Alice in Wonderland (1951)

Directed by: Walt Disney
Adapted from the novel by: Lewis Carroll

I've always found it harder to review animated films than real-life films. Obviously there's things like performances (the only animated film with an outstanding performance I've found is Aladdin and Robin Williams' genie). But animated films offer something different. Think mental health in Inside Out, or loneliness in Wall-E. Animated films have a power that only animation has. Alice in Wonderland is so rich with deeper meanings that one could mistake it for being a psychological drama, not a children's film. Once you read into the life of the author of the original book, Lewis Carroll, you see that this film is weird. In so many ways.

So in this quasi-review, I'll look at two interesting theories that have developed from many viewings and analyses of Alice in Wonderland. The first one is from a psychoanalytical point-of-view. This film is littered with Freudian moments and symbols. To sum up Freud's work very briefly, everything is a metaphor for sex and mothers are overbearing. With that in mind, when you look for these symbols in the film, they're everywhere. To get into Wonderland, Alice follows a rabbit into a hole. That symbolism is screaming sexuality. Unlocking the tiny door to get into Wonderland is also a sexual metaphor if I've ever seen one. These may seem accidental, but Walt Disney was one weird man, so there is every possibility that he intended this. When we see the oysters, the mother oyster is very motherly and domineering. This echoes a lot of what Freud talked about in his work The Interpretation of Dreams. The old man eating the oysters is where symbolism starts to get creepy. The original author, Lewis Carroll, had a certain "affection" for photographing children nude or semi-nude. When the old man calls the oysters "dear" before he eats them, this could well be a reference to Carroll's odd interests. Again, I don't know for certain. This is just an interpretation. Tweedledee and Tweedledum are very interesting characters to analyse in this regard. They are manifestations of how, in a dream, the "cogito" or "thinking-self" that Freud talked about is absent. Instead, it is replaced with the "id" or the part of our conscience that holds all our repressed feelings of sexuality and other dark thoughts. Tweedledee and Tweedledum are without ration and take everything that is said as gospel. Therefore, they have no cogito. As the film is all technically a dream, this is a justified viewing of the film. The film also deals with Freudian ideas of adolescence. Two flowers talk about Alice's "blossoming petals". This is a reference to puberty, something Freud discussed at length when he talked about an Oedipus Complex. Alice hunts for her identity in her dreams, trying to repress the "id" and re-discover the cogito that is present in the real world. When asked who she is, she replies "I hardly know, sir". Her search for identity is also very Freudian. The domineering Queen of Hearts is also a straight depiction of the Freudian mother. This is just one way of viewing the film.

Another way is in viewing it as a psychedelic drug trip. There is also a lot of evidence in the film for that. There are many references to "Flower Power". Now this film did pre-date the counter-culture movement of the 60s where Flower Power became a thing. Still though, it's fun to imagine that hippies saw this film while blasted on LSD and decided to name their movement after it. The psychedelic colours of the passage to Wonderland are quite trippy, so to speak. Even the name of Alice's dream world, Wonderland. It sounds like the name of a new-world festival for millennials near Lake Bled in Slovenia. Alice eats these oddly-coloured foods and she grows very tall. These foods alter her state, like drugs do to us. There are many times when characters are smoking things through pipes. One character is even sitting on mushrooms smoking hashish. I mean come on, like. This film is just like a Hunter S. Thompson novel. Again, this is just another way of viewing this film. I still haven't found a meaning for the Cheshire Cat, but that big wide-ass grin is enough to freak me out for a while after watching the film.

Anyways, you can look past all this shite and enjoy the weird animals, songs and fun world as a children's film and nothing else. There's a good chance that this could just be my warped mind reading far too much into an innocent children's films. Just one final sentiment to leave you with: Freud argued that books are interpreted the same way dreams are. Nowhere is this clearer than in Alice in Wonderland. Sorry for ruining your childhood!

By Cathal McGuinness.

