My Thoughts on "Meg 2: The Trench 🦈"
Well, I finally watched Meg 2: The Trench 🦈, the long-awaited sequel to the hit 2018 sci-fi action horror blockbuster, The Meg 🦈. It's hard to believe that it's been 5 years since the first Meg 🦈 movie. We waited a long time for this sequel. I started thinking we would never get a sequel to The Meg 🦈. But, we did, and I finally got to watch it. Given that the second book 📖 in the Meg series is just called The Trench, I was a bit curious about what they would title it.
Would they call it, The Meg: The Trench, or The Meg: Trench, or The Meg 2: The Trench? There was also that canceled Aquaman spin-off movie that James Wan tried to make that was also called The Trench to add the confusion. Kind of surprised that they didn't call it, Meg 2 The Trench without a colon, so it would like the Meg is going to the trench, thus Meg 2 The Trench, like that Jet Li and DMX movie, Cradle 2 The Grave. That movie wasn't a sequel to anything, they just replaced the word "to" with the number 2, so it's Cradle 2 The Grave, instead of "Cradle to the Grave." Kind of wish that they had done a similar pun or similar substituting numbers with letters or words with the title of this movie. You know, to play up the ridiculousness.
This was one of the few movies in 2023 that I didn't get to see in 2023, and didn't get to see in theaters. I did want to see it in theaters, along with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem 🐢🥷. But, I never got the chance to because things were happening in August back then, and we just didn't have any time or money 💵 to see it in theaters. So, I ended up having to watch it in February 2024.
So far, I haven't seen any new movies in theaters in 2024. All of the movies I've watched so far in 2024 are movies that I missed in 2023, like Rebel Moon: Part One for instance. I haven't seen The Beekeeper 🐝, which is the movie that has come out so far in 2024 that I actually want to see. And I haven't seen Argylle, the latest Matthew Vaughn spy movie. The man makes nothing but spy movies these days, especially ever since Kingsman: The Secret Service, which is a franchise that he kind of ran into the ground.
I mean, Kingsman: The Golden Circle was okay, but still inferior to the first movie, and The King's Man absolutely sucked, I'm sorry. I hated that movie man. I was against the idea of them doing a prequel to Kingsman, and I was against them setting in World War I, like it just seems like a really odd choice, and I wasn't wrong. The results were horrible, and The King's Man is an absolute embarrassment of a film. The only decent part of that whole movie is Ralph Fiennes. He wasn't what was wrong with that movie, and it was cool to see him play a good guy and to see him kicking ass. Other than that, you can forget about it about The King's Man.
So, I wasn't super enthusiastic about Argylle, but I was willing to watch it if it was the only movie I could see in theaters in the month of February, especially if The Beekeeper 🐝 stops playing, which it probably will since it came out in January, and movies don't stay in theaters for that long anymore. But, from what I've been hearing about Argylle, it seems like I'm not missing out on much. It just seems like it's more of the same from Matthew Vaughn.
His movies have been declining in quality, with each one being worst than the last. And I guess that movie is apart of Kingsman franchise too because they decided to tie Argylle in with Kingsman at the end with an after credit scene or a mid credit scene or whatever. As if I didn't have enough of a reason not to watch it. Kingsman is a sinking ship, and they're taking this stupid Argylle movie down with it by anchoring their chain to it ⚓️.
Needless to say, I'm glad that Matthew Vaughn never got the chance to direct a Superman movie. I really hope he doesn't. James Gunn, you better not hand the Superman keys 🔑 over to him because he doesn't deserve it. It wasn't just the Matthew Vaughn of it all, and it wasn't just the Kingsman connection that has turned me off to Argylle and made me decide not to watch it, it was also the whole mess of the marketing, and who actually wrote the book 📖 the movie is purported to be based on, and whether it was actually even based on a book 📖. Because not only is the author of the book 📖, Elly Conway not a real person (she's a character in the movie and the name itself is a pseudonym for the actual author of the book 📖), but the book 📖 wasn't even written as an independent book 📖 from the movie.
