DRAWMA KINGG Movie Reviews

Tag: film-critic

  • THE PHANTOM 1996 Movie Review – A superhero that Slammed Evil before Batman and Superman

    Now I know some of you are thinking – “The Phantom doesn’t count as a classic!” OK, you win that argument. Moving on… This movie is one of my top 10 personal favorites. Wait, that doesn’t sound right. It’s gotta at least be in my top 5000 superhero movies of the last 30 years though. Yeah that sounds like the right category for it!

    Unlike most SO-CALLED PEOPLE, I like The Phantom. That is not even a joke or a lie. It holds a special place in my heart from the 90’s. However, I would be lying if I said I LOVED the movie or that it was a cinematic experience worth everyone’s time. But c’mon, with a tagline like “SLAM EVIL!” how could this movie go wrong?

    The character of The Phantom predates both Superman and Batman. He is a contender for the argument – “Who is the first superhero?” along with Zorro and some other costumed crime fighters. Who better to play him than Billy Zane?! It would probably be impossible to lead a movie with this many varying tones unless you were previously a cast member on Twin Peaks. Billy, Kristy Swanson, and Catherine Zeta-Jones are definitely the highlights of the film. The beginning of the movie is pretty rocky and lackluster, but it really picks up and becomes much more entertaining once Zane, Swanson, and Jones have their first scene together. Honestly, I think these actors could’ve carried this movie to a great place if there was a better director. I feel like the director must not have been a fan of the comic, because he did not seem to have a good vision of how to present this character on screen.

    What are some of the good things in this movie? My favorite scene is when Phantom’s doggie and horsey meet up in the forest, make some noises and gestures that show they can communicate with each other (horse-dog language), then go off on a hero/buddy mission to save Phantom and Buffy. Kristy Swanson’s character kicks a lotta butt, so we were one character name away from getting a Phantom/Buffy The Vampire Slayer superhero team up movie. There was also one scene where the director actually impressed me with the clever way he put it together. The villain does something very bad to another character, but it happens off screen. The dastardly act was just implied to the audience, which kind of made it MORE terrifying than actually showing what happened. This might have just been a way to avoid the censors, but it came across as artistic and well done.

    Ending Explained: Phantom explodes the bad guy.

    Final Thoughts: The Phantom is very close to having the components it needed to work. I think it would have succeeded with these improvements:

    1 – The costume didn’t look very good and desperately needed a redesign.

    2 – The cinematography was bad. Personally, I would have liked a darker atmosphere, but it definitely needed something different than what we got.

    3 – Different director, please!

    I really like the casting choices for the main characters. Catherine Zeta-Jones character particularly had a cool enemy turned ally arc. I thought she was perfect for this role. Unfortunately, a great cast can’t usually save a movie from a bad choice of director. But hey, I’ll trade parallel universe great versions of The Phantom for the one with posters and merchandise that encourage you to “SLAM EVIL!”

    Nostalgia rating: 7/10 Crowns

    Critical rating: 4 or 5 out of 10 Crowns

  • 28 YEARS LATER 2025 Movie Review – Ending Explained

    28 Years Later really is a different beast than I was expecting. It felt like a slice of life virus movie. Compared to other 28 Later movies, there was arguably quite a lot of drama here! If you know anything about dis Drawma Kingg so far, you know I am AT LEAST a moderate fan of drama!

    The good: Oddly, my favorite part about the movie is the pacing. It seems to move just at the right pace to keep you engaged in the experiences the main character is having. The acting, in my opinion, was very good IF I am allowed to voice my opinion on whether acting is good or bad in a movie of pictures that move. The directing and the camerawork were both exceptional. For someone that feeds on the dramatic flair, these are not the usual things I praise in a movie.

    Now, let me explain. I was enjoying the film while watching it. It even won me over after a rocky start with the odd intro scene. This is my super extra nonchalant express method of segueing into the next SPOILER paragraph:

    I won’t ever be able to talk about 28 Years Later without talking about Da Sandwich! The beginning and end involve this Jimmy character that seemingly has nothing to do with the rest of the film. He is a boy that survives an attack during the intro and is NOT the boy that is the actual main character. Then at the very end, we have a complete tonal shift to the Adidas Parkour People. Jimmy from the intro is now the leader of these people that do jump flips in what looks like Adidas style comfy clothes. The final scene feels drastically out of place in an otherwise well-made drama. I have imagined a conspiracy theory where the producers told the filmmakers that the initial movie didn’t wrap around like a bow properly and then forced them to add Da Sandwich (perhaps they called it this TOO) scenes at the beginning and end. Just don’t quote me on my imagination’s machinations. Usually, I love sandwiches! Unfortunately, this time Da Sandwich was the worst part.

    Ending Explained: Father and son live, mom not so much. Intro boy now leads a team of Adidas Parkour People.

    Final thoughts: 8/10 Ish, if the first and last scenes about Jimmy were cut from the master (film masters still work that way!). 6/10 ish as the movie played to me at the theater. The slice of life angle of the film is probably what I enjoyed most about the third 28 Later movie. Overall, it wouldn’t be a bad choice for an outing at the theater with some friends and sum snaxxy snax. That is, assuming I hadn’t spoiled it for you already. Drawma Kingg out.