Tag Archives: Marvel

Aug 25 2012
Leave a comment
Film

My Favorite Superhero Films. #5: X-Men (2000)

Sorry for the random drought there! I actually have the next review already written, so as long as I can get a reasonable chunk of the one after that done, I’ll post it tomorrow night!

~-~-~

#5: X-Men (2000)

For those who don’t remember the pre-2000 superhero film landscape, and how much of a seismic shift occurred after X-Men, it might actually be difficult to contextualize just how seminal this film actually was to the genre. Anyone who’s been raised on post-2000 superhero films would probably watch this film and think, “Well, yeah. It’s pretty great, but it’s what I’m used to seeing from a really good superhero film: a well-made film for any genre with a heavy emphasis on character interaction and development. It’s really good, but what’s the big deal?”

Here’s the big deal: this is the film that introduced that formula to the genre. Prior to X-Men, the only two widely successful superhero film franchises were Superman and Batman. The former had descended into silliness and showed no sign of dramatically changing the film landscape, the latter had gone from being a vehicle for Tim Burton’s sensibilities, then later a corporate marketing machine whose primary purpose was to serve as an excuse to sell action figures. What X-Men did (this is going to sound like a no-brainer, but it was really actually not) was give superhero films license not only to be good, but to be the ends unto themselves.

X-Men had all of the elements you needed for an exceptionally entertaining film even if it hadn’t been a superhero film. The script by David Hayter based on the story by Bryan Singer and Tom DeSanto was a major strength. Rather than seeing being the introduction to a series as a handicap, X-Men decided to take the novel approach of making that aspect of the film genuinely interesting. The pacing was excellent, with well-spaced dramatic beats and necessary exposition weaved together seamlessly. The overall tone was fairly light-hearted and optimistic, but it definitely had its fair share of dramatic moments.

The strong script was brought to life by the exceptional director Bryan Singer, and an unbelievably strong ensemble cast headlined by the likes of Sirs Patrick Stewart (as Professor Charles Xavier) and Ian McKellen (as Eric Lensherr/Magneto), and Hugh Jackman (as Logan/Wolverine.) One of the things that would later make The Avengers so terrifically successful was its emphasis on group dynamics, and Joss Whedon’s existing expertise notwithstanding, it very well may have found its prototype in this film. The team is introduced to the audience through the eyes of newcomers Logan and Rogue (Anna Paquin.)

Unlike many later Marvel films that will make the heroes the most interesting thing about he film by simply not having an overpowering villain, X-Men uses the franchise’s most iconic villain, who could easily be the most interesting thing about his entire series in his own right. The thing is, what makes Magneto such an effective villain for this series is he doesn’t detract from the heroes’ ability to shine at all because of how intimately involved he is with the X-Men. The film depicts a sympathetic Magneto with deep, personal reasons for what he’s doing. We also see the complicated relationship between him and Charles Xavier, with strong hints at an extensive backstory between the two that really forms one of the emotional cores of this entire series. (Strikingly, this will actually later turn out to be one of the only things Brett Ratner’s monstrosity of a third film “gets” about the earlier films, though it’s more or less a throwaway token reference.)

One likely reason I–unlike many fans–actually prefer the first film to the second is that it’s actually the only film in the entire series that doesn’t badly underuse Cyclops (aka Scott Summers, played by James Marsden.) Actually, his role in the film’s final action sequence is one of the biggest “wow” moments of the series for me. Of course, the film does have to introduce the love triangle between Scott, Logan, and Jean Grey (Famke Janssen), but since Bryan Singer isn’t a hack who doesn’t understand these characters at all (we’ll get to you in a later review, Brett Ratner), this really actually serves to give Logan another source of character conflict and added emotional depth. What little relationship drama there was served essentially the same role it did in the comics and animated series, and you never got the impression that Singer was going to take it farther than that.

One of the biggest reasons I can’t buy the argument that X-Men: First Class (2011) is actually an improvement over Singer’s first two films is the secondary villains in X-Men. Much like Azazel (Jason Flemyng) and… What’s-His-Name (yeah, it’s Riptide, played by Alex Gonzalez, but you had to look that up) from First Class, X-Men‘s villains are essentially walking plot devices. The thing is? You remember them. You remember Sabretooth (Tyler Mane), Toad (Ray Park), and especially Mystique (Rebecca Romijn.) Were there any unmemorable characters in this film? I don’t remember. (Har har.) When even a film’s plot device characters are memorable, it’s doing something very right. (Really, First Class actually had a pretty big problem with many of its heroes being unmemorable, but let’s move on.)

