I'm Sure I Was Making Some Kind Of Point: 2011 Movie List

Showing posts with label 2011 Movie List. Show all posts

Tuesday, 27 March 2012

With This Ring, You'll Be Dead (Part 2)

(Please note: the following blog was originally posted on my old blog Why Yes I Am Quite Random, Why Do You Ask?, a blog I can no longer access for some unknown reason. This is being put at the start of each blog I'm uploading, in case anyone comes across the blog and accuses me of plagiarism. This is explained further in my introduction blog.

The following was originally posted on Friday, February 10th, 2012 at 1 am)

And welcome back to my review of the 2011 live action Green Lantern film. Last blog, I went over how uninteresting or downright irritating I found the supporting cast of Hal's friends on Earth, while Hal himself was well acted.

In contrast to the Earthlings, the members of the Lantern Corps are much more fun to hang with. Tomar-Re (Geoffrey Rush) NEEDED more screen time, that's how criminally underused he was. Playing the role of gentle mentor to Hal, Geoffrey's little screen time was not wasted.
And Michael Clarke Duncan as Kilowog? He's a hoot, and he even gets to say “Poozer”! Like Ryan, he's a fan of the comics and much like Geoffrey, I demand he get more screen time in the sequel (which I hope they do).

Luckily, the film does have an ace up its sleeve in terms of supporting characters with Mark Strong as senior Green Lantern, Sinestro. Even when things are at their worst, and death seems imminent, Sinestro remains calm and level-headed and that inspires our confidence that he's an exceptional Lantern. Though distrusting of Hal at first (cos of the whole “humans have never been Lanterns” thing), he doesn't come down especially harsh on him, just skeptical, with Sinestro being a creature of logic and all. Considering how much time the movie spends on Earth, he gets a fair amount of screen time (though a little more wouldn't hurt) and he might just be my favourite character in the movie (tied with Tomar-Re).

But it's not all fun and games in space. Our main villain, Parallax, isn't something I'd praise the creative team for. Visually, he looks like one of aliens of Mars Attacks with tentacles and for that, it kind of detracts from the menace he's supposed to project. Also, I know it might have been a little taxing to adapt Parallax directly from the comics but besides the prominent use of yellow, he doesn't resemble a giant bug at all. Yeah, that probably doesn't sound very menacing but its all about delivery. He's almost as badly mangled from the comics as Galactus was in Rise Of The Silver Surfer (seriously, a giant cloud? Really? That's your best idea? Look, the attire of Galactus may look silly, but making him a bad special effect out of some Twister knock-off isn't an acceptable alternative. I'll get to those movies eventually, too, though before the reboot, since no one has any clue on when that will hit our screens).
Character-wise... well, he's not much of one. Standard villain dialogue and motivation of conquest, blah blah blah. But what really pisses me off is how the film deals with him in the end (spoiler warning, best to skip ahead if you have yet to see this film)

Now, it's probably no shock that he gets killed off. He's a supervillain in a comic book movie after all, we're more shocked when they don't die/vanish. Basically, Hal and Parallax duke it out in space and Hal uses his ring to create a giant green fist and punches Parallax straight into a nearby sun. Parallax is vanquished, Hal's fellow Lanterns take him to the Lantern homeworld, Oa and Hal is given the respect he deserves.
That last part doesn't bother me. Again, par for the course. No, it's the fact that we have yet another comic book movie in which the rookie hero, with little to no training, takes out the major threat, sometimes through dumb luck. Biggest offenders before Green Lantern were Daredevil (come on, the Kingpin's solid muscle! I don't care if Daredevil had been active for some months before the movie, the Kingpin's been doing this for YEARS!) And in Fantastic Four, despite even less training (did they even experiment with their powers, besides Reed?), Dr. Doom gets his arse handed to him. Granted, he wasn't all that adept a fighter but that's for another blog somewhere down the line.
My point is, these are the representations of the supervillains from the comics that are just so badass and cool. To see them on the big screen go down like weaklings feels like a disrespect to their comic counterparts.
Let's compare to how some other supervillains are defeated in other movies. In Spider-Man, Green Goblin takes himself out and its a homage to the comic, and the scene is a shock to the system for anyone who never read the comic beforehand. Batman Begins, again, the villain doesn't get apprehended by the hero. Batman does stop his plan but Ra's Al Ghul chooses not to save himself, basically committing seppuku with a train. Iron Man, Stane's had less time in his suit than Tony and it's Pepper who delivers the final shot, so to speak. That one gets bonus points for having the love interest play an active part in the villain's defeat. In fact, she pretty much kills him (not in cold blood, mind you). Yes, those movies are much better than Green Lantern regardless but if Parallax had been sealed again or weakened to the point of near-death, I wouldn't be so annoyed. Or if it had been Sinestro or Kilowog or the Guardians who faced him down, but no, can't have that, gotta have the rookie be the one that takes on the supposed menace. If Hal had weakened him and Sinestro had been the one to finish him off once and for all, it would have given Sinestro closure for Parallax causing the death of his friend, Abin Sur. It would have looked awesome and Hal still would have been a hero, for his bravery and effort.

But also, was Parallax chosen just because they needed the Earth threatened in a big way and thus build him up? You're telling me that other Green Lantern villains wouldn't have worked? Granted, I don't see The Icicle or Solomon Grundy being dangerous to the world or universe at large but what about the Manhunters? Or Mongul, despite his association with Superman as well? Kanjar Ro appeared in the DC Original Animated film Green Lantern: First Flight but he could work again, as he wasn't even the main villain in that. And while it might seem too early, having members from the other Lantern Corps would have worked, the Red Lanterns in particular, being powered by rage and all (but explaining all the different Corps would take a whole other blog on its own and this one's way long already).

To summarize, Green Lantern's biggest problems were not enough time spent in space, with the interesting characters, and spending too much time on Earth, with the dirtbags we don't care about and the cliché of the rookie overcoming the big bad too easily. For all that, though, I still award it 3.5/5, if only because there is promise here. With Sinestro crossing the threshold to villainy like in the comics, he'll get his day and maybe we'll get an epic space battle. We can only hope.

This Little Light Of Mine, I'm Gonna Let It Shine (Part 1)

The following was originally posted on Thursday, February 9th, 2012 at 4:26 pm)

Even though I've given it a mini-review of sorts in my blog on the movies I saw in 2011, Green Lantern is a film I've been wanting to review for sometime now. I've held off mostly due to all the films I've seen this year and as an attempt to spread my wings a little with what I review, since I have done a fair few comics and comic book movies. Granted, that won't be stopping (not with this year seeing the release of some great comic book movies and some more titles from the New 52) but I feel now I should go over my feelings about the Green Lantern film.

Now, considering how many Green Lanterns there have been in the comics, I won't be giving a brief history on the Corps itself. However, I do want to go into Hal Jordan's origin.

Hal Jordan was created by John Broome and Gil Kane during what was known as the Silver Age Of Comics (when a lot of silly stuff happened), making his debut in October 1959. Despite his title, he was not connected to the previous Green Lantern, Alan Scott (who was not connected to the Corps. Long story, for another time). Whereas Alan was a solo hero with a magic lantern, Hal was part of the Green Lantern Corps, an intergalactic police force. Dividing the universe into 3600 sectors, the Guardians created the Corps and dispatched at least two Lanterns per sector and gave them a ring harnessing green energy representing willpower. Thus, to be a Lantern, you needed great willpower and the ability to overcome fear. This willpower allows the ring bearer to create constructs of anything they can think of.
Hal was special for at the time, he was the first human to be a Lantern and in the public consciousness, he is the face of the Corps. Other Lanterns from Earth would come and go and some would even gain popularity in other mediums (John Stewart in the DCAU production Justice League for example) but Hal is who most people would think of, regardless of which Lantern they grew up with or read first.

So, naturally, he was the Lantern selected to be the focus for the live action film. At this point, DC's track record of putting their heroes on the big screen is mixed. On the one hand, Batman and Superman have well known and well loved films, with the reboot of Batman changing not just how comic book movies (and comic books to some extent) are done but the industry as a whole (as did Inception. I'm going to go ahead and call it, Nolan is some kind of sorcerer, he's just too damn good). On the other... well, that's it for DC's A-list roster on the big screen. Despite having such strong and solid characters like the Flash, Wonder Woman and the Teen Titans, most of what DC fling at us are characters with a smaller following. Now, I'm not against that, I'm happy to see DC try and get some more characters into a wider scene but why exactly does Jonah Hex get his own movie before someone like Green Arrow? And Steel, from way back? I can understand The Losers, being a Vertigo imprint (for non comic fans, Vertigo's essentially a section inside of DC, mostly focusing on more “mature” content, like Sandman, Preacher and Hellblazer) and Watchmen is a standalone work, which are always easier to adapt. But how can you expect a Justice League movie when only two of your major players get the screen time? And yes, there WAS a Justice League movie being planned but that got scrapped and I don't see it happening anytime soon.