Up (2009)

I don't know what it is about Pixar, but every time that mute lamp hops all over those Ps and As a wave of nostalgia passes over me, like I'm being transported back into my childhood. And then I remember I'm watching Up, and that feeling doesn't let up for the next 90 or so minutes. This film may just contain the cutest and most tragic opening sequence animation has ever done. I'll get back to this montage later, however. Up is, in essence, a film about lost childhood, or perhaps lost dreams of childhood. This is par-for-the-course in Pixar films. This universality is what makes everyone love their films. It's why they receive Oscar nominations in more than just the animation category. It's why Up received nominations for Sound Mixing and Screenplay and won for Music. Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton have started a film production studio that is unrivaled in evoking emotion out of everyone, young and old.

Up tells the story of an old man, Carl Fredricksen, who decides to follow his life-long wish after the death of his wife and travel by balloon to Paradise Falls in South America. However, he ends up accidentally taking Russell, a naive "wilderness explorer", with him. On their way they meet Kevin, a ginormous bird, and Dug, an obsequiously chatty dog. Then they encounter Charles Muntz, a famous explorer who has lived near Paradise Falls for his whole career. Charles is seeking Kevin, so Carl is determined to keep Kevin safe. This is the film, and it is a gem.

There is one thing about this film that everyone always praises when they see it: the music. Michael Giacchino is the genius behind the score, creating one of the most recognisable film themes going. The majority of the score is just him using this leitmotif to represent different moods. Heavy brass indicates dramatic moments, light percussion and flutes indicate happier and lighter moments. Another excellent use of music is the use of Bizet's "Habanera" when we see Carl's daily routine. The irony of an old man's morning being accompanied by a song about gypsies in a Cabaret club is another symbol of Pixar's ingenuity. With that, I move onto the opening montage.

Everyone knows the scene. Find me someone who doesn't get emotional during the opening montage and I'll find you a liar. The use of clouds is excellent animation. The fact that there's no dialogue and this sequence still packs a huge punch is testament to the brilliance of the storytelling in this film. It really harks back to the silent-comedy era of Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton when gags came a mile a minute and it was the image and only the image that told the story and sold the humour. Those films truly contain some of the funniest moments ever filmed, and Pixar here are both paying homage to them and putting their own spin on them. The brief moments where we see that Ellie has lost her child will always resonate particularly with me. This sequence is just magnificent. I don't know what other words can do it justice. I guess that could be why it's a silent sequence: no words can truly do it justice.

The film deals with many themes, from puerile innocence ("It's like America, but South") to trying to deal with grief. I've always seen Carl's travelling with the balloons to Paradise Falls as a metaphor for Carl travelling through the afterlife towards a peaceful death, where Russell is a sort-of Charon-type figure leading the soul on its final journey. That's just me anyway. It's a kids film so I'm reading WAY too much into what is mostly good storytelling. I don't know if anyone reading this is silly enough not to have seen this film, and I'd blame your parents for not rearing you correctly but again, that's just me. See this film again, now, whether you've seen it before or not. Seriously stop reading this jargon and go watch it. It's much better than any summation I could try to give it.

By Cathal McGuinness.

Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again (2018)

Director/writer: Ol Parker

WARNING: SPOILERS! 

Picture this: you live in a parallel universe, where everything in the world is exactly the same as it is in reality, except the only people who have ever written music are the extremely talented members of ABBA. And the only people you ever meet are Colin Firth and company. If that sounds appealing to you, then by God you will love Mamma Mia 2. 

Acting as both a prequel and sequel to 2008's Mamma Mia, this film is better than the original in nearly every way. Sure, its premise may still be as ridiculous as it was first time around and there's not as much of the original's beloved cast, but this film is a massive hit from start to finish.

Normally, one would save the film's greatest strength as the last to write about, but I just cannot wait to write about how fantastic Lily James is. Already having proven her ability in last year's Baby Driver and Darkest Hour, this is James' true breakout performance. She is utterly convincing as a young Donna Sheridan and her likability elevates the film immeasurably. James is by some stretch the strongest vocalist in the main cast and does an impressive job of replicating Meryl Streep's Donna from Mamma Mia 1. Seriously, this film is worth seeing for James alone.