If this film had one weakness, it is that it felt like there was just a bit of vestigial guilt about being a superhero film. There’s even an in-joke when Cyclops asks a discontent Wolverine regarding the uniforms, “What would you prefer, yellow spandex?” Most comic book fans probably couldn’t help but roll their eyes and wonder how exactly black leather was any less impractical and silly-looking. But we’re still not talking about Chris Nolan levels of “I can’t believe I’m making a superhero film,” and remember: this was the film that hit Hollywood over the head with the fact that superhero films could be mostly faithful to their source material and well-crafted films in their own right.

To date, The Avengers may be the ultimate expression of what a superhero film can be, but X-Men was the first film to show us that such a thing was possible at all. It showed us how to make a superhero film that people will take seriously without Christopher Nolan’s aesthetic of “things are meaningful because they are dark and gritty.” Keep making them like this, Hollywood. Trust me.

Tagged , , , , , , , ,
Aug 16 2012
Leave a comment
Film

My Favorite Superhero Films. #6: Iron Man (2008)

Sorry if it seems like I was gone for a week. There’s actually a perfectly good explanation for that, though: I was gone for a week!

~-~-~

#6: Iron Man (2008)

I have seen two perfect superhero origin films: Batman Begins, and this one. Batman Begins was a bit more serious and featured a much more impressive villain. Iron Man brought quite a bit more fun. Traditional superhero movie logic dictates the narrative necessity of a dominant villain, but I think it’s very okay for most of the focus to be on the hero, especially in an origin story, and especially when the hero is played by Robert Downey Jr. (I’m actually completely serious about that last part.)

Iron Man doubles as arguably my favorite origin story of all time and easily the most watchable superhero film of all time. The blend of action and humor make the sheer entertainment value of this film pretty unmatched in the genre. I just can’t imagine someone saying, “Hey, let’s watch Iron Man” and me “not being in the mood.” There might be something I’d rather watch, but it’s always cool to watch Iron Man. Always.

The most impressive part of Tony Stark’s character arc is that he manages to almost completely reinvent himself without ever stopping being an arrogant asshole. (Well, it’s either that or the fact that he manages to be an arrogant asshole that the audience absolutely loves.) Stark’s reinvention of himself has more to do with practical changes, with taking responsibility for what he and his company are doing and changing it for the better. Tony becomes driven, and thanks to Downey Jr.’s skill you can see that determination in his eyes throughout the film’s second and third acts.

Stark’s actions draw the attention of the “Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement and Logistics Division.” Though the name isn’t diminutized (“S.H.I.E.L.D.”) until the end of the film, most comic book fans were probably able to connect the dots the first time they heard the name Stark describes as a “mouthful,” and most of them probably immediately wet their pants with excitement. (Which they probably should’ve saved for the post-credits scene when Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) visits Tony Stark to talk about the “Avengers Initiative.”)

S.H.I.E.L.D. is represented during the bulk of the film by the first appearance of Agent Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg), who probably surprised even the filmmakers by becoming a huge fan favorite. I recognized Clark Gregg from a supporting role in The West Wing as FBI Special Agent Mike Casper. Coulson’s characterization actually has quite a few similarities to his role on The West Wing, having an “everyman” vibe despite his position as an intelligence agent, as well as an earnest good-naturedness.

I thoroughly enjoyed Pepper Potts’ (Gwyneth Paltrow) role in the film and her chemistry with Tony. And, in a rarity for superhero films, the stirrings of a romantic subplot with Tony didn’t feel “overdone” here. Rather, it was a collection of “little” moments, perhaps the most poignant of which was her exclamation of, “Are those bullet holes?” upon seeing damage to Tony’s suit.

Terrence Howard was also excellent as Tony’s best friend, Arthur Rhodes. The chemistry between the two characters was a lot of fun, and frankly my biggest disappointment about the sequel was that Howard wasn’t back. The dynamic between Downey Jr. and Howard’s replacement Don Cheadle was dramatically different and much more serious.

The choice to have Jarvis (voiced by Paul Bettany) as an artificial intelligence computer program rather than a human butler was, I think, a wise one. It allows Tony to have someone to talk to when he’s in the armor, and it also seems to fit in much better with both the tone of the film and Tony’s lifestyle.

