How much Spider-Man is too much Spider-Man? This was likely on the minds of many when Sony announced their second reboot of Marvel's A-lister in just three years, after the dumpster-fire, universe building disaster than was Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man 2 (you'll always get a pass for 500 Days of Summer, Webb), and in the process decimating all of Sony's plans for two more sequels, a Sinister Six spin-off and an... Aunt May spy flick? This planned universe was definitely caught in a tangled web of a mess.

The silver lining out of that announcement was that their third(!) Spider-Man will be part of Marvel Studios/Disney's Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), with a young Tom Holland (The Impossible) cast in the role soon after. This culminated in a memorable yet well-received debut in 2016's Captain America: Civil War, as this new edition blended well with the long established Marvel characters right on the get-go. So, with the new Spider-Man: Homecoming following Holland off the heels of Civil War, is this third Spider-Man in 10 years more Sam Raimi's original trilogy or more Webb's Amazing series?

If you've never warmed to the MCU films over the past decade, chances are that Homecoming would do little to convince you otherwise, as it retains most of the pros and (few) pitfalls that is apparent in this billion dollar franchise. Marvel had always preferred to hire indie directors to direct their latest projects, and it's no different with the hiring of Jon Watts to write plus helm Homecoming, having just come off the $5 million-budgeted Cop Car starring Kevin Bacon. The end result is a film with all the makings of a Marvel Studios film, and this new series retains the aesthetics of the Marvel movies with little repercussions for our heroes, for better or for worse. Quips have always been Spider-Man's other superpower since his printed debut, and it's certainly a match made in heaven when combined with level of banter which are omnipresent in the MCU.

Speaking of which, the integration mythos of past MCU's films appear to fit Homecoming like a glove, providing a more complementary relation between the new film and previous entries, rather than just throwing in blatant references for the sake of continuity. Adrian Toomes's turn to crime is deeply rooted from the Chitauri invasion from 2012's Avengers, while his dastardly plans all stem from technology salvaged/stolen from past battles (an Ultron head makes a cameo too). Don't worry, it's not the Spider-Man & Iron Man adventure the trailer had us worried, as Robert Downey Jr. only appears in a glorified four-scenes cameo, for which most were shown in the various commercials. In fact, take out the Iron Man and Avengers angles and you'll still have a pretty solid Spider-Man movie on its own.

Onto the new dude in the suit, this new... new Spider-Man by Tom Holland is an absolute delight on-screen, and by far the best young version of Peter Parker. Don't get me wrong, but each rendition of Spidey thus far has brought something to the table. You could argue that Tobey Maguire is great as an "Adult Parker", while Andrew Garfield shines as a "Boyfriend Parker", but it'll be interesting to see whether Holland could snatch these (hastily thought of) accolades in future sequels.

The lack of an origin story, which is pretty unnecessary by now, meant that this rendition of the web crawler does not have the weight of a dead Uncle Ben or his parents on his shoulders, and for once we get a Peter Parker who's definitely enjoying his superhero life, and one that we actually see converse through his school life and his crime fighting duties. Thankfully, Holland's rendition comes off as uncertain, stubborn yet equally eager, energetic and enthusiastic, while Parker's personality seem to trade seamlessly between his alter-egos (you'll notice the mega bump in confidence when Maguire dons the suit in the original).

What really sets this new Parker apart from those before him are his interactions with practically everyone in this film, from his young Aunt May (Marisa Tomei) to Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau), and it is with his peers that serve as Homecoming's better moments. Parker's classmates are given a 2010-esque makeover, focusing more on diversity in not only ethnicity but also in personality, while straying pretty far from their comic book counterparts.

Parker's best friend Ned Leeds (Jacob Batalon) is his best friend as well as confidante to his secret identity, and has perhaps the funniest lines and scenes in Homecoming. The stereotypical meathead bully Flash Thompson now a cynical, compensating nerd played by The Grand Budapest Hotel's Tony Revolori, while Zendaya's Michelle is equally narcissistic as she is sarcastic. We don't see these classmates all too often outside of Ned, but given that Homecoming takes place during Parker's sophomore year, they'll likely is plenty of sequels to get reacquainted with these colourful characters.

