Some brief opening text lays out the setting for director Harald Zwart’s astounding “The 12th Man”. Nazi Germany occupied Norway on April 9, 1940. Three years later in Scotland British forces trained Norwegian soldiers to carry out sabotage missions in their homeland. On March 24, 1943 twelve Norwegian resistance fighters were sent to target German airfields in Operation Martin Red. Only one would come back alive.

This Norwegian historical thriller is based on the extraordinary true story of Jan Baalsrud, the lone survivor of that doomed operation. The film is based on a biography by Tore Haug and Astrid Karlsen Scott. It’s not the first movie based on a book of Baalsrud’s life. The 1957 drama “Nine Lives” received an Oscar nomination and remains a highly regarded picture.

The grueling role of Baalsrud is played by Thomas Gullestad. Zwart starts quickly with Baalsrud and his team crawling out of the icy arctic waters onto the northern shores of Norway amid a hail of bullets. We learn that a costly mistake blew their cover and a German vessel attacks as they approach the mainland. Forced to scuttle their shot-up fishing boat, the twelve struggle ashore where German troops await them. Eleven are captured, Baalsrud escapes.

One of the first things I noticed was Zwart and cinematographer Geir Hartly Andreassen’s striking perspectives. Their camera placements and the fluidity of its movements offer one penetrating visual after another. Then you have the shots of the stunning Norwegian landscapes which in context are both beautiful and ominous. These images add a menacing dimension as the wounded and battered Baalsrud trudges through the frigid snow and ice.

“The 12th Man” spotlights Jan Baalsrud’s resilience as he makes his way towards neutral Sweden’s border, fighting treacherous terrain, excruciating cold and the doggedly determined Gestapo. But as he slowly succumbs to snowblindness, hypothermia, and gangrene the true crux of the story comes into focus. The film is just as much about the people he meets throughout his harrowing journey. Jan’s strength and heroism is matched, often exceeded, only by the Norwegian patriots helping him at every step – civilians routinely risking their lives to save his. In many ways they form the emotional core of the movie.

Equally fascinating is when the movie shifts focus to that of a Gestapo officer named Kurt Stage (played by Jonathan Rhys Meyers). No one has ever escaped Stage’s pursuit and he takes Baalsrud’s flight personally. He persistently hunts Jan rejecting the skepticism and needling of an ambitious fellow officer (Martin Kiefer). Myers offers a charismatic antagonist pushed more by ego and obsession than duty.

Some may say the film’s biggest surprise is in Harald Zwart’s direction. Perhaps known more for his misfires (“Agent Cody Banks”, “The Pink Panther 2”, “The Karate Kid” remake), but don’t let that dissuade you for a second. His portrayal of this unbelievable true story is riveting both visually and narratively. Whether he is capturing Jan Baalsrud’s intense and sometimes brutal attempts at survival or creating genuine moments of levity with the men and women risking everything to aid him. It makes for truly inspirational cinema.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

As a younger video game enthusiast I remember being excited at the news of “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider”, a 2001 movie based on the “Tomb Raider” video game franchise. It seemed ripe for the big screen with potential to be an Indiana Jones styled action-adventure. While it certainly couldn’t hold a candle to the three true Indy pictures, it was a fun and successful adaptation. A sequel followed – not quite as good and not quite as successful.

The video game series started in 1996 and over the years has seen several sequels, remakes, and spin-offs. The most recent reboot was in 2013. The game from developer Crystal Dynamics was critically acclaimed and wildly successful. It would become the highest grossing game in the franchise. Players responded to the grittier tone and human element that was sometimes overlooked in past games.

Now the movie series returns, freshly rebooted and based on the most recent incarnation of the “Tomb Raider” games. And like its inspiration, it seeks to be grittier and more focused on giving us a more human Lara Croft. For the most part the movie succeeds.

The first smart decision was casting Oscar-winner Alicia Vikander. She gives us a Lara who is considerably more grounded than Angelina Jolie’s version from the previous films. Vikander’s portrayal is anchored by heartbreak, vulnerability and uncertainty. She isn’t a swashbuckling tomb-rainding buttkicker by nature or desire. The story frames her as a heartbroken young woman at a loss following the disappearance of her father (played by Dominic West) some seven years earlier.

But Lara is also full of determination and bravery. An unexpected clue leads her to her father’s secret study at the family’s now abandoned estate. There she discovers her father last set off for a mysterious remote island outside of Hong Kong. Through a ‘if you’re watching this I must be dead’ recording he commands Lara to destroy all of his research regarding the island. Instead she uses it to find the location and heads there in hopes of discovering what happened to him.

