The film has two plots that, while they’re shown separated for much of the story, they end up coming together. The first relates to how the Winter Soldier was created, while the second and the most important theory, refers to the attempt of over a hundred countries around the world to control the interventions of The Avengers (the straw that broke the camel's back is one intervention of several in which, again, civilians were affected). Here we find one of the commonalities that "Captain America: Civil War" has with "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice". Luckily, the title of Marvel is better developed than that of DC Entertainment.

This is something that is noticeable both in the content, where are discussed interesting issues about ideas in order to decide whether to put safety or freedom first take place, as well as the presentation of the characters are introduced. Regarding the former, a more daring execution is missing by the writers, but in the end, neither is supposedly brainy to develop a film that ultimately ends becoming too pompous (did someone mention Zack Snyder?).

As for the latter, there are many characters in the film, but, fortunately, at the same time, there is a careful balance at the moment of displaying them on the screen. Spider-Man and Black Panther have a major roles and, in fact, you can almost say that Marvel has added them to "Captain America: Civil War" to promote their individual films (to be released in 2017 and 2018, respectively).

The problem of adding so many superheroes in one adventure is that this causes an excessive increase in the length of the film, since it must justify their presence in some way. We also found a new villain (the wasted Zemo), which means that the fact of who he is and how he executes his plan had to be explained. In short, there’s too many scenes of character development and short story whit little action. I think they could have deleted many sequences of "Captain America: Civil War", which would have helped to improve the pace of the film. However, it seems that the writers did not want any of his heroes and villains to become irrelevant in the story. This is accomplished, but by paying the quoted price.

The dramatic battle of "Captain America: Civil War"

The final section of "Captain America: Civil War" shows a bright confrontation between multiple superheroes (and in broad daylight!). Colorful, spectacular and surprising, undoubtedly it becomes the most memorable part of the film. Directors, Anthony Russo and Joe Russo, re-use close-ups, jerky camera movements in the melees (as in "Captain America: The Winter Soldier"), being more restrained when visual effects take over the images. They have earned the respect of Marvel and there’s no wonder they will take over  both installments of "Avengers: Infinity War".

As for the cast, I love the contrast between Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr. The latter knows how to deal with the darker side of Tony Stark, don’t worry though, neither the ego nor the usual cunning of his character is dissipating. Sebastian Stan and Anthony Mackie have a major role, while Scarlett Johansson almost has to compete with Emily VanCamp as the heroine of the story.

I like the relationship between Vision (Paul Bettany) and the Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), just as Chadwick Boseman and Tom Holland seem to be two great new additions. Jeremy Renner, Don Cheadle and Paul Rudd take hundred percent advantage of their presence in "Captain America: Civil War", while Daniel Brühl settles the type of antagonist he has been assigned with. If these names were not enough, the glittering cast of the film is completed by William Hurt, Martin Freeman, Marisa Tomei, Frank Grillo, John Slattery, Hope Davis and Alfre Woodard.

Crítica en español de "Capitán América: Civil War"

Basically, "Toro" is a story of multiple vendettas. The main character in the film is a young man who, with his two older brothers, "works" for Romano, an important mobster. However, Toro is determined to stop his criminal life. After a hit goes wrong, things get complicated and the boy ends up in prison while Lopez, one of his brothers, continues to work with Romano. Five years later, Lopez's daughter is kidnapped, because his father has stolen from his "boss". Because of this, he enlists the help of Toro, who now has a partner and very little time left in prison (he only goes there to sleep).

The previously mentioned vendettas originate from betrayals, settlings and even an uncontrollable rage caused by the harm caused to a loved one. To narrate, the director Kike Maíllo and screenwriters Rafael Cobos and Fernando Navarro built the tape using a number of film genres: thriller, drama, action ... There are even some touches of humor, but they’re quite short, few moments that serve to relieve the tension of the story.