Writer Ol Parker also made some very wise choices with the music for this film. The favourites from the first film are still here (Mamma Mia, Dancing Queen, et al), but some of the new additions are inspired. Angel Eyes is used particularly well, once again bringing the best out of the superb Christine Baranski and Julie Walters, while James and Hugh Skinner bring Waterloo brilliantly to life.

The film's editing and direction are inventive and the performances of the young cast are vivid and enjoyable. Perhaps the film's biggest weakness is its under-usage of the stars of the first film. Colin Firth and Stellan Skarsgard aren't seen until an hour into the film and when they do appear, they take a back seat. Walters, Baranski and Amanda Seyfried are the only original cast members who get anywhere near the screen time they had in the first film.

That being said, the prolonged absence of Meryl Streep is vindicated by that tearjerker of a penultimate song. An incredibly emotional rendition of My Love, My Life is the perfect way to use Streep, given the plot. For such a lighthearted and fun film, this scene packs a real emotional punch.

It must also be said that Amanda Seyfried has improved noticeably since the first film. Both as an actress and a vocalist, Seyfried has matured fantastically and the improvements are even noticeable from her turn as Cosette in Les Misérables. This improvement may be down to the fact her character is given a lot more of meaning to do in this film than the original, but nonetheless she does a very impressive job with what she is given.

Oh, and Cher is in this movie too. Her scenes are fun, particularly her duet with Andy Garcia on Fernando, but it says a lot about the quality of the rest of the film that it would not feel any lesser without her.

In summary, the music is great, the stars are great and Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again is a fantastically fun watch. Dragged down only by the sparing use of Firth, Skarsgaard and Dominic Cooper, it hits all of the right notes. Unlike Pierce Brosnan.

Eoin Harrington

The Silence of the Lambs (1990)

Director: Jonathan Demme
Writer: Ted Tally, adapted from the novel by Thomas Harris

This film is something alright. Before watching it, I was apprehensive. I'm not a fan of horror films at all. However, I soon discovered that isn't your usual jump-scare horror film. What's horrifying about this film is that this happens. There are serial killers out there who skin their victims. It gets scarier when you learn that the serial killer here Buffalo Bill is a composite of three infamous American serial killers. As exhilarating as it is harrowing, this film is a slasher film in which the woman is the hero not the victim, the pursuer not the pursued. It says something about our fetishistic obsession with serial killers that this film has been ranked by over a million IMDB users. This fetish is still there in society today.

The film opens with Clarice Starling (a superb Jodie Foster) training to receive her FBI badge. She is put on a case by her boss Jack Crawford (a stern but rounded Scott Glenn): find out who this serial killer Buffalo Bill (a creepy-as-hell Ted Levine) really is. To do so, her boss suggests she consult incarcerated serial killer Dr. Hannibal Lecter (Anthony Hopkins, we'll come to him later). From here, Clarice probes Lecter's mind and he probes hers as she seeks information. Then we meet Bill while Lecter goes off to do his own thing (I won't spoil it because it's just too genius for spoiling). The plotting of this film is unique and masterful, teasing out little nuggets of information like a proper investigation. For a film as thrilling as this one, it is also remarkably faithful to procedure. It's unique nature also comes from the fact that our main villain, Bill, isn't introduced to us visually for roughly an hour. The whole time we're engulfed by Clarice and Lecter. Ted Tally the screenwriter and Thomas Harris the original novelist must receive credit for this.

This film is a masterpiece in tension. Its direction from Jonathan Demme is superb, leading the actors into this story and getting them to deliver with such gusto that you'd be forgiven for thinking this were a documentary. The cinematography, the editing, the music, all the nitty-gritty bits of film-making are excellently displayed here. A perfect example of this is the scene towards the end where Clarice is in Bill's house in utter darkness and he puts on night-vision goggles. He reaches out to touch her and she has no idea. This scene is gripping, masterful and I'm running out of adjectives to describe its effect on my heart rate. Truly brilliant. Now for Anthony Hopkins.