Having so little emphasis on the film’s villain could’ve easily been a fatal weakness for the film, which is why Jeff Bridges’ performance as Obadiah Stane was so important. He made the character imposing with his body language, such that he always seemed to be “in control” of whatever situation he was in. Although his villain turn was hardly a huge surprise, he was able to play the role of Tony’s father-figure-turned-enemy quite convincingly.

There is so much to love about this film. If The Avengers is the template for ensemble superhero films, this might well be the template for solo superhero films. It “feels” light and entertaining, but it’s actually surprisingly smart and definitely well-constructed. Really, when it gets right down to it, it’s just one of the most enjoyable films I’ve ever seen.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,
Aug 08 2012
Leave a comment
Uncategorized

DC Comics and the Failed “NO U”

Coming literally the day after Disney/Marvel thrilled us with the news that Joss Whedon will return for Avengers 2 and develop a live-action television show, Warner Bros./DC Comics (not to be outdone!) has underwhelmed us by (reportedly) courting Ben Affleck to direct Justice League.

Okay, yeah. “Underwhelmed” is probably not strong enough of a term. To general moviegoers, Affleck might be a pretty successful and recognizable actor and filmmaker. For comic book fans? We’re talking about the guy who starred in Daredevil.

Swing and a miss?

What’s really frustrating about his is that DC actually does know how to make films… they’re just all animated.

Tagged , , , , , , ,
Aug 08 2012
4 Comments
Film

My Least Favorite Superhero Films: #6: The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

So! I’m leaving for a trip tomorrow in the very early a.m., and won’t be back until Monday in the very late p.m. Functionally, this means I will likely not be posting anything new until Tuesday afternoon at the earliest. If everything goes according to plan, I should have another post up this evening that dovetails with this one, and that will be it for a few days. I really hope everyone is enjoying reading this series almost as much as I’m enjoying writing it!

Also, as I was typing out the tags for this entry, I had an awkward moment where I had typed, “Sam Raimi, Marc Webb,” and I was very tempted to add, “unfair comparisons.”

~-~-~

#6: The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

I know you’re probably wondering, “Weren’t we just here?” Yeah, I know I’ve already ripped this film to shreds in its original review, but you know what? I have no problem doing so again. It deserves it.

Little or no effort was put into any of this film’s most basic elements. The script is unbelievably weak and doesn’t seem to have been proofread by anyone who has the slightest concern about things like basic logic or character motivation. I’m no insider, but I’ve read plenty or articles by people who know insiders or are insiders themselves, and all of them suggest that the studio was looking for a pushover director who would do whatever the studio wanted and (again, not an insider), my best guess based on what we saw on the screen is that they got their man in Marc Webb. Everything just combines to make this film pretty lackluster.

The decision to make this film has been postulated to be primarily financially motivated. Sony had to make another Spider-Man film to keep the rights to the series, or they would revert back to Marvel (Disney.) This, coupled with Sam Raimi’s unwillingness to rush a film onto screens when he wasn’t satisfied with the script led to them jettisoning Spider-Man 4 and rebooting the series. Really, once they made that decision, they had hardly put themselves in a position to succeed. With Sam Raimi’s highly successful films still fresh in everyone’s collective memories, The Amazing Spider-Man basically had two choices: it could do the exact same thing as Raimi’s Spider-Man (and be both repetitive and not quite as good), or it could try to do something unexpected.

Let’s stop here and remember something pretty crucial: there is a massive difference between unexpected and stupid. Completely changing Uncle Ben’s death’s emotional significance in Peter’s life, and making its relationship to his identity as Spider-Man confusing at best? That would be an example of “stupid.” Completely changing Peter Parker’s characterization? Massively stupid.

Andrew Garfield seems like he could’ve been a much better Spider-Man given a superior script. The few times when he acts at least a little like Spider-Man (the bridge rescue toward the middle of the film, and the race across Manhattan to stop the Lizard toward the end of it) are genuinely pretty good, but there really isn’t any time during the film when he seems remotely like Peter Parker. Emma Stone (as Gwen Stacy) wasn’t terrible, but she was playing a poorly-written character, and she was certainly no Kirsten Dunst (as Mary Jane Watson).

