Tag Archives: movie review

Review: “The Avengers”

by

17

Marvel Studio’s “The Avengers” is the culmination of what may be the most ambitious project in film history. For those movie fans who have been living in a cave for the past several years, Marvel has been releasing several individual superhero movies that have all set the table for this huge event film. Two “Iron Man” pictures, “Captain America”, “Thor”, and “The Incredible Hulk” have all been linked together through brief reoccuring cameos and hidden after-credits scenes that refer to something called “The Avengers Initiative”. As any comic book geek could tell you, that’s a reference to the Marvel superhero team that first debuted in comics in 1963. On the surface, the idea for an Avengers film that’s directly tied into other individual superhero movies sounds great. On the flip side, even though the other films have been good, there are still plenty of areas where “The Avengers” could go off track. Well as a movie and comic book fan, I’m happy to say that “The Avengers” not only meets the challenges of it’s vision, but it’s an action packed adrenaline rush that offers some of the most fun I’ve had at the theater this year.

To handle this rather large undertaking, Marvel placed the project in the hands of Joss Whedon. Whedon was a good choice mainly due to his variety of experience. He’s found success in television, film, and comic books and he uses his knowledge of each combined with Disney’s deep pockets to create a movie that would appeal to the fanboy and the casual moviegoer alike. One thing that helps Whedon is that the film doesn’t require your traditional origin story. While we do see the generation of the team, we know all of the characters from the previous Marvel movies so Whedon is able to dive right into the story. That being said, don’t mistake this for a deep, engaging story that will challenge the audience. But I’ll also say that anyone going into “The Avengers” for that has already missed the point.

Throughout the other Marvel films, particularly “Captain America”, we learned about a cosmic energy source known as the cosmic cube. In “The Avengers”, S.H.E.I.L.D. head honcho Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has a team of scientists led by physicist Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) trying to harness the power of the cube, now known as the Tesseract. But suddenly the cube activates and opens a portal allowing the evil Loki (Tom Hiddleston) to entire the facility and steal it. Knowing the immense threat associated with the Tesseract being in the wrong hands, Fury activates the Avengers Initiative. But getting such a diverse group of superheroes to cooperate and coexist proves to be a lot harder than expected.

Fury starts by contacting Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson). He sends her to India to find Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) while sending Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg) to Stark Tower to speak to Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.). While the two are gone, he approaches Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) and sends him on a mission to retrieve the Tesseract. Upon hearing of Loki’s involvement, the thunder god Thor (Chris Hemsworth) also entires the mix as does the marksman and assassin known as Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner). Each of the heroes have their own baggage and their own personalities which often times clash to the point of dysfunction. But their disagreements give us some of the movie’s cooler and often times funnier moments. As you would expect the situation worsens and it’s up to the team to pull together or the world will be taken over starting with New York City.

It’s a pretty cut-and-dry story but it really works because Whedon understand his characters and he knows what kind of movie he’s trying to make. His familiarity with the Marvel comic book universe is clearly seen throughout the picture but nowhere more than in his treatment of the characters. As a comic book fan, I was really impressed with how they all felt right and it’s clear that the source material played a big role in shaping the on-screen versions. But Whedon never falls into the trap of taking things too seriously. The movie is filled with laugh out loud funny moments that are cleverly used and they never feel cheap or forced. They mix perfectly with the razor-sharp dialogue and the jaw-dropping action sequences. But the fantastic action and special effects shouldn’t surprise anyone. Afterall, “The Avengers” is a superhero action picture and Whedon knows it. The action comes at a furious pace and I can see where some may view it as relentless. Personally, I was completely wrapped up in it. The movie sells the superhero action through some of the most spectacular visuals and editing that you’ll see. I was blown away.

I can’t write a review of “The Avengers” without mentioning the incredible cast. One of the reasons the Marvel films and particularly “The Avengers” works so well is because of the amazing casting. Everyone is invested in their character and not one single performer phones it in. Downey, Jr. continues to be the perfect Tony Stark mainly due to his natural ability to use sarcasm and fire off funny quips without hesitation. Chris Evans, known more for his goofier roles,  is also quite good as the serious and straight-laced Captain America. I also really liked Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner. He’s the third actor to take on the role and he nails it. Much like Downey, Jr., Hemsworth is the perfect Thor and he shares some of the film’s best scenes with Hulk. Renner and Johannson also handle their roles very well. But I have to give special time to the wonderful Tom Hiddleston. He’s a remarkably diverse actor and he shows it here. His Loki is mysterious, mischievous, and evil and Hiddleston slithers through his scenes stealing many of them. There are also nice smaller performances from Gregg, Gwyneth Paltrow and Cobie Smulders that are just icing on the cake.