In the last review on this page, I argued that Heath Ledger's incarnation of "The Joker" from The Dark Knight was the greatest villain in cinematic history. Here, however, he has a rival. Sort of. You see, I'm torn whether or not to call Lecter a villain. On the one hand yes there's the whole cannibalism thing in his past and his actions in the scene in Memphis are nothing short of disgusting (watch the film to get this reference). However, on the other hand he leads Clarice straight to the killer, giving her vital information and helping the hero, or heroine here, catch the villain. Surely a villain is someone who only does bad, who, in the vain of The Joker, wishes to create chaos for chaos' sake. I found it ironic that in the scene in the bedroom of the first victim, music from The Magic Flute is playing. That's an opera by Mozart where an evil queen tricks a young prince into fighting a rival king, only to find out that the rival king is the virtuous one and the evil queen is, well, evil. It's this level of detail and symbolism that elevates the film. We're never certain who the villain is. Is there more than one? Are we all villains? By posing these questions, this film makes a statement greater than any horror film.

His stare, similar to Ledger's Joker from The Dark Knight, plants itself deep within our soul and spooks us to our core.

Lecter here doesn't blink which is incredibly creepy. He stares malignantly at Clarice and at the camera, at us. He even invites Clarice to look at herself, egging her on to be introspective, as if the clues to the identity of Bill lie within her. This raises a question of morality and the goodness within us. Do we all have a hidden side to us that has evil thoughts lurking, and only some people put these thoughts into practice? Anthony Hopkins called Lecter a "compassionate man, trapped inside an insane mind". I agree completely with this. His all-white costume when he's transferred to Memphis is just inherently spooky and leaves everyone feeling just a teeny bit uncomfortable. Lecter is the most likable cannibal there is, but also incredibly creepy too. I never thought I'd be saying that.

Horror films are usually cheap. They rely on jump-scares and dark setting and mysterious characters to spook us. This film doesn't do that. It scares us because it's true, because it's human. It is like The Shining (1980) in this respect. It doesn't rely on boring clichéd tricks to make us feel scared. That's why people should watch this film instead of awful zombie flicks or stupid vampire films. I don't even like horror films and I liked this. 9/10 for me.

By Cathal McGuinness.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Director: Christopher Nolan
Writer: Christopher Nolan and Jonathan Nolan and David S. Goyer.

Sometimes, a film comes along and it leaves us speechless. For me, there's been a few. There Will Be Blood, Drive and The Social Network to name some. The Dark Knight will always be on this list for me. I was lucky enough to catch it in 35mm in cinemas recently for its 10th anniversary. This was only the second time I'd ever seen a film and not taken a breath during (the other is Dunkirk, another Nolan masterpiece). From the opening bank robbery to the final confrontation, my heart beat rose and rose and rose. With the ending came a sort of euphoria. I could breathe. My heart could relax. I was free from this film. But like anything truly good, I wanted more. I needed more. This film is like a drug, or perhaps great sex. During the "high", I felt like I was on another planet. It was an out-of-body experience. Some people get their kicks by doing drugs, but not me. I'll take a good film instead. This films is the perfect drug.

The film opens with a bank robbery and the introduction to The Joker (Heath Ledger, we'll come to him), definitely the greatest cinematic villain of the 21st century and maybe of all cinema. From there we switch between Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale, excellent) and Alfred (Michael Caine, brilliant), Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes (Aaron Eckhart and Maggie Gyllenhaal respectively, both stunning), Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman, far too under-rated) and The Joker. Nolan and his story writer Goyer create, above all else, a humanist superhero story with viable threats and realistic outcomes. The Joker is a terrorist, an anarchist, someone who wishes solely to bring chaos to the world. Batman, our "hero", tries to stop him while also remaining within his moral code (thou shalt not kill). This creates a moral dilemma for Batman, and what occurs is a journey for him, mostly introspective, where he tries to figure out who is a villain and who is a circumstantial hero (the answer = everyone's a villain, except Rachel maybe). The plot grounds itself in reality, and by doing so, it elevates this film above the usual explosion porn seen in superhero films (see any other DC film).