Rhys Ifans (as Curt Conners) actually suffers dramatically in comparison to Dylan Baker even though the latter had a much more limited role in the first three films. Perhaps the most personally frustrating bit of failed casting was Martin Sheen as Ben Parker. In Raimi’s films, Cliff Robertson played a version of Uncle Ben that was ripped pretty directly from the comics. Sheen is an actor I admire a great deal, but he comes off as far too intellectual for the role he’s playing, a role which even this film’s script defines as more “street smart” than “book smart.” I would comment on the characterization of Aunt May (Sally Field), but then I’d be saying more about her than the film did, so that would feel a little unfair.

The real problem is, nothing anyone says or does in this film makes any sense. I spent most of my time watching this film asking, “Why is he doing that? Why is she saying that? What is happening?” The most egregious example of this is the Lizard’s motivations… what are they, exactly? A fairly common defense I’ve been seeing is that the Lizard “wasn’t a very deep character in the first place.” You can choose to believe that if you want (I don’t), but it’s a pretty awful excuse to turn him into a bizarre lizard supremacist fascist. If you’re going to play it that way, at least have it make sense. By way of contrast, let’s consider the approach Raimi was taking to the character. Connors is mentioned in Spider-Man, and is a prominent secondary character in Spider-Man 2 and Spider-Man 3 as Peter’s professor and mentor. The two have a somewhat complicated relationship that Raimi likely would’ve capitalized on in Spider-Man 4 by having Peter experience emotional turmoil over being forced to fight his mentor, while playing the Lizard portion of Connors’ character pretty straight from the comics like he did the rest of his villains.

The romance subplot, which was the emotional core of Raimi’s films, is for the most part shoved to the side here. I actually think the minimalist approach to the romance was one of the few things that worked pretty well, but that’s somewhat of a backhanded compliment because the reason it worked for me is there is absolutely no way I want to see very much of this Peter Parker in a romance subplot. Thank you, no.

Denis Leary as Gwen’s father, NYPD Captain George Stacy, was a very unexpected bright spot in this film. He’s a little one-dimensional, but I think he would’ve fit quite well in a better film with a better script. And Stacy is a much more interesting part of this film than he was of Spider-Man 3, where he was played by the very talented James Cromwell but not really given much of a role.

Webb’s version does make the wise choice of not killing off the villain at the end of the film, but rather imprisoning him. You know, like every other version of Spider-Man except Raimi’s does (though Raimi’s had pretty good reasons for doing what it did.) Establishing a precedent of not killing villains allows the series to use whichever villains they want without eliminating the chance of bringing them back later, maybe even for something as huge as the Sinister Six. After all, every Spider-Man fan knows: “We’ll meet again, Spider-Man!”

Unfortunately, due to this film’s undeservedly robust box office performance, it’s likely that we’ll meet him again in this continuity. Hopefully someone on the sequel’s creative team will decide it’s a pretty good idea to have Peter Parker be Peter Parker instead of this weird emo hipster kid who dresses like a nerd but doesn’t act like one at all.

I’ve actually included this film ahead of a lot of films that are indisputably much worse films because it is utterly soulless. Yeah, it was more technically proficient than, say, Steel or Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance, but it offends me with its very existence and the cynical motives that led to that existence.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Aug 07 2012
Leave a comment
Film, Television

I cannot react rationally to this.

So, the news just broke that Joss Whedon has been signed to return to write/direct Avengers 2 (which was pretty much a foregone conclusion) and develop a Marvel live-action television series (which was not.)

If you’ll allow me a moment of uncritical reaction: YESSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!

Seriously, this is like the nerd equivalent of your favorite team winning the Super Bowl, only you’re the real winner because you get to watch a Joss Whedon-developed Marvel telvision show! And it’s on ABC, so Fox can’t cancel it. (Too soon?)

(Disclaimer: what I am about to say is never going to happen in a million years.) Now, my dream scenario is still Marvel and Fox working out some kind of deal to allow X-Men/Avengers crossovers. “But Marvel crossovers usually suck!” a discerning reader might protest.

… yeah, but imagine if those crossovers were produced by Joss Whedon and Bryan Singer.

Hey, there’s a thought! Why can’t Bryan Singer produce a live-action X-Men television series? Yeah, okay, I’m clearly getting greedy now, but it’s in his pedigree! A lot of people don’t realize he produced House. Yeah, that’s a thing. Look it up.

… okay, I’m getting dizzy. Where am I, again? What was I talking about? Oh, right, Joss Whedon is returning for Avengers 2 and developing a live-action Marvel television series!