I can see where some people may not respond as positively as I did to “The Avengers”. The action is pretty much start-to-finish and if you’re not interested in the characters you’ll have a hard time embracing the story. There are also a few shortcuts taken with the story for the sake of convenience that could have been done a little better. For me, I have a connection to these characters through all my years of comic book reading and this film exceeded my expectations. But being a comic reader isn’t a prerequisite for enjoying this movie. If you’ve liked what Marvel has put out leading to it, you’re going to love “The Avengers”. Sure, it’s a loud, energetic summer popcorn flick, but it’s also a really good one. It’s honest and it never tries to be something it’s not. Featuring one of the better ensemble casts and some top-notch directing from Joss Whedon, “The Avengers” is a big budget blockbuster that actually deserves all the money it’s going to rake it. When’s the next showing? I’m ready to see it again.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

4-stars

REVIEW: “Thor”

by

0

The summer of 2011 was all about superheroes. The summer movie season started with “Thor”, the first of four superhero film’s that were released between May and July of 2011. The idea of a Thor movie changed hands multiple times but Marvel Studios would finally green-light the project after the strong success of the Iron Man film. “Thor” was another movie that led to this week’s much-anticipated Avengers movie.

Of the four big superhero releases that year, I always felt “Thor” had the biggest chance fir failure. While I understood how a great picture could be made considering the wealth of quality source material available, I couldn’t help but question how it would look on-screen. I was thrilled to see that it’s a cleverly crafted film and Marvel Studios did a nice job placing it in the hands of director Kenneth Branagh. Now Branagh wasn’t the first name that I thought of when it comes to directing superhero movies. He’s better known for his Shakespeare movie adaptations but don’t let that scare you away. He does a great job here with some tricky material.

Australian actor Chris Hemsworth plays Thor, the tough but brash god of thunder and heir to the throne of Asgard who is banished to earth after bringing war to his home and losing favor with his father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins). Thor’s banishment opens the door for his brother Loki (wonderfully played by Tom Hiddleston), also known as the god of mischief, to rise to power. Upon crashing down to earth, Thor is found by a group of scientists led by Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) who can’t determine whether Thor is from another “realm” or truly insane. To make things worse, Thor finds himself to be without  Mjolnir, his mystical hammer and ultimate power source, making his ability to return to Asgard virtually impossible.

Perhaps the greatest thing about Thor is that it’s just so much fun. For me personally, it was a fantastic movie theater experience. The cast is having fun and easily passes it on to us. Of course it’s filled with spectacular action sequences and special effects but also the perfect amount of humor that never goes too far. The movie never takes itself too seriously and that’s a key to it’s success. “Thor” sticks close enough to the comic book source material to satisfy any fanboy like me but also has a strong mass appeal that anyone could easily appreciate. I also loved the portrayals of Thor’s great assortment of side characters such as Heimdall, Volstagg, and Sif. Almost everything works well. There are moments that had me wanting to clap and others that had me laughing out loud. It’s that well done.

Hemsworth really brings it with his performance. He proves to be a great casting choice and his bulked up, Norse warrior look combined with a genuinely funny, self-deprecating humor does Thor justice. Portman, fresh off of her Academy Award win, is also very good as Jane Foster. She has a nice, believable chemistry with Hemsworth that’s pretty easy to buy into. Hiddleston’s Loki was one of the trickiest roles (no pun intended) but he pulls it off masterfully and Hopkins is as strong as always. I also enjoyed Jaimie Alexander’s Sif. Unfortunately she isn’t given much to do and I would have loved to have seen more of her in the picture.

There isn’t a lot to say negatively about the film but I do have to mention the 3-D. There are very few scenes that really stand out and at the end of the day the 3-D seems tacked on and pointless. As is the case with many conversions, it adds a darker look to the screen and I could have done without it completely. I also wasn’t really taken Kat Dennings’ Darcy Lewis character. She’s mainly in there for comic relief and honestly some of her lines are pretty funny. But I could think of a few better ways to use that screen time. But these things do nothing to ruin what’s a really good film.