Although the plot lacks originality and sometimes some ups and downs occur during the development of "Toro", in general, we find ourselves before a competent, entertaining and full of tributes to titles of the 70s and 80s film (although there are references to films that have been premiered a few years ago, with the case of "Drive" which is the most striking, but I’d also dare to mention films ranging from "Old boy" to "Thai-dragon").

As the film proceeds, "Toro" approaches a brutal climax in which violence takes over the images and which highlights the careful execution of Kike Maíllo and great Arnau Valls Colomer photograph. Joe Crepusculo’s soundtrack is the one thing that convinces me the least of the technical sections of the film. I like the dramatic fragments, but in others, it reminds me about decaffeinated Vangelis or Jean Michel Jarre. The action scenes are where it fails the most, wrongly using the organ. Too bad Kike Maíllo didn’t appeal for Miquel Pardo, with whom he collaborated on an Oysho ad.

The actors of "Toro"

Of course, I can not fail to mention the good work of the cast. Mario Casas retains its characteristic interpretative registration. He is an actor who I like but that, in my opinion, must still learn a lot from his career. However, although he has no charisma or always declaims dialogues with the same form, you have to praise how he was physically prepared for the role (which is found in different fights in which his character is involved).

Luis Tosar is credible as the cowardly brother who gets to Toro in all kinds of problems, while José Sacristán gives life to a restrained villain, not by the actions carried out (which are brutal), but by the fact that he got under the skins of the character without shouting or gesticulating excessively.

Crítica en español de "Toro"

Unfortunately, this new installment of the adventures of Eric is a bit worse than the original film. It begins in the past, while the narrative then unfolds after the events we saw in “Snow White and the Huntsman”. I like the start, it gives off a tragic tone and we understand why Freya becomes the Ice Queen. However, the film overall lacks the sense of adventure one expects to find in a movie like this.

The characters have a (very simple, yes) objective, but we can not vibrate with their adventures. We observe what happens on the screen but we’re not introduced, probably because the writers failed to convey their concerns. Everything is too formulaic, and even the plot twists are predictable (and there are plenty). There’s no magic, no spark or showmanship; in fact, it gives the impression that the script of “The Huntsman: Winter’s War” has been written thinking solely on its end (although it’s not that good, at least it’s enjoyable).

One of the things that works worst of this story is its humor. It seems forced and doesn’t end upmatching the set of the film, presenting itself as a somewhat abrupt and unexpected way. On the other hand, from a visual point of view I must include the wardrobe or part of the production design, but not the work of the director, Cedric Nicolas-Troyan, in the action scenes (Frank Darabont was initially planned to direct it). Such passages offer nothing new, lack vigor and its duration is very short (if anyone’s hoping to see some epic battles, they’ll have a big disappointment).

Two actresses save the film every time they make an appearance: Charlize Theron and Emily Blunt. Both take their roles very seriously, giving nuances that are not present in the script. Chris Hemsworth can’t do a thing with the charisma of both female performers, but this time he is lucky to share misadventures with the righteous Jessica Chastain.

Crítica en español de "Las crónicas de Blancanieves: El cazador y la Reina del Hielo"

On the other hand, the income from the "Divergent" films remained below the expected, being included even in the group of the disappointments of the box office in 2014 and 2015. I didn’t care that the fourth part of this franchise would be nameas "The Divergent Series: Ascending" (therefore eliminating the "Part 1" and "Part 2" subtitles), the fear was there. However, after watching "The Divergent Series: Allegiant" I must admit that I enjoyed it. It's not the best movie in the world and it won’t remain etched in the memory of the viewer, but at least it's entertaining and its two hours fly by.

In this sequel, Tris wants to know what's behind the walls of Chicago. The problem is that Evelyn is not willing to let her go with her friends. With this simple premise begins a journey that has a great pace and in which response is given to some of the unknown facts of the saga. However, and as happened with its predecessor, the changes from the original novel are numerous, something that probably infuriated its staunchest supporters. From my point of view, this decision could not be more appropriate, since, as there is a greater creative freedom, you can take the elements of the book that have a higher film component and better adapt them to this environment.

