RageLite review - Shazam!

Note - This episode is almost a week late, my apologies. 

The year is 1939, and creators C. C. Beck and Bill Parker create a character for Fawcett Comics named Captain Marvel. He was a big hit, becoming the most popular superhero of the 1940’s, even getting a film adaptation, but in 1953, a lawsuit alleging that the character was a copy of Superman, no accounting for accuracy there, lead to Fawcett Comics ceasing publication on this character. In 1972 they licensed out the character to DC Comics (the guys that sued them, that’s gotta sting) and by 1991, DC had purchased the rights outright. But when your main competitor is Marvel, who have a Captain Marvel of their own, it ultimately is no surprise that another name became the name associated with the hero, so much so that in 2011 they dropped the use of the name Captain Marvel altogether. So, the new name, Shazam!

Shazam! Is a very different beast for DC but then, it looks like DC is shying away from the shared universe and connected narratives and more towards experimentation with different genres and story arcs. For better or worse, Joker would not have come out if not for that. Shazam is a story about a kid getting super-powers, it’s wish fulfilment, a power-fantasy, it’s cheesy.

In the writers chair is Henry Gayden, whose only other writing credit is Earth to Echo, and Darren Lenke, no stranger to comedy with credits like Shrek 4, and the Goosebumps films.  David F Sandberg is an interesting choice for director as he’s done more around horror than action. The film made $388m on a $100m budget and got solid review scores, 90% average 7.26/10 with critics and 82% average 4.2/5 with audiences.

Shazam borrows fairly heavily from the Geoff Johns New-52 version of Billy Batson. Billy’s been aged up a little and he’s not the pure-hearted entirely good boy he was in earlier Shazam Stories. He’s more a realistic kid with abandonment issues and a yearning for the family he’ll never have, as opposed to the family that’s ultimately in front of him. Family is up and centre when it comes to the movie’s themes.

After running away again, he gets placed in a group home, with disabled Freddy Freeman and 4 others you don’t really get to know very much about. Mary, Darla, Pedro and Eugene all get a bit shafted to make room for Billy’s origin and overall story arc, they don’t get any powers until the climax and I’m not sure what some of their powers even are. I know Darla and Pedro got specific elements of Shazam’s powers, not entirely sure with the others.

There is definitely merit to Billy’s arc. I’m a sucker for coming of age stories in general and this is executed pretty well. The casting as Asher Angel and Zachery Levi help as they both bring the correct amount of youthful energy and abject cynicism. Zachery Levi does a good job of playing in a child in an adult’s body and this is the main source of the film’s humour.

Freddie serves as a pop-cultural guide, something you could compare to say… Willhelm from Antboy. Unlike Willhelm though he’s also Billy’s moral compass, helping him test out his powers and talking him down when he think his ego has gone too far. He’s not entirely faultless either, his excitement over the situation gives him a sense of importance that he at one point tries to capitalise on. Of course, we have bullies straight out of a 90’s film. Bet they think they’re real hard beating up a guy on crutches in front of a crowd.

Incidentally, Mr and Mrs Vasquez, I know Billy does plenty wrong which you have the right to tell him off about but chastising Billy for ‘starting fights’ with the bullies who were beating up on your disabled foster child makes you look like assholes. This is a problem I’ve begun to notice where films try and take a nuanced approach to violence and go ‘it doesn’t matter who started it’ it’s something I remember hearing a lot as a child, and it’s nonsense. Yes, it matters who is the instigator of a fight, and this is especially true of a superhero film, else there’d be no difference between hero and villain.

Speaking of villains, it pains me to say it but I don’t really care for how they portrayed Dr Sivanna. I get what they’re going for. Sivana is supposed to be a reflection of Billy. Billy yearns for a family he could never have, Sivana is an outcast from his. Both have shunned any familial warmth and tried to live their lives alone. And then they give him the powers of the 7 deadly sins to make him a threat, and their power-sets being similar is another sign of their connection.

Few problems here though, first off the 7 deadly sins are boring at best and at worst a wild tonal inconsistency as before the climax, any scene with them ends up being dark and horrific. They don’t have unique characteristics or personalities, despite the speech from Billy trying to account for it. And this doesn’t feel like the Sivana from the comics at all.

Dr Sivana is first and foremost a genius, with money and connections to back it up. He’s not as stable as someone like Luthor, and requires the insight of Mr Mind (the worm that we did see at the end) to gain a full picture of the magical world. I find it odd he’d spend his life obsessing over getting through a door rather than searching for power through other means, be them spells, chemicals or technology.

Mark Strong’s performance is perfectly fine but I don’t think he was well cast as Sivana.

There is some strong sentiment about family in the film, and the leads are well-cast and likeable with a good mix of comic-book action (although with some questionable special effects) and well-rounded humour. The story does fall into the trappings of a super-hero story with only 2/6 members of the family getting real screen-time, and 2 of them getting no development at all, and the villains are underwhelming. But these negatives do not outweigh the positives and I’m looking forward to what the future may hold with Mr Mind.

Rating 70/100