Michael Keaton is a fine addition to the storied franchise. Much like Jeff Bridges in the original Iron Man, the seasoned actor brings plenty of gravitas and tension to a role that admittedly looks bloody silly in the comics, as the former Beetlejuice is now playing his third flight-based character after Batman and Birdman. One memorable scene at the end of the second act really showcases the veracity and terror that Keaton can bring to the screen. Even if he does become a one-off villain, he was certainly one of the more memorable, even if that bar is still *shockingly* low in the MCU's Hall of Baddies. While the Vulture does command a presence whenever he's on screen, it's still nowhere as storied or layered than the likes of Willem Dafoe or Alfred Molina preceding him.

Spidey's rogue gallery is also present, but are presented as more of a support unit for the Vulture than full blown super villains integral to the plot à la Spider-Man 3, played by the likes of  Bokeem Woodbine (Fargo), Logan Marshall-Green (Prometheus, also discount Tom Hardy), and Donald Glover (The Martian; Childish Gambino). Glover in particular steals the show in one confrontation with Spider-Man in an empty parking lot.

Spider-Man: Homecoming is a noteworthy entry into the Marvel Universe, but while it couldn't match the dizzying heights or scale of Raimi's Spider-Man 2, arguably the gold standard of Spider-Man flicks, Homecoming's emphasis on the 'FUN' side of being the web-crawler is an enjoyable romp, and the new set of heroes and villains rarely put a foot wrong. Tom Holland's Spider-Man is one for the ages, and one that's likely struck a web cord with audiences  to embrace in the long haul. For Sony, maybe third time really was the charm? Hell, there was one blatant Sony product placement in sight this time around, and that's already a 'Stark' improvement.

After Captain America: Civil War got Marvel Studios' Phase 3 slate of franchise films off to a flyer, matters now turn to another one of Marvel's classic comic characters Stephen Strange, whose last real-life portrayal coming all the way back in a 1978 television film! Scott Derrickson, known for his work in the horror film circuit, with Sinister & Deliver Us from Evil under his resume, is tasked with introducing Doctor Strange, with his mystical powers into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), and while last year's Ant-Man benefited from its Avengers connection, can Doctor Strange pull a rabbit out of the hat with a new horizon for the franchise into the realm of magic?

Right from the get-go, Doctor Strange treads very closely to the usual origin story beats, and more particularly in tandem with the original Iron Man way back in 2008, with the film beginning with your egotistical protagonist (played by Benedict Cumberbatch) whose accident puts him on a path to help others with the assistance of irregular abilities. Sounds like someone took the Iron Man script and labelled a sticky note saying "ADD MAGIC!" (no discredit to the writers here).

#OscarSoWhite! Scarlett Johanssen in Ghost in the Shell! Women in Ghostbusters! Hollywood can't seem to get a break when the race card rears its unpleasant head around here. Almost every time a controversy regarding casting of an ethnic character gets blown up on the Internet, we're treated to the same myriad of articles proclaiming that Hollywood isn't exactly a diversity-friendly haven for actors of ethnic minority, and for good reason. Other than the whitewashing of ethnic characters in many big budget films, the same minority groups have to endure the brunt of severe stereotyping on screen which can be traced back to the decades.

We get it, Hollywood is a convoluted system, and many decisions are rarely decided by single person. There's also the business element when creating films, where forecasted revenue are brought to the fore in favour of  pleasing the fickle minds of the audience. I certainly believe that while whitewashing is not the worst action condone on screen, the creative liberties taken with it mist be justified in a manner that persuades the audiences that the studios made the right call, and does not spark further outrage. 

In this piece, we're going to be looking at the for and against elements towards Hollywood whitewashing, focusing on the Asian American dilemmas this time around.

"Everything they built will fall, and from the ashes of their world... we'll build a better one!" bellows Oscar Isaac's Apocalypse in pretty much all the trailers in X-Men: Apocalypse, the latest installment in the long-running X-Men franchise. That may be a reference, or indeed a pitch of sorts, when 20th Century Fox went about making X-Men: The Last Stand, the Brett Ratner-directed final film in the previous trilogy which tarnished all the goodwill created from Bryan Singer's first two mutant efforts.

With all those bridges burnt, the silver lining that came out of this was the birth of the prequel trilogy starting with Matthew Vaughn's X-Men: First Class and followed by the critical darling of a sequel Days of Future Past (DOFP). The newer films worked as it centers on the main three trio of younger versions of Professor X (James McAvoy), Magneto (Michael Fassbender) and Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence)... and Nicholas Hoult's Beast for that matter, as well as tying their stories by the decades with links to real world events. Having the old cast and Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) returning in DOFP certainly gave the series a commercial boost it lacked from First Class, and here we are now with the latest world-ending installment. With the last two films being high watermark for this 16 year old franchise (along with a hysterical Deadpool film this year), can X-Men: Apocalypse continue the hot streak?

