactly as the title sounds. The moon is falling.

And it sucks. *Ends review*

Okay, okay, there’s more to it than that, but that’s the backbone here. Basically, for some established reason, the moon, which has been circling alongside the Earth for years, goes out of orbit, and decides one day, “Screw everything, I’m gonna kiss the planet goodbye!” So it is up to a few scientists to figure out how to save the earth before the moon destroys all life and civilization as we know it.

Director Roland Emmerich on the set of Columbia Pictures’ 2012. The action film will be released November 13, 2009.

They say that certain filmmakers who have been around in the industry for awhile get attached to their genres or consistencies. For Martin Scorsese, that would be mob movies. For Michael Bay, that would be explosive action movies. For Roland Emmerich, that would be disaster movies. When it comes to this genre, he is no stranger. He’s done movies such as “White House Down,” “2012,” and “Indepndence Day” along with its sequel. I have not seen every single one of these films, but I nevertheless have an expectation when it comes to Roland Emmerich. None of these films are Shakespearean, nor are they a Best Picture contender. When it comes to my expectations for “Moonfall,” I did not walk in the door asking for a whole lot. I just wanted to have fun while the moon crashes the Earth. Sure, you have your humanized storyline, but if you make the characters relatable enough, it will be worthwhile in the end.

“Moonfall” is something I’d rather witness through fiction as opposed to reality. But it does not change the fact that “Moonfall” is one of the worst science fiction films I have seen in a long time.

Although, slight digression, I think getting crushed by a moon would be a cool way to die. And after seeing this movie, I hope one falls sooner than later.

“Moonfall” is what happens when you write a script for Syfy channel original movie and somehow get in touch with someone who promises they’ll put a little more money into it. This movie has big stars, big effects, but a small plot. That is if there even is one. If you go to the Wikipedia page for “Moonfall,” there’s a whole section that is titled “Plot,” which explains everything that happens in the movie. Honestly, I think Wikipedia is being generous. When it comes to “Moonfall,” Roland Emmerich partially financed the film himself. This makes sense, given how he’s probably done well financially due to the success of some of his previous films, and the fact that the script for this movie is probably not as memorable as one or two of his previous films. I’ve seen “Independence Day.” It knew what it was, it did not take itself too seriously, and it was fun for what it was. “Moonfall” is actually so bad that I would have been okay if they killed off all the main characters. Almost none of them are interesting. Some of them are flat out annoyingly written, and whenever I watched JC Bradley’s character, I almost felt bad that he had to take on this role. There were a couple okay lines out of him, but around the halfway point of the movie, I felt like I was watching a high school play written by the robots from “The Mitchells vs. the Machines.” Forced jokes! Lazy lines! It’s cringe all the way to the moon! The screenplay is one small step for man, and one giant leap for the moon to waltz through the stars to end civilization as we know it. Both literally and figuratively.

I will admit, I’m an aspiring screenwriter, and I’m one of those people who doesn’t really have a whole concrete plan on how my scripts go from start to finish. Some of my ideas are made up as they go along, because I want to project the feeling I would have as an audience member who would want to be surprised and see something they haven’t seen before. First off, the concept of the moon falling is not new. I cannot recall it being done in a movie, but I think some of my viewers would know that it was once done in a “Legend of Zelda” game. And even though I never finished the game (which may play into my mediocre time management skills), I think that moon-falling story is better. The point is, the screenplay for “Moonfall” barely feels like it was planned. You can perhaps write a movie with little planning and have it be great, but Roland Emmerich took the film in a haywire, offish, and unexpectedly disastrous direction that left me with my jaw open and my hands over my head. There was a point during the second half of this film, where I simply stopped caring.

I could write something about the characters in this review. But in actuality I don’t feel like I can. There is not a single individual I care about enough to say they were worth watching, as much effort as some of the actors put into their performances. I wonder if any of the actors actually wanted to be in this movie for a single reason other than the paycheck.

You know a movie is bad when you try to think of anything positive to say about the characters, and not only is there almost nothing that comes to mind, but you can’t even remember their name! I don’t think it would be a surprise that I would have to go back to IMDb a couple times and look up a certain character’s name just to include them in the review. But “Moonfall” is a prime example of a movie where I’d have to do that for every character for all the wrong reasons. They’re lucky they’ve got a couple recognizable faces in this like Halle Berry and Michael Peña. If I were doing this review on video, Jeremy Jahns style, I would be in front my green screen yelling at the camera before the next jumpcut, freezing, then turning my head over to my phone to see what I’ve forgotten.

