Movie Review: MELANCHOLIA

MELANCHOLIA

2011

R

"Hold my hand. Close your eyes."

-- Justine

Melancholia is a 2011 dramatic arthouse film directed by Lars von Trier that delves into the concepts of depression and disaster. In the midst of her wedding celebration, new bride Justine (Kirsten Dunst) unwittingly falls victim to a number of outside circumstances that keep her from enjoying what should be the happiest day of her life. Her sister Claire (Charlotte Gainsbourg) and her husband John (Kiefer Sutherland) continually pester her about her mood, and she withstands a number of confrontations from her employer (Stellan Skarsgård) about work-related issues. Her mood swings affect her new husband Michael (Alexander Skarsgård), and at the end of the night, Justine finds herself without a husband and without a job. The film then transitions to its main story: Justine has fallen into a deep depression, and the world watches as a rogue planet called Melancholia heads on a course for a fly-by of Earth. Justine comes to stay with Claire and her family, and she slowly gets back on her feet. Around the same time, Claire begins to worry that Melancholia might, in fact, collide with Earth, causing the end of the world as she knows it.

I first heard about Melancholia as it made its way through the film festival circuits back in early 2011. Dunst managed to nab the Best Actress Award at the Cannes Film Festival, a feat which sparked early Oscar buzz for her performance. The film itself would go on to be selected as the best film of 2011 by the U.S. National Society of Film Critics, and it managed to score a number of nominations and wins at ceremonies around the world. But it was the performance of Dunst, whom has been both good and bad over the years, that truly drew my personal interest in the film. Little did I know that von Trier had something truly special hidden up his sleeve.

I think I need to start with this disclaimer before I get into my overall review: Melancholia is an arthouse film, and it's not going to appeal to all viewers and audiences. Fortunately, the film's opening sequence will set the stage for whether or not you are personally going to make it through the over two-hour venture. The film opens in true arthouse fashion with a number of seemingly random sequences that are sure to confuse many. I myself was scratching my head at the very outset, wondering what exactly I was getting myself into. If you're already turned off by the opening sequence, then Melancholia might not be the flick for you, but if it offers you a sense of intrigue, I implore you to keep watching.

As I previously stated, the film delves into the deepest realms of depression and disaster. It's not the easiest film to watch, and it certainly doesn't offer any real happy ending. It's going to leave a bit of a sour taste in your mouth, but I think that's the point. The storyline itself is relatively rudimentary, but it's the subtle nuances about the screenplay that bring this film to life. The events taking place in the world outside of the film's characters are merely the pieces that keep time moving forward. Melancholia is more about investing yourself in the characters and the emotions they convey. The brilliance in the screenplay stems from the wonderfully-written characters. Even the characters we only see for a moment seem perfectly-placed, and it gives the film a true sense of reality and validity.

The best part of the screenplay, in my opinion, is von Trier's look at the world of depression. Having had my own issues with mental illness, I'd be lying if I said I didn't take a personal emotional interest in the cinematic look at this world so familiar to me. Von Trier himself has had his own issues with depression, and it was these circumstances that led him to craft this particular film. What he creates is one of the most honest and heartbreaking looks at a person with depression, and for that alone, I have to applaud the filmmaker and writer.

This character-driven creation would have never come to life were it not for the stellar cast that von Trier was able to bring together. Dunst is a revelation as one of our principal leads, and I'm left scratching my head, wondering how she was left off last year's Oscar ballot. This is a role unlike any she has ever taken before, and she knocks it out of the park. I laughed with her Justine, I cried with her, I fell to the very depths of sanity with her. When an actor is capable of bringing the viewer on that kind of emotional ride, you know they're doing something right. What's incredible is that Gainsbourg is just as good as Dunst, and it's almost unfair to think that this film managed to snag two fantastic performances. Between the two, it's easily one of the best pairs of performances I've seen together in one film in the last few years. Dunst may take the cake, but Gainsbourg is definitely having a slice or two. The rest of the cast fills out quite nicely, with both the elder and younger Skarsgård offering solid, albeit small, performances. Sutherland also does well with his bit, but he's overshadowed by his female counterparts. Also be on the watch for a great bit piece from John Hurt.

As I said before, Melancholia is not going to be a film that everyone will enjoy. If you've watched other arthouse fare and had trouble remaining engaged, then you might want to pass this one by. However, I personally found it to be an incredible cinematic feat, and Dunst's performance alone is enough to give it recommendation. If you have the patience for it, I'm sure Melancholia will deliver for you in the way it delivered for me.
 