Like, it wasn't written as a book 📖 first, and then someone came to the author and asked for the movie rights, no, it wasn't like that. It was turned into a movie before it was even published and released to the public. So, it was like a chicken 🐓 and the egg 🥚 situation, like which came first, the book 📖 or the movie, and was this a book 📖 that was written as book 📖 and then was adapted into a movie? Or was it specifically written for the movie? Like, it was it specifically written so that it could be turned into a movie, which is why it was already being made into a movie before it was even published? It's a mystery, and it's all very suspicious. Especially since everything that I've heard about the book 📖 indicates that it's just a glorified novelization of the movie.
On top of that, when Taylor Swift fans, the Swifties, start posting ridiculous conspiracy theories that she was the one who wrote the Argylle book 📖, the marketing people didn't discourage it. They quietly encouraged it, and really did try to make people think that Taylor Swift wrote the book 📖 because they know that anything that has Taylor Swift's name on it will make tons of money 💵 or will generate hype and gain a female audience ♀︎ because she's the biggest pop star in the world right now. And let's face it, the female audience ♀︎ is the main demographic they were trying to capture with Argylle. I mean, they put Henry Cavill and a CGI cat 🐈 in it. Key-jingling 🔑 for cat ladies 🐈♀︎ and women ♀︎ who are thirsty for Henry Cavill 😍.
Taylor Swift is a freaking billionaire 💵, she sold out several concerts, and helped boost the American economy 🇺🇸 just with her Eras Tour alone. People make a big deal out of her when she just shows up at a football game 🏈 to support her boyfriend, Travis Kelce. President Biden wants her endorsement in the 2024 Presidential Election because he and his campaign know that she helped swing the 2020 Election in his favor by publicly endorsing him. So, they want her to endorse him again, so that she'll drive the female vote ♀︎🗳️, and beat Trump in the election.
And believe me, Biden needs the female vote ♀︎🗳️ in order to beat Trump in the General, and I'm fairly confident that he will, even without a Taylor Swift endorsement. Most women ♀︎ are not going to vote for Trump, they just aren't. Unless you're my aunt, in-which case, you do you I guess. I strongly disagree with your decision, I think you're voting against your own interest, but if you want to vote the for the guy who helped overturn Roe v. Wade, and bragged about it, you be my guest. I'm fairly confident that my aunt probably won't vote because she's against the idea of voting, like she's convinced her vote and no else's vote doesn't actually count so she decided not even to bother. And she's just one person, so we won't have to worry about her.
Anyway, that's how big and important Taylor Swift has become. She's more popular and influential now than she has ever been in the past decade. So, of course, if Swifties latch onto something, and organically generate buzz for a movie on social media, of course a movie studio would embrace that, and try to encourage it as much as possible. Even if it's all fake, all based on lies, and based on fanatic delusion on the part of the Swifties themselves, who convinced themselves and tried to convince everyone else that Taylor Swift wrote the Argylle book 📖.
I don't know why they would want her to be associated with a box office bomb 💣. Argylle flopped in theaters, not even getting close to making back its $200 million budget 💵, and it was critically panned 👎. Why would you want Swift, one of the most successful and influential women ♀︎ in the world right now, to be associated with that in any way? But, like women ♀︎ who support Trump (like my aunt), you do you I guess. It's all very deceptive marketing, and it kind of made me lose whatever respect for Matthew Vaughn I had left, because he was apart of this too.
I mean, he denied the Taylor Swift connection because of course he did. Any sensible and rational person could see that the Swift conspiracy theories were ridiculous and don't actually hold up to scrutiny. The most he actually said about it is that he was "inspired" by Taylor Swift because of his daughters, and that's why he included the cat 🐈 and the cat backpack. But, he didn't confirm any of the crazy and unhinged Taylor Swift conspiracy theories that Swifties have been peddling. And he kept pushing the other lies about the book 📖. It's not even just that either.