Anyway, "The Divergent Series: Allegiant" is not just a succession of action scenes. The screenplay by Noah Oppenheim, Adam Cooper and Bill Collage, who had not worked in the previous films (in fact, the scripts of each are signed by different writers), introduces interesting ideas about leaders who make wrong decisions convinced that they do the best for a community (that's what happens with Evelyn in Chicago and David in their attempt to save the world). The film presents these arguments lightly without being in the audience’s face with highbrow philosophical reflections, making it clear that it is intended primarily to be a pleasant entertainment. In addition, the romantic aspect of the story is not heavy because it takes little footage time (don’t worry, this is not "Twilight").

The discrete special effects of "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"

The visual section of "The Divergent Series: Allegiant" is somewhat uneven, because sometimes the special effects are too imperfect. Who knows, maybe this time the budget was lower than its predecessors, but if not, more spectacular stuff is missing in several of its scenes (the final escape, to name just one example). I want to make clear that, despite this, the accomplishment of Robert Schwentke is of a competent craftsman.

Regarding the cast, it is led again by Shailene Woodley and Theo James. The first one is a bit away of the spotlight because the drama of the plot had diminished. In fact, the relationship between Four and his mother Evelyn becomes more relevant this time. Ansel Elgort, Zoë Kravitz and Miles Teller accompany the protagonists on their journey, with the little presence of Naomi Watts and Octavia Spencer (however, the ones that really appeared for just a few minutes on the screen were Maggie Q, Daniel Dae Kim and Ray Stevenson). As novelties, Bill Skarsgård, Alexander Skarsgård's brother, and, especially, Jeff Daniels are included. The actor knows how to express the duality of the character of David and turns it into a quirky villain. His character is not as aggressive as Jeanine (which Kate Winslet starred in "Divergent" and "The Divergent Series: Insurgent"), but his serene gestures precisely are what makes him so disturbing.

Crítica en español de "La serie Divergente: Leal"

Nevertheless, the important thing was that i enjoyed "Man of Steel", which knew how to mix the intensity and the emotions. Definitely: I was pleased. When they spoke about the continuation of the movie, the idea of bringing another DC mystic character to the story immediately came up. Warner wanted, not just that Batman came back after "The Dark Knight Rises", but it wanted to face Marvel once it for all. How? Trying that this continuation could become the starting point for the first big screen adventure of the Justice League. The result, from an artistic point of view, its full of ups and downs.

Why "Batman v Super: Dawn of Justice" is a letdown?

During the opening of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice", we got to see once again how Bruce Wayne parents were murdered in front of the young one. This fragment it’s not really well filmed and it doesn't shock the audience (different to what it happens in the TV series "Gotham"). Nevertheless, at the end we understand its inclusion, because its deeply related with the story (probably one of the best of all, which show us the humanity of our main characters and how much they have in common).

Then we contemplate another flashback. Bruce Wayne is back at Metropolis, just as Superman faces Zod and destroys a good chunk of the city, killing thousands. It’s an amazing fragment that links, even when being apart, both characters and it becomes the starting point that without doubt is the most interesting premise of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice". After such a wreck, Superman is truly a savior or just an alien of incredible power of whom to be afraid of? This part does not get developed deep enough, because the writers rather kept an argument about the search of Kryptonite.

A rather weak plot line that, by the way, it is based on a succession of short scenes. And this is because we must be introduced to Lois Lane, Lex Luthor, Alfred, Diana Prince, Wallace Keefe… Definitely, it turns into more than a puzzle in which they try to fit all these pieces, it ends up looking like a plain hotchpotch. But, of course, to hide the fragility of the script, Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer have no other occurrence that give to the text a false transcendence. This makes that for a good half of the movie, barely anything happens! In fact, the first encounter between Batman and Superman it's really short, being clear then that the most intense combat was saved till the climax of the movie. Its two and a half hours could have been shortened easily.