Movie Review Summary

Grade: A-

Status: Should See

Movie Review: THE AVENGERS

THE AVENGERS

2012

PG-13

"You think you're the only hero in the world?"

-- Nick Fury

The Avengers is a 2012 superhero action film directed by Joss Whedon that brings together the Marvel super-team for which the film is named. It serves as a type of sequel to a number of Marvel-centric films that have been released in the past four years. This film centers around an object known as the Tesseract, an energy source with an unknown amount of potential, which is stolen in the opening scenes by the banished Asgardian Loki (Tom Hiddleston). Because he perceives this as a threat and an act of war, S.H.I.E.L.D. director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) chooses to assemble the Avengers in the hopes of bringing them together to stop Loki's nefarious plot. After pulling some strings, he manages to bring together Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) and Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), but they initially have a bit of trouble getting along. Loki, with the help of Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård) and Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner), makes a successful attack against S.H.I.E.L.D., and the ensuing battle helps pull the Avengers into a more cohesive unit. Armed and ready, they prepare to square off against Loki and his army of Chitauri who aim to conquer the Earth.

I would like to start this review by saying that I am by no means a die-hard Marvel comics fan. In fact, I'm not quite sure whether I've actually read an Marvel superhero comic, let alone one that's Avengers-centric. Anything I know about the Avengers Initiative stems from the films that have been released over the past few years. Still, I found myself becoming increasingly excited about the potential for The Avengers despite my relatively positive review of Captain America: The First Avenger and my so-so review of Thor. However, when the film started to garner extremely positive reviews, I definitely started to pay a little more attention. At the writing of this review, The Avengers currently holds a ninety-two percent approval rating on Rottentomatoes.com, and it holds the following critical consensus:

With a script that never forgets its heroes' humanity and no shortage of superpowered set pieces, The Avengers lives up to its hype - and raises the bar for Marvel at the movies.

I'd have to say that I agree wholeheartedly.

Part of the reason the film works so well is the creative genius that is Joss Whedon. Those of you who read my review for The Cabin in the Woods will know that I think very highly of Whedon's talents as a screenwriter, and I personally think he's rather deft behind the camera as well. While this film doesn't necessarily feel like your typical Joss Whedon fare, it certainly has the pitch-perfect dialogue that fills his work. And what's truly great about the screenplay is that Whedon was able to flesh out the characters incredibly well despite the fact that there's so many different personalities dominating the screen. One of my biggest fears entering this film was whether the high number of A-list actors might overcrowd the film as they all jockey for position. With Whedon at the helm, however, each character is given exactly the right amount of screen-time, and just the right amount of touch is given to each of their personalities. While we may have been introduced to the characters in their own respective films, their relationships with one another in The Avengers are the facets that truly start to humanize each individual, making them more likable both individually and as a whole. This is where I thought the film succeeded most, by establishing each member of the Avengers as an individual with a specific set of emotions that ultimately makes them more easily relatable.

I also think that the dialogue and screenplay allowed for each of the actors to step up their game. Now, it was going to be tough for Downey Jr. to top his performances as Tony Stark/Iron Man from his two films, but I thought he did a fantastic job at least staying on par. I thought both Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth stepped it up a notch and brought more thoughtful and emotional characters to the screen this time around. It was also nice to get a little more of a back-story on Johansson and Renner's characters. The real surprise, however, was Tom Hiddleston as the devious Loki. As I previously mentioned, I was not a huge fan of the film Thor, and part of the reason it was so off-putting was that I didn't feel the need to root against Loki, who was also the villain in that film. This time around, there's something much more sinister about him, and I honestly thought Hiddleston brought his A-game. It's a truly fantastic performance, and I have to say that he should be applauded. Also be on the watch for some great smaller performances from the likes of Clark Gregg and Cobie Smulders, as well as vocal performances from Paul Bettany and Lou Ferrigno.

Oh, and some of the film's intangible qualities are top-notch as well. The special effects are utterly fantastic, and I was continually wowed by just how great the visual aspect of the film continued to be. On a personal note, I think they finally found a way to convey the Hulk properly, but that's just my own opinion. Some of the special effects are so beautifully intricate that you'll have a hard time believing that it's actually computer-generated. It's just that good. I'd also like to applaud Alan Silvestri for the score he composed for the film. It fit perfectly, and it might be one of the more memorable scores I've heard of late. Here's a snippet for your listening pleasure:

(Oh, and as with any Marvel film, make sure you stay all the way through the credits. There's a scene - or two - left there for your viewing pleasure.)

