True, it is overstuffed, a favorite word used by most critics. Even so, things do coalesce. Bryan Singer as director and Simon Kinberg who crafted the screenplay did very well on this go around by also producing a more muscular film.
While I eventually became uninterested in the original X-Men movies, X-Men: Apocalypse now has me excited and curious to see where this franchise might go, how screenwriters will weave the storyline into recent history, and how its talented cast might reinvent and deepen their characters.
Ten years ago I took a shank to X-Men: The Last Stand, a sequel I found so disagreeable that I likened it to "studio-mandated seppuku" (which might ha...
It's the best of the bunch. In a season of crime fighter against crime fighter, super power vs. super power films, this mutant-on-mutant spectacular has the most depth, innovation, majesty and visual wonder.
I'm not really a film critic. When it comes to book to movie adaptations, though, I suddenly become the one person everyone wants (or doesn't want) to go to the theater with. That's because I will laugh, I will cry, and I will critique.
Welcome to my annual Oscars Party! This year's theme is The Fork Awakens! Let me take your Coat Winslet, you sure look like you're ready to Hateful At...
At brunch at the Vault in the St. Regis Hotel last week, writer Aaron Sorkin spoke about his script, loosely based on Walter Isaacson's biography.
Steve Jobs, which I've seen three times now, is a curious and entertaining film. Until recently seen as a top Oscar favorite, it's also proved to be a shocking box office bomb, falling away to virtually nothing just now after only its third weekend in general release.
Here we have collected the best predictions on who will replace Mr. Craig as the new 007.
I awaited few fall releases with more anticipation than Steve Jobs, the Danny Boyle directed, Aaron Sorkin penned film based on Walter Isaacson's best-selling biography. After all, as they say at Nate'n Al deli in Beverly Hills, "what's not to like" about that team?
The new biopic "Steve Jobs" is as much about Aaron Sorkin's screenplay as it is about the man behind Apple. Sorkin's "walk and talk" way of delivering cogent dialogue dominates the film from beginning to end and is the best part of the movie and the worst.
Like Aaron Sorkin's work on The Social Network before it, Steve Jobs isn't meant to serve as historical document of a man, but rather a meditation on a movement.
I understand creative license and why films need to condense, simplify, fudge, and invent to create drama, but is there a point where this can be considered excessively dishonest?
The latest attempt to peel away the layers of the enigmatic Jobs comes via Steve Jobs, a new film from a veritable varsity team of cinematic heavy-hitters: Michael Fassbender playing the title role, a script by Academy Award-winner Aaron Sorkin, and direction by Danny Boyle.
People don't talk that way, even brilliant people. And, for the most part, they're not going to shout vitriol back and forth across a conference hall while many are watching them tear each other apart.
The demands of a major motion picture and its limitations may be too conventional and narrow a box for the complex and world-changing Jobs.