Movie Review: “Aquaman” finds DC and WB taking a small step in the right direction

Movie Review: “Aquaman” (PG-13)

Born of both the land and sea, “Aquaman” is a somewhat polarizing superhero property thanks in part to the depiction of the character in those old-school “Superfriends” cartoons and at the hands of constant ribbing in HBO’s “Entourage.” Of course, the powers that be were probably wise to cast bigger-than-life alpha male Jason Momoa in the role, because at the very least, his over-the-top, charismatic, and altogether loose take on the character keep this movie from drowning in a sea of self importance.  “Aquaman” has no interest in being serious, but at the same time, it has more upstairs than Marvel’s equally goofy but inferior misfire, “Venom.”

As “Aquaman” opens, we learn of this hero’s origin as his alter ego Arthur Curry is born of a forbidden love between woman of the sea Atlanna (Nicole Kidmam) and man of the Earth Tom Curry (Temuera Morrison). As Arthur grows into adulthood, he is essentially stuck between two worlds but opts to live the majority of his life as a mainlander. Of course, he gains a little notoriety thanks to his part in a handful of seabound heroics as well as having had a hand in helping save the world in a very subpar “Justice League” movie.

When contention arises between him and his estranged Atlantis-dwelling brother, King Orm (Patrick Wilson), a reluctant Arthur joins forces with water-warrior Mera (Amber Heard) in an undersea adventure that will find him fighting for both mankind and a crown that he isn’t altogether interested in wearing.

“Aquaman” was directed by James Wan, and you have to give the lively “Conjuring” director this: He’s got energy to spare! “Aquaman” is a massive, campy, comic-booky epic that refuses to take itself too seriously. It has a flavor more akin to the ’80s take on “Flash Gordon” than it does something like the more serious masterwork that is “The Dark Knight.” It also has a few elements that are reminiscent of “Tron: Legacy” and George Lucas’ “Star Wars” prequels. Not that any of this is necessarily meant to be taken as a negative. The dopey theatrics and offbeat nature of “Aquaman” actually complement the colorful world Wan has created here. Furthermore, you’ll see every cent of the budget right there on the screen, particularly if you go to see this film in the IMAX format.

But for all its visual bravado (some of the effects are good and some not so good) and skillfully executed set pieces (none more exciting than a high-octane rooftop chase), there are times when the cheesy dialogue and Momoa’s alpha male surfer-dude demeanor do wear thin. Furthermore, despite her beauty and sense of humor, Amber Heard is a bit of a blank, and the fact that her warrior and Momoa’s reluctant hero fail to generate chemistry doesn’t help matters. Even a silly European courtship sequence fails at attempting to showcase sparks that aren’t really there.

From a story standpoint, “Aquaman” throws in everything but the kitchen sink. Again, this movie is loose and fun, but there are things that simply don’t work, high among them an undercooked subplot involving Black Manta sporting a costume resembling that creepy robot in “Rocky IV,” which is ironic given that “Aquaman” also co-stars Ivan Drago himself. To call this plot thread secondary would be a gross understatement. Clearly, this character has been groomed to have a more pivotal role in future “Aquaman” adventures, but he’s virtually wasted in this picture. The primary conflict here is the Shakespearean contention between estranged brothers — and truth be told, that was a wise choice.

Also lacking in “Aquaman” is any sort of real drama with the notable exception of Nicole Kidman, who brings a level of class and emotional weight that the rest of the movie isn’t really interested in. Kidman has a couple of moments with both Morrison and Momoa that bristle with a surprising amount of heart.

Beyond Momoa, Heard, Wilson, Morrison, and Kidman, “Aquaman” is peppered with a supporting cast that includes mentor Willem Dafoe, king Dolph Lundgren, and villainous Yahya Abdul-Mateen II.

From a technical standpoint, there’s plenty of production value to speak of in “Aquaman” including wonderfully colorful costume design and a barrage of eye-popping effects that are best when used to showcase the kind of spectacular underwater landscapes that would make the makers of “Finding Nemo” and “The Abyss” proud. So with all the money spent on this picture, it’s incredibly disappointing that very little was spent to make characters sound cool when they’re talking underwater. Instead, everyone sounds like they were ADR’d in someone’s garage. Likewise, the score by Rupert Gregson-Williams (clearly no relation to John) is a crushing disappointment, failing to give “Aquaman” a properly rousing theme.

“Aquaman” is mixed bag, overall. Yes, it’s stronger than “Batman v Superman,” “Justice League,” and “Suicide Squad,” but even with it’s numerous flaws, “Wonder Woman” emerges as a stronger film. Yes, “Aquaman” has a much welcome (and goofy) sense of humor. Yes, it’s batshit insane. And yes, it moves at a brisk pace. But the fact remains that there isn’t a performance in this picture that measures up to Gal Gadot’s, and there isn’t a single sequence here that’s as rousing as Wonder Woman’s charge on the World War II battlefield. Still, you could do much worse than the bombastic underwater spectacle that is “Aquaman.” There’s little doubt that DC and Warner Brothers have taken a step in the right direction with this silly, over-the-top comic book come to life.

Articles related to “Movie Review: ‘Aquaman’ finds DC and WB taking a small step in the right direction”

Movie Review: “Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse” is beyond 2018’s best animated film

Movie Review: “Overlord” is a bonkers but entertaining fusion of “Re-Animator” and “Saving Private Ryan”

Movie Review: “Ralph Breaks the Internet” is a zany cyber adventure with humor and heart