Tagged , , , , , , ,
Aug 05 2012
Leave a comment
Film

My Favorite Superhero Films. #8: Spider-Man (2002)

#8: Spider-Man (2000)

I think we sometimes forget that the Star Wars prequels were so bad that we actually overreacted to them. We would come to make sense of their awfulness through the gradually-revealed narrative that George Lucas should never ever have complete creative control over anything. Yet the anticipation for these films had been so rabid, and the actual product on the screen so profoundly bad, that they became the vocal point of a much broader critical narrative: special effects, and computer-generated special effects in particular, were killing movies.

This is going to sound unforgivably silly to modern audiences, but we needed proof that groundbreaking special effects and brilliant acting and storytelling could coexist. The Matrix was a nice start, but its effects were too distinctive to serve as a general referendum on this issue, and no one has ever accused Keanu Reeves of being a brilliant actor. Besides, what made The Matrix such a hit was that it was interesting conceptually. We needed a traditional blockbuster with big special effects and great acting.

We needed Spider-Man.

Spider-Man fans were spared the monstrosity that James Cameron almost put on the big screen in the early 90s. Instead, we were given the now-familiar Sam Raimi feature. After an opening credits sequence rather heavy on that computer-generated imagery we had grown so dubious of, the film opened with a voice-over by Peter Parker (Tobey Macguire) telling the audience, “Let me assure you: this, like any story worth telling, is all about a girl.”

This opening wasn’t merely a calculated stylistic choice (though it was probably also that), it set the tone for the entire series. Far from disappearing into a film dominated by special effects, the emotional story of Peter Parker and Marry Jane Watson (Kirsten Dunst) gave the series an emotional core that kept it grounded and about these characters. It was as much (if not more) about Peter’s life as Peter, not just Peter’s life as Spider-Man. Spider-Man stories have always been at their best when they’ve been about how being a superhero affects Peter’s life as much as they’ve been about the superheroics themselves. And it’s this key element that Raimi’s films were so spectacular at portraying.

I ended my review of The Dark Knight by talking about the “Holy Trinity” of Singer, Raimi, and Nolan. How these filmmakers had a strong vision of what they wanted to do with their films, and were excellent at bringing that vision to life. In Raimi’s case, he seemed to care most deeply about character development and relationships, which obviously works quite well for a Spider-Man film. Where Raimi differs from Nolan (and even, to a certain extent, from Singer) is that he seemed largely committed to bringing the mythology of Spider-Man to the screen unfiltered, unembarrassed by his source material. It is clear that Raimi believed he could bring these believable characters and relationships to life without fundamentally altering their comic book world, and I would argue that he succeeded brilliantly. In this way, he actually came very close to the same formula Marvel Studios would employ in their Avengers films, most notably in Joss Whedon’s The Avengers.

Raimi also made the unusual, but effective, decision to utilize the adversary most see as Spider-Man’s “arch nemesis” in the first film, rather than “saving” him for the sequel. This was largely responsive to the demands of the story, tying in to Peter’s relationship with his best friend, Harry Osborn (James Franco.) And Willem Dafoe was simply brilliant as Norman Osborn (aka Green Goblin.) He was quite a bit more “over the top” than many villains in recent superhero films, but it worked quite well with the tone of the film. And presenting this character unironically as a villain didn’t prevent him from being a serious character with serious development and conflict.

It’s all about relationships in this series. Norman’s relationship with Peter, which starts off with Norman as a proud mentor but ends tragically, deeply affects Peter, and will come to affect his relationship with Harry. Although Peter has been pining for Mary Jane for years, it’s Harry who will initially end up dating her, which strains their friendship. Fortunately, Raimi doesn’t fall into the trap of making this the defining factor of Peter and Harry’s relationship, but we’ll go into that further when we get to Spider-Man 2.

And, speaking of relationships, if Mary Jane is the most important relationship in Peter’s life, an extremely close second is Peter’s relationship with his aunt and uncle. Raimi decided to essentially lift Peter’s relationships with his guardians right out of the comic book pages, while merely fleshing them out a bit more. (Unlike that… other film that felt the need to completely reinvent them. But we’ll get to that in a few days.) Peter’s relationship with his Uncle Ben (Cliff Robertson) and the circumstances of his death were nearly identical to Amazing Fantasy #15, the comic that introduced Spider-Man. Aunt May (Rosemary Harris) is also nearly directly drawn from the comics, often serving as Peter’s moral compass and offering profound wisdom.