But I'm getting off-track. In short, having Green Lantern on screen gave me hope that things were moving forward, and that maybe Aquaman, Flash and Wonder Woman films would soon follow.
Now, let's get to the movie proper. Due to how much I have to say about this movie, I'm splitting the review in two posts. I don't like doing it because it feels a bit cheap and it seems like I'm favouring a movie (despite the rating I give it) but considering everything I have to say, plus the text above, I feel in this case that it's necessary.

Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) is a cocky and smug test pilot for Ferris Aircraft, who's putting the careers of his co-workers in jeopardy while showing off during a test flight. One night, he is drawn to the crash site of a dying alien, Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison) and is inducted into the Green Lantern Corps. Hal soon learns of Parallax (voiced by Clancy Brown), a being of immense power, capable of destruction on planetary levels and that Parallax has his sights set on Earth. It's up to Hal to prove his worth amongst the Corps, under the watchful eye of Thaal Sinestro (Mark Strong) and save the Earth.

OK, there's a bit more to it, but we'll get to that. Green Lantern is a mixed film. For just about every good element, there's something that needed to be tweaked or removed altogether. Rather than do a point by point on every good and negative aspect, I'll try and keep it short and go with just a few of each.

Let's start with something good: Ryan Reynolds is a damn good Hal Jordan. A huge comic fan, it's always nice to see Ryan in any comic book movie, because you know he cares. Would I say Hal is his best? No, but when you've played Wade Wilson, it's a hard act to follow (and he better be Deadpool when that movie finally takes off. Seriously, he was the best thing in X-Men Origins: Wolverine). Ryan plays Hal as smug but noble, traits the character has had in the comics since his creation and hearing him say the oath, you can't help but be pumped. Though, part of that might be due to how awesome the oath is on its own.
Hal's a quick thinker, too, and the constructs he creates are wonderful. There's the standard giant green fist, and guns and swords (in a damn good scene, no less, between Sinestro and Hal in which they practice with sword constructs) but without giving them all away, they're way better than I expected and easily a highlight of the film.

For something bad... there's the supporting cast of characters on Earth. They range from being average (pretty much everybody not about to be mentioned) to being poorly developed (Hector Hammond, Thomas Kalmaku) to being Blake Lively.
Yeah. I hate Blake Lively. What exactly is a Gossip Girl doing in a movie like this? There's no himbos to slut up to or drugs to snort, so why was she chosen over candidates like Jennifer Garner or Eva Green? Really, throughout most of the movie, she just looks pissed off or vacant, like she doesn't want to be there. Well, that's fine, we don't want you there. I get that comics aren't big to a lot of Hollywood stars but why would you cast someone so superficial? At least get someone who gives a damn. Hell, Jennifer Garner has already been in a comic book movie (what's that? Elektra got a spin-off? I don't know what you're talking about and let us never speak of that again) and another potential for the role, Keri Russell, voiced Wonder Woman in the movie of the same name released under the DC Original Animated line (and she suited that role to a tee, and helped make it the best movie of the entire line). So, what did Blake offer that they couldn't? Could be worse, we could have that Heidi Montag skank. Having seen that “audition tape” she sent for the third Transformers movie, I would pay someone to punch her parents for letting her exist.

But on to Hammond, as the secondary villain. Before being infected with an aspect of Parallax, he's an average guy, and so far, no complaints from me. Once the infection kicks in... what the Hell? I've read his debut story. He may have a big head thanks to the alien influence but why does he look like Quasimodo's bastard son? In that story, while his head was big, he still looked dapper. But that doesn't compare to the characterization. Again, pre-infection, nothing wrong, everything seems promising. After... he becomes a whiny, petulant, creepy stalker. The scene that reveals he knew Carol (Blake's “character”, and if Carol Ferris was real, she'd kick Blake's arse for raping her name) and Hal back in their youth is right about the time I realized this movie wasn't getting any better. Oh look, another “everybody knows everybody” movie. It doesn't add to anything, he doesn't do much with Carol and no one cares about his eventual fate anyway, so if we were supposed to sympathize with him, you failed, movie. And to add insult to injury, the biggest recurring characteristic is his sour relationship with his father and how he keeps bitching about him. What I hate about that is that it made me think of Blackheart from Ghost Rider. And I HATE Blackheart. “Wah wah, Daddy didn't love me, I'm going to use my superpowers in rage against him RAAAARGHBARGBLEGH!” and you just wish someone would hurry up and shoot them in the goddamn head (and I'll get to reviewing Ghost Rider, probably just before the sequel comes out).

Next time, I'll get into the other members of the supporting cast and the villain.

Tuesday, 13 March 2012

The Movies Of 2011 Part 3: Anachronistic Robots Vs. Men Of Magic. Taking All Bets

The following was originally posted on Friday, December 23rd, 2011 at 8:13 pm)

And now, for the final post of the movies I've seen for 2011. Here, I present the bottom five and the top five.

For the bottom five, I've decided to reverse the order, to save the worst for last (until we get to the best, no way am I ending this blog on a sour note). I should also point out that while nothing was rated lower than a 2, that could change if I decide to give them another chance. Possibly sometime in the near future, I intend to look at the films I have that I gave 2 or 2.5 stars, to determine whether or not I want to keep them or toss them. Think of it as a make-up exam.

The Dilemma (Ron Howard)

Or, One Episode Of A Subpar Sitcom Extended To Feature Length. Seriously, if Vince Vaughn's character stopped to think about what he's trying to say and approach it more rationally, this movie would have been over in 30 minutes. And this is one of the rare times where he's not playing some smarmy slacker, which might be why he's one of the only good aspects of this film (the other being Winona Ryder doing the best with what little she's given, despite being the closest thing this movie has to a villain). Not all that funny and not all that memorable. Just kind of sad. 2.5/5

No Strings Attached (Ivan Reitman)

You know, this has something in common with the above entry: both have directors that should be above the material provided. And of course, this shares a similar concept to Friends With Benefits. Except whereas Friends With Benefits remembers to have fun before reaching the obvious conclusion, No Strings Attached just groans and says “Just wake me when you're finished”. Natalie Portman really looks like she doesn't want to be there and Ashton Kutcher gets on your nerves after a while. They fare better than the supporting cast though, as they all SUCK. Unhelpful asshats who I wanted to see get punched in the back of the head. Every last one of them (and when you make me dislike Cary Elwes, you really screwed yourself over. Kevin Kline is the sole exception, he shouldn't get a punch to the back of the head. A “what were you thinking, you were in A Fish Called Wanda for the love of God” moment, sure). I give the movie credit for actually making the male character try and instigate romance for a change but that's about it. Natalie Portman, like James Franco, makes multiple entries in this years list but I sure as Hell won't be regarding this as one of her best.

Here's the movie in a nutshell:
“Go out with me”
“No”

“Go out with me”
“No”
“Go out with me”
“No”
“Go out with me”

Sighs “Fine” 2.5/5

Sucker Punch (Zack Snyder)

I was surprised that I found movies that I liked less than this. For the longest time, I felt sure this was going to be on the very bottom of my 2011 list. That's not exactly high praise, however. I have reviewed this one in an earlier blog too, and as I said before, the aspects keeping this film from being a potentially good one are the below average acting, the plot holes and the anachronisms. Especially the anachronisms. The only work not based on anything else in Zack's filmography and it's the one that makes us bury our heads into our hands and wonder where it all went wrong. Ah well, no hard feelings eh Zack? I'm still going to rock up for Man Of Steel, come Hell or high water. 2.5/5

MacGruber (Jorma Taccone)

I know next to nothing about the character as seen on Saturday Night Live. After seeing this, I really don't think I want to. Who decided this was worth 90 minutes of our time? Look, I get that people create unlikeable characters on purpose and that's the joke. But here's what they forget: WE HAVE TO WATCH THEM THE ENTIRE TIME! Would you want to be stuck with him for 90 minutes if this was a real guy? I'd want to blow myself up after 10, if he wouldn't beat me to it with his ineptitude. And bare in mind, in real life, you don't have Kristen Wiig to keep you sane, or Val Kilmer to kill him. If you're rooting for the villain because he's cool or mysterious, that's a good villain. When you're rooting for the villain because you hate the hero, something has gone horribly, horribly wrong. Doesn't help that most of the jokes are more miss than hit, the romance angle is telegraphed just by looking at the bloody DVD cover and I don't understand why, if MacGruber misses his wife but has fallen in love with Vicki St. Elmo, his wife tells him to be with her, yet they have sex. MacGruber and his dead wife have sex. The beauty of this is it works both ways: if he didn't imagine it, it's a minor plothole and makes no sense. If he did imagine it, it's a crappy joke.

