A wonderful new angle on the superhero theme

So, yes, I mentioned I've seen Deadpool and with whiplash smart humour and post-modern referencing and deconstruction, it gives its due to its eponymous anti-hero protagonist.  Ryan Reynolds was slightly behind Ben Affleck in the quality of his super-powered output (Daredevil and Hollywoodland for Affleck, Green Lantern and X-Men Origins: Wolverine for Reynolds) but with Deadpool, Reynolds pulls way ahead.  There's a glorious smattering of violence but, unlike for Batman, it's entirely in keeping with Deadpool's world that many people die, often at his hands.  The only disappointment is the main villain, Ajax (Francis), who although Deadpool's first adversary in the comics, is not really much more than a henchman in all honesty (the film's opening credits joke about how a British guy was selected to play Ajax).
But the strength of the film in all other respects makes Deadpool a triumph -  the referencing visually and orally cheekily takes in things copyrighted by another studio: a downed SHIELD/HYDRA helicarrier and Nick Fury.  With Spiderman being released by Sony to join in the next Captain America picture, there does seem to be movement towards uniting the entire Marvel 'universe'.  But even if that doesn't happen, a sequel to Deadpool seems certain - and gladly so - because, unlike Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, it doesn't cheat its audience of an end-(or mid-)credits teaser sequence.  Ryan Reynolds may have ripped it out of himself in-movie as not getting where he was "through his superior acting ability" but he's definitely landed on his feet here. 8/10

Dawn of Justice, sunset of quality

I went to watch Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice to see how bad it really was, given some searingly negative comments about it, but emerged finding it passable fare.  It didn't have the gravitas or depth of, say, Christoper Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy (Nolan attached as an executive director here), though it aims for it - it's just that director Zack Snyder is a pretender to that rather than the real thing.  Mentioning a god (or God) numerous times does not imbue your film with grandeur.  Nevertheless, I've spent worse two and a half hours and ten pounds.
This is not to say there are aspects seriously out of whack.  Batman seems to have acquired a rather disturbing predilection for killing minor bad guys, dehumanising them as 'weeds' to be ripped up, though they keep coming back.  Portraying Lex Luthor as autistic to justify his genius-level intellect is a misstep, as is 'retconning' his family history (for him to inherit his father's firm rather than killing his parents who had tried to exploit his brain and then cashing in on the life insurance).  Jesse Eisenberg's plays him as the nerdiest of nerds - at no point is Luthor at all threatening; I'd be more afraid of Mark Zuckerberg.  Wonder Woman's place in the film is entirely superfluous, only giving Gal Gadot a platform to spin-off a standalone film of her character's own - she could easily have been confined to one of the database files wherein we see Aquaman, the Flash and Cyborg.
Then there are other little niggles.  The lighting is mostly too dark.  Until Doomsday comes along, the action scenes are too choppy and incoherent (when will directors and cinematographers learn the intensity, swift reactions and rapid panning is meaningless to an audience who are not compensated with the adrenaline of such a fight).  Bruce Wayne's dreams (and dreams within dreams) are annoying and serve no real purpose.  It is never really explained how Lex Luthor came to know that Clark Kent is Superman (was it really just the crushing handshake and firm chest?).  Apparently not only can Superman survive a nuclear explosion but his outfit isn't burnt off either.  Jeremy Irons does his best but, for me, never convinces as Alfred (unlike e.g. Michael Caine).  Why does Lex slice open his hand instead of using a vial of extracted blood - for whom is such a dramatic act intended (oh, it's for us - is this breaking of the fourth wall?  Nope)?  Bruce Wayne developing no respiratory problems and/or cancer from plunging into a 9/11-style dust cloud - seriously?  It seems that Wonder Woman's gauntlets can not only deflect bullets but death rays too (and Gadot's portrayal was a little too exotic; I'd have loved to have known how Charisma Carpenter would have played WW).  People punching (or being punched) through concrete is another of my bugbears - Superman is allowed to do that, Batman  isn't.  Gotham and Metropolis just across the bay from each other - I know they're both supposed to be a reflection of New York but still...
There is more besides but that being said there are some good moments.  Ben Affleck isn't the worst Batman and Henry Cavill appears to have grown into his role as Superman/Clark Kent.  The onset of Doomsday recalls the 'boss' villain of arcade games and though I've read it in the comics, I was genuinely surprised at the denouement with Superman (though from his very first seconds on screen, one knows he will meet his fate at the tip of the Kryptonite spear).  The bagpipe rendition of Amazing Grace is the smartest part of the whole film, referencing Mr Spock's fate in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (itself an ultimately underwhelming movie, though that's not the tie-in here).  Luthor acquiring his bald pate through a prisoner's haircut is clever.  Amy Adams as Lois Lane looks hot in her widow get-up.  And Laurence Fishburne nailed Perry White, editor of 'The Daily Planet'.
In an age of wall-to-wall superhero films because the studios are too scared of investing money into anything they can't parlay as a franchise (hello, Dredd anyone?  So many storylines), if you don't cut the mustard, you'll quickly be forgotten.  The recent Deadpool, though not without its flaws, was immensely more enjoyable than the square-off between the Bat and Man of Steel - it was played for laughs but in that it knew what it was about.  So while BVS:DoJ isn't terrible, it is forgettable and won't be lamented for that. 5/10