At the end of the day, The Avengers is one of the most honestly entertaining films I've seen in quite a while. I laughed and cheered along with the rest of the midnight audience, and it's easily one of the better movie-going experiences I've had in recent memory. I heard a few people already calling it the "best superhero movie" they'd ever seen, and although I can't quite place it on that high a pedestal just yet - The Dark Knight still holds that spot, and The Dark Knight Rises looms on the horizon - I'd say The Avengers definitely has to be in the conversation. It's just a fantastically-made film that's sure to keep a smile on your face.

Movie Review Summary

Grade: A

Should You See It? Yes

Movie Review: THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO

THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO

2011
R


"The fear of offending is stronger than the fear of pain."
-- Martin Vanger

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is a 2011 film directed by David Fincher that serves as a remake of the 2010 Swedish film Män som hatar kvinnor, which in turn was an adaptation of the late Stieg Larsson's 2005 novel of the same name. After he is sued for allegedly offering incorrect information about a high-level businessman, Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is offered the chance to retaliate if he can aid aging patriarch Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) in discovering the details surrounding his niece's disappearance nearly forty years earlier. Mikael has luck in the early stages of his investigation, but as time goes by and fewer and fewer clues surface, he enlists the help of a young hacker named Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara), who happens to be the person who exposed the miscues that led to his being sued. As the two dig deeper into the secrets that lie within the Vanger family history, they find a very convoluted plot that slowly begins to unfold, leading them to a strange and dangerous ending.

When I first heard about the proposed remake of the Swedish adaptations of Larsson's Millennium trilogy, I have to say I was a tad bit worried for a few reasons. First, I wondered whether initiating a remake so quickly after the success of the Swedish films was a good idea. The first of those films was released in Sweden in 2009 and hit the United States in 2010, so U.S. audiences only had to wait another year for an English-language version. While some quick remakes have found success (i.e., 2010's Let Me In, which was a remake of the 2008 Swedish Låt den rätte komma in, or Let the Right One In), I was still a little concerned about the prospects for this particular franchise. Secondly, because of the way the storyline is crafted, I could only think of a few possible directors that could have handled the remake. When it was announced that David Fincher would be taking the helm, some of my worries were silenced, but I still held a little bit of doubt. Ultimately, there wasn't any way I was going to be able to watch this film without comparing it to its Swedish predecessor, so I hope you'll forgive me if this turns into more of a compare-and-contrast piece than a straight-forward review.

There isn't much to say in terms of the film's screenplay that I didn't already say in my review of the Swedish version, which you can read here. I found Steven Zaillian's script to be tightly-written and intriguing, but I did have a few issues that probably serve as nitpicking more than anything else. One of my biggest issues was the fact that, while the film takes place in Sweden, every character happens to speak in English. Normally this wouldn't be much of an issue, but the fact that the filmmakers chose to leave all of the visually-written objects - including signs, posters and car decals - in Swedish threw me a little off. While I'm hearing English being spoken, I'm seeing words in Swedish, and it just took me a little out of the movie. That's not necessarily a good thing for any film, much less one that's throwing you so much information on a consistent basis that you need to be able to keep up.

We are getting a rather good ensemble cast, although I'm not sure it quite measures up to the one from the film it's following. Mara and Craig are fine as our leads, and Mara is getting quite a bit of praise for her performance, but I personally didn't think she came close to being as effective as Noomi Rapace was in her role. I was pleasantly surprised to see Christopher Plummer's turn in this one, even if his role didn't consist of much screen-time. Also be on the lookout for fine performances from the likes of Robin Wright, Stellan Skarsgård and Joely Richardson, who help fill out the cast list nicely.

At the end of the day, I thought that The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo did enough to keep me engaged, but I couldn't help but think that it just wasn't quite as good as the original 2010 film. Although it hasn't garnered much success at the box office, both of the series' sequels have received the green-light for production, so be on the watch for Mara and Craig to team up twice more in the next few years. Still, if you are looking to watch this film, I honestly think you should at least give the Swedish adaptation a chance. This one is good, but it's just a half-step behind its predecessor.