Speaking of fidelity to the source material (and one of the many “comic booky” elements that that other film ignored), J. K. Simmons does an exceptionally hilarious rendition of J. Jonah Jameson, the newspaper editor Peter works for as a photographer who considers Spider-Man a menace.

In this film, Raimi laid the foundation for a future of unironic superhero films that were not in any way ashamed of themselves, and had no reason to be. The real shame is how few films have followed this example, and how much of Raimi’s blood is all over Sony after stabbing Raimi in the back so thoroughly. But don’t worry: we’ll get to that later.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,
Aug 04 2012
Leave a comment
Film

My Least Favorite Superhero Films. #8: Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011)

#8: Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011)

Marvel’s first Ghost Rider was admittedly not terrific, but it was a simple film, and didn’t do much to get in the way of how fun it was to watch Nicholas Cage pretend to be a superhero whose face was replaced by a skull that was, serioiusly, on fire (Johnny Blaze, aka the titular Ghost Rider.) If anyone can convince me that this isn’t the perfect role for him, I’ll give you a dollar.

Unfortunately, the same can most certainly not be said for its sequel, Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance. Spirit of Vengeance instead opts to focus its attention on an exceptionally convoluted plot that’s never really coherently explained. There are some relatively original stylistic details (like Johnny’s voiceovers about the nature of his powers and the enemies he faces), but both the writing and acting were hilarious bad. And not “so bad it’s good” bad. Just bad.

Cage’s acting, in particular, was in “so bad it’s good” territory in the first film, but for the sequel he veered into “just plain bad” territory. The most egregious examples of this came in his transformation and near-transformation scenes, which lacked both believability and hilarity. (One or the other would’ve done.)

As far as the hopelessly complicated plot… well… I guess it might’ve been interesting if it had given you any reason to care about any of these characters? Or if, instead of doing that, it had embraced the fact that this is a film about a motorcycle-riding leather-clad Nicholas Cage whose face turns into a flaming skull during every action scene? Consider the enormity of what this film accomplished: it actually managed to make that boring.

I know that some of my entries on the Least Favorite side of things are running quite a bit shorter than those on the Favorite list, but I honestly can’t think of much to say when a film is this plainly bad for pretty uninteresting reasons. There isn’t much to analyze here. I think the most perplexing thing about this film is why they bothered making it in the first place. Seriously, why did this film exist?

Tagged , , , , , ,
Jul 25 2012
Leave a comment
Film

My Least Favorite Superhero Films: A Fantastic Four Double Feature!

#13. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)
#12. Fantastic Four (2005)

Yeah, I’m doing these two at the same time because that’s just how much I care about this franchise.

I almost can’t hold how boring the first film is against it, because that’s how I’ve always felt about the Fantastic Four. As a child who religiously watched Spider-Man: The Animated Series, I absolutely dreaded the Fantastic Four crossover episodes because the tone and pace of the Fantastic Four (“boring” and “glacial,” respectively) completely overpowered Spider-Man’s. I realize this is entirely a matter of personal taste and I’m committing a serious act of comic book fan blasphemy, but I really don’t like the Fantastic Four. At all. Sorry.

That being said, I have no problem seeing how you could make a pretty reasonably good movie out of them. As you probably already know by now… that didn’t happen. Instead, we got a film that perplexingly managed the trick of being unbelievably slow while also not developing its characters at all. Oh, and for a film that leaned so heavily on science, this film either had a horrible science advisor, or ignored everything that person said.

Although he was just as much a one-note character as everyone else in the film, I did actually enjoy Johnny Storm (aka the Human Torch, played by Chris Evans.) It’s pretty interesting to compare Evans’ performance as the cocky, showboating Storm to his performance as the humble, conventionally heroic Captain America. (It would also break the unwritten rule that you’re not supposed to play two different superheroes, but that would require me or anybody else caring about this film.)

While we’re wasting our time pondering some of the myriad reasons this film was pretty terrible, Jessica Alba (playing Sue Storm, aka the Invisible Woman) is really not even a little good here, and has absolutely no chemistry with Ioan Gruffudd (playing Reed Richards, aka Mr. Fantastic), who was also… well… not fantastic, but not as notably bad.

Ben Grimm’s (aka The Thing, played by Michael Chiklis) subplot is really the only place this film feels like it could have heart, but there isn’t a lot of effort put into it, and it certainly wasn’t enough to carry the movie.