“Thor” was a great start to the summer season and a true accomplishment for fans of the comic book movie genre. It’s strong cast is complimented by a well written story and sharp direction. As I mentioned, it never takes itself too seriously but does have enough drama to draw you in. It trips up in a few small places but as a whole “Thor” was a joy. As a comic book fan it met nearly every expectation I had. It’s an obvious attempt to start yet another Marvel movie franchise and ties in nicely to the upcoming Avengers film. It moves at a perfect pace and maintains a great balance between it’s parallel stories. It a fun, exciting, and often hilarious popcorn picture that I’m ready to see again.

VERDICT – 4 STARS

“SAFE” – 3 1/2 STARS

by

0

While not all of Jason Statham’s action pictures have been good, you can’t deny that he has an almost infectious tough guy charisma. He’s a believable action movie star even in the middle of some pretty far-fetched action sequences. In “Safe”, Statham shoots, kicks, and punches through some pretty familiar territory. But it’s also a sharply directed action picture that builds on a really strong performance from Statham all the way to its bullet-ridden finale.

Statham plays Luke Wright, an ex-NYPD special agent who has hit rock bottom. We learn that Luke has resorted to cage fighting, something he hasn’t done well at. After winning a fight he was supposed to lose and costing the Russian Mafia a load of money, his life is utterly shattered by the orders of the mob’s leader. Homeless and at the end of his rope, he sees a young Chinese girl being chased by the same Russians. He intervenes to save the girl who he quickly finds is also being hunted by the Chinese Triads and some corrupt NYPD cops. Luke finds himself in the middle of an all out war in the New York City streets as he tries to protect the girl and the long list of numbers she holds in her memory.

Several things make “Safe” stand out from some of Statham’s other movies.  For one thing, the Luke Wright character shows more humanity than we see in some of his other roles. Statham absolutely has the athletic, tough-as-nails, butt-kicker persona down perfectly. But I was really surprised to see how well he brought genuine emotion to several scenes that called for it. The movie also benefits from a pretty tight and well structured story. It’s fast-paced and adrenaline filled but it’s also cleverly layed out. But that doesn’t mean the story is flawless. There’s nothing that happens that you won’t see coming from a mile away. The only exception is the very end which really didn’t work for me. I’m not going any further because I don’t want to spoil anything, but let’s just say the big finale was a head-scratcher.

But “Safe” is an action movie first and foremost and it delivers plenty of it. There’s plenty of gunfire and bone breaking and the frantic herky-jerky camera work actually works better here than in many other films that employ the technique. Director Boaz Yakin knows Statham’s strengths and he rides them. Statham’s martial arts background fuels some really slick fight sequences and he’s not bad with a pistol either. And while there is plenty violence, Yakin portrays it without buckets of blood. It’s gritty and edgy but it maintains the feel without the unneccessary gore. The action is the movie’s bread and butter and I was sold on it.

This certainly isn’t a movie for everyone and it isn’t a film that will garner a lot of critical praise. But it’s a fun, no-nonsense action picture that I enjoyed. Statham really brings it both physically and with a performance that shows he has some acting chops. The movie is fairly predictable and it’s supposed twist at the end isn’t all that impressive. But will anyone be going to see “Safe” other than to see Statham kick, punch, and shoot his way through waves of bad guys? That’s one of the reasons I went to see it and I definitely got what I paid for.

“HANNA” – 4 STARS

by

12

In “Hanna” Saoirse Ronan plays the title character who lives in isolation with her father Erik (Eric Bana) in the snow-covered forests of Finland. While there, he’s instructs her in methods of survival and trains her in hand-to-hand combat which immediately let’s you know there is more going on under the surface. Hanna finds out she has been trained to kill Marissa Wiegler (Cate Blanchett), a corrupt CIA agent who has a history with Erik. But after setting out on her mission things go wrong and Hanna finds herself running for her life while trying to piece together who she really is and where she came from.

Ronan again proves she is one of the top young acting talents in film today. She’s simply magnificent as the sheltered but lethal Hanna. She captures the conflict within Hanna through some tender scenes that show her innocent curiosity and some intense action sequences that show the violent nature of her training. Hanna hasn’t experienced any of the modern conveniences or technologies of today and it truly feels as if you are watching her enter a whole new world. It’s also great to see Eric Bana giving a good performance in a very nice role for him. But the usually solid Cate Blanchett is surprisingly inconsistent as C.I.A. agent Wiegler. She sometimes comes across as unconvincing and her odd southern accent seems to come and go. But overall this is Ronan’s show and she is fantastic.