Movie Review Summary
Grade: B+
1.5 Thumbs Up

Movie Review: GOOD WILL HUNTING

GOOD WILL HUNTING

1997
R

Good Will Hunting is a 1997 drama directed by Gus Van Sant that tells the story of an exceptionally intelligent young man who's not quite striving for his potential. When an MIT math professor writes a nearly unsolvable theorem on a hallway blackboard, young janitor Will Hunting (Matt Damon) takes a crack at it and solves the theorem with relative ease. Flabbergasted, Professor Gerald Lambeau (Stellan Skarsgård) seeks out the mastermind and finds him facing jail-time after a blacktop brawl. Lambeau cuts a deal with the judge, bringing Will under his supervision. He gives him two stipulations: first, he must work on mathematical formulas with him; second, he must see a therapist in order to rid himself of any demons from his past. Will isn't too fond of the idea but figures it's better than spending time in jail. After going through a number of psychologists, he lands on a community college professor named Sean Maguire (Robin Williams) who seems to be the perfect fit. The two work together - often times butting heads - to try to understand how Will's past has affected his current character of non-attachment.

What I've given you above is essentially the basic storyline offered by Good Will Hunting. There are a couple of sub-plots at hand that include Will's best friend Chuckie (Ben Affleck) and his love interest Skylar (Minnie Driver), but to go into detail about the sub-plots would take a lot more time than I'd like to spend on the synopsis. Just know that they're there, and they definitely add important pieces to the puzzle.

Now, I know the first thing you're all thinking is, "How has This Movie Guy never seen Good Will Hunting?" I know, it's probably a little blasphemous considering, but now I can say that I've seen it so we can all stop worrying about my future livelihood! I am a tad bit disappointed in myself for waiting this long to watch this film considering how much I ended up enjoying it. For a long time, I wasn't much of a fan of either Damon or Affleck, so that probably kept me from giving it a chance before today. That being said, let's get into the review.

I thought that the screenplay worked rather effectively. I've always had a bit of beef with any relation to this screenplay. Because Damon and Affleck wrote it and ultimately won an Oscar for it, they are always referred to as "Academy Award winner" so and so. It's not a bad thing, but because the driving force behind their careers has been acting, it just makes it seem like they might have won their Oscar for acting which isn't the case at all. Did they deserve the award for this film? Probably, although I haven't seen all the films it was nominated against. But I digress. The screenplay works well to craft a real and believable character in Will Hunting. It gives him an ambiguous back-story that slowly bubbles to the surface with the help and guidance of Sean Maguire, who's character is equally damaged. In a way, Good Will Hunting works more as a character study than a plot-driven vehicle. We have two major character arcs from our main two men, and they're so complete that I almost want to give Damon and Affleck a standing ovation for their writing effort. They also have a great feel for the setting, crafting dialogue that fits almost perfectly. Kudos, boys. You guys did well in my book.

Fortunately, the acting backs up everything that's so great about the screenplay. Damon is definitely fantastic as our lead, whether he's spouting his random bouts of knowledge or breaking down to his lowest point. Williams is a revelation in his Academy Award-winning role that's a drastic change from anything I've seen him do prior to this point. He's most well-known for his comedy, but he's dabbled in drama now and again, but this might be his most complete dramatic role. Simply brilliant, if I do say so myself. We also get some fantastic performances from our supporting cast, including Skarsgård and Affleck. Minnie Driver is great in her limited amount of screen-time, bringing the only real female presence in the film to the screen and knocking it out of the park. Even a young Casey Affleck brings some much-needed laughter to his small role. All in all, we have a fantastic cast to support the equally fantastic screenplay.

The psychology of the film was really the selling point for me. Having earned my Bachelor's degree in psychology, it's always a fascinating watch when a movie can realistically delve into the psyche of its characters. I was a little blind-sided by this particular film because I see myself as a bit of a combination of Will Hunting and Sean Maguire. In a way, each of them reflects a piece of me, so this film might have been a little more resonant for me than I had originally intended. Was it earth-shattering for me? Not quite, but it definitely opened my eyes a little bit to some of the stuff I've had to endure in my own lifetime. But enough about me - I won't get into my psyche right now; I wouldn't want to bore you.

Overall, I think Good Will Hunting is a fantastic film that definitely deserves a watch. I'm glad I finally had the opportunity to give it a gander as it's easily made it's way onto my list of "greatest films of all time." Oh, and for those of you who've seen this movie, you might enjoy this little clip from the 2001 film, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, where the boys come back to film a (fictional) Good Will Hunting 2:

Movie Review Summary:
Grade: A-
2 Thumbs Up

Addition to Rankings
Greatest All-Time - #174

Trailer Breakdown: THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO

A teaser trailer has been released for the upcoming American remake of the Swedish film Män som hatar kvinnor, which translates to The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. That film was the first of the Millennium trilogy and was based on a series of novels written by Stieg Larsson. I reviewed the original film in December, giving it a rather glowing review. It even fared well enough to nab three nominations in my personal "Best of 2010" list, so that should say quite a bit about its overall quality. When I first heard about the remake, my immediate thought was, "Well, of course they're going to remake it. That's what we do as Americans." However, as I heard the list of cast and crew grow, my feelings of worry slowly started to dissipate. Could we actually be getting a legitimate remake? I suppose we'll have to wait and see. Here's the new teaser trailer for your viewing pleasure. I'll break it down after the jump.