There's also the deceptive and misleading marketing surrounding some of the stars, the big name actors and celebrities they got to be in this, Henry Cavill, John Cena, Dua Lipa, and Bryan Cranston. Those four actors are all supporting roles in Argylle. Henry Cavill is not the main star of the movie, or even one of the main stars. Bryce Dallas Howard is. So, is Sam Rockwell, he's her co-star, and is the main male lead ♂︎ of the movie. And yet, Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell are the least prominent and least emphasized on the posters. Like, they tucked them into the background, and put the bigger name actors more at the forefront and convince people that they were the main stars, and not Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell. So, yeah, fuck Matthew Vaughn🖕.
I hope that other spy movie that Henry Cavill was in that's coming out this year, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare will be far better than Argylle. I am fairly confident that it will because it's directed by Guy Ritchie, who is a way more talented director than Matthew Vaughn. Like, Guy Ritchie can make a way better spy movie than Matthew Vaughn ever could. At least Henry Cavill has better hair in The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare than he did in Argylle.
But, speaking of sequels that are inferior to the first movie, I am way off topic with this one, but you should expect that from me by now. I mention something that's on my mind at the time, and I'll veer off topic and spend several paragraphs talking about that thing. In this case, it was Argylle. What did I think of Meg 2: The Trench 🦈? It was okay. Like, I didn't enjoy it nearly as much as I enjoyed the first movie, and I do ultimately think that it's inferior. But, at the same time, I don't think it's as bad as the critics made it out to be. I actively avoided watching reviews of this movie besides the few that I had already seen, and I tried to avoid watching any videos that spoiled the whole movie. Especially Pitch Meetings, they pretty much tell the whole plot of a movie. But, from the reviews I did see of the movie, I did know a lot of the basic criticisms of the movie.
Like, that it didn't focus enough on the creatures, and focused too much on the humans and the human villains, it didn't embrace it's inherent campiness and was too self-serious, it's too long, and also that it was rated PG-13, and not R. Those are the gist of the criticisms towards Meg 2 🦈. Most reviews of that movie will probably have one of, and all of those criticisms. After watching the movie for myself, I gotta say that at least three of those criticisms are exaggerated.
When people said that the movie focused too much on the humans, and focused too much on the human story and the human action, and didn't have enough Megalodon carnage 🦈, I felt that they were exaggerating and misleading. They sprinkle a lot of shark 🦈 and other creature stuff in here. It's not like it's a Call of Duty game for most of it and then there's some shark stuff 🦈, no. That's how a lot of people were describing it, that it was just humans shooting at each other inside of hallways and corridors, and fighting over environmental stuff, and there were no Megalodons 🦈 whatsoever until the last half. But, that's not actually the case.
They do sprinkle enough creature stuff throughout the movie to let you know that it is indeed a Megalodon movie 🦈. And not only are there more Megalodons 🦈 in this movie than the first one (there are three of them in this movie), but there are other creatures like a giant octopus 🐙 and some dinosaur looking things that aren't actual dinosaurs, but everyone who worked on this movie refers to them as dinosaurs. They're called "Snappers," and they're probably the most interesting new creature that they introduced in this film. They aren't in the books 📖, they're an entirely new and original created specifically for this movie. Also, the fact that they're called Snappers makes things kind of confusing to talk about because there's a fish species 🐟 in real life called snappers. Multiple fish species 🐟 that go under the name "snapper." I kind of wish they had some of the mosasaurs like the Kronosaurus that they had in the books 📖.
That's another thing too, I don't know how accurate this movie even is to the book 📖 it's based on. I mean, I own the first Meg 🦈 book, Meg: A Novel of Deep Terror 🦈, but I've never read it all the way through. What I do know is that the movie wasn't all that accurate to the book 📖, like they changed a lot of stuff. And I imagine it's the same deal here with The Trench book 📖 and the Meg 2: The Trench 🦈 movie. One of the biggest changes that The Meg 🦈 made from Meg: A Novel of Deep Terror 🦈, was the setting. They changed the setting to China 🇨🇳, and I imagine that the book 📖 was not set in China 🇨🇳 at all. And the only reason why they set the movie in and around China 🇨🇳, and had Chinese characters 🇨🇳 played by Chinese actors 🇨🇳 was to appeal to Chinese market 🇨🇳.