Comic book movies are a dime a dozen these days, with one released pretty much every season in a year. Back in the early days (till this year anyway), these films' premises were simple yet effective: it was always the case of good guys vs the bad guys. This doesn't seem to be the case anymore, with the desire for more convoluted plots and an array of characters, fueled by the success of 2012's The Avengers, has prompted film studios to craft up fresh takes on these fabled comic characters, often resorting to their long list of comic iterations for a hint of inspiration.

We've already seen the first of these, Warner Bros' Batman v Superman serving up an overstuffed and frankly depressing take on their planned DC Comics Universe, with that film also failing to consolidate itself in terms of box office receipts after a lofty opening. Thus, a month later on, we now have our second seismic Hollywood face-off of 2016, pitting the Captain of America against the Man of Iron in Captain America: Civil War.

Directed by Antony and Joe Russo, the 13th Marvel Cinematic Universe entry aims to follow up on the events of 2014's The Winter Soldier (which the Russos' also directed) as well as last summer's Avengers: Age of Ultron, and like Dawn of Justice, both films tackle the nature of a superhero's responsibilities on civilian casualties amidst their display of strength in saving the world, resulting in a  divide of super-heroic proportions. All of these, whilst introducing a third Spiderman in less than a decade, seems like an almighty feat indeed, but did the Russo Brothers' second Marvel feature do a better 'clash of the superheroes' depiction than Zack Synder's DC offering?

What exactly is The Huntsman: Winter's War? Is it a sequel to 2012's Snow White & The Huntsman? Or is it a sequel to the that same 2012 film? Well, in the vein of 300: Rise of an Empire, The Huntsman looks to be a bit of both, looking to fill in the gaps before and after the original story of Snow White. The real question though is: did anyone ask for a sequel for that? I personally didn't see the original as it looked uninspiring and wasn't the biggest fan of Kristen Stewart at the time, even with a then newly minted Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Charlize Theron in supporting roles.

Well, the powers that may be (in this case, just Universal Pictures) decided a prequel/sequel was in order, and due to off-screen reasons chucked out Stewart and director Rupert Sanders as well, bringing in Cedric Nicolas-Troyan to the director's throne (he was visual effects artist for the original). With Stewart gone, Universal not only retained Hemsworth and Theron, both fresh from 2015 smash hits (Avengers and Mad Max respectively), but also brought the entire cavalry to the table by adding in Emily Blunt and Jessica Chastain to the mix. With an even more star studded cast this time round, is The Huntsman considered the fairest of them all? Or was the poison apple the more viable option?

Man of Steel was pretty okay right? I just want to put it out there that I quite enjoyed Zack Synder's installment of the American hero, especially the action-packed fights during the film's second half. Well, Synder's back at it again with Superman in tow, and he's brought along a certain bat vigilante and Amazonian warrior along for the ride in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (BvS). Using the aftermath of Man of Steel as a template for bigger things to come, BvS continues Clark Kent's journey into Superman, while having to introduce a new Batman and our first film iteration of Wonder Woman. The trailers released over the past year have been great, save for that one which basically condensed this 2 and a half hour film into a two minute synopsis, complete with story beats, Doomsday spoiler and Wonder Woman reveal.

The beginning of Dawn of Justice drops us right into a reiteration of the Metropolis destruction seen in Man of Steel, which showed us the destruction caused between Superman (Henry Cavill) and General Zod's (Michael Shannon) neck-snapping battle from the eyes of Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck) down below... but not before we were treated to yet another rendition of Bruce Wayne's family murder for the umpteenth time (also: bats floating Bruce out of a well). Anyway, Batman feels responsible for taking down Superman for his reckless savings (and I don't mean in terms of money) while a sinister corporate leader (Jesse Eisenberg) intents to have the Son of Krypton and Bat of Gotham butt heads... because reasons.

Fortunately, the events of 2014's X-Men: Days of Future Past retconned that continuity out of existence, allowing for a faithful representation of the Rob Liefeld-created comic book character. However, a Deadpool film, a R-rated one at that, wasn't greenlit over at 20th Century Fox until a test footage was 'leaked' online to online critical acclaim. So here we are years later, with the long gestating film's eventual release, but is Deadpool more 'worthy of the hype'? More 'game changer in the R-rated superhero genre'? Or is it more so 'average film resorting to profanity to cover its faults'?