MacGruber: protecting the world from humor everywhere. 2/5

And now, for the bottom of the barrel of what I've seen this year:

Hall Pass (Peter and Bobby Farrelly)

I wasn't expecting much. I expected the bare minimum from this. How do you manage not to even meet that? Oh wow, yet another “men like sex, women are bitches who exist to complain about the men they are married to and could leave at any time since no one has a gun to their head but they don't leave” comedy. That's breaking new ground! Almost every joke can be changed to read “blah blah blah, sex” over and over again. I'll spoil the movie for you: the wives don't leave their husbands. Never mind the fact that one is very unpleasant and the other is only just slightly above him in terms of passing for human (that one being played by Owen Wilson). Nicky Whelan does not add a damn thing and is quickly joining Sophie Monk and Isabel Lucas in the group of Australian “actresses” who need to stop being in movies and vanish from the movie/TV scene all together (and do NOT go back to music, Sophie Monk, you sucked at that too). Also, why bother cast Alyssa Milano if you're not going to do anything with her? I really, really wanted to give this a chance. But it fumbled every chance of elevating itself. So, you are indeed the worst film I have seen in 2011. 2/5

Captain America: The First Avenger (Joe Johnston)

DC may be riding high with its nigh-untouchable Nolan directed Batman series but Marvel's striking back with its solid stable of characters and here's the best of the year. The star spangled man has a plan: to kick ass and take names. And kick ass he does. Chris Evans, while being an alright Johnny Storm in the Fantastic Four films, proves his acting chops much better here and the support cast is as awesome, like the rest of the recent Marvel movies. Like a war movie with additional sprinklings of superheroes and villains, it excels at action very nearly beats Iron Man as the best movie from Marvel Studios. If I wasn't already pumped for The Avengers (and I was ever since Iron Man finished!), I am now. If this year was an excellent year for comic book movies, next year will be the year comic book movies ascend to a new level. It'll be like 2008 all over again, but with higher stakes. And I say bring it. Until then, I highly, highly recommend Captain America: The First Avenger. 4/5

Source Code (Duncan Jones)

This may sound negative, but this is clearly the Inception of 2011. It may sound negative because it looks like I'm saying it's a knock-off, but it's praise, because I love Inception (best film of 2010 in my opinion). It's like Inception because it's complex but simple to get a hold of, intelligent without losing its emotional center. Like Inception, it wants you to learn but doesn't force its lessons upon you. It wants you to learn naturally. It's a kind teacher who wants you to figure out the answers so that you may enrich yourself. It is a film that says “I merely offer a look into this world. Now it is up to you to follow the trail”. Films that leave you asking questions like a curious child are great. You feel changed by it. And that's what cinema is to me: an experience that gives me something new to consider. Definitely a must-see. Also, Moon, Duncan Jones' first film. Go see that too. 4.5/5

Rabbit Hole (John Cameron Mitchell)

YES. This is high quality drama. This is one of the most realistic drama films I have ever seen. The characters are three dimensional, the dialogue feels like what we would say in everyday life. I can't say the acting is excellent, that is an insult. Nicole Kidman has never been better and Aaron Eckhart has another knock-out role under his belt. No one is portrayed as being in the wrong, no one is made into a monster. Even the teenage catalyst for the tragedy that the plot is based around is completely sympathetic. On that note, the actor playing him, Miles Teller? I demand he get more work.

Sometimes, the best films are the ones you don't expect to be transcendental. What I expected to be a good film became something much bigger. And I am grateful to have seen this film. 4.5/5

Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 2 (David Yates)

And so, the Harry Potter film franchise draws to a close. It's been a spellbinding ride and this film goes all out. Unlike a certain other book-turned-film franchise, the split into two parts was completely justifiable. Action-packed, emotional and faithful to its source material (not 100% but really, that's too much to expect) it captured the main events of the book flawlessly and added new dimensions to already beloved characters (Neville Longbottom's badassery was finally on display for the masses to revel in!) I love the books, I love the games and I love the films. As another door closes for Harry Potter, another opens with Pottermore. So long, Harry, and thanks for everything. 4.5/5

And now, my absolute favourite film of the year

Black Swan (Darren Aronofsky)

I've mentioned aspects that make great films when I've brought up Inception in this blog and previous posts, but another, smaller aspect, is that a great film punishes you for thinking it was going to go down a cliché route or do the familiar. Well, Black Swan, I only thought it once, but I apologize and I sing your praises now and forever. The casting, like Rabbit Hole, goes beyond excellent and is on another level altogether. The dedication to detail, acting and direction-wise, is what makes this a cut above most other films. Natalie Portman absolutely shines as Nina, Mila Kunis stuns with her role as Lily and I really hope this opens a lot more doors in the film world for her. The musical score knows when to be silent and when to jar you, the images meant to confuse you don't linger and they're often more effective jump scares than you see in horror movies! And the ending is a perfect capper to such a show-stopper.

Another thing that makes this really special is that this is the first film I saw this year, and it couldn't be dethroned by forty-nine entries (OK, some had no chance in Hell but still), even with the awe of Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part 2, the emotional conflicts of Rabbit Hole, the thought inspiring nature of Source Code and the high-flying action of Captain America: The First Avenger. Delightful from start to finish. THE must see film, above all others. 4.5/5

Well, there you have it. There were some films that couldn't meet the bare minimum, some that got by on their meagre offerings, some with interesting ideas that couldn't take them to the end game, some that I hold in high regard and some that I treasure so very dearly. Hopefully, I've inspired you to see even just one of these films (just hopefully not the bottom five, unless you're riffing on any of them. In that case, go right for it). And with 2012 having a great slate of films, I think next year may prove even better.

The Movies Of 2011 Part 2: Apes, Trains And Automobiles That Are Actually Giant Robots In Disguise

The following was originally posted on Thursday, December 22nd, 2011 at 8:29 pm )

And so, we carry on the theme of the movies of 2011 that I have seen. Here are the films #25-#6, with the top and bottom five to be displayed in the next blog.

Bridesmaids (Paul Feig)

Another I've already reviewed, and it's a very good comedy. Uneven to begin with but picks up traction by the third act, despite not knowing to do with some of its characters and a karma houdini rival. I really hope Kristen Wiig gets a higher profile from this, she has huge potential. And if partnered up with Tina Fey, they could prove a nigh-unbeatable team. 3.5/5

Friends With Benefits (Will Gluck)

Seems like the whole 'friends with benefits' thing is kicking off in movies these days, so the movie with that very title gets a chance to shine. And shine it does. Justin Timberlake (more than making up for what he did in Bad Teacher) and Mila Kunis have excellent chemistry and comedic timing, with the jokes being more hit than miss and flying fast. Just don't expect the wheel to be reinvented and you'll be fine. 3.5/5

The Thing (Matthijs van Heijningen Jr.)

A prequel with a story that actually needed to be told and even then it still had surprises. Resembling but not quite replicating the feel of the John Carpenter masterpiece, it carves its own place into the mythology. Helping the atmosphere are great performances, a recurring subplot reflecting the opinions of the nations at the time and no damn forced romance. Granted, we see more of the titular creature than we ought to, thus eliminating some of the mystery but still. I'd love another trip into this world. 3.5/5

Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes (Rupert Wyatt)

Say what you will about reboots, sometimes they ARE necessary. And this one is a treat. Unlike Green Lantern and the Michael Bay Transformers series, the focus is even on the humans and the simians, with characters developing naturally. James Franco shines, Andy Serkis maintains his crown as the motion-capture king, the action is fierce and the end is actually kind of unexpected. Oh, and one more thing: if you mess with John Lithgow and a chimp attacks you, totally your fault. And on a related note, I demand John Lithgow be in more films/television shows. Between this and his time on Dexter, he proves he's still a powerful player in the game. 3.5/5

21.Transformers: Dark Of The Moon (Michael Bay)

Despite what grievances I have with the series (and there are a few, in a blog post I'll do in the new year), this was still a slick action film. The humor is toned down, the details closer to the G1 continuity, the Decepticons menacing again, the addition of Leonard Nimoy and we replaced Megan Fox with someone slightly less irritating. Could have done without Patrick Dempsey, though (or as I call him, Slimy Von Douchington. I don't care who you think you are, either, you do NOT order Soundwave around like he works for you. He should backhand you, bitch. Soundwave superior, you are inferior!) and I don't know how they're going to go with a fourth based on how it ended. Still, I'm keen to see where they go (fingers crossed for Unicron. Also, Dinobots. Me David demand to see Grimlock!) 4/5

Rango (Gore Verbinski)

Johnny Depp and Gore Verbinski reunite for this delightfully delivered animated animal family film. The ultimate chameleon (Johnny, that is) disappears into another colourful character, and Isla Fisher is virtually unrecognisable as the female lead. Playing up the Western genre while being affectionate towards it is the key element here. Good times indeed. 4/5

127 Hours (Danny Boyle)

Wow, James Franco gets around a lot doesn't he? Three entries in this list alone (not the only multiple entry, though), there's no stopping him. And who would, when he's doing stuff like this? Much like a one-man play, the burden lies on him to carry the weight of the film. Luckily, he makes the experience memorable with his ability to run the gauntlet of emotions. Danny Boyle easily makes up for Slumdog Millionaire. 4/5