During the 2010s, Hollywood really tried to placate to China 🇨🇳 and their tastes and sensibilities because the Chinese film market 🇨🇳 was becoming increasingly more important than the American film market 🇺🇸. Having the movie play in China 🇨🇳 and play well in China 🇨🇳 was seen as make or break for a blockbuster movie during that decade. But, in order to get an American movie 🇺🇸 into Chinese theaters 🇨🇳 is to make some compromises. Avoid certain subjects, and don't criticize the Chinese government 🇨🇳 or its policies. Because the Chinese censors 🇨🇳 are very strict, and will not allow your movie to play in their country if you reference Taiwan 🇹🇼 for example, or if you criticize the Chinese Communist Party 🇨🇳☭ (CCP) or Xi Jinping in any way. Or if China 🇨🇳 is presented in any sort of negative light. They won't play it.
So a lot of Hollywood movies had to censor themselves, or add new scenes specifically for the Chinese release 🇨🇳 just to get approved by the Chinese censors 🇨🇳, and appeal to Chinese audiences 🇨🇳 and hopefully, make a lot of money 💵. And of course, Chinese production companies 🇨🇳 came in, and influenced Hollywood in a way that other foreign film production companies never really did. So, in addition to self-censorship on the part of Hollywood, you had these Chinese companies 🇨🇳 insisting on using these films to spread Chinese propaganda 🇨🇳 to gullible Westerners. That's why the second half of Transformers: Age of Extinction took place in Hong Kong 🇭🇰, and had scenes depicting the Hong Kong government 🇭🇰 and the mainland government 🇨🇳 in as positive and heroic of a light as possible.
Of course, The Meg 🦈 was part of this trend too, and it was a major hit in China 🇨🇳. In fact, the only reason it was a financial success 🤑 and was able to get a sequel was because of China 🇨🇳. Now, if you've read any of the stuff that I've written about China 🇨🇳, especially the post I wrote about Chinese propaganda 🇨🇳 or the one about China 🇨🇳's struggling economy, you can probably guess that I'm against this whole practice. I don't like it when Hollywood movie studios suck up to China 🇨🇳 in this very pathetic way, and I don't like Chinese companies 🇨🇳 influencing Hollywood and trying to sneak in Chinese propaganda 🇨🇳 into these films.
You might say, "Well, what about the 1980s, when Japan 🇯🇵 had a booming economy and Hollywood was collaborating with Japanese film studios 🇯🇵 and focused on Japanese culture 🇯🇵, and had Japanese actors 🇯🇵 (or at least, Japanese-American actors 🇯🇵🇺🇸)? What about the reason surge in popularity of Korean media 🇰🇷? And Hollywood doing more stuff with Korean studios and Korean actors 🇰🇷?" Well, the difference with Japan 🇯🇵 and South Korea 🇰🇷 "influencing" Hollywood is that those are actual democratic countries (South Korea 🇰🇷 is more democratic than Japan 🇯🇵, but you get the idea), while China 🇨🇳 is not.
China 🇨🇳 is an authoritarian one party state, there's nothing actually democratic about it. In fact, it's even more authoritarian now under Xi Jinping. The country is at its most authoritarian since the Mao Zedong era. And neither Japan 🇯🇵 and South Korea 🇰🇷 insist on their countries being portrayed 100% positively and being portrayed as infallible in films, and don't try to sneak government propaganda in the films like China 🇨🇳 does. What China 🇨🇳 does is worse than anything either Japan 🇯🇵 and South Korea 🇰🇷 do when it comes to working with Hollywood.
Luckily, this sort of thing is becoming less common, now that tensions between the US 🇺🇸 and China 🇨🇳 are increasing, and the two countries now see each other more as rivals than as partners. Hollywood is moving away from China 🇨🇳 and China 🇨🇳 is moving away from Hollywood. But, Meg 2: The Trench 🦈 is one of the last vestiges of that. It's like it's a film from a bygone era when Hollywood desperately wanted to please China 🇨🇳, and Chinese companies 🇨🇳 wanted to spread Chinese propaganda 🇨🇳 and influence Americans 🇺🇸 using Hollywood.