2015 ended with a blast from the past in the form of Star Wars: The Force Awakens, tearing up box office records in the United States and on course to be the highest grossing blockbuster not directed by James Cameron. With that year just passed, we'll hence shift our minds to the Hollywood offerings for the next 12 months, which yet again includes a glutton of superhero adaptations, remakes, reboots, prequels and sequels. 

While there's the usual suspects in the form of Marvel, DC and Disney offerings, signifying another franchise overload in 2016, some original entries still manage to trickle into this list, and some films, especially those released at the year end for awards buzz, are still difficult to gauge at this point (as with last year's Ex Machina, The Martian, Creed, Room and Bridge of Spies). Be warned though, those listed here aren't guaranteed to be goodies, as evidenced by my previous list, where I had the abysmal Mortdecai and Terminator Genisys listed as hot picks.

So sit back, relax with a warm cuppa, and dive into the biggest offerings 2016 has to deliver!

With Ant-Man rolling out in pretty much around the world already (save for the usual suspects - China and Japan), thus ends another billion dollar era in the short history of Marvel Studios. Unlike Phase 1, the second phase in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) was tasked with not only expanding on the stories of our established heroes after the events of 2012's The Avengers, but at the same time introducing newer characters to the mix, these new entities deriving from more obscure source materials than the likes of Iron Man and Captain America.

As evidenced over the past three years, all films improved greatly over their respective installments, with two billion dollar-spinning entries (Iron Man 3 and Avengers: Age of Ultron), but the biggest surprise was 2014's Guardians of the Galaxy, which attained universal acclaim on its way to a $750 million worldwide gross.

On the flip side, criticism soon surfaced over the recycled storylines and forced connections for a wider universe, leading to some quarters to believe that Marvel are getting both lazy or lethargic, though the revenue on-hand speaks for itself entirely. With fan demand at a fever pitch after The Avengers, and with DC Comics' on universe building steam sooner rather than later, how does the six Phase 2 films released stack up against each other?

"WHAT IS THIS? A MOVIE FOR ANTS? THE FILM'S GOT TO BE AT LEAST... THREE TIMES BIGGER THAN THIS"

Zoolander reference aside, being the 12th effort from Marvel Studios' long running Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), Ant-Man is the first non-Marvel sequel since last year's massively popular Guardians of the Galaxy, and the first solo Marvel film since 2011's Captain America: The First Avenger. If people thought GOTG was a risky property to bring to the cinema screens, Ant-Man probably felt worse off, no less due to its obscure source material and being further compounded by its own production problems right before cameras started rolling.

Edgar Wright, a personal favourite director of mine with efforts such as Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz and Scott Pilgrim vs the World, had been working on an Ant-Man standalone film way before Jon Favreau's Iron Man came to fruition. However, with the Marvel franchise ever expanding by the 2010s, the need for connections with every subsequent Marvel film was in order, Ant-Man included. Friction between Wright and the higher-ups at Marvel eventually came to a boiling point which prompted the director to leave deep into pre-production (and most of the cast members confirmed already). 

Peyton Reed, whose directorial portfolio includes comedies such as The Break-Up and Yes Man, was quickly drafted in the director's seat, while script revisions were conducted by Adam McKay (another comedy director of Anchorman and The Other Guys) and even Paul Rudd himself. So, with its chief designer gone and the behind-the-scenes trouble, is Ant-Man destined to underwhelm under Wright's shadow, or is it more of a blessing in disguise and another feather in Marvel Studios' feather-filled cap?

Jurassic Park, along with Back to the Future and the Terminator, are the few franchises that I hold dear to, and no matter how bad some of the sequels can get, the goodwill from the classic original are enough to suppress their mediocrity.

As mentioned in my Jurassic Park Trilogy review, the sequels of 1993's Jurassic Park pales in comparison to the Steven Spielberg classic. After a decade in development hell (with one script even suggesting a human/dinosaur army hybrid... ew), a third sequel is released in the form of Jurassic World, which largely acts as a direct sequel to Jurassic Park (The Lost World and Jurassic Park III are still canon as it took place on a separate island).

Gone are the veteran directors like Speilberg and Joe Johnston, with indie filmmaker Colin Trevorrow in charge of rebooting the franchise to its former greatness. With a talented new group of casts, and a even bigger threat to a now functional theme park, is this modernised entry more like the original or the The Lost World?