But even then, there are still a few elements that do not work in "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice". The way in which Lex Luthor fulfills its purpose it’s ridiculous, leaving us shocked on his skills to manipulate Krypton technology. About this, I think Brainiac would have fit better in the story. And the cameos of the different characters that will join the Justice League in the future couldn’t be more forced.

If we keep adding up these small letdowns, it's not a shocker that, all together, it barely makes it out with an "ok". Even the action sequences, except the one we talked about in the beginning of the movie, cause some indifference, mostly because of the craze of director Zack Snyder of using short shots or rough camera movements. Maybe he believes that, with the introduction of a few winks to the comic frames, was enough to please all the Batman and Superman fans.

And what to say about cast? Henry Cavill gives a lot of spotlight to an Ben Affleck who is superb in his Dark Knight role. I must admit that i wasn't fan of the idea about him playing out Batman, but, if the movie fails, it’s definitely not his fault. Also, I'm happy to confirm that Amy Adams has a lot of presence in the plot, because I was afraid that, with so many different characters, she would have to remain confined to several sporadic appearances. Jesse Eisenberg is by far the worst actor of the film, being an annoying histrion and giving life to an Lex Luthor who feels like a relative to the Joker. About Gal Gadot, she seems like a fragile Wonder Woman, not to mention that I do not buy her appearance in "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" (but this is not her fault). Jeremy Irons does a good job as the butler Alfred and it has the luck of having good dialogue lines.

This being said, I hope that this will get better with the next releases, because among other things, if this doesn’t happen, MARVEL will keep the superhero movies throne. And competition is always necessary (at least when it’s a good one, which is not the case of "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice").

Crítica en español de "Batman v Superman: El amanecer de la Justicia"

The film starts like a typical thriller in which a group of criminals seek to rob a bank. Not only did they carry weapons, but explosives as well. From this point on, what is expected in a film of this genre happens: hostage taking, differences between the thugs, police intervention... There is nothing original in this approach, which would not bother me if it were not because of, unfortunately, the development of the heist lacked the vigor required to keep us hooked on what happens on the screen.

Yes, a twist related to the murky world of politics is introduced, but, on my eyes, is an added which is there to tell the audience that they’re watching something more than a mere entertainment (Jorge Guerricaechevarría, regular collaborator of Álex de la Iglesia, is the author of the script). The worst of it is that “One hundred years of forgiveness” is not a particularly entertaining film. Despite its small footage, the film does not have a good pace, which makes it a very irregular title. On the other hand, back to its more serious side, everything is told with excessive simplicity, as if to make clear to the viewer what is the message that is intended to convey.

"One hundred years of forgiveness" is and, at the same time, isn’t like one of the highest collecting Spanish film productions of last year: “El desconocido”. I explain myself. In both of them, social criticism is addressed using commercial genres. The problem is that the former knows not to mix the two concepts, a thing which the recommended tape of Dani de la Torre did. In fact, the differences between the respective films are increased if you look at their technical sections, being much more colorful in "El desconocido".

The "I want but I can’t" of "One hundred years of forgiveness"

And it is that Daniel Calparsoro chooses to offer a careful and effective realization but absolutely not risky at all. It looks like the filmmaker limits the suspense, drama and action of the film, perhaps for the social content to not get diluted. Furthermore, the introduction of elements of humor doesn’t end up working. What does deserve a lot of praise is its setting, with a steady rain and a magnificent cinematography of Josu Inchaustegui.

The cast is competent, with actors as diverse as the Spanish Luis Tosar, Raúl Arévalo, Patricia Vico and Jose Coronado, and the Argentine Rodrigo De la Serna or Luciano Cáceres. The problem is that they don’t get us to connect with their characters, something that’s not their fault, but of the shallowness with which they are described in the script (there is a scene where the Gallego and the Uruguayan talk about their past, but I think it shows that it is a forced attempt to remedy this flaw).