Marco Rubio bites the dust, deservedly

The freshman senator from Florida, Marco Rubio, had a patter during his presidential nomination bid that he had won every election in which he had entered.  Well, he will have to amend that now for all future stump speeches as he announced his departure from the 2016 Republican nomination contest after being humiliated in his own state of Florida.  He may have triumphed in winning a plurality in Minnesota, like his hero Ronald Reagan but Reagan won a majority in Minnesota and right across the country when he took part in the 1980 nominating process.  By contrast, in Florida Rubio lost every single county, bar Miami-Dade, his home town, to arch-rival Donald 'Drumpf' Trump.
But no tears should be issued.  He had been the standard-bearer of the Republican establishment, a role which now falls to John Kasich, who could win his own state (of Ohio).  But as venal as the establishment is viewed, Rubio's policies were not far away from being batshit crazy as Trump's or the odious Ted Cruz's.  Like Cruz, Rubio wanted to tear up the nuclear deal with Iran 'on day one' in the White House and set warming relations with Cuba into reverse.  Like Cruz and Kasich, he wanted to limit abortion rights (in Rubio's case, not even a raped woman could claim an abortion) - an issue which haunts the GOP like 'Europe' does with the British Conservatives.  All three pledged to unscramble the omelette that is Obamacare.
Despite all this, Rubio may have had great appeal to the wider country had he secured the nomination and would have been a very dangerous president.  So even though Trump goes marching on, the businessman can say 'You're fired' to another failed Apprentice candidate who falls before the master showman.  Plus he may tack back to the centre once he no longer has to throw red meat to the baying Republican base.
Since 2008, the field of contenders has got steadily more right-wing.  In 2008, John McCain was no hand-wringer but he was moderate by GOP standards, then we had the more right-wing Mitt Romney and finally it seems to have reached its apotheosis in Trump (perhaps), Cruz and Rubio.  Like with British Labour in the opposite direction, the Republicans react to presidential failure by thinking if only were they more right-wing would they succeed.  Rubio liked citing Abraham Lincoln too but he would not have recognised this Republican party as his own - rather they represent the Democrats of the reactionary, secessionist South that he fought against.
It was a good night for Hillary Clinton too, exploding the jibe of the Bernie Sanders' camp that she was a regional candidate by winning Ohio, Illinois and Missouri as well as completing her sweep of the 'South' (the civil war secessionist states).  Sanders is not the sweetness and light his Millenial supporters see him as, peddling fantasy rhetoric that resonates in their starry-eyed naivety - bash the banks, bash Wall Street, rip up trade deals; it all sounds wonderful to hitherto jaded ears but is it electable on a wider level, let alone achievable if in power.  It's something when people trust Sanders' gut instinct on foreign policy rather then the vast experience of Clinton - isn't going on gut part of the reason why the Iraq War II was such a failure?  But then Sanders' supporters also buy into anti-American conspiracy theories.  He's big on gun ownership too, dodging questions on his backing - the National Rifle Association would not be displeased to see him in the Oval Office.
Sanders also seems to have an antipathy towards Britain giving his association with IRA apologists and campaigns for IRA prisoners in the 1980s.  With Sanders, Gerry Adams would have had no trouble entering the White House for pre-St Patrick Day celebrations (his Sinn Fein colleagues were waved through).  Typically, Adams indulged in a classless act - while conflating himself and 'Sinn Fein' as one and the same, he used a racially insensitive phrase given the current occupant of the White House: "Sinn Fein will not sit at the back of the bus for anyone."  Just as well for Adams that this is the last St Patrick's Day that Barack Obama hosts in the White House given that the Sinn Fein leader appropriated the reasons for the Montgomery Bus Boycott to mollify his own pathetic self-pity.