Director Joe Wright starts the film with a bang and keeps it moving at a break-neck pace. It never loses it’s frantic energy or momentum. The gritty techno soundtrack by The Chemical Brothers isn’t overused and, along with the quick camera cuts and sharp angles, contributes to the overall feel of the picture. “Hanna” moves from one country to another and is filmed in some beautiful locations including Finland, Germany, and Morocco. There’s also a unique style to the way “Hanna” is made. At times it has an almost fantasy feel to it due to the way it’s shot and edited. Other times it shows some pretty standard elements from other action/revenge thrillers.

But the film does have a few issues. Throughout the picture you feel there is more to the story than there really is. The abrupt ending is satisfying in one sense but it’s also conventional and predictable. The tension that nicely builds up seems a little hollow as the film reveals itself to be nothing more than a high-octane action/chase picture. Now don’t get me wrong, I love a good action/chase picture. But “Hanna” seemed to be breaking away from the traditional action movie formula. Unfortunately it doesn’t see it through to the end.

The few gripes aside, “Hanna” is a fun and stylish movie as well as a showcase for young Saoirse Ronan. I can’t say enough about her performance. And while Blanchett’s performance is a little distracting and the ending may be somewhat of a letdown, it doesn’t kill the film. There’s many other things to like about “Hanna” and many things that separates it from most action thrillers. So sit down, buckle up, and enjoy the ride. I know I did.

REVIEW: “To Kill A Mockingbird”

by

14

Classic Movie SpotlightMOCKINGConsidered an American movie classic, “To Kill a Mockingbird” is one of the best films to come out of the 1960’s and features what many consider to be Gregory Peck’s finest performance. It was nominated for eight Oscars, a winner of three, and was listed in The National Film Registry in 1995. In many ways “To Kill a Mockingbird” is a time capsule. Each time I watch it I’m transported back to a time that in many ways was kinder and gentler but not without its own open wounds. What’s most impressive is that it manages to do this without ever feeling unimportant or dated. It feels just as powerful and relevent now as it did when I first saw it.

The movie is based on the Pulitzer Prize winning novel by Harper Lee about the small town of Maycomb, Alabama during the 1930’s. Gregory Peck plays Atticus Finch, a town lawyer and a single father of two young children. Atticus is asked to represent Tom Robinson (Brock Peters), a black man who is accused of beating and raping a white woman. Atticus believes in the judicial process and believes Tom to be innocent. But even before the trial, many in the town have already judged Tom to be guilty and tensions soon reach the boiling point.

Peck won the Best Actor Oscar for his performance and many have said it was because of the striking similarity between him and his Atticus character. Atticus is a true man of character and integrity. He stands up for what’s right and tries to instill that same principle in his children. But while the trial and the fallout is a key part of the story, it’s not the main part. The movie’s bigger focus is on Atticus’ children, his son Jem (Phillip Alford) and his daughter Scout (Mary Badham). We first see them in all their innocence, from their imaginative playtime to their light-hearted mischief. Jem and Scout just live their life with a care-free child-like approach that I was really, really drawn into. Perhaps the wonderful portrayal of their innocence helps make what comes later so much more powerful.

At its core, “To Kill a Mockingbird” is about the loss of innocence. Eventually things unfold through the eyes of the children that reveals to them the darker and more troubling aspects to the world they live in. As the town begins to react to the alleged rape and the tensions leading up to the trial date rise, the kids see things that leave them confused and often times scared. The way director Robert Mulligan switches his camera to the children as they’re watching these harsh and disturbing things unfold is beautifully executed yet so heart-breaking. But yet it’s true and authentic. Unfortunately, as kids we’ve all had those moments. Moments when we realized that the world wasn’t just about tire swings and ice cream. Moments that we see the dark side of society and the people around us. But that’s also when the light shines the brightest and for these kids, their father Atticus was certainly a shining light.

There are several other smaller but equally enthralling side stories and side characters in the movie. Jem and Scout make friends with a young boy named Dill (John Megna) who comes to visit his Aunt Rachel each summer. I loved Dill and the three have some great scenes together including their investigations into Boo Radley, a mysterious crazy man who is believed to only come out of his creepy broken-down house after dark. Robert Duvall plays Boo in what was his big screen debut. I also loved Jack K. Anderson’s performance as Bob Ewell, the slimy and disgraceful father of the rape victim. He’s a despicable man and his vitriol hatred makes him an easy character to dislike. Everyone is well cast and the performances are spot-on.