True Grit (Joel and Ethan Coen)

I've only seen about half their filmography so far but I hold the belief that the Coens are incapable of making a crap movie. Average ones, maybe (like A Serious Man) but that would be as low as they can go and that's not bad. And their adaptation of True Grit is one of the better ones. Darker than the first adaptation, it boasts magnificent acting from the ace Jeff Bridges and Matt Damon, a great musical score and a lovely atmosphere you can get lost in. I still prefer the first adaptation, but this is no slouch either. 4/5

Unstoppable (Tony Scott)

Boy, Tony Scott loves his trains doesn't he? And more power to him, it's actually a solid drama/disaster film. Chris Pine and Denzel Washington play off each other really well, the little details are not neglected and the threat of an oncoming, unmanned train crashing is always taken seriously. Rosario Dawson is just the icing on the cake. 4/5

The Fighter (David O. Russell)

Much like an upcoming entry, an unusual but not unwelcome biopic. Christian Bale and Mark Wahlberg make a great pair and their acting is of the highest standard. Also of note is Amy Adams, doing an impressive Boston accent. The dialogue is sharp and this is easily in the same ranks of other great boxing movies like the early Rocky films and Raging Bull. 4/5

Batman: Year One (Lauren Montgomery/Sam Liu)

Not the best Batman animated feature from DC's Animated Original line (that honor goes to Under The Red Hood) but still one of the finest direct adaptations of a comic I've ever seen. While Benjamin McKenzie never really gets a handle on being Bruce Wayne or Batman, he's not terrible, though the real stand-out is Bryan Cranston as James Gordon. The action is fast paced and not toned down from the comic and much like the original story, it's as much about Gordon's first year in Gotham as much as it is Bruce's as Batman. Also, Eliza Dushku as Selina Kyle. Words cannot describe the level of awesome she brings. And she gets her own short too, so bonus! 4/5

The Adjustment Bureau (George Nalfi)

Not exactly what I was expecting but I still applaud what we have here. Matt Damon and Emily Blunt's relationship is a delight to watch develop, with all the cute little moments (like the footrace) and the concept is intriguing. Also, it pulls out a trump card with Terrence Stamp's performance. Seriously, the man's got a commanding presence. 4/5

Green Lantern: Emerald Knights (Christopher Berkeley, Lauren Montgomery and Jay Oliva)

The better Green Lantern film. An anthology with some interesting stories (including one of my all time favourite Green Lantern comic stories, Mogo Doesn't Socialize), the usual high quality DC animation and Nathan Fillion being an awesome Hal Jordan (and he was who I was hoping for when the Green Lantern live action film was in pre-production. But then, Nathan Fillion runs on awesome.) Nathan will be back for the next DC Animated Original movie (Justice League: Doom) and I'll be there. 4/5

All-Star Superman (Sam Liu)

The winner of this crop of DC Animated Original films and the first solo Superman film to do so. Despite missing some of the smaller moments of the Grant Morrison story, it's still a sheer delight to see Superman's epic stories take flight. As usual, the animation and voice casting lift the DC films above Marvel's and when you have James Denton, Christina Hendricks, Anthony LaPaglia, Alexis Denisof and Linda Cardellini, you have a top team indeed. 4/5

Thor (Kenneth Branagh)

Again, to summarise my own review, the key to Thor is that it takes the fish out of water concept and deliberately avoids all the cliches. Thor is never treated like an idiot, and Jane is a well-written love interest (as are all the love interests in the Marvel Studio productions, actually.) Thor also gets to kick ass and take names and Anthony Hopkins just makes it all the more enjoyable. I'll say it again: “I now take from you, your power! In the name of my father, and his father before, I, Odin Allfather, cast you out!” I will never get tired of that. 4/5

Paul (Greg Mottola)

Despite the lack of Edgar Wright, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost carry on and are just as hilarious as ever. The character of Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen) is extremely likeable, as is Kristen Wiig's, and it's like one giant love letter to the sci-fi genre. Affectionate and funny, it was always due to hit my top ten. Oh and Jason Bateman is just awesome. I want to go on record with that. 4/5

Arthur (Peter Baynham)

Taking this film on its own merits (I haven't seen the original yet, I plan to eventually), it's a lot of fun. And I'm not a huge fan of Russell Brand (at least in this film he cleaned himself up and doesn't look like a wino who's going to mug me) but damn if he doesn't deliver. Jennifer Garner seems to be having a lot of fun playing the bitch, Helen Mirren provides wonderful support and the character arc Arthur goes through is touching and believable. A feel-good film I highly recommend. 4/5

I Love You, Phillip Morris (Glenn Ficarra/John Requa)

Sometimes the best biopics come from the most unlikely sources and this is a serious contender to become my favourite. Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor work so well together that I demand they appear together again, in any capacity. A story full of surprises, and equal parts cute and funny, this is a criminally (pun not intended, for anyone who has seen the film) underrated film. 4/5

Scream 4 (Wes Craven)

After a long absence, Ghostface is back with a vengeance. Kicking it old school, Scream 4 comes back to show the kids how its done. It stays in the familiar while using the tricks that have arisen in the time between the third and fourth film, a wise move indeed. Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox and David Arquette can't be faulted, we've come to greet them like old friends. And hey, Hayden Panettiere is actually great in something! Also, after being wowed by him in Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World, it's nice to see Rory Culkin in an excellent supporting role again. The kills are still fresh and the twists still engaging. Welcome back, Scream, we've missed you. Don't stay away too long now. 4/5

Super 8 (J.J Abrams)

Spellbinding. Mysterious in typical Abrams fashion and just like his other mysteries, you're dying to get to the bottom of it. All the child actors are wonderful, and I hope they go on to have long and prosperous careers. The train sequence is one of the most amazing scenes captured on film and the rest of the film has you on the edge of your seat. I am a little put off by how much the kids swear (did all kids swear like sailors back in the 70's? Seriously, swap some of the slang and they would sound like the kids today, only the kids in the movie are much smarter and more mature than kids today) but that's the most minor gripe I can think of if I'm forced to.

Well, certainly a varied list again, though this one having a lot more comic book related movies (I'm a comic nerd, so sue me. If I do a list for 2012, expect to see a lot of them again).

Only one more to go. Which films will be the cream of the crop and which will be the ones that cause me to hang my head in shame? Find out next time.

The Movies Of 2011 Part 1: Lawyers, Psychics, Space Cops And Clones, Oh My!

The following was originally posted on Tuesday, December 20th, 2011 at 7:31 pm )

Once, twice, three times a theme week (hmm, maybe I should have swapped this and the previous one around to make this joke). This week, I'm ranking the fifty movies released this year that I have seen.

For anyone who has read previous blogs, it's probably no secret that I love movies. Almost never do I have a empty “to watch” pile and as of writing, my amount of movies to view is between twenty-five to thirty films. I've been collecting movies for over a decade and I have no intentions of stopping.

So, I present my personal ranking for each of the fifty films released this year that I have seen. And as of writing, I have all but three on DVD (though most of them I watched on DVD anyway, some were straight-to-DVD here and some would have been straight-to-DVD regardless of where it was released)

Now, I want to cover a few things before I get into the blog proper:

Some of these films might have been released overseas in 2010 (or earlier even) but I'm going by Australian release, cinema or otherwise.
Not everything here is going to be a big release so if it's not on here, I haven't seen it yet and it's not among the movies I have to watch (stuff like Pirates Of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides and Cars 2) and there are some I'm not going to. Ever (like Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol). I'll probably get to my thoughts on those another time once I actually see them
I won't be doing plot synopsis because that would take up more time and going through fifty films with a short statement of what I thought is long enough. Also, in some cases, I imagine you know the story or the gist of the goings-on.
I'm going to do things in a slightly different matter. I'm going to save my bottom five for the last post, to go with my top five, as comparison to what the year has seen in good and bad movies. This post will cover #45-26, listing title, director and rating.