And now for some thoughts and questions that came up while I was watching the trailer:

1. This trailer is ridiculously fast-paced. Should we expect that from the actual film?
At the end of the day, this is just a teaser trailer, and it should be taken as such. It's purpose is to give us a taste as to what we might see in the film, so I'm not sure whether we should take any of the pacing style here and assume it will convey to the actual feature film. I personally thought that the original Swedish film was a little on the slow side, but that ultimately worked towards its advantage. The plot was so intricate that it almost needed to be a little bit slow in order for it to be understandable. This American remake, however, has David Fincher at the helm. He's known for creating some fast-paced flicks (i.e., 1999's Fight Club; 2010's The Social Network), but he's also shown he can slow it down (i.e., 2008's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button). Despite the blinding speeds shown in this teaser, I think the final product will end up being a little bit slower. However, if it does maintain a fast pace, I couldn't think of a director other than Fincher that I'd rather have handling it.

2. What's the storyline of the film?
There really isn't much in this teaser to get people interested in any semblance of a story. I think that this particular trailer works more as a means to grab the attention of people who may already be fans of the novels or the original Swedish films. Everything moves so quickly that it's almost impossible to understand anything that's going on if you don't have prior knowledge of the story. Still, the fast pace could draw some into the trailer in the hopes that they'll be receiving an action thriller come December. The trailer just doesn't give much in terms of guessing what might happen in the film. If you already know the story, then you're one step ahead.

3. Since we're not getting any clues to the storyline, what can we get from the trailer?
Because we're simply given a string of flashing scenes for nearly one hundred seconds, I think the thing that most viewers will take away are the actors featured within the trailer. For those of you paying attention, you'll be happy to find the following actors and actresses who will be holding important roles within the film: Daniel Craig, Rooney Mara, Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgård, Robin Wright, Embeth Davidtz and Joely Richardson. It's a pretty legitimate cast list, if I do say so myself. Will they be able to hold up to the Swedish original? We'll have to wait and see.

4. Who covered "Immigrant Song" for the trailer?
I'm not quite sure as to the reasons behind using Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song" in this teaser trailer, but I can say that I'm thoroughly impressed with the rendition offered by Academy Award-winner Trent Reznor and Karen O. It adds to the overall pace of the trailer, and it gives us a little taste of what we might be hearing once the final product hits theaters. Reznor is helming the score, of course.

5. "The feel bad movie of Christmas?"
Having seen the original film, I'd have to say that this might be the perfect tagline moving forward. I don't want to get into too many specifics about the storyline for fear of ruining it for those of you who may not know the story already, but it's definitely a visceral experience that's going to leave you wondering just how to feel.

Overall, I'd say I'm pretty excited about the potential for this particular remake. Having been a fan of the original film, I'd have to say that I do have rather lofty expectations. However, with the direction of Fincher and the look of this trailer, I feel a lot more confident in my overall judgment.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo will hit theaters in the U.S. on December 21, 2011.

Movie Review: THOR

THOR

2011
PG-13

Thor is a 2011 superhero action film directed by Kenneth Branagh and serves as the latest addition to the list of films leading to the upcoming "Avengers Initiative" movie set for release next year. The film starts with a flash-forward on Earth as Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) hits Thor (Chris Hemsworth) with her car. We're immediately taken back to Thor's home world of Asgard where we learn that he is the heir apparent to the great king Odin (Anthony Hopkins). However, Thor's arrogance and desire to start a war with the enemy frost giants forces Odin to banish Thor from Asgard and strip him of his supernatural powers. Thor soon finds himself a mortal on Earth, where he meets the aforementioned Jane, a scientist trying to find the secrets to the wormholes first proposed by Einstein. Jane and her fellow scientists Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård) and Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings) try to make sense of the seemingly crazed ramblings of Thor as they try to piece together from where he may have come. The group soon learns of a mysterious "satellite" crash near where they found Thor, which immediately piques the Asgardian's interest as he realizes the satellite is, in fact, his hammer Mjölnir. With Jane's help, he makes his way to the site which has been surrounded by government security, but he soon realizes that without his immortality, he cannot control Mjölnir. As Thor struggles to find a way back to Asgard, he learns of the nefarious plot concocted by his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) and swears to defend both Asgard and Earth from his rule.