I also loved the way the film visually captured the 1930’s Depression-era South. By the end of the film you really feel as though you know Jem and Scout’s neighborhood as if it were your own. The subtle things such as porch swings, school attire, and southern accents all give the movie such a homey and believable feel. But the movie doesn’t shy away from the deep racial divide and clear bigotry that was a problem at that time. It shows a warped and broken social structure that put personal hatred above justice and makes no apologies. We see this in not only the story itself but also in the striking visual details as well.

 I think my only real issue with “To Kill a Mockingbird” was with the courtroom scene. Now don’t misunderstand me, it was a great extended scene. But it felt to me like something was missing. With a couple of exceptions, there wasn’t a lot of emotion or intensity. It also seemed as though everything moved and flowed perfectly with nothing to buck the plans of the defense or the prosecution. Now I understand that the courtroom scene itself wasn’t intended to be the centerpiece of the picture. But I really felt it could have had a little more “pop”. That said, Peck was fantastic in the scene and his questioning of Bob Ewell and Tom Robinson were fantastic moments in the film.

“To Kill a Mockingbird” does so many things right that it’s easy to overlook the small faults. Peck certainly deserved his Oscar as he is brilliant playing, as many believe, himself. Atticus Finch really touched me especially as a father trying but failing to shield his kids from the sick side of the world they live in. That father/children relationship really, really worked for me. But the movie also had so many other components that resonated with me and that’s another reason it’s so good. It’s a multifaceted story that’s told with a great visual and technical style and that isn’t ashamed to address the deep-rooted problems of that day. It’s been called “timeless” and I have to agree. It never gets old and it still has the same effect on me today as it always has.

VERDICT – 4.5 STARS

“GROWN UPS” – 1 STAR

by

7

I kinda knew what I was getting into when I decided to watch Adam Sandler’s “Grown Ups”. Sandler is on a streak of pretty dreadful yet profitable movies, most of which have become cheap, lazy, and formulaic. Unfortunately, “Grown Ups” is no different. It’s a tedious and unfunny film that provides more moans and head-shakes than laughs. It’s a lame and juvenile exercise in banality that makes you question where Sandler’s loyalties lie – in making good movies or making money.

Sandler teams up with Kevin James, David Spade, Chris Rock, and Rob Schneider to play five childhood friends who are reunited after the death of their old junior high basketball coach. After attending the funeral, the five take their families to a lake house for the 4th of July weekend in hopes of catching up. Of course none are completely forthcoming about their lives and instead choose to impress their friends by making things seem better than they really are. Each bring along their own quirky baggage including a nagging mother-in-law, maladjusted children, and a 70-year old wife. Each are played for laughs but none are even remotely funny. Of course families come together, friendships are rekindled, and audiences are bludgeoned to death with one stupid, rehashed gag after another.

Sandler co-wrote and co-produced this mess and he doesn’t seem to know what kind of movie he wants to make here. The movie jumps back-and-forth between family friendly and filthy bathroom comedy with neither being effective. He employs so many of the same overused gags that have become commonplace in Adam Sandler movies. We get fart jokes. We get urine jokes. We even get lowbrow breast milk jokes. “Grown Ups” pulls out all the stops to try to cover up its appallingly poor writing. You name the gimmick and you’ll probably find it here.

I was also taken back by Sandler’s sometimes shameless uses of the children in the film. In the movie, one boy is 4-years-old but still breast feeds. Several of his scenes go well beyond good taster as do the numerous lines of dialogue that calls for the boy to say all sorts of crude things about it. I’m not trying to say I’m the expert when it comes to determining what’s proper for a child or even what passes as funny. But this really felt wrong and it certainly wasn’t funny. Sandler doesn’t show much more respect for the other child actors but at least they are older and don’t feel quit as exploited.

There is absolutely nothing genuine about “Grown Ups”. The characters feel fake. The relationships feel fake. The attempts at humor certainly feel fake. Even when the movie tries to drum up some emotion and sentiment it feels completely forced and fabricated.  None of the actors really sell their character. Kevin James comes the closest but even he is a mixture of numerous characters we have seen before. Even the wives are shallow and one-dimensional and contribute their fair share of cringe-worthy scenes. The material is so bad that it’s impossible to invest in anyone or believe in anything you’re seeing on-screen.

When it comes down to it, “Grown Ups” is yet another sloppy, adolescent “comedy” and another red mark on Adam Sandler’s resume. There’s absolutely nothing to take away from the movie and sitting through it quickly becomes excruciating. This begs the question, how on earth did this monstrosity gross over $270 million worldwide? Is this really the best Hollywood can do? Do people really find this stuff funny? Who knows, maybe I’m the one who is out of the loop on this one.