So, with that out of the way, let's start the movie rankings, in reverse order

The Ward (John Carpenter)

I've seen two films set in an asylum in this year, and both seem bent on destroying any chances for films set in asylums to be good. The acting is sub-par, the pacing boring and the ending... well, without spoiling anything, let's just say I've seen another film involving a crazy person with a very, very similar ending. After a long absence from the film world, this is a disappointing return from a man who's done so many horror classics. 2.5/5

Season Of The Witch (Dominic Sena)

Despite Nicholas Cage, Christopher Lee and Ron Perlman being experts at making crap seem... well, less crap, this film can't rely on them alone. It's dull and dreary and lacking surprise. Hopefully Nic and Ron get to act together again, in a much better film. 2.5/5

Morning Glory (Roger Michell)

This film had serious potential to be something, with decent acting from Rachel McAdams and Diane Keaton and even better acting from Harrison Ford. But the plot basically throws up its hands and goes “You win, standard cliches, I'll behave more conventionally” and the romantic sub-plot is poorly handled. Not the best work of any of the actors/actresses involved, or even the director. 2.5/5

The Next Three Days (Paul Haggis)

Russell Crowe and Elizabeth Banks work really well together and the ending is neatly executed. But this is one long movie. And I mean it, the time really drags on. And you feel it could be better edited. Still, it's a good little film. 3/5

Dead Space: Aftermath (Mike Disa)

Yeah, I probably should have played the games first (as of writing, I only have the first) as I might have understood it better. Though I have seen Deadfall and I got that with little trouble. I mean, it's not a bad film, but it doesn't really take kindly to newcomers. But I guess that's more my fault than the movie's. Though, what the movie can take blame for is switching back and forth between animation styles, one of which is ugly and off-putting. 3/5

The Mechanic (Simon West)

Jason Statham as Jason Statham alias Jason Statham in Jason Statham Shoots Stuff While Looking Serious. Really, if you don't know that going in, you don't know Jason Statham. Still, not a bad action film. Needs more Donald Sutherland though, the man's an icon. 3/5

Unknown (Jaume Collet-Serra)

So, is Liam Neeson the guy who loses stuff on a regular basis instead of Harrison Ford?

“We now return to Liam Neeson in Liam Neeson Wants His Identity Back”

“Give me back my identity!”

“I want my identity back!”

But seriously, it's an OK film. Neeson is as good as always and the ending is well thought out, but it's all that remarkable. 3/5

Limitless (Neil Burger)

Interesting premise and Bradley Cooper can carry a film. Abbie Cornish still hasn't improved since I first saw her though and in the second half, the film seems to become a new film almost divorced from its first half. Also, the ending is a cop-out. Still worth a look. 3/5

Veronika Decides To Die (Emily Young)

I've been a fan of Sarah Michelle Gellar since her Buffy days and it's always nice to see her try something different (still have to see Ringer, too) and she, along with David Thewlis, are the saving graces. Otherwise, the film is easily distracted and doesn't seem to have a lot to say. Maybe the book will offer more depth. 3/5

The Lincoln Lawyer (Brad Furman)

You would almost think you're watching a John Grisham adaptation (it actually is based on a book, he just didn't write this particular one, this one is a Michael Connelly). Matthew McConaughey manages NOT to suck (very rare) and I especially like the casting of Marisa Tomei and Bryan Cranston. Also, I did a double take when I first saw William H. Macy, I barely recognized him! Plot holds up, too. 3/5

Peacock (Michael Lander)

An unusual little film, held together by the solid acting in a double role by Cillian Murphy, with support from Ellen Page and Susan Sarandon. It does take a bit of time to get into, unfortunate since the running time is only 90 minutes, but it does pay off. 3/5

Hereafter (Clint Eastwood)

Three stories all related to death and how we cope with it. One involves a tsunami aftermath and is forgettable. One involves a retired medium (Matt Damon) trying to get by and its really good. And the other involves a little boy trying to find a way to communicate with his recently deceased twin and it too shows promise. Well, two out of three ain't bad as the song says. Not one of Eastwood's stronger works but considering his resume, he's allowed to make films that don't always hit the high notes. 3/5

Insidious (James Wan)

Much like Wan's previous effort Dead Silence, he's proving he has what it takes to make a decent horror film and not rely on cliches. He knows what makes a jump scare work and writer Leigh Whannell knows how to write smart and likable characters. It's a bit disorienting in the third act but then that's not a bad thing for a horror movie. 3/5

Bad Teacher (Jake Kasdan)

A real mixed bag. On the one hand, it doesn't portray the leading character as always being right and Cameron Diaz and Jason Segel do really good work. On the other, the toilet jokes are weak, some of the supporting characters are irrelevant at best, irritating at worst (especially the best friend of Diaz's character) and Justin Timberlake's character is inconsistent. I've seen worse, but I think this film needs a parent/teacher conference to get it to focus its attention more. 3/5

Thor: Tales Of Asgard (Sam Liu)

Unlike his bigger brother, this film is a straight-out adventure. Roughly on par with Marvel's previous straight-to-DVD affairs, which is good since this is currently the last planned, which means they don't get slack with their last film. It's also bad, though, since none have been able to stand up to the dynamic entries DC offers. Still, I'm hoping for more Marvel movies like this. 3.5/5

Green Lantern (Martin Campbell)

Only slightly beaten by the above entry as least favourite comic book movie of the year. Ryan Reynolds does a great job, the constructs are well thought-out and the supporting cast of fellow Green Lantern alumni are excellent. But at the same time, the film suffers from what I call “Transformers Syndrome”, which means it has too many squishy pathetic humans, not enough of awesome stuff from space. Also, in regards to Parallax, that is the worst design of an adapted comic book villain since Galactus. I would love a sequel, so long as its mostly set in space and lacking in Blake Lively. 3.5/5

X-Men: First Class (Matthew Vaughn)

Summarizing my own review, it can't make up its mind as to whether or not it's a prequel or a reboot and some of the characters behave in ways that don't ring true with what I know, new continuity or not. But the acting is strong (especially from Michael Fassbender) and the action solid. A good start to a new look at the X-Men. 3.5/5

Never Let Me Go (Mark Romanek)

A charming little film about clones and how we tend not to think of them as people, merely appendages meant to enhance our lives. Picks up the pace after the first act and very emotional, with great performances from the three leads (Keira Knightly, Andrew Garfield and Carey Mulligan). 3.5/5

Your Highness (David Gordon Green)

Well, I certainly didn't think it was all that bad. There were worse comedies this year. James Franco plays his role seriously and it totally works and rather than make him an obnoxious twat, he's a really likeable character. The main villain's henchman aren't all that engaging, though and anyone wanting lots of Natalie Portman screentime is due to be disappointed. 3.5/5

Hanna (Joe Wright)

Boasting one of the best soundtracks of the year (The Chemical Brothers and I totally called it when I first saw the movie), we have another solid action movie. Erik Bana and Cate Blanchett deliver some of their best performances (and Erik Bana gets to kick some major arse). Though, I really, REALLY hate the character of Sophie. Yeah, I get that she's meant to be a representation of the youth of today's bad values versus Hanna's old ways but do we need to be hit over the head with it constantly? 3.5/5

And that ends part one of this countdown. Next blog, it's #25-#6. But of what I've listed so far, what have you seen and what did you think of it?

Saturday, 10 March 2012

Men Are From Asgard, Women Are From Midgard

The following was originally posted on Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 8:53 pm)

So, we reach the last of the comic book movie trilogy for films of 2011. It's been a good year for comic book movies, live action and animated. Now, in my last two blogs, I've already looked at two of Marvel's live action releases and for this one, I look at the remaining (though first released) Marvel movie and another from the Marvel Cinematic Universe: Thor.

So, does it tell tales of great battle and conquest or is this all a myth we should regard as nonsense? I think we all know the answer to that but let's get to it, shall we?

Brief history of Thor: he made his debut in the comic Journey Into Mystery, a sci-fi/fantasy anthology title, in issue 83, which was published in 1962. Much like Detective Comics and Batman, Thor would later take over the comic. Unlike Batman, the comic was renamed for the main character. Thor was created by Stan Lee, Larry Lieber and Jack Kirby, partially as a challenge to create someone stronger than the Incredible Hulk, which they did by creating a god.

While perhaps not as well known as his Marvel compatriots, it can be argued that if DC's “Trinity” is made up of Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman then Marvel's is Captain America, Iron Man and Thor, due to how much they've been through together and how much they value each other in their lives.

Now, onto the film adaptation. And insert standard disclaimer about spoilers and such.

In the far-off realm of Asgard, Odin (Anthony Hopkins) has banished his son, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) for breaking a truce between the Asgardians and the Frost Giants of Jotunheim. Thor ends up on Earth (or Midgard as it is known to the Asgardians) and meets Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) and Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings), who are eager to learn about him and where he came from. However, all Thor cares about is finding his hammer, Moljnir, and getting back to Asgard. And in Asgard itself, Thor's brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) has ascended to the throne after a weakened Odin is forced to slumber and is planning to prove himself worthy to Odin by annihilating Jotunheim once and for all.

I'd say my favourite thing of this movie is how serious the treatment of the material is. Now, being a long time comic fan, I've seen all sorts of weird things in comics (the Silver Age practically breathed on the weird stuff). I've seen Jimmy Olsen get weird powers (though that occurred more than the sun rising, really); twin clones of Hitler; Spider-Man and Wolverine having their minds swapped by Jean Grey (Ultimate Universe but still); Batman and Superman taking on vampires and werewolves; robot bears vs. cyber gorillas. The list goes on. But some of those are niche titles or Elseworlds, so only people really eager to get into comics will explore such options. Trying to sell someone who's never read comics or a casual reader on something like Thor might take some doing. And even then, a lot of people might be put off by the fact that most of Thor's language is reminiscent of Shakespere or Arthurian days. Hell, even the Ultimate Universe version has some complications (“Well, me MIGHT be a god OR he's a mental patient who THINKS he's the God Of Thunder, we don't know!”) As such, people might not take it seriously, which would translate to a campy film in the wrong hands. Some actors might see a script like this and think you're supposed to ham it up, act all boisterous and and basically embody BRIAN BLESSED (yes, that is supposed to be in caps. Don't ask me why, it's like an internet rule or something). Hell, at one point, BRIAN BLESSED was supposed to be Odin.