Everything Christopher Nolan touches seemingly turns to gold. A psychological thriller (Memento)? Check. A thriller about magicians (The Prestige)? Check. Sci-fi (Interstellar)? Check. War (Dunkirk)? Check. Whatever the hell Inception is? Check. Include in that a superhero trilogy. However, to downgrade it simply to a superhero trilogy is to diminish its best quality. Its questions about humanity, morality and vigilantism are poignant, thought-provoking and strikingly relevant. It shows us the triumph of humanity over a supposedly unconquerable evil, the ferry scene showing that there is some good in us after all. Nolan makes a film with a lot of death, but we see very little of it. That creates a brooding atmosphere, one that shows death is around the corner, but it shall strike before we turn. Everything in this film oozes auteur. They don't come around very often. But Nolan is a gem who should be mined for every quality he possesses before we're left thinking what might have been.

The music is something I had never appreciated in this film. I've seen it upwards of 10 times at this stage. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard build tension with striking percussion and heavy brass interludes. It pushes us further to the edge of our seats, which is what strong music should do in a film like this. The script is sensational. Every line of dialogue out of Alfred's mouth is the perfect line. The same goes for The Joker. Kudos to the writers for achieving that.The cinematography, the editing, the VFX, the sound work. Everything in this film is exceptional. This is the kind of film we get where everyone involved is working at the top of their game.

His maniacal stare grips us from first minute to last

Now for Heath Ledger. His performance is usually listed on "best ever" lists, often alongside Marlon Brando for The Godfather and Daniel Day-Lewis for There Will Be Blood. Look. More has been said about his performance that's far better than anything I could write. It's been analysed down to his lip-licking and grunting and all of it. Yes, Nolan wrote an exceptional, meaty character for him to develop, but by God he took The Joker off the page and made him into the single most memorable villain of recent history in all art, literature included. His malevolent eyes, moist lips, sinister costume and creepy laugh has stuck with me ever since I was a 10 year old cowering behind a cushion when he came on the news programme in this film. Art is about transporting us to another level, letting the common person see something they would not normally see, letting us feel something we would not normally feel. By this definition, Ledger is a true artist, transcending the traditional villain who has a motive. His character creates chaos because he wants to. He doesn't want Batman to die because, as he says, Batman completes him. Without Batman, The Joker has no game to play and no one to play with. All he wants is to wreak havoc, to have "a better class of criminal" in Gotham. The perfect antidote to Batman. And Ledger is the perfect possessor of this ampoule of the antidote.

There is no thing that is truly perfect. Perfection and universality don't exist. Someone out there was underwhelmed by The Mona Lisa. Someone detested Citizen Kane. Someone couldn't stand Ulysses. Someone turned Eine Kleine Nachtmusik off after 30 seconds. We will never find a film, or work of art for that matter, that is perfect, that is universal, that transcends us and whoever will come after us. But put a gun to my head and I say The Dark Knight is a worthy nominee for this accolade. 10/10 doesn't do this film justice. Nothing does.

By Cathal McGuinness.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe | All 18 Movies Ranked

By Eoin Harrington

Perhaps one the most ambitious films ever made, Avengers: Infinity War is finally hitting Irish cinemas tomorrow. 10 years and 18 films worth of set up have all been leading to this first part of an epic finale to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. In anticipation of the release of the latest Avengers movie, I thought it would be fun to rank every movie released in the MCU so far. And yes, that does include The Incredible Hulk. There's 18 movies to get through so let's get down to business! Warning: this article may contain mild spoilers for the films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

18. Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Hemsworth is one of the few bright sports in Thor's second outing

Without question the weakest installment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Thor 2 just doesn't really have too much going for it. Natalie Portman's character, somewhat interesting in Thor is resigned to becoming a plot device, while the plot seems to cheat with get out of jail cards throughout. Too dark and too dreary...and nothing really happens!