The highly anticipated Avengers: Age of Ultron is finally here, and expectations are riding high for the 11th entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). Ever since the highly successful The Avengers raked in $1.5 billion in 2012, many studios have since tried to replicate the all-star formula, with Warner Bros kick-starting their DC Universe with Batman v Superman next year, and Sony attempting an oddball Ghostbusters universe (Honourable mention should go to the Fast & Furious franchise, who did the whole all-star assemble gimmick with Fast Five in 2011 - a year before The Avengers did).

Again directed by Joss Whedon, Age of Ultron assembles our heores on a more international journey, spanning from an orange-hue Johannesburg to the blue-hue Seoul, while introducing new team members and a robotic villain to an already big roster of characters. The hype for this film has been ongoing since its big reveal at Comic Con 2013, hence, does the massive sequel manage to outshine the well-received 2012 installment?

2014's coming to a close, and the new year will usher in another batch of film offerings, which promises to be bigger than ever (they always say that). With every sequel released, there's bound to be a franchise reboot somewhere along the lines, while an original film may pop up from time to time if movie studios were nice enough. So, with so many films released in the next 12 months, which ones are the most sough after? 

My top 15 (with the top 10 after the jump):

Johnny Depp's been kinda in a ditch for the past couple of years, with a slew of under-performing starring vehicles such as Dark Shadows, The Lone Ranger and 2014's disappointing Transcendence. In January, he's donning yet another  odd-looking makeup in a comedy heist which looks like good fun, as suggested as the very hilarious trailer (Tom Jones' 'It's not Unusual' in the background). Supported by an ensemble cast which includes Gwyneth Paltrow, Ewan McGregor and Olivia Munn, this may be the smaller-budgeted movie to help rejuvenate Depp's career.

14) Ted 2

13) The Peanuts Movie / Snoopy & Charlie Brown

Nothing much is known about this, but the teaser trailers shown so far oozes cuteness, and seems true to the original comic strips by Charles Schulz. After many film adaptations of the Dr. Suess materials, the rebooting of several classic literature and cartoons continues with The Peanuts Movie and an animated Popeye film also on the way (also similarly gorgeous).

It's hard to imagine that the first Hunger Games film was released only three years ago, and by year's end we'll be getting the final installment of the "Why does Katniss Care for Peeta?" four part series. Mockingjay Part 1 suffered from the splitting of the final book by showcasing less action and hardly any plot at all, so it's hopeful that the boring predecessor only serves as a massive build-up to the rebellion and an exciting conclusion to the entertaining young adult adaptation.

The Fast & Furious franchise sure is a lucky franchise. After almost seeping into a direct-to-DVD livelihood with Tokyo Drift, the series has gone strength by strength, in terms of quality and box office returns as well.

The seventh installment (!) now introduces even more new characters in the form of Jason Statham as Owen Shaw's evil brother and veteran Kurt Russell in an unknown role, while the director's duty is taken over by fellow Malaysian-born director James Wan, whose credit include the Saw franchise and The Conjuring. This is also the first installment since the unfortunate death of Paul Walker, who couldn't complete his filming of the movie, and has since been replaced with his brothers and some complicated CGI mumbo jumbo.

Summer has gone and dusted, and along with it came a host of blockbuster movies, and while this summer was one of the lowest-grossing in years, it should not deter the fact that many of these films have been nothing short of excellent. Even with a few duds like Transformers and A Million Ways to Die in the West, we have been blessed with amazing sequels and entertaining original films.

For now, here's a list of my top 5 movies of the summer, and are ranked based on current preferences, regardless of the review score I gave when I reviewed them. Also do note that Captain America 2 isn't really a summer movie as it was released in way early in April, hence ineligible for this list.

The Expendables franchise duly establishes the many action men in the entertainment industry, but plenty of them had their glory days back in the eighties/nineties, so where are the hard hitting men of today? Well, the noughties and beyond might now belong to the opposite sex, as women have seemingly taken up the mantle as the main action stars, which include names like Kate Beckinsale, Milla Jovovich, Angelina Jolie, and now Scarlett Johansson, but most of us already know she's a tough cookie from per portrayal as Black Widow in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Now, Johansson's trading the leather suit and gadgets for mobsters and brain-enhancing drugs in Lucy, directed by Luc Besson, who's impressive résumé include Léon: The Professional, The Fifth Element and many producing contributions. Produced by Besson's own EuropaCorp, a studio known for churning out many action flicks (most notably the Transporter and Taken franchise), Lucy is no different, but has the benefit of an extra pinch of sci-fi to keep the audience glued.