But in Thor, it's not the case at all. Everything is treated seriously when it's meant to be serious, while putting in some well timed humor. The mythology of Thor and Asgard is not treated as some silly faraway make believe land, it's another realm of awe and wonder. The dialogue is true to the comic while delivered in a straightforward manner.

In fact, my favourite part of the movie involves an excellent line delivery from Anthony Hopkins (who is absolutely wonderful in this). It's the scene in which Thor, after having attacked Jotunheim after being forbidden by Odin. For his arrogant nature, Odin strips Thor of his power and exiles him to one of the other realms. The line: “I now take from you, your power! In the name of my father, and his father before, I, Odin Allfather, cast you out!”

The backing music, the effects, the confined space, it all makes a wonderful scene, followed by Thor's descent to Earth.

Before going further, I want to say I was extremely impressed with Chris Hemsworth's performance as Thor. He doesn't play him as a berserker or a bloodthirsty individual, there is a compassion to his performance and even when he's playing the character as arrogant, he doesn't slide too far into unlikeable territory, if he even goes there.

Going back to the topic of taking itself seriously, Thor's time on Earth isn't entirely played for laughs either and I really appreciated that. It's a different spin on the “fish out of water” story, the one in which a person arrives in an unfamiliar location/time frame and acts so weirdly and no one picks up on it. Besides the occasional difference of culture (this is where the film's humor lies and does so effectively, like Thor expressing his enjoyment of his beverage by smashing a mug and demanding another or when he and Dr. Selvig go drinking), Thor takes his situation pretty well and doesn't (usually) run off half-cocked and getting into all sorts of trouble.

Helping that situation is how Jane Foster deals with it and Natalie Portman plays her as being very sweet, eager and smart, all strengths Natalie knows how to play by now. She and Chris have great chemistry and their relationship shows the two of them learning about each other while simultaneously teaching the other. I don't know if this will be developed on in The Avengers, but I certainly hope to see more of their romance in Thor 2.

One thing I definitely hope to see more of in The Avengers is how Thor and Loki play off each other. Tom Hiddleston plays Loki with great sympathy and his development from overlooked brother to main threat of Asgard is well developed. Even his plan doesn't seem 100% villainous.

The action is spectacular too, almost every confrontation with the Frost Giants is a sight to behold and towards the end, when Thor regains his hammer and takes on a being known as the Destroyer, it's some damn impressive fighting. But the best action sequence of all is Thor taking on members of SHIELD in the rain, in an attempt to recover Moljnir (the hammer) and just being so damn effective (also helping the scene is the cameo of Hawkeye, who will hopefully be given much more to do in The Avengers)

Speaking of cameos, one final note: Stan Lee has had cameos in plenty of Marvel movies and a lot of them are really funny (like in Iron Man) but this has to be his absolute best so far: he plays “Stan The Man”, a pick-up truck driver who attempts to use his own vehicle to lift Moljnir out of the ground, after it fell to Earth through Odin's intervention. And it nearly takes the whole truck apart. Lee's only line is “Did it work?”, and that just slays me every time.

So, despite being outshone by Captain America: The First Avenger, Thor is a solid film that I happily award 4/5 to.

So, thus ends my week of comic book movie reviews. I hope you've enjoyed them, and there will be more to come, but onto a new theme next week.

He's In The Nazi Punching Business And Business Is Good

The following was originally posted on Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 3:32 pm )

And welcome, to the second in the trilogy of comic book film reviews. Once again, I look at a movie on DVD after seeing it on the initial cinema run and see if it's still as good (or better) the second time around or if I was wrong in my judgment. And today, we're looking at the star spangled man with a plan himself, in Captain America: The First Avenger.

Conceived in the 1940's, Captain America was one of the earliest Marvel heroes (beaten by the oddly-named-no-relation-to-Johnny-Storm-and-is-actually-an-android Human Torch and Namor the Sub-Mariner) and was created to be as patriotic as could be. The first issue of Captain America Comics depicted him punching Hitler square in the jaw, a cover that is now among the most famous, like the covers for Amazing Fantasy #15, Fantastic Four #1 and Crisis On Infinite Earths #7. After being put on ice towards the end of the war, he re-emerges in the 60's to become part of the Avengers and has stayed a fan favourite ever since.

So, should we pledge allegiance to Captain America: The First Avenger or should we hold a court martial session?

Brief plot synopsis: Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is eager to join the army and fight the Nazis but is constantly turned down, based on his physique and medical history. Given a chance to prove himself by Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci), Steve undergoes a procedure that makes him the first super-soldier and gives the Allies a new weapon in the war. Going by the moniker Captain America, Steve makes it his personal mission to stop HYDRA commander Johann Schmidt (aka the Red Skull, played by Hugo Weaving)

Besides the usual thing about spoilers, blah blah blah, I have one thing I need to say upfront: I loved this movie.

Much like the other entries in the Marvel Cinematic Universe/Movieverse, by keeping the project in the family (so to speak) at Marvel Studios, the movie feels much truer to the character and the feel of their own series rather than take huge deviations (like turning Dr. Doom metal in the first Fantastic Four film. Or turning Bane into a complete idiot for Batman And Robin. Or silencing Deadpool in X-Men Origins: Wolverine, if you want to call him that).

Chris Evans is sensational in the title role, and this is perhaps the best role in a comic book adaptation he's done (and he's done a few, too. The Fantastic Four duology, TMNT, The Losers and Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World before this. It's almost like he's competing with Ryan Reynolds for most comic book movie roles). While he wasn't terrible as the Human Torch (the more well known one this time), it's an interesting contrast to see him go from a cocky, hotheaded lady killer to an earnest, humble, determined young man who wants to fight in a war because he doesn't like bullies. Hell, it might just be his best role yet. One factor that helps sell it is that Steve always has a straight face, even when he's delivering lines about war bonds like a shill. Or cracking jokes (“I've punched out Hitler 200 times”).

In fact, Col. Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones, doing what Tommy Lee Jones does best: kicking ass and taking names) is similar, as he keeps the same disposition (largely) and is almost always deadpan with every line.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) almost always has a smile on his face and knows his way around a joke. One of my favourite scenes is when he's showing off a prototype of a flying car he's created, saying in a few years cars won't have wheels. And not too long after, the car comes crashing down. Without missing a beat, he smiles and says “I said a few years, didn't I?” Yeah, considering how much his son is like him, is it any wonder why this guy's so cool?

With regards to other roles, Hugo Weaving is tremendous in his portrayal of the Red Skull. He revels in his role, and his accent is flawless. Oh and whoever did the work on the Red Skull mask, that was some damn fine work.

Hayley Atwell played an excellent soldier/love interest in the form of Peggy Carter. Much like Pepper Potts from Iron Man, she takes no nonsense, can hold her own and rarely loses composure. She doesn't even get kidnapped, something I love seeing in comic book movies (that's one of my criticisms of the Raimi directed Spider-Man trilogy. While I love it, there are things that nag at me, MJ's constant kidnappings being one of them. I'm beginning to think her name is really Princess Toadstool. But that's for another blog). Hayley and Chris work well together and I hope they do more together in the future.

Speaking of Iron Man comparisons, besides the kick-ass love interests and featuring a member of the Stark family, the most glaring shared trait is the death of the mentor. Both Yinsen and Dr. Erskine are wonderful characters who give our heroes a new motivation or chance at life and both die right before the hero's big debut. If I had to pick, I'd say Dr. Erskine's death is sadder, since Yinsen was actively seeking it so that he could be reunited with his family in the afterlife. It doesn't make it any less sad, but at least he was expecting it and he died with happy thoughts. Dr. Erskine dies pointing to Steve's chest, a callback to an earlier scene in which he told Steve the most important thing in life is to be a good man. Steve takes it hard and so do we. I almost wish the movie would bend the rules and let Steve teleport right in front of the Nazi saboteur and beat the living snot out of him. The guy may die later, but Steve doesn't get the satisfaction of doing it or even letting the authorities handle him, as he kills himself with a suicide capsule.

While it is a comic book movie, it's also a war movie and it balances the two nicely. Besides the idea of a super soldier serum, a shield made out of a fictitious material and a cube of unimaginable power, there's nothing out of the ordinary that would prevent this from being a stand-alone war movie, even with Steve's costume. The action is invigorating, from all the gun play to the vehicular combat. But the best action scenes... well, anytime Cap throws his shield, that's where the awesomeness lies. In fact, my absolute favourite scene of the movie has Cap leaping into the air then coming right down on some goon, shield first.

