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: WAR HORSE

WAR HORSE

2011
PG-13


"Can you imagine flying over a war, and you know that you can never look down? You have to look forward, or you'll never get home."
-- Grandfather

War Horse is a 2011 dramatic war film directed by Steven Spielberg that serves as an adaptation of the 2007 stage play of the same name, which in turn was adapted from a 1982 children's novel by Michael Morpurgo. When his father drunkenly purchases a beautiful thoroughbred horse in the hopes that it will plow his fields, Albert Narracott (Jeremy Irvine) defies expectations and trains the horse, which he names Joey, to do just that. Despite his success, a spot of bad luck forces Albert's father to sell Joey to the army when England goes to war against Germany. The horse is placed into the care of Captain Nicholls (Tom Hiddleston), who takes Joey into the very front of the war against the Germans. From this moment, an incredible adventure begins, with Joey first fighting with the English then with the Germans. At the same time, however, Albert has made it his solemn vow to find Joey and bring him home, no matter the lengths it may take.

(Note: While the above plot synopsis is a tad bit sparse, I think I've conveyed the basic story outline of the film without giving away too many of the plot details. I'd rather not engage in spoilers more than I must in order to craft this review successfully.)

The first thing you're going to notice about War Horse is the beauty of its cinematography. In the film's opening scenes, we're placed in a beautiful English countryside as we (slightly) witness the birth of Joey and the start of Albert's fascination with him. From there, we're gradually taken into the depths of wartime efforts, an area in which we know Spielberg is well-versed (see: 1998's Saving Private Ryan). As the film trudges onward, the cinematography and set pieces become gloomier and gloomier, and the visual aspect of the film helps to create and enhance the mood that the audience should be feeling. It's rare that the visual aspect of a film will affect me so deeply, but with Spielberg at the helm, I should have known we'd be in for such a spectacle.

Fortunately, the rest of the film corrals around this beautiful central aspect and complements it rather well. In terms of creating the mood, I'd have to say that composer John Williams did a stunning job with the movie's score. This is the second Williams-scored film I've reviewed in the past few days - the first was the also-Spielberg-directed The Adventures of Tintin - and of the two, I'd have to say that this one feels more like a Williams score. It's sweeping and truly interpretive of the grandness of this film, and it aids the cinematography in creating the film's overall atmosphere. Here's a little snippet of the opening title sequence, for your listening pleasure:

While it is those two cinematic devices that work most effectively throughout the film, there's still quite a bit to say about the most pressing issues: the screenplay and the acting. Let's start with our storyline, shall we? In a sense, it's a very straightforward story. The audience is essentially following Joey from one locale to the next, seeing his plight as he traverses the European countryside in the midst of the horrors of war. In a way, the film is split into a series of vignettes. As Joey makes his way from one caretaker to the next, the tone of the film shifts as well. As a story, it's a little bit complacent and sappy at times, but I can see where an individual could find an emotional connection. There were moments where I was truly terrified for Joey and his well-being, so in that, I have to say that the film succeeded in crafting an emotional bridge. At the end of the day, however, the sentimental nature of the film was just a tad too much for my personal liking. It just seemed a little too over-the-top and gentle. Then again, knowing that this was based off a children's story might add a little bit of perspective to that insight.

The acting in the film is solid, if not all that spectacular. Jeremy Irvine does well as our film's lead, and his bonding with the horse that played Joey seems terribly genuine, and they work well together on-screen. There are some rather recognizable faces hidden in the swarming ensemble here, and yet, there isn't one particular character who stands above the rest, save for perhaps the Grandfather (played by Niels Arestrup) whom I quoted at the start of this review. Be on the watch for the following appearances in the film:

Peter Mullan as Ted Narracott, Albert's father
David Thewlis as Lyons, the landlord
Benedict Cumberbatch as Major Jamie Stewart, Captain Nicholls's commanding officer
Celine Buckens as Emilie, the Grandfather's granddaughter
David Kross as Gunther, a German soldier
Eddie Marsan as Sgt. Fry, an English soldier

At the end of the day, however, War Horse didn't particularly land that emotional punch that I so expected it to give. Nearly all the positive reviews I've read on the film have mentioned that the film pulls at the heartstrings, but aside from a few fleeting moments, there just didn't seem to be that much depth to the film. That doesn't mean that I found it to be terrible; on the contrary, I thought it was a well-constructed and beautifully-shot cinematic adventure. I only fear that the memory of the film will be as fleeting as the moments of emotion I was able to enjoy during my watching of this movie.

Movie Review Summary
Grade: B+
1.5 Thumbs Up

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