Crítica en español de "Cien años de perdón"

Another of my fears when watching "Room" was on the fact of how such a raw story would be taken to the big screen. Thus, the director Lenny Abrahamson and the writer Emma Donoghue, also author of the book on which the film is based, chose to narrate what happens in the film through the child's eyes, Jack. The decision could not have been better.

"Room" can be divided into two parts. In one of them we watch as Joy and Jack live in a small room. The first tries to protect her son from the horrible situation that they have had to go through, but can’t help to get angry with the boy under certain circumstances. Regarding the second half of the film, it explains how both characters try to rebuild their lives after fleeing from their abductor.

The most powerful scene of "Room" is featured in-between, the same in which it’s shown to us how the mother and son manage to escape from the clutches of their abductor. Simply masterful. Although all I'm pointing out may seem like a spoiler, it’s actually explained in the trailers. In addition, the importance of this feature is not the plot itself, but the profound human journey in which we are introduced by the images or, which is the same, the emotions it conveys.

Although many viewers probably would have liked the film to be developed only in the place where Joy and Jack were held, the fact is that it’s a success that "Room" botheredto detail how the characters were affected by everything that happened. I also include the family of the protagonist here, with existing passages of great dramatic force in which, when apparently it would all have to be happiness, disputes and recriminations arise. The way how a trauma is described and how to overcome it is exemplary, and the good thing is that this is not just some tear falling into gimmicky scenes.

There’s also the issue of the media and its attempt to exploit a painful event as the one Joy had to suffer, though personally I found this to be the least interesting section of the film (I guess it’s because it’s a fact we see regularly around us, even in far less dramatic cases than the one presented in the film).

The superb performances of "Room"

Of course, "Room" could not exist without its cast. Brie Larson is fantastic and manages to convey what her character feels, that contradiction that lies in the soul of a tortured Joy. The actress has worked on television series, independent titles and big Hollywood productions, so, although it is now when many will hear her name, she has an extensive background on her backs.

However, the real discovery of the film is Jacob Tremblay, who plays her son. This young man manages to enthrall us at all times and make its history believable (both when he thinks that there is a world beyond the house as when he is reluctant to discover what lies outside the "safe haven" in which he was born). I wouldn’t want to forget the extraordinary work of Joan Allen (there is a beautiful scene between grandmother and grandchild), or to mention the brief presence of William H. Macy, far from the unpresentable Frank Gallagher from "Shameless".

Crítica en español de "La habitación"

So, I would have said it would gather more than 300 million dollars, a number which has been surpassed smoothly in less than a week (and only in the United States). Unbelievable, right? To my credit I must point out that, half a month before the film was released, the most optimistic forecasts ensured that the revenue from "Deadpool" during his debut in US theaters would be $60 million (It ended up amassing 132 million and beating all kinds of records).

If we talk about adaptations of superhero comics, Marvel has a luminous style that favors light entertainment and comedy. In contrast, DC takes things too seriously, just as we’ll probably see in "Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice". And then there's 20th Century Fox, which owns the film rights to some major Marvel characters. They’re not doing so badly with the "X-Men" series, with which they convey a lightly solemnity, but their attempt to become more relevant with "Fantastic Four" did not work for them (they drifted away too much from the spirit of the original work).

It’s not surprising that they didn’t have a clear what-to-do with "Deadpool". Thanks to the insistence of Ryan Reynolds, the intermediation of Hugh Jackman and the low budget for the film ($58 million), they finally gave the green light to the project (cutting expensive stunts and even eliminating the presence of another villain). The 20th Century Fox executives are probably still pinching one another, because, of course, no such success was expected. It’s true that the focus given to the advertising of the film was brilliant, but nothing presaged it became a whooping success.

In fact, we have already seen other comic book movies that have high doses of irreverence before. There is a bit of it in "Wanted" and, especially, in "Kick-Ass" and "Kingsman: The Secret Service". It worked well for those three at the box office, but ... wow, "Deadpool" took the lead too easily.