If I had one complaint (and me being me, I have to find at least one thing I don't like in great movies. But the opposite is true too, I like to find the good in the truly awful. For example, the good thing about White Chicks is that the disc makes a handy target when you run out of clay pigeons), it's the scene where Cap gets kissed by that hussy of a secretary and Peggy sees it. Now, at this point in the movie, she would probably know Steve almost as well as he knows himself and they both know he's not a hotshot around girls. Yet she gets frustrated at him and doesn't berate the secretary. OK, the shots following are hilarious (involving actual shots, too!) but I felt like it was a misstep. Peggy is smarter and she shouldn't have jumped to the conclusion she did. But it's minor, anyway.

All in all, of the five Marvel Studios pictures, this falls slightly short of defeating Iron Man, but by no means is that a bad thing. I mean, Iron Man's an amazing film that would have been the best comic book movie (and probably best movie) of 2008 if not for a certain film featuring a man dressed as a bat taking on a clown.

Hell, none of them have been crap. And Captain America: The First Avenger is no exception. It's a dynamic, heartfelt, bold film with a great build-up to next year's Avengers movie. And believe you me, it's the biggest threat to The Dark Knight Rises.
In fact, for anyone who hasn't seen this movie yet, stick around after the credits for a teaser for the Avengers.

Oh and Stan Lee's cameo was hilarious. But there's one that outranks all of his cameos. Which is it? Next blog...

But before closing, how do I score Captain America: The First Avenger? 4/5, easily. A solid film and very easily a top 10 contender for when I rank the films I've seen this year.

What? Darwin Is Evolving! Wait... Oh

The following was originally posted on Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 9:05 pm )

Today is going to be the first blog for a themed week I'm calling “comic book film review” week, in which I will review three of this year's comic book adaptations, now that I have all three on DVD and thus have more time to explore them. Let's kick things off with X-Men: First Class.

I don't think I need to go into great detail about the X-Men, but I'll give a brief overview: the X-Men are mutants, considered by some to be homo superior and they constantly face adversity from the human race, as well as evil mutant teams like the Brotherhood and the Hellfire Club. That is, when they're not engaged in mini-civil wars within their own ranks.

Before X-Men: First Class, there were four X-Men films, and each was a financial, if not critical, success. But after X-Men: The Last Stand, the decision was made to take the franchise in different directions. X-Men Origins: Wolverine was a prequel to the original film series, and is usually considered the weakest instalment in the series. As of writing this blog, a sequel is on the way, entitled The Wolverine. In fact, the original series has a fourth film potentially being made. And then there are all the other spin-offs... yeah, these are topics for another blog.

Today, we're looking at the newest addition to the X-Men film franchise. So, will First Class prove too cool for school or will we see it in detention? Let's find out.

Set largely in the 1960's, Sebastian Shaw and his fellow mutants are conspiring to start World War 3, in order to make mutants the dominant species. With the CIA keeping tabs on Shaw and his band, Moira MacTaggert enlists the help of mutant expert (and powerful telepath) Charles Xavier to convince the CIA of the existence of mutants. With the help of a new ally, Erik Lensherr, Charles sets out to find others like them and stop Shaw's plan from coming to fruition.

Like the previous X-Men films, there is a large cast of mutants (albeit this and Wolverine have a slightly smaller roster) so let's start with a brief description of each mutant's power and little details.

Charles Xavier/Professor X (James McAvoy), as noted above, is a telepath. And a very powerful one at that.

Erik Lensherr/ Magneto (Michael Fassbender) is a master manipulator of magnetism. But I bet you knew that.

Raven Darkholme/Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) is a shape-shifter. And, in this universe, Charles' adopted sister (of sorts. Kinda complicated.)

Hank McCoy/Beast (Nicholas Hoult) has animal-like physiology and enhanced strength, stamina, agility and a whole bunch of traits (and in this film, he does gain the blue fur he is well known for. And that is not a spoiler.)

Emma Frost (January Jones) is also a telepath, but she has a secondary ability: transforming her body into a diamond form.

Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon) absorbs kinetic and radiated energy and controls it.

Angel Salvadore (Zoe Kravitz) can fly (much like the Angel from X-Men we all know and love) and spit acid (yeah, the other Angel can't do that...)

Sean Cassidy/Banshee (Caleb Landry Jones) screams at ultrasonic levels, which he can also use as a form of flight.

Azazel (Jason Flemyng) is a teleporter (and in the comics, the father of Nightcrawler)

Armando Munoz/Darwin (Edi Gathegi) adapts to situations as they come (growing gills in water, becoming heat resistant around fire, that sort of thing.)

Janos Quested/Riptide (Alex Gonzalez) creates whirlwinds.

And Alex Summers/Havok (Lucas Till) absorbs energy and blasts it.

Now, there may be spoilers for the rest of the review, but Charles getting paralyzed and Erik striking out as Magneto are NOT spoilers. You kind of expect this if you know even the slightest of X-Men. Everything else is still fair game for spoilers so I warn you now.

Now, in a film with this many characters, chances are you're going to try and pick your favourites and pick the ones you either hate or just would have cut out of the film. Based on the acting, the characterization and the dialogue, my favourite characters would have to be Erik (I don't call him Magneto because he doesn't really become Magneto until the end), Darwin and Azazel. Michael Fassbender has a hard act to follow with inheriting the role (in a way) from Sir Ian McKellen and he nails it. His anguish, his determination, his hard exterior that hides a heavy heart, Fassbender just gets it. If I had to choose a favourite part, a part in which he truly shines, it's near the end, where he's poised to take on the role we all know him for. After a bullet aimed for him is deflected, it hits Charles in the back. The look of horror on Erik's face just sells it. He's panicking, his best friend in the whole world is in pain, he doesn't know what to do. His dialogue after that only confirms just how good Fassbender is and I really, really hope he gets some excellent roles now.

Darwin didn't get much time to develop but what he did get, he used well. He was funny, laid-back and his power is frickin' awesome. Unfortunately, he gets killed off soon after his introduction. I may joke about it in the title of this blog (as well as referencing Pokemon but that's neither here or there) but in all seriousness, damn. He doesn't even get a big send-off. He dies and then the scene changes. Wow, thanks a lot, movie. Take one of the coolest characters in the movie and get rid of him. Oh well, at least he did try and stand up to the villain. He may not have been a hero for long but he was an X-Man through and through.

Azazel doesn't say much and is treated like a lackey but besides looking cool (it's like if the Devil wore a suit to work. No, no! He's like that one background character from that episode of Angel! Season 5, The Girl In Question. He works in the Italian branch of Wolfram And Hart. Yeah, he looks like that guy! Also, just to clarify, I do not think the Devil is cool, I'm just describing him for anyone who doesn't know who the Hell he is. Pun not intended), he has one of the most super awesome powers (as I mentioned above, teleporting). And what does he use it for? He drops people. From the sky. Yeah. Badass or what?

I'll come back to some of the other characters later, when I go into the negatives.

The action scenes were really damn impressive and they didn't feel overblown, either. The battle toward the end felt really authentic (as authentic as a movie with mutants can be anyway) and I really liked Erik and Charles' confrontation with Emma Frost, in which Erik uses a bed frame to constrict her.

However, there are two very big negatives that keep this film from being one of the truly excellent films of the year.

Going back to the characters now, despite being a new take, I don't think I like the changes made to Xavier and Beast. Neither of them has any tact when talking to Mystique about her power and disregard her feelings. Or, to put it bluntly: they kind of act like dicks. Xavier can't even answer a simple question she directs to him (OK, it might be about if he thinks she's attractive and would they date if they didn't know each other and he responds with “But I do know you”. Dude, it's called a hypothetical. You're a scientist, you should know all about those. The correct response is “You're my sister” because after growing up with you, that's what she IS). And if you want more dickish behaviour, at the end of the movie, he and Moira (Rose Byrne, not playing a mutant and her character's not American in the comics despite being one here, doing a very good job) share a kiss... which he uses to wipe her memory of the existence of mutants. You might be trying to protect yourself and the others but now her credibility is shot to Hell. And you could have trusted her or gone another way. But nooooo, you had to wipe her mind.

And don't give me that “it's an alternate universe, they can do what they want” song and dance or the routine of “he's only young, he'll grow into the guy we know”. You know who else was brain-wipe happy? The Xavier of the Ultimate Universe and that universe is filled with arseholes! This is not a path I want to see Xavier go down.

Beast isn't that much different either. He openly tells Mystique she's beautiful when transformed to the state she normally appears in (not the blue, I mean when she's in public).

I've stated in my X-Men comic review that Beast is my favourite character. Even in the aforementioned Ultimate Universe, Beast escapes arseholeification. But here, he had to be vain and self-centered. And no, I will not take the “young = allowed to make mistakes” argument here either. Being young does not absolve you of everything you do. And at his age, he should know better.