This opens the rather obvious door to Lara’s adventure. She runs into Walton Goggins who plays Mathias Vogel, the film’s chief antagonist. Turns out he heads an expedition on the island to find the same ancient tomb Lara’s father was seeking. Goggins is an unexpectedly fun choice. He brings a subtle (and slightly humorous) wide-eyed madness to his character who is a bit stir-crazy from his years on the island. For Lara it becomes a journey of revelation and self-discovery as she finds herself at odds with Vogel and his band of mercenaries. Oh, and of course there is also the tomb and the potentially devastating power it may hold.

Director Roar Uthaug’s last film was the excellent 2015 Norwegian disaster picture “The Wave”. Here he is given a much different canvas but the sharp camera eye from his previous movie remains. The action scenes are shot with energy and clarity. No annoying rapid-fire quick cuts or shaky hand-held approach. He also wisely stops at certain points and sets his camera on Vikander allowing her to flesh out pieces of her character through her performance. That may sound a bit obvious, but far too often directors don’t give good performers that room. And again, Vikander is spot-on.

Does “Tomb Raider” break new ground or change the movie landscape? Not hardly. But is that a prerequisite for every film? Absolutely not. Will it be pigeonholed as just another video game movie? I think we’ve already seen some of that. But when you toss aside any preconceived notions or sky-high expectations, what you get is a fun and often times thrilling action-adventure with a strong, believable female protagonist . It’s a nice new foundation for a franchise. Unfortunately due to some iffy box office numbers that may not happen. What a shame.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

Marvel Studios seems so have found a soft spot with many critics. Unlike their DC competition, Marvel movies are generally well received by critics who (as I gabbed about in my “Justice League” review) appreciate the MCU’s willingness to be a bit more lighthearted and poke fun at itself. Never has that been more true than with “Thor: Ragnarok”.

With a Rotten Tomatoes score of 92% and over $820 million in the box office bank (so far), Thor’s third solo film and seventeenth installment in Marvel’s cinematic universe has been yet another critical and commercial success. But what made is such a treat for many critics is part of what held me back.

Easily the most intriguing thing about “Thor: Ragnarok” was the choice of director. Taika Waititi has made two of my favorite straight comedies of the past several years. “What We Do in the Shadows” and “Hunt for the Wilderpeople” showcased Waititi’s hyper-quirky brand of humor. Handing him the reins of a Marvel franchise film was guaranteeing something different.

The story begins with Thor (Chris Hemsworth) held captive by the flaming demon Surtur. Thor learns that his father Odin (Anthony Hopkins) has left his throne and Surtur plans to fulfill the Ragnarok prophecy and destroy Asgard. The God of Thunder will have none of that. Waititi wastes no time showing his comic intentions. This quick opening sequence summarizes the balance the entire film wants to maintain – wacky humor and superhero action.

For the remainder of the first act the story hurriedly hops from one plot point to the next. Thinking he has prevented Ragnarok, Thor returns to Asgard and soon learns the true threat to the realm is none other than Cate Blanchett. She plays Hela, the Goddess of Death and Odom’s long-lost firstborn who returns to Asgard to take the throne and wake her army of the dead. Her intent is the same as most MCU baddies – power, world domination, the usual. But Blanchett is wickedly fun, a bit dry at times but a hoot.

Hela wins round one and Thor finds himself stranded on a trashy planet ran by Jeff Goldblum’s Grandmaster. No one else in the film can match Goldblum whose performance is both bizarre and hysterical. Waititi urged Goldblum to improvise and the actor runs with it without the slightest restraint. I can see some audience members bewildered by what he’s doing. I found him to be an absolute scene stealer.

Adding to the fun is the return of the mischievous Loki (Tom Hiddleston). We also get an overly chatty Hulk played partly by Mark Ruffalo and partly by a lot of green CGI. Idris Elba also returns as Heimdall, Asgard’s guardian sentry. The biggest new addition is Tessa Thompson who plays a hard-as-nails bounty hunter with a complicated past. Thompson adds plenty of energy even though she occasionally overplays the hard-drinking scoundrel type.

Waititi and company put together a lot of big action, but the film plays more as a comedy which means plenty of funny moments. But his treatment of Thor clashes with the past Marvel movies. From his first film Thor has been a bit of a lug. “Ragnarok” portrays him as more of a wisecracking dimwit. There are scenes where he steps outside of that box and reminds us of why he’s one of Marvel’s powerhouses. But after this movie it will be hard for some to see him as much more than a goof. The same could be said with Hulk. The film makes some weird moves with him and it will be interesting to see how it effects the character going forward.

Those not interested in continuity or source material won’t have any problems with “Thor: Ragnarok”. That’s probably the best way to approach it. For me, despite having some truly great aspects, something felt off. I can’t deny the film’s charm and there are some genuinely funny scenes. By no means is it a difficult watch. But I find its skittish first act and some questionable character handling is still gnawing at me.

VERDICT – 3 STARS