"Deadpool" or the art of not taking itself seriously

"Deadpool" starts with some credits from which the viewer quickly realizes that the film does not take itself seriously. Laughter makes an appearance at once, like the sharp and provocative language of its protagonist. The same applies to the action, since the writers chose to narrate the origins of Wade Wilson by intermittent flashbacks. With this decision, and to moderate the duration of the film, they ensured that the story held a terrific pace.

On the other hand, "Deadpool" is not a series of phrases and witty banter, as it would be exhausting for the viewer. In fact, there is a story, a very, very simple but effective story of love and revenge. What happens is that the well mouthed protagonist makes us soon forget it. Because, make no mistake, the star of the show is Deadpool and his impertinent mouth. Although I don’t like vulgar films (a bad habit of, for example, the current comedy), that aspect here is well worked and not merely a resource to get by and get easy laughter from the audience. As for violence, it’s not that realistic and it shows that it seeks to recreate a comic with real images (which obviously is a success).

Tim Miller makes his directorial debut with "Deadpool", being this work more than correct. Of course, it’s evident that he worked with a less-than-usual budget available for this type of production, but achieved quite acceptable results (there are several special effects that take place, but this is something that the viewer doesn’t care about, and that is, after all, because it’s not actually a realistic film). The best is that he presents a title that even if it’s not actually a big deal, at least it’s quite amusing from the beginning to the end.

About the cast, I can only say that Ryan Reynolds is great and he definitely was born to play the main character in the film. Morena Baccarin adapted perfectly to the comic tone of "Deadpool" while Ed Skrein delivers as the antagonist of the story. The one who should take a step back from the world of acting is Gina Carano. Clearly, this is not her thing...

Crítica en español de "Deadpool"

Byron Howard, Rich Moore and Jared Bush are the directors of "Zootopia". The first dealt with the underrated "Bolt" and "Tangled", a film that marked Disney's return to musicals. The second took over "Wreck-It Ralph", while the third debuted in this category, while he signed the screenplay for the film with the help of Phil Johnston.

The film tells the story of a bunny named Judy who, since childhood, dreams of being a law enforcement officer in the city of Zootopia. However, her parents prefer for her, like her hundreds of brothers, to stay in the village and dedicate to grow carrots. However, the years pass and, after many difficulties, Judy manages to pass the tests to work as a cop in the big city. The problem is that her boss and peers judge her by her size, which is why she decides to show them she can solve a mysterious case. To fix this, she requires the help of Nick, a fox whose personality is completely opposite to hers.

The positive and negative aspects of “Zootopia”

"Zootopia" is a good movie, but one of its major flaws is that we have already seen most of its best moments in the trailers that Disney has been showing us since a few months ago. This is what happens with the passage in which Judy and Nick go to the traffic office in which they serve a sloth (this being a clear mockery of the bureaucracy we have to overcome in our daily routine). On the other hand, the funny fragments are quite scarce, while the plot of the research takes too long and is given a disproportionate importance (the film can spare a few minutes).

There are more aspects of the film that failed to convince me, like the brief action scenes and the serious tone of some of its fragments (as happens when we know certain details of Nick’s past). That said, it almost seems like "Zootopia" is not worth watching and, of course, I don’t mean for the reader to be left with this feeling. What happens is that I think some elements of the script could have been polished to make a rounder work (it’s even noticeable that there are moments when there is a clear separation between the winks and jokes that are aimed at children and those appropriate to adult audience).

Now, "Zootopia" introduces us into a peculiar universe recreated with astonishing detail. It is delightful to walk around the streets of the city in which the story takes place and realize that there are many things that deserve our attention. The animals that walk on the streets, their different habitats or character design itself are a clear example. It is simply stunning, and proof of the good work of everyone who worked on this film.

It also conveys to the viewer some messages that, well, may be a bit optimistic, but it's worth taking them into account in our lives, at least for a while (the fulfillment of a dream if you try your best and the danger of prejudice).

Crítica de "Zootrópolis" en español.