Rise of the Silver Surfer actually pulled off the neat trick of being as bad as (maybe even worse than) the first film. The attempts at humor such as the forced banter before the aborted wedding of Reed Richards and Sue Storm were laughable, but not in a good way. The early chase scene between Johnny the Human Torch and Silver Surfer was actually pretty good, but it was the only borderline-outstanding part of the film and it happens about five minutes in.


(Pictured: the only reason anyone should watch this film.)

I don’t really hate these films, in the sense that I can’t bring myself to care about them enough to hate them. I might feel more strongly about their blandness and badness if it weren’t for the fact that I already consider the Fantastic Four pretty bland in general. (Again, apologies for the sacrilege.)

I think the weirdest thing about these films is that they have all the trappings of a mainstream superhero film franchise (which makes sense since we’re talking about one of Marvel’s major franchises here), but the entire production really ends up coming off more like a pair of “off-brand” superhero films. If it weren’t for Stan Lee’s obligatory cameos, I would be digging to make sure these films were actually sanctioned by Marvel.

Tagged , , , , , ,
Jul 22 2012
Leave a comment
Fandom, Film

My Favorite Superhero Films. #15: Thor (2011)

Alright, having now seen The Dark Knight Rises my self-imposed social media blackout is over! A review of that film will be somewhat forthcoming (I may need to see the film again first), but in the meantime here’s the next entry in our exciting series of my favorite superhero films!

~-~-~

#15: Thor (2011)

Out of all the origin films building the Marvel Cinematic Universe in anticipation of The Avengers, Thor is actually probably the one I was looking forward to the least. I didn’t know much about the character, and what I did know seemed badly out of place in the ultra-realistic universe of modern superhero films. (What I didn’t know at the time, of course, was that Marvel was throwing that fad out the window without the slightest hint of remorse.) So you can imagine my surprise when it turned out to be my favorite Marvel origin film since we found out they were indeed Marvel origin films. (Remember: we didn’t go into Iron Man knowing that it was an origin film. There were rumors, but the Nick Fury post-credits scene was the franchise’s big coming out party, and even then it wasn’t until a few weeks later that The Avengers was officially confirmed.)

I would not have been as surprised at how much I enjoyed the film had I read up on its highly-decorated creative team ahead of time. The film was helmed by the legendary Kenneth Branagh who is mostly known for the critically-acclaimed adaptations of William Shakespeare plays he has either directed or starred in (or both.) I’m amazed at how perfect Marvel continues to be at picking the right person for the job in film after film. Large segments of this film’s plot have been affectionately described as “Shakespeare in space,” which makes Branagh pretty transparently the right person, but moreover the challenges involved in bringing Thor to the big screen were nearly identical to the challenges involved in doing the same with Shakespeare. Shakespeare’s plays have such towering figures and dramatic scope that it’s easy for the human element (which is actually such a vital part of their appeal) to get lost in the noise. And the language of Elizabethan drama creates characters nearly as alien to modern audiences as, say, a god from outer space. A great actor or director in this sort of role must be able to see the human element, to understand the character’s emotional connection to the story and the people around them. It’s exactly what Branagh has shown himself to be a master of, and it’s exactly what this film needed to convincingly depict a god that had fallen to earth and started to form relationships with humans.

Branagh at director is not the only brilliant behind-the-scenes choice Marvel made for this film. J. Michael Straczynski (creator/writer/showrunner of the sprawling scifi epic television series Babylon 5, writer of The Amazing Spider-Man from 2001 to 2007, and a man who literally wrote the book on script-writing) was brought aboard to co-write the film’s story with Mark Protosevich. The script was written by longtime collaborators Ashley Miller and Zack Stentz (Andromeda, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, and more recently adding to their comic book film credentials with X-Men: First Class) along with a third co-writer, Don Payne.

Finally, the casting was brilliant from top to bottom. Chris Hemsworth, though a relative unknown at the time, fit the role of Thor perfectly (and didn’t stay unknown for long after a huge year this year between Cabin in the Woods and The Avengers.) Tom Hiddleston was a revelation as Loki, and his chemistry with Hemsworth was spectacular both here and in The Avengers. Loki is a believable and compelling villain in both films. His resentment for his brother and discovery that he was actually a Frost Giant child adopted by Odin (Anthony Hopkins) give him a believable motivation, while seeing his sibling’s descent into villainy creates internal conflict in Thor and gives their battles additional emotional subtext. And having Anthony