Also, what the Hell is up with Angel pulling a face heel turn? One minute she's happy to be free from the life of a stripper and having fun with her new mutant friends, the next she's off to help bring down humanity. Hell, when Sebastian Shaw makes the offer for any mutant to join him, she takes it up with no hesitation and gives some bullcrap reason. I basically view it as “Oh hai losers, I'm off to join the winning side kthanxbai”. Or, however it would be said in the 60's. Probably involving some dialogue about felines and the shapes of boxing rings.

I reckon she just saw their clothes and powers and wanted to live it up. It's just so poorly executed.

But the biggest gripe I have with the movie: it can't decide if it wants to be a prequel or a reboot. It wants to be both, but it can't happen. The two cancel each other out. If it's a reboot, why did you reuse the footage of Erik in the camps from the first X-Men movie? And why put Hugh Jackman as Wolverine for a cameo if the films aren't connected? (Granted, that scene was funny). Is Hugh Jackman-as-Wolverine a constant in all the multiple universes?

But if you are a prequel, that just raises further questions: why is Charles paralyzed at the end of this movie if he can walk in The Last Stand? And more to the point, why would he and Erik be all chummy for one little girl? And why is Emma Frost an adult when she appears as a teenager in Wolverine?

No, movie. You pick one or the other. Casino Royale did. Sure, Judi Dench portrayed M again but at least they said outright they were rebooting Bond and bringing him back to basics.

Admittedly, they do lean more towards reboot but they don't outright say it and before release, it was even being touted as another prequel. Heck, because of the early Erik scenes at the camps, X-Men Origins: Magneto was scrapped.

All in all, a solid movie, but some things still bug me. Unlike Bridesmaids, I think I rated this one a little too high initially. Thus, I give it 3.5/5 (now it shares that with Bridesmaids)

P.S Still hoping to see Apocalypse one of these days. And can someone please hurry up with the Deadpool spin-off?!

Mama, They're All Crazy Now... Or Are They?

The following was originally posted on Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 5:51 pm)

Recently, I viewed Sucker Punch for the second time, this time on DVD, to see if it's a movie that actually gets better with repeated viewing. Does it improve second time around or is there no hope?

And yes, there will be spoilers.

In the 1960's, a young woman (Emily Browning), whose name is never revealed but goes by the nickname “Babydoll”, is sent to an asylum by her abusive stepfather in the wake of her sister's death (who she may or may not have killed) and is due to be lobotomized within the week of her arrival. Escaping into a fantasy, she conspires with four other girls to escape: Amber (Jamie Chung), Blondie (Vanessa Hudgens), Rocket (Jena Malone) and Sweet Pea (Abbie Cornish).

Let's start with that: the fantasy concept. So, she's in an asylum, with a lobotomy pending, and she's been fantasize the entire time. What does everyone around her think? The people she sees in her fantasies are plucked from people she knows in real life and some of the events that happen within the fantasies are happening in reality. So, to anyone not involved, what do they make of this?

“Hey, what's the new girl doing?”
“I think she thinks she's a burlesque dancer or something? Who cares, she's weird”
They may all be in an asylum but I highly doubt they're sharing the same fantasy, it's not like there's magic in play. No cupboards holding gateways to other worlds, no books to conjure dimensional portals.

But what really annoys me is that within the fantasies, she will fantasize AGAIN. What, do you think you're Inception? A fantasy within a fantasy? You going to reveal there's another one in that? Or that the events of the entire movie were made up by some kid holding a snowglobe? More on the fantasies within fantasies later.

Let's talk characters. Babydoll's expression throughout most of the movie is pretty blank. She says little and I find it hard to sympathize with her. Her stepfather might have been (OK, was) an arsehole and I'm disappointed that he survived the film but that doesn't mean she is entirely all there.

Blondie (why is she called that? Because of the five, three of them ARE blonde but she's not? Why isn't Amber called Blondie then) adds little. And being played by Vanessa Hudgens isn't getting you points, either.

Amber (and why doesn't she get a nickname? What, is she not good enough? And if that is a nickname, it sucks, because it sounds like a real name as opposed to the others) is pretty much the same as Blondie, but actually likable.

Sweet Pea really does nothing for me, but then, I really, really do not like Abbie Cornish and I do not believe she's a capable actress (starring in my least favourite movie of all time does not help. Somersault, I loathe your existence and you are the antithesis of everything I love in film)

And Rocket... I actually like her. She's helpful, largely cheerful and full of spunk. So, naturally, the film has to do something about that...

Most of the other characters in this film are either irrelevant (Mrs. Gorski, who I don't hate but if she's trying to be the moral center of the movie, she's not very good at it) antagonistic but ineffectual (Blue) or barely worth a mention even if some things in the plot involve them (the doctor performing the lobotomy... who isn't even given a real name, that's just how much the movie cares).

Now, if it sounds like I'm being too negative, I want to point out I don't hate this film. There are points where it does look like it's trying. And one of the things I sing absolute praise to (no pun intended) is the soundtrack, even if it is anachronistic. Emily Browning actually provided the vocals for a darker remake of Sweet Dreams (Are Made Of This) and its really well done, as is the cover of White Rabbit by Emiliana Torrini. Normally I'm not big on remakes in music that take the song out of the genre when its fine in where it came from but they experiment and put some effort into and I applaud it (except for the usage of Queen. Do not frickin' touch Queen. They are immortal and should not be treated with such disrespect).

However, it's time to come to the biggest flaw of the movie. Going back to the fantasies within the fantasies... well, that's just it. Those fantasies are anachronistic, in a way that it almost seems like a plot hole. Remember, this film is set in the 1960's. So, what goes through the mind of the fantasy Babydoll? Giant robots, advanced computers and girls with guns.

…

This IS a movie I'm watching, right? And not the fanfic of some sex-starved teenager with little to no attention span?
“And it's gotta have chicks with guns, lots and lots of guns! And the sky is dark and smoke filled, when it's not filled with fire! And it needs giant mechas! And computers and bombs! Ooh, and put a dragon in!” Hell, all it was missing was two girls kissing and it would have been a teenage dream that gets their heart racing.

...Wait a minute. Oh my God, those sequences sound like the kind of things 90's Kid would write! Damn it 90's Kid, go back to reading Bloodgun!

Zack, you're better than this, you can have awesome action and still make sense. Dawn Of The Dead was a remake that didn't suck, 300 was over-hyped but still had decent fight choreography, and I still consider Watchmen one of my favourite movies of all time (even if it does lose points now that I have read the graphic novel). These films prove you can combine a solid narrative and invigorating action (on the subject of Zack, I have not seen Legend Of The Guardians: The Owls Of Ga'Hoole. I have no intention of seeing it. Ever. I am, however, very eager to see Zack's reboot of the Superman films in the upcoming Man Of Steel)

But anyway, back to the Incep- I mean fantasy-fantasies (I'm beginning to think they're like those Russian dolls that you open up and find a smaller version inside, and a smaller version inside that and so on and so forth. They are Russian aren't they? Probably should have researched that first. If I am wrong, consider this an apology and an admission of my stupidity)

So, considering the media available in that era, where exactly did she conjure these images from? I don't recall TV shows about giant robots that look kind of like rejected Big Daddies from Bioshock. And if she did read comics, they would have looked more simplistic. The whole thing just seems like an excuse to get arses onto cinema seats because no one could deal with the “mind-screwy nature” of the film

To sum up, I'd like to state something about the movies I watch and a marker of how good or bad they can be: a great movie (once again, I'll use Inception. Seriously, best movie of 2010 in my opinion) can leave you asking questions, in a way like a student eager to learn. You want to know more about the world its created, about the possibilities, the pasts of the characters if not fully disclosed, and you come up with theories for the unanswered stuff, and it makes you feel smarter.

A bad or disappointing movie leaves you asking questions, but usually the types of questions that poke holes in what the movie presents to you. It has failed to provide an answer and can't be bothered to think one up. And you really don't want to because it'll either raise further questions or because you don't like the answer. And Sucker Punch is the latter. As I addressed, this falls into the concepts of the fantasy-fantasies, what the supporting characters are doing while Babydoll is off in her own little world but also one big glaring problem (here's where the major spoiler comes in): so, Sweetpea escapes the asylum. She's rescued by somebody who appeared in one of the fantasy-fantasies, albeit not exactly as they were within that realm. So, does that mean Babydoll somehow accessed another world? How? And if she didn't, how did the Wise Man (as he is called) appear in the fantasy-fantasies? Is he a supernatural being of some sorts? Well, no. You can't do that, movie. You can't just make stuff up like that and keep changing the rules or keep the audience in the dark. That's cheap and lazy.

It's ironic that with Zack Snyder's career at this point being adaptations (or one remake), that the film to get the most scorn is the only original one in the bunch. Well, original in the sense that it's not based on prior work, I can't speak for its content being original. Especially ironic seeing as how we all complain that Hollywood's run out of ideas or it can't do anything original anymore. Well, here's proof that original isn't always going to work.

Despite all that, I give it a 2.5/5. It passes, but this could have been a lot better.