“Moonfall” proves that sometimes bigger isn’t always better. This movie has too many characters that it asks you to latch onto. The script doesn’t serve any of these characters properly. And they’re all directed like this movie was written with intentional 1990s cheese. Yes, “Independence Day” worked in the 1990s. I need “Moonfall” to work in the 2020s. I went into this movie simply wanting the moon to wreak havoc over the earth, and maybe they’ll come up something to make that concept work. Without spoiling anything, the film tries to give some reason as to why everything is happening, but that reason is arguably the biggest insult of the movie. Yes, the “characters” develop and alter, but they do so in a way that made me want to sucker punch my popcorn. This movie honestly would have been better had Roland Emmerich popped out of the screen and cut the off all the heads of everyone in my auditorium. At least in that reality, we’d probably never get to experience the space oddity, and that’s putting it lightly, that is “Moonfall.”

In the end, “Moonfall” is an insult to science fiction. The effects look okay at times, and that may be the one big plus of the film. It could work as a tech demo. There may be one or two lines in the movie that could get a laugh, but by the end of the film I was rolling my eyes way more than I was slapping my knees. It’s crazy to think that in the same weekend we get an epic sci-fi movie, which cost over $150 million, about the moon potentially destroying Earth, where people go up into space to see if they can solve the problem, “Jackass Forever” is the movie that looks like it was made for smart people. Gosh, that was so funny. Aren’t space movies supposedly taken a bit more seriously than guys destroying their balls? I’m not asking for all my space movies to be the same, but I just want them to be good. And clearly Roland Emmerich failed the assignment. I’m going to give “Moonfall” a 2/10.

“Moonfall” is now playing in theaters everywhere, tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed my review for “Moonfall,” be sure to look out for more upcoming reviews including one I’ve got for “Death on the Nile” and another one for “Uncharted.” Also, I want to apologize to everyone who follows my personal account on Instagram. I share my latest posts on the platform, but I completely forgot to do so for one of my recent film reviews, and that is “Belfast.” So for those who have not read that review yet, feel free to do so! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or a WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Moonfall?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite Roland Emmerich film? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Aquaman (2018): A Big Splash of Fun

Posted on by Jack Drees

MV5BOTk5ODg0OTU5M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDQ3MDY3NjM@._V1_SY1000_CR006741000_AL_

“Aquaman” is directed by James Wan (The Conjuring, Furious 7) and stars Jason Momoa (Game of Thrones, Conan the Barbarian), Amber Heard (The Danish Girl, 3 Days To Kill), Willem Dafoe (Spider-Man, xXx: State of the Union), Patrick Wilson (Fargo, Insidious), Dolph Lundgren (Rocky IV, Masters of the Universe), Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (The Get Down, The Greatest Showman), and Nicole Kidman (Boy Erased, Big Little Lies). This film is based on the Detective Comics property that is probably mocked more than any other. Fittingly, this movie is most likely to be seen by people who are mocked more than any other. The plot to “Aquaman” is that Arthur Curry is the heir to the throne in his underwater kingdom, Atlantis. He also must unleash his inner hero and defend the world.

The world as we know it seems to have a very complicated relationship with the Detective Comics Extended Universe, and this includes myself. I have seen all the movies in its franchise thus far. I really enjoyed “Man of Steel.” “Batman v. Superman” is not as good as I would have hoped, but it’s still watchable. “Suicide Squad” is just plain awful, even though I enjoyed it the first time around. “Wonder Woman” was spectacular, and at one point, was probably my favorite movie of 2017. “Justice League” was pretty good, in fact, I honestly think I enjoyed it more than a lot of other people did. However, there is no denying that the turnout of the movie, almost felt like a movie that went through development hell. There were some clashing tones, lackluster effects at times, and Steppenwolf was kind of a one-dimensional villain. Then again, it’s hard to blame everybody because the technical director, Zack Snyder, needed Joss Whedon to fill his shoes for post-production because he lost his daughter to suicide, but nevertheless. I personally thought while DC was not as big or as close to quality as the Marvel Cinematic Universe, they were heading in the right direction. This direction personally tends to continue with “Aquaman” because it’s just a damn good time at the movies.

Comic book movies are perhaps the biggest trend in film right now, and I don’t know when it is going to stop, or even IF it is ever going to stop. If somebody were to ask me, what the definition of “comic book movie” would be, I’d just point them straight to “Aquaman.” Now I mean that in the most generous of ways, because the reality is that I tend to be a complete nerd who enjoys comic book movies. But when I think of comic books, superheroes, and stuff like that. I tend to think of big spectacles, compelling characters who have interesting backstories, epic fights, and stories that don’t necessarily need to be completely catered to logic. This is THAT movie. Without getting into heavy spoilers, let me just tell you about some of the weird s*it that goes down in “Aquaman.”

  • An Octopus plays the drums!
  • Laser sharks!
  • Underwater gladiator fights!
  • Occasional cartoony music!
  • Jumping off an aircraft and landing into a desert with no pain whatsoever!
  • Getting inside a giant fish who apparently doesn’t eat everything in its mouth!
  • Witty banter!
  • A shark nearly breaks the glass in an aquarium!
  • And of course, a man can talk to fish.

This is not just a movie, it’s a Saturday morning cartoon in all of its glory. And in all honesty, it’s actually better than “Thor: Ragnarok,” which I’ve heard from some people is like a Saturday morning cartoon, but in my eyes, that’s not what it should have been. I would have much preferred seeing a darker version of the story, one where there is despair! But no, you gotta get kids in the theater! La-de-frikin-dah! But the thing about “Thor: Ragnarok” is while it is a superhero movie and might as well be something that kids can enjoy, it seemed much lighter compared to the previous two “Thor” movies. It feels like a change of pace that I wasn’t able to grasp onto. “Aquaman” has yet to have his own standalone film, so therefore, I didn’t really know what to expect. A lot of information prior to the to release of “Aquaman” can be interpreted in one’s own imagination. What really matters is how people like me react to the execution. And I thought the execution was pretty swell if you ask me.

Visually speaking, this is one of the best movies of the year. Someone really must have had fun with the concept art for this film, because this film feels like what happens when you create Dungeons & Dragons underwater. I wanted to know more about the lore and mythology behind Atlantis. I mean, it really doesn’t surprise me that this movie looks good. After all, I have the fighting game “Injustice: Gods Among Us” and Atlantis happens to be my favorite stage in the entire game.

Let’s talk about Arthur Curry, AKA “Aquaman.” He’s played by Jason Momoa who we’ve seen in “Justice League” as the title character but now we get a much more personal look. One thing I will say about many superheroes is that they seem to highly associate with one certain word. With “Spider-Man,” he seems to clearly define an outsider, a nerd. With “Thor,” he seems to define a powerful god. With “Aquaman,” he may be that “chosen one” cliche per se, but he also seems to come off as a regular, everyday guy. There’s a scene with him at the bar where I got this vibe that he is that character on a sitcom that a main character would want to have a beer with. Also, out of all the superheroes that I’ve seen on screen, “Aquaman” by far, possibly might be the most masculine out of all of them. He’s ripped, he’s ready to have a good time, and that haircut, while it makes this dude look like a lady, it certainly just screams “MAN!”

Also, Mera? Yeah. She’s cool. I’d just say she’s hot and leave the description at that, but that’s not the point. I will say that prior to seeing “Aquaman” I went out and bought Mera’s Funko Pop before even going out to see the film. Not only did it look cool, but based on how awesome Mera is in this movie, the Pop was well worth the money. When I saw the “Ghostbusters” remake back in 2016, I imagined personally how much better the movie would be had it included half a team with girls and half a team with boys, to show gender equality, not to mention men and women working together for the better of society. This dynamic duo does not disappoint! Mera doesn’t feel like a sidekick and instead feels like Aquaman’s equal. They go together like bread and butter!

Also, one common complaint that many comic book movies seem to be getting nowadays is the inclusion of lackluster villains. Out of the DCEU films, I gotta say that one of the villains of “Aquaman” is the best one in the DCEU thus far. Specifically, Aquaman’s brother, King Orm. And to add to all of this Saturday morning cartoon glory, in my eyes, this guy really does resemble the word dick if you ask me. He reminds me of Legolas’s father from “The Hobbit.” Also, one thing that we’ve seen in a couple of recent comic book films like “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” and “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is that the main villain has some previous relation to the main character, “Aquaman” manages to continue that trend, while not necessarily improving upon it, but not destroying it either.

I really want to talk about the action in this film. One thing I’m noticing a lot nowadays is that in certain action flicks like “Kingsman: The Secret Service,” “Atomic Blonde,” and “The Hitman’s Bodyguard,” there is a really long one-take sequence where the camera does not cut away from whatever is going on in terms of action. While this movie doesn’t have THAT, there is one notable longer than usual take action scene in the beginning of the film that completely set the tone for what’s to come. Now keep in mind, this movie was directed by James Wan, who also directed “Furious 7.” That is not my favorite “Fast & Furious” film, but in terms of action and stunts, it’s probably the best. Based on his stellar action choreography and directing in that movie, it provides an excellent transition from there to here. Going back to Saturday morning cartooniness, a lot of the fighting is not just stylistically pleasing, but it’s big and loud, it kind of sent chills down my spine at this point. And, to compare this movie to “Black Panther,” Aquaman has to duel against his brother in a gladiator style ring, all of it is epic, brings things that I usually don’t see in movies. The most notable difference is that a lot of the fighting is done underwater. Granted, it’s not like the filmmakers went into the water and created a gigantic world by hand. In fact, if they actually did that, this movie actually would have probably been worse because it wouldn’t look as fantastical as it does now. Granted, there are times where I do draw a line on a movie looking fantastical, but this to me is a believable fantastical vision.

When I got home from this movie, I was able to say that this movie in no way breaks new ground. Granted, some of the action is stellar, but I felt like I’ve seen a portion of it before. However, the movies I was able to compare this to were actually likable choices. One of the easiest picks was “Black Panther.” You have this guy who is heir to the throne, who is eventually challenged by somebody for that position. The way they get to determine whether someone is worthy is through a duel. And honestly, the way they do the duel in this movie is honestly better than “Black Panther.” It feels more like an event, whereas the duel in “Black Panther” just like a couple of friends watching you play Classic mode on “Super Smash Brothers.” It was more like an underwater version of the Planet Hulk scene in “Thor: Ragnarok.” Coincidentally, this movie reminded me of “Thor,” because you have this one slightly out of place being trying to be a better version of himself. Not to mention, like in “Thor,” Aquaman is destined to rise to the throne. I also said this film kind of reminded me of a “Lord of the Rings” movie. While this is nowhere near as compelling as say “Return of the King,” it had elements of “Lord of the Rings” intact. There is a scene where our main characters have to trek through a piece of land for some time. At times the movie feels like a road trip, one moment you’re in the Sahara, the other you’re in Italy. La-de-la-de-da. Not to mention, there are some big, massive fights in the film with tons of special effects. This is where you also get to see the laser sharks in action at times. The other film this reminds me of is “Fast & Furious,” which to me is no surprise because of the director once being attached to direct “Furious 7.” It’s big, loud, absurd, and overall just balls to the wall.

Going back to the action, I gotta point one thing about it. As I said before, the action in this movie is f*cking amazing. This is one simple comparison I have to make because I’m a complete and total nerd, and nerds have opinions. When it comes to Marvel, they know how to create a story, they know how to write something, maybe not always something compelling, but something that is structured properly and is not in danger of breaking apart. When it comes to DC, one thing I’ve noticed in all of their movies is that the action is always worth the price of admission. Granted, Marvel tends to have good action, but it doesn’t hold a candle to DC. It’s always fast paced, rumbly tumbly, and it feels like something that would be in a nerd’s fantasy world. I would like to thank “Aquaman” for keeping DC’s action-based identity alive.

In the end, “Aquaman” is not the best superhero movie of the year. In fact, it came out a week after “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse,” so it already has a tough competitor. What it really is though is the definition of what a superhero movie should be. Fun, big, and a fine form of escapism. This is certainly a crowd-pleasing movie, and honestly, I enjoyed it more than “Black Panther.” I know some people will want to kill me for saying that, but I’m just telling the honest truth. Jason Momoa’s great as Aquaman, Amber Heard is equally as wonderful as Mera. The two have great on-screen chemistry together, and I loved every minute of the movie. I’m gonna give “Aquaman” a 7/10. Before I go any further, I gotta point out something about this movie that sets it apart from a film like “Justice League.” One thing I noticed about this film is the runtime, and it is two hours and twenty-three minutes. While some people might consider that a bit long for their liking, I honestly don’t mind it, and in some ways, it’s better than “Justice League.” When it comes to “Justice League,” it comes in nearly a couple of hours even. That is a movie with more heroes and a lower runtime. It really just feels more like a corporate cash-in effort than anything else. Granted, somewhere around the two hour mark is your typical superhero movie, but some could argue that “Justice League” deserved to be more than two hours in order to make a better product. “Aquaman,” which comes in nearly two and a half hours, feels more like it is part of a vision as opposed to a corporate product. And for that, I have nothing but respect for the studio and the filmmakers. Granted there is an argument to be made that “Batman v. Superman” is too short at a two and a half hour long runtime, but I imagine there are some people arguing it is also too long. This world is divided! Also, to enhance your experience as much as possible, go see this in a theater, on the biggest screen possible, with the highest sound quality possible. Go to RPX or IMAX, you won’t be disappointed, and stay for the mid-credits scene! Thanks for reading this review! Pretty soon I’ll have a couple of reviews up for “The Mule” and “Instant Family,” as far as I know, those will be my last reviews before I put up my countdowns of my top 10 BEST and WORST movies of the year. Stay tuned for all of that, and if you like content like this, be sure to follow Scene Before either with an email or WordPress account so you can stay tuned for more great content! I want to know, did you see “Aquaman?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite superhero movie of 2018? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!