But, similar to the first Meg 🦈 book 📖, the second book 📖 likely had nothing to do with China 🇨🇳 whatsoever. The China setting 🇨🇳 and the presence of Chinese actors 🇨🇳 is just a thing in the movies because Warner Bros. still wants to pander to China 🇨🇳. That being said though, neither of these two films are as obnoxious about their China pandering 🇨🇳 as other films have been. Like, there's no overt Chinese propaganda 🇨🇳 like there was in Transformers: Age of Extinction, and they didn't add entirely new scenes just for the Chinese release 🇨🇳 like Iron Man 3 did. Sure, they set the movie in and around China 🇨🇳, and they speak Mandarin at several points, but that's about it.
I would say that they speak more Mandarin in this movie than they did in the first movie. Like, the two main Chinese characters 🇨🇳 in the movie have conversations entirely in Mandarin. And while it does make sense within the context of the film because these two characters are both Chinese 🇨🇳 and speak fluent Mandarin (they don't need speak English to each other when there are no English speakers around), it is also clear that this was done to appeal to a Chinese audience 🇨🇳. They had these characters speak Mandarin and have conversations in Mandarin specifically so that Chinese audiences 🇨🇳 could relate to it more.
I will say that I am glad that one of my big concerns about this movie proved to be unfounded. You see, when I saw the trailer, and I saw that the movie featured Chinese actor 🇨🇳, Wu Jing as the second leading man, I was worried that he would completely steal the spotlight from Jason Statham. That the movie would just focus on Wu Jing the whole time and Jason Statham would be reduced to being a side character in his own movie. Because Wu Jing is a pretty huge star in China 🇨🇳 from what I understand. But, luckily, that wasn't the case, and it is still a Jason Statham movie through and through. Wu Jing plays more of a supporting role in this, and isn't the main protagonist. He was alright, like his acting was decent, even if I found his character annoying at several points in the film, and I kind of wanted his character to die, even though I knew he wouldn't because he's got plot armor as thick and impenetrable as Jason Statham's.
If these movies were made a couple of decades earlier, I wish it could've been Jet Li co-starring alongside Jason Statham since they are such good friends in real life and have great onscreen chemistry with each other. Just watch the movies, The One and War (2007). Also, the idea of Jet Li starring in a Megalodon movie 🦈 is beyond awesome, and would've my kid self sing in excitement. I mean, I guess he could still do it now since he is still active, he's just not doing Hollywood films anymore, he's not doing English language films anymore. But, even if his prime, I doubt Jet Li would've agreed to do a giant killer shark movie 🦈, even one set in and around China 🇨🇳.
That leads me to a criticism that I personally had of this movie that I don't think anyone else has said. All of the characters, except Jason Statham's Jonas Taylor character and Cliff Curtis's character, Mac, are annoying. Like, Wu Jing's character, the girl ♀︎ (the same one from the first movie, but a bit older), some of the other scientist characters, and the villains, they're all kind of irritating. You kind of want them all to die at a certain point because they are so annoying and they are so stupid and make such stupid decisions, that they kind of deserve to die. Page Kennedy's character, DJ is probably ironically the best character in the entire movie besides Jonas Taylor and Mac.
DJ was kind of a coward in the first movie, like he was afraid of the Megalodons 🦈, and he didn't know how to swim even though his work involves the ocean and being surrounded by water 💦 at all times. He was kind of just the stereotypical black guy in a horror movie in the last one. But here, they made him tough, like he actually kicks some ass. He beats up a couple of bad guys while at the facility when the bad guys take it over, and then towards the end of the film, he kills one of the Snappers using a Desert Eagle that he brought with him. He's the smartest and most levelheaded character besides Jonas and Mac. Everyone else is either a dumb smart person or a dumb greedy person, and not at all worth rooting for. Why couldn't we have just focused on those three the entire time?