17. Iron Man 2 (2010)

It says a lot that the best part of this movie is Sam Rockwell dancing

This is another fairly self explanatory one. This movie is just downright confusing. Who is the true villain? What's the main plot? Should this movie simply be called SHIELD: The Set Up? I'm a huge fan of Sam Rockwell, but even his fun performance can't elevate this mess of a film. Don Cheadle at least is a welcome addition.

16. The Incredible Hulk (2008)

This is actually just a photo of Ed Norton on set

Ed Norton is great. The Hulk is great. Ed Norton's Hulk movie? Not so great. Norton himself does his best and there are some memorable scenes, but the movie struggles to give any real depth to its characters and the story isn't well developed. Considering its near complete irrelevance to the rest of the MCU as well, its hard to find a lot of positives.

15. Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

Yeah, this is awesome

Before any of you start screaming: yes, the scene where Vision picks up Thor's hammer is one of the most amazing in the whole of the MCU. And James Spader is superb. But this movie is just so...bleh. There's a lot going on and it doesn't help that a lot of it doesn't really make sense. After the first Avengers was such a hit, this felt like a bit of a dud.

14. Thor (2011)

Two of the MCU's brightest stars

Ah, that Shakespearian Marvel movie. If The Dark World had been a bit more like its predecessor, it might have been a bit more enjoyable. This movie is deeply flawed but Chris Hemsworth gives a breakout performance and the concept of a Norse god stranded in an American desert town is pure gold. A lot of fun. Also Loki.

13. Iron Man (2008)

Iron Man was the movie that started it all for the MCU

Okay, so a lot of people are going to disagree with me on this one. The first Iron Man is great and it is the one that started it all. It just says a lot about the quality of the movies that came after that this is so far down the list. A really fun time all round but not quite on the level of the movies that followed.

12. Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

"I've knocked out Adolf Hitler over 200 times"

Look, I know this will be my most unpopular decision. Putting the first Captain America ahead of Iron Man is basically sacrilege. But I'm a sucker for a good Cap movie and the World War II setting works so well. The reason this is the highest ranking of the solo Phase One movies is that it by far does the best job of setting up its central character - Cap is fully fleshed out going into the Avengers, both literally and metaphorically. I just like Captain America, alright?!

11. Ant-Man (2015)

Yep. This is my favourite supehero fight scene for the presence of Thomas alone.

How fun is this movie?! Sure, it may not hugely impact on the rest of the MCU, but it's just so much fun! Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas have fantastic chemistry, but Michael Pena steals the show. Perhaps the only regret I have is that Edgar Wright never got to finish his Ant-Man. How awesome would that have been?! 

10. Iron Man Three (2013)

Everything is not what it seems.

Yep. The third Iron Man is my favourite. This is by far the best human drama in the MCU and Shane Black's fantastic wit shines through. A superhero movie set at Christmas - who knew it was such a great idea? And I don't care what anyone says, that Mandarin twist is one of the most brilliant plot twists in recent film history. 

9. Captain America: Civil War (2016)

"Hey, guys"

I have always stood by my opinion that this film is a mess. The directors struggle to keep up with the sprawling story and there are far too many free passes given to characters. Has anything really changed by the end of the movie? But, in all fairness, the closing fight scenes between Bucky, Cap and Iron Man are among the all time great superhero fights and the introduction of T'Challa as Black Panther brings chills. Also, SPIDEY, YAY!

8. Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

"We are Groot"

Do I need to explain what makes this movie good? If it's not Chris Pratt's breakout virtuoso performance, or the decorated actors making brief appearances (Glenn Close, John C Reilly, among others), or the laugh-out-loud humour, or the break from MCU tradition, then SURELY it's the soundtrack. I dare you to watch this movie and not sing along with at least half of the songs. What a bunch of fun this movie is.

7. Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

The Revengers

The first out and out indie film in the MCU and also the first out and out comedy film, Thor: Ragnarok breaks the mold of its Thor predecessors and soars to newfound heights. Without question the funniest movie in the MCU, it also contains some of the best performances, with Jeff Goldblum and Hemsworth being the standouts. Sure, the plot literally makes no sense but the comedy is the best in any superhero movie and it elevates the film to these lofty heights.

6. Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2 (2017)

Get me Mr Blue Sky playing and get me it now!

This has all the stuff that made the first Guardians so fun: brilliant humour, brilliant performances, brilliant cast, brilliant special effects and fight scenes. It not only adds Baby Groot to the equation, but it also has a heart. The story is emotive and genuinely touching at points and, somehow, James Gunn gets us all emotional about a talking raccoon. Also, the soundtrack is somehow even better than Vol. 1. 

5. Doctor Strange (2016)

"I've come to bargain"

Similarly to Ragnarok, Doctor Strange is one of the most inventive films in the MCU. The first MCU film to buy completely into magic, the special effects are among the best ever seen on film and even elevate the plot to new heights. As a lover of all things Cumberbatch, I may be biased, but this movie is one of the least flawed in the MCU and the closing "bargain" scene is just fantastic.

4. Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

Yeah...definitely not ripped off from that other great Spider-Man movie...

Y'know how Spidey was, along with Black Panther, the best part of Civil War? Well, he was somehow even better in his solo movie. Sure, the story strays from our image of a friendly, neighbourhood Spider-Man, but Tom Holland is surely already the greatest film Spider-Man. Michael Keaton also delivers the strongest villain in the MCU and Robert Downey Jr gives a surprisingly measured performance. Dragged down only by its late fall to superhero movie clichés, this movie re-imagines what makes a good Spider-Man movie; and succeeds in spectacular fashion.

3. Avengers Assemble (2012)

The money shot!

There's a point, ten minutes into Avengers Assemble, where Samuel L Jackson is asked, "what do we do now?" and you know exactly what's coming. Though some may have passed it out since in terms of outright quality, Avengers remains the model of how to make a fun superhero movie in the 21st century. Mark Ruffalo's introduction, taking over as the Hulk, is the highlight of one of the most fun movies ever released.

2. Black Panther (2018)

Wakanda is one of the most rich settings for any superhero movie

Y'know how Black Panther was, along with Spidey, the best part of Civil War? Well, he was somehow even better in his solo movie. This movie is just breathtaking. The cast, the soundtrack and the screenplay are all top notch, but my god the cinematography is just sensational. The most lush and rich film cinematographically in the whole MCU, Black Panther is simply gorgeous to look at. There also has not been a better match up so far than Chadwick Boseman vs Michael B Jordan. They don't get much better than this one.

1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Perhaps not quite the reunion with Bucky that Cap was expecting

If you're looking for the film that best combines world building, fun, action, invention, a great cast, superb performances, thrilling effects and a gripping story, then there is no other contender here. Winter Soldier is, without question, Cap's strongest outing, while Bucky's return and Falcon's introduction are highlights of the Universe as a whole. It says a lot about Robert Redford's all-time great acting ability that, even as part of such an all-star cast and even in such a bitty role, he acts everyone else off the screen with one of the best performances in the MCU. This film just has it all and proves that the way to make a good superhero movie is to make a genre movie within a superhero movie.

So, do you agree with my choices? Make sure to like us on Facebook (/TheFilmFormula), follow us on Twitter (@FilmFormula) or comment below and let us know your thoughts!