Lèse majesté

A few weeks ago Prince William made a speech that many people who want Britain to leave the EU saw as providing a case for staying in the club.  That he had done so was denied vigorously by Wills' people but still he had tabloid ordure tipped on his head.  That wasn't the end of it for the right-wing, spiteful, hate-filled pro-Brexit newspapers - they don't just refute, they destroy.  So the second-in-line to the throne has been lambasted for being lazy and not caring enough for his grandmother, the Queen, by taking on more of her duties as she approaches 90 years old.  The pictures of the prince and his family in the Alps was a double-edged sword, adding to the playboy image while being cutesy as well.  And these papers claim to be pro-Royal Family!
One of them, the Currant Bun, today though claimed on its front page that "The Queen Backs Brexit."  No questions here about breach of impartiality that surrounded William.  Except that the Queen has launched a formal complaint against the paper.  It says it stands by its story that comes from "two impeccable sources" - a clear lie as no impeccable source would betray the Queen's confidence and drag the Queen into political mud-slinging; rather, like the rag, these people are the lowest of the low (but they are pro-Brexit so that's to be expected).
The flimsy evidence justifying the headline is beyond credible.  Apparently, maybe, perhaps, the Queen told Nick Clegg in 2011 that "the EU was going backwards" - people might think that but still weigh up being inside the EU as worth it.  Further, she allegedly said this almost two full years before David Cameron surprised everyone by announcing a referendum before the end of 2017.  So that instantly throws that Brexit slur on the fire as Brexit wasn't on the table when she made it.  Another source said she expressed bewilderment with 'Europe' (note, not the EU) with some venom.  Both these quotations are out of context and are not corroborated by anyone else present, least of all a furious Buckingham Palace.  Moreover, people can change their minds in five years - a speech (played down by the anti-EU newspapers) that the Queen made in Berlin last year seemed to speak quite warmly of harmony and security in Europe, some implying that as support for the European project.
Meanwhile, it seems the editor of the Currant Bun, Tony Gallagher, has gone insane.  A respected editor of The Daily Telegraph, he has slid down the pole via being associate editor as The Daily Wail, to the bottom in his current assignment.  He has already been forced to issue an unprecedented front-page apology (as small as possible) when forced by the newspaper editors' own watchdog for lying about a majority of British Muslims supporting ISIS (Daesh). Now this.  If one was being charitable, he is trying too hard and hasn't quite yet found his metier.  While his paper is being talked about, this latest scheme of the pro-Brexit campaigners could backfire quite easily.  Following gaffes galore including Boris Johnson's gagging of his City hall staff (which he lied about countermanding), they really are a shower.