Another thing too is that those three characters, the ones I actually liked in this movie, they were the only ones who were played by the same actors from the first movie. Jason Statham, Cliff Curtis, and Page Kennedy are the only three returning cast members in this movie. Everyone else is either a new actor playing a new character, or if it is a character from the first one, they're played by a different actor. Like, Ruby Rose's character from the first movie does technically return in this movie, but she's played by a different actress. And she doesn't look the same, she doesn't really dress the same, and she doesn't really act the same. It might as well be a new character entirely, but from what I understand, it's not. It's the same character. She references events from the first movie as if she was there, and experienced them first hand. But, it's not Ruby Rose playing the role, it's a different actress entirely.
For one of the actors at least, it makes sense why they didn't return. Like, Li Bingbing didn't come back because I guess she's been marred by some controversy of her own. I don't really know what that controversy is, if it was political or not, or if it's something else entirely. Whatever the reason, Li Bingbing is a controversial celebrity in China 🇨🇳, and they obviously didn't want to potentially upset Chinese audiences 🇨🇳 by including her. So, she just didn't come back, and they just decided to kill her character off in-between movies. Could've just recast the part, that's what you did with everyone else.
And I'm not sure if the girl ♀︎, the daughter of Li Bingbing's character in the first movie, is played by the same actress or if they recast the part to have an older girl ♀︎ to play that part. I really don't know. She looks kind of different, and her voice is different. I mean, of course her voice is different, she's older now, but it didn't sound like what the voice of that little girl ♀︎ would’ve sounded like if she was 11 or 12 years old.
As for the movie being too long, no. The movie's 116 minutes long, which is 1 hour and 56 minutes. If you think that's too long for a movie like this, then I'm sorry, but you have a pretty short attention span and you lack patience. And no, I don't care that this movie's rated PG-13. If you went into this movie or the first movie expecting them to be R, then you're watching the wrong movie. Besides, Megalodons 🦈 are huge. They're literally big enough to swallow people whole.
There's not really that much opportunity for blood and gore 🩸 when the Megalodon 🦈 can just swallow a bunch of humans in one single gulp. It'd be like when Merlin and Dory got swallowed by that whale 🐋 in Finding Nemo. Megalodons 🦈 evolved to eat whales 🐋 and other large prey. They were never meant to eat humans. We're too small for that. We'd barely be a snack for the darn things. I mean, sure you could more blood and gore 🩸 with the Snappers, but I really don't think that's entirely necessary. Adding more blood 🩸 or adding more F bombs would not have made this movie any better.
The only one of those criticisms that I actually agree with is that the movie really didn't embrace its campiness or its ridiculousness enough, and it did kind of take itself too seriously. I mean, I'm not saying that the movie should be self-aware or have quips every ten seconds. I'm fine with the movie playing these events straight rather than parodying itself. I'm just saying that the movie should've embraced the fact that its premise is inherently ridiculous and silly.
It should have leaned into the camp value of seeing Jason Statham fight giant sharks 🦈 and a giant octopus 🐙 and weird marine reptiles. Like, just have fun, make it exciting. But, a lot of this movie didn't feel particularly fun or exciting, it kind of just felt a bit dry and boring. Those are two things that you definitely don't want your giant killer shark movie 🦈 to feel like. But, it definitely did for me. So, yeah, this movie was a bit of a letdown, and it's not as good as the first one. I like the first one way more than I do this one. What a surprise? A sequel that's inferior to the first one. Those are unfortunately more common than sequels that are just as good or better than the first one.
I just hope that they get to the fourth book 📖, Meg: Hell's Aquarium 🦈 and make that one into a movie. That one would actually make for a good movie, just from hearing the premise alone. It's like Jurassic Park, but with exclusively prehistoric sea creatures and an aquarium instead of a zoo/amusement park. And the bad guy's a Dubai prince 🇦🇪, so that'd be a great opportunity to get the franchise away from China 🇨🇳, get it out of China 🇨🇳, and introduce a new setting that you don't normally see for these kinds of creature features, for these shark movies 🦈, the Middle East. It'd be perfect. Please make a Hell's Aquarium movie happen. Oh, and in case you're wondering, no I didn't watch the Super Bowl. I watched this movie instead. What that says about me, I really don't know. But, I'll probably watch all of the commercials on YouTube after I write this.
Comments
Post a Comment