I'd like to start by saying that I am not a fan of the source comics and have never been one. I don't think I've ever read a comic book of any kind, to be honest, but I just think that should be mentioned as I try to explain my opinion of this film. In a way, I was able to go into the film without any real expectations, so I could view it simply as a film rather than an adaptation. I've had conversations with avid Marvel fans who span the entire spectrum of enjoyment with Thor - some said they loved it, others said they hated it, but they all mentioned that they based their opinion on whether or not they felt it reflected the comic books well. I will not be doing that; instead, I'll be looking at this as a stand-alone film despite the fact that I know it's anything but.

I had some hesitations going into the film based on the trailers I had seen in the previous few months. In fact, there was enough hesitation that I did not place Thor on my list of the twenty-five summer films I was most excited to see. Something about the trailers made it look a little bit on the unsatisfying side, and I'd have to say that I feel like I hit the nail on the head with my original feelings. While the film wasn't horrendous by any means, it lacked any real spark that could possibly propel it towards anything beyond being "good."

I actually didn't know that Branagh had directed the film until the day of its release, and the moment I heard it, I had some qualms. Branagh is a classically trained Shakespearean actor and director who has deftly taken on such famous titles as Henry V, Hamlet and Frankenstein. But how would he do with a superhero comic book adaptation? I've heard reports that Branagh has been a massive Thor fan since he was a child, so that precision should have translated into a well thought-out endeavor. However, things just seemed a little amiss throughout this one.

The screenplay wasn't anything spectacular, giving us a rather predictable storyline aided by some very simplistic dialogue. From the first moment, even non-comic book readers like myself should be able to guess exactly how this one's going to end, and that doesn't do much in terms of hooking the viewer into the movie. And while not atrocious, the dialogue spoken throughout the film seemed so simple and easy that it just wasn't realistic. It's difficult not to compare this film to its Iron Man predecessors, but part of the reason those films worked so well is because the dialogue was fresh and interesting. In Thor, it's just a little bit stale, and it's hard to imagine that anyone would speak in such a manner.

To be fair, the Iron Man films are lucky enough to have the ever-fabulous Robert Downey Jr., and unfortunately, no one in Thor comes within a thousand miles of his brilliance. Our lead is Hemsworth, whose largest film role prior to this one was his cameo appearance in the beginning of 2009's Star Trek. He definitely has the look for Thor, but his acting bravado just isn't quite enough to make him a captivating lead for this particular film. Sadly, we'll have to see some more of him in the Avengers film, and I can already tell you that he's going to be pushed to the side by Downey and Chris Evans, who will appear as Captain America. Considering the rest of Thor's cast, we should have seen something a little bit better than what we get. Recent Oscar winner Portman mails in a performance that's not bad but not good by any means. Skarsgård and Hiddleston are decent but nothing spectacular. Dennings probably gives the most realistic performance in the film, but she's not given much screen-time. And even the "great" Anthony Hopkins isn't all that great. I could make an argument towards the "greatness" of Hopkins' overall acting ability, but I won't bog down this review with that particular argument.

If anything works extremely well in the film, it's the musical composition which definitely deserves mention. Patrick Doyle does well with the score that fits the scene almost perfectly. It's always there, but it's never so strong that it dominates the film. It does exactly what a film score should do: complement the events on-screen without taking them over.

Overall, Thor is a pedestrian addition to the annals of superhero film history. I understand its necessity in crafting a prelude to the character as he enters the Avengers film, but there just wasn't anything that was going to blow you away. It's not quite good, but it's not quite bad - it's just found a niche somewhere in the middle, but that doesn't necessarily bode well for its longevity. I'd say save your money and wait for the DVD unless you desperately think you need to see it on the big screen for the visual effects (which were, admittedly, quite good even if they were a tad bit frantic). But visual effects don't make a successful film - screenplay and acting do, and in those facets, Thor just doesn't entirely succeed.

(Oh, and as is the new norm with Marvel flicks, don't forget to wait through all the credits for one last scene. It might seem like a long time - the credits span seven minutes - but if you're interested, you'll probably want to sit through them all for that one last bit).

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: C+
0.5 Thumbs Up