#TEAMCAP

Story by: Maggie Brown, News and Copy Editor

When going into the theater to see “Captain America: Civil War,” my expectations were extremely high. I am an enormous fan of the Marvel movies, and as someone whose favorite has always been Captain America, I was pretty sure that no matter what happened I would be on Team Cap.

Thankfully, as I witnessed the events of the movie I found that even if Steve Rogers hadn’t been my personal hero, I would have been Team Cap. The movie was excellent, and is the perfect blend of action and comedy, as all Marvel movies seem to be. The addition of characters such as Spiderman, who is portrayed by Tom Holland, and Ant Man, who is played by Paul Rudd, add so much to the already fantastic story line. The quality of almost all of the performances was beyond my expectations, and I am extremely pleased.

The story was a bit odd, but the themes were clear and the point they were attempting to make was definitely made. What makes a hero? Does killing a few to save millions warrant revoking a hero’s title? Would it even make someone a monster?

In my opinion the lives of a few are worth less than the lives of all. Sacrificing a building of people, or even a city of them, to save the world is entirely justified. Team Cap is the only way to go here.

 

Advertisements

Superman movie is superflop

Story by: Dakota Fisher, Sports Editor
From ridiculously unnecessary slow motion gunfights to hallucinogenic dream scenes, it is no wonder that “Batman Vs. Superman” suffered a 68.4% revenue loss in the box office from opening weekend.

The movie opens with the all-too-familiar death of the Mr. and Mrs. Wayne. Yes, the same one they have played in the opening of every Batman movie that has ever existed, but this time with a twist. Slow motion.

There is no denying that there are some aspects of the movie that are quite enjoyable. Jesse Eisenberg’s Lex Luthor performance, for example, was stellar. He was about the only character that was even mildly developed.

Superman, played by Henry Cavill was a fantastic character and Cavill did a marvellous job of portraying the hero. However, he was grossly underdeveloped. Throughout the movie, the hero remained the same charismatic do-gooder and his individual plot was largely focused around his love interest, Lois Lane.  Romance can sometimes make or break a movie and this instance was definitely straddling the fence. Superman’s almost constant canonization of Lois made the movie feel more like “Lois vs. The World (Ft. Some Other People)” as opposed to a superhero movie.

Batman too was remarkably underdeveloped. I found myself wanting to take a nap every time Ben Affleck’s depressing excuse for a Batman was on screen.  Not only was he stale, he was honestly pointless. I would have much rather watched Jesse Eisenberg and Henry Cavill play rock paper scissors; it would have been far more entertaining than the dry version of Batman that was shoved towards my eyes.

“The movie definitely could have been better,” said Jake Hawkins, 11, “the majority of it was honestly just boring and really didn’t make sense.”

What makes the movie all the more disheartening is Wonder Woman. Now you may be asking yourself; “Whoa! Wonder Woman was in that movie?” And the answer is yes. Remember that busty brunette with the all-too-unrealistic “battle outfit”? That was supposed to be Wonder Woman. However not once is she introduced as Wonder Woman. Throughout the entire move she remains the beautiful- yet-mysterious girl who just miraculously swoops in and saves the day. Gal Gadot’s character is simply overlooked as another set of long tan legs and is blatantly thrown into the mix for sex appeal and is regarded as nothing more than “that one hot chick.”

The movie, overall was mediocre at best. A potentially powerful story was teeming with rudimentary characters, desultory plot developments and unnecessary special effects; however Jesse Eisenberg’s performance as Luthor was arguably his best and Henry Cavill was enjoyable, for the short time he was on screen, but I definitely would have loved to have seen so much more from a franchise that had so much potential.  

“Hardcore Henry” is hardcore

Story by: Blake Slunaker, staff writer

The movie “Hardcore Henry,” released on April 8,  is an action movie thriller that uses new GoPro technology to shoot it in first-person point-of-view.

The runtime of the movie is about 95 minutes long and I was intrigued every minute of it. I would not say that I exactly enjoyed every minute, but it definitely kept my interest and was very thrilling.

I enjoyed the first-person view as it gave a fresh and interesting angle for an action movie that made me feel like they were right there doing the action.