The resistable rise of Donald Drumpf

While the Democratic field of nominees was rapidly whittled down with the hopeful no-hopers falling away leaving the unhopeful no-hopers (though Martin O'Malley(?) still beat Vermin Supreme in votes even after he had ended his run after getting 0.5% in the first caucus/primary Iowa) plus Hillary Clinton and an increasingly beleaguered Bernie Sanders - though the latter will still take things all the way to the Convention like for the Republicans in 2012, the libertarian Ron Paul (because he's Ron Paul!) - the GOP field has often resembled whack-a-mole, especially in the debates.  Donald 'The Donald' Trump, giving the lie to the implied antonym of 'politics is showbiz for ugly people', keeps getting whacked and keeps popping up again.  John Oliver, the comic host, has launched a hashtag recalling Trump's old family name of Drumpf.  But the Republican candidates after getting clobbered too many times, either in debates or lack of support in voting after starting to drop like flies.
Union-busting governor Paul Walker was Icarus, seen as the 'bright' dark horse, campaigning around Iowa and then posing by a motorcycle as if to suggest he was some lone rider, burned up before even the first voting began.  Then Mike 'Huckster' Huckabee, Rick 'Oops' Perry and Sick Rantorum, I mean Rick Santorum, went the way of all flesh.  It must have been particularly galling for Santorum to register just 1.5 % in Iowa after winning the state in 2012 (though not before it was erroneously and momentum-buildingly given to Mitt Romney).  'Ayn' Rand Paul betrayed his father's principles and despite barely registering in Iowa, he did not take the libertarian fight all the way to the Convention.  Other undercards also rapidly folded, such as Carly 'Unemployment Queen' Fiorina.  Chris Christie, supposedly the hope of the moderate Republican wing, signed out after eviscerating Marco 'Marcobot' Rubio in the debate but disappointing in the New Hampshire primary.  'Jeb Bush!' (or 'upside down exclamation mark Jeb!' for the Hispanic voter) clung on to South Carolina though to take the words of The Travelling Wilburys he had "been beat up and battered around, been sent up but been shot down."  He even wheeled out his mother and his brother-who-must-not-be-mentioned president.  The 'America' tweet of a personally engraved handgun was as gauche as one can get and when he said in a debate, "My mother is the strongest person I know," Trump hit back with one of the best quips of the election so far, "Maybe she should be running."  That would have possibly set up a re-run of Bush versus Clinton but also, so long as ninetysomething George H W Bush survives, set up the tantalising certainty of the first 'First Man' also having been president.  Yet he failed again in the Palmetto State and if he couldn't win in this heartland, he was doomed.
And so then there was five.  Trump, Rubio, Ted 'Cruising for a bruising' Cruz, Ben 'Wikipedia' Carson and John 'I'm still here' Kasich.  The first three garnered all the headlines and virtually all the delegates between them on Super Tuesday.  This prompted Carson to suspend his campaign and formally end it yesterday.  The death of former President Calvin 'Silent Cal' Coolidge elicited the witticism from Dorothy Parker, "How can they tell?"  One might say the same of ending of the campaign of the 'softly spoken,' nay somnolent, Carson whose inept, chaotic run spent most of the donations on additional fund-raising.
The doomsday clock ticks ever closer for Kasich if he can't win his own state of Ohio and similarly for Rubio (who at least has one state to his name) if he tanks in his backyard of Florida - it could be a 'double firing' on 15th March on "The Presidential Celebrity Apprentice"...  A brokered Convention to defeat Trump via the backdoor is seemingly dead-in-the-water after Rince Preibus (what a name, not needing a moniker, unlike Bill Clinton), chief of CPAC, the annual conservative political conference, said the people will decide.  But despite the agonies and hand-wringing of the Republican Party, a lot of Trump supporters are Democrats, who only vote once in a generation.  The possibility of President Trump is very real.