Logan (2017)

Watching this film, I was struck by one glaring thing: this is NOT a superhero film. Just like Wonder Woman is a war film, Logan is western, in the vain of Sergio Leone, that includes superheroes. However, there's none of the saving-the-world-from-an-impossible-scenario bullshit about this film (see Suicide Squad for that). No Michael bay explosion porn to be found here.This film takes a realistic goal in a realistic setting and amplifies it. In the near future, mutants and their like are outlawed, with only Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) and Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) seemingly being alive. Along with Caliban (Stephen Merchant), they live in solitude. One day, however, their quiet refuge is interrupted by the arrival of two mutants: Laura (Dafne Keen) and Pierce (Boyd Holbrook), the villain. Wolverine, Professor X and Laura initially escape the threat posed by Pierce and his band of me. After this the threat becomes imposing, and the film focuses on the characters. This is where the film flourishes. Credit must go to James Mangold for his story, giving the film a depth of realism that is void in nearly every superhero film before this one. For fear of spoilers, I won't divulge any further plot points. I will say that you should see this film as soon as possible.

This film helped me breath a sigh of relief, for I thought that all superhero films produced for the rest of eternity would take the VFX and abuse it until my eyes are incapable of seeing a regular image again. Thankfully, this was different. Some of you may say "why is different so good"? Here's why. How sick were people of the VFX abuse in Suicide Squad that the film was reviled upon release? Doctor Strange came next, and while that is certainly a lot better than Suicide Squad, it too indulges in the VFX. This film was the next superhero film released, and it couldn't have been more different. This is original. There are films few and far between about which you can say that. I don't want to say that it takes a fresh approach to the superhero genre, because I don't want to pigeonhole it. Instead, I will say that it takes a fresh approach to the western genre. The last wide-release western before this was The Hateful Eight, a 3 hour stageplay amplified by Tarantino in his usual manner. Before that, there was Django Unchained, an expletive-filled revenge story stylised by Tarantino. So you can see just how different Logan is. It paints Wolverine as an alcoholic, Professor X as a loony conspiracy theorist and Laura as a mysterious experiment. Rarely has a western or a superhero film involved all three of those. Hence difference. An R-rated superhero film is also a rarity, and we have Deadpool to thank for their very existence. Superhero films can be one of two things: either cartoonish and playful or somber and overly dark. While this straddles the line of dark, it doesn't cross it the way most DCEU films have. This is because it creates realism, realism I have only seen before in The Dark Knight, the crown jewel of superhero films. It's about a man afraid to let go of his past, or even his whole life. It doesn't have a direct love interest, which I have never seen in a superhero film. It has a host of lovable characters who are not your usual sidekicks. This film is just different. Good different.

Superhero films tend to do well at the box office but lack the critical acclaim. Here lies the exception. Hugh Jackman's swan song as Wolverine is his best by far. He shows pain, anger and suffering rarely seen in the genre. In the trailer, the song "Hurt" by Johnny Cash played. It's as if the song was written specifically for this film. The same praise must go to Patrick Stewart in his final outing as Professor X. He plays an old man trying to save the last strains of his whole life as a mutant before they die out. If the whole film had been just him, I would have still seen it and probably loved it. Dafne Keen as Laura is exceptional. In a role that has next-to-no dialogue, she owns it, stealing scenes from both Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart. The rest of the ensemble do very well too. Now for James Mangold. I didn't know he had this in him. He's made good films before, don't get me wrong, but this, this is a whole new level. His direction is key but I'll focus on his screenwriting. He's not as well-known as a screenwriter, but hopefully that will change after this film. His story is exceptional and his script, along with Scott Frank and Michael Green, revels in the dialogue it uses and excels in the moments where there is no dialogue. The Oscar nomination is just reward for this outstanding piece of writing.

Everything else about this film is brilliant too. The music is exceptional. The cinematography is equally breathtaking and harsh. When I say harsh, I mean realistic or unflinching. Everything else excels. I've never enjoyed a Wolverine film as much as I enjoyed this one, nor will I ever enjoy one as much. See it, regardless of your taste on either superhero or western films. 9 out of 10 for me.

By Cathal McGuinness