However, the only problem with the first-person style shooting is it made the movie feel like every action video game ever made. I feel like the movie only kept my attention because of the way it was shot. The story was very cliché and uninspiring. It had the typical bad guys that Henry was able to slash through no problem and it just did not feel real to me.

The lack of dialogue in the movie made it very hard to follow as well making whatever type of story they were aiming for hard to keep up with.

“I thought it was cool and interesting to see a movie like that from a first-person point-of-view, I just wish the story was a bit easier to keep up with,” said Cameron Huff, 12.

Although the movie had its mistakes, it was still a very compelling movie. The action was definitely top notch and really was the reason it peaked my interest. Overall, I liked the direction the movie was heading towards, but I feel like it is just not all the way there yet.

I give it three out of five stars.

Allegiant fails to live up to expectations

Story by: Sydney Shurman, Reviews Editor
Photos by: Mackenzie Carpenter, Photography Editor

allegiant

Allegiant, the second-to-last installment in the film adaptation of the young adult book series Divergent, hit theaters March 18th. I was finally able to see it, and I have to say that I feel very let down.

While I cannot say the book trilogy was the best series I have ever read, I did thoroughly enjoy it. It had a nice balance of action and romance, as well as character and plot development. However, the Allegiant movie had none of these aspects.

The most glaringly obvious mistake with the movie that lead to all of its other problems was the fact that for some reason, the people in charge of making it decided to split it into two parts. This seemed incredibly unnecessary because the book did not have enough content to create two movies.

Because of this, I found that the two hours I spent watching the movie dragged on. The plot developed incredibly slowly, and I felt that the majority of it was not that exciting. Most scenes just included talking and explaining, whereas the previous movies included more action scenes. I realize that explanation is necessary to explain the plot, but if the book had been made into only one movie there would have been a much better ratio of explanation to action.

allegiant 2I also felt that the plot was completely predictable. I did not find a single plot twist in the whole movie and every time something happened, I was not surprised in the least. The characters all made decisions that I could see coming a mile away.

These predictable decisions were probably due to the fact that the characters were also very one-dimensional, which was disappointing. In the books, they were far more complex and well-developed. However, Four was barely shown throughout the entire movie, and he spoke about ten words the whole time. Also, Tris did not have nearly the emotional appeal and strength that she should have had.

“I chose not to see Allegiant, because I did see Divergent and I didn’t think it was what I thought it would be,” said Mrs. Ballard, media assistant.”I also went online and saw that it had bad reviews, so I didn’t want to pay to see in the theater.”

In addition, the plot was not even that similar to that of the books. It was loosely based at best. All of these factors came together to create a great big disappointing mess. I can see why it got such bad reviews.

“Imitation Game” is no imposter

By Tess Barnett, staff writer

In history class, we normally only learn about the events that changed the course of wars or nations. The life of those who commit these great acts and discoveries is rarely taught to students.

One such man is Alan Turing, who invented the machine that helped to win World War II for the allies. “The Imitation Game” is the story of this incredible man’s life.

My knowledge about Alan Turing before seeing the movie was slightly above average, and I was pleased to see that the writers and directors of the film had maintained a high degree of historical accuracy in portraying the work of Turing during World War II.

Alan Turing, a genius mathematician from Cambridge, was played by Benedict Cumberbatch, who also stars in the wildly popular “Sherlock” television series. In both roles, Cumberbatch is required to play a socially inept genius who solves other people’s problems for the fun of it.

The movie follows Turing’s adventures while working as head of a team in England whose job is to break the unbreakable enigma that will hopefully bring about the end of the war.

Turing is accompanied in his computer building by an oddity in the 1940s world of electronics: Joan Clarke, a woman who surpasses his puzzle-solving skills and is played by Kiera Knightley.

To me, the message of the film was the injustice that Turing faced after the end of the war. The audience witnesses his downward spiral after he is made into a criminal for being gay. Seeing a war hero ostracized for his sexual preferences revealed the naivete of ages gone by.

“The Imitation Game” is one of the best movies I have seen in my life. The actors, particularly Cumberbatch, portray their characters expertly and successfully tell the story of the amazing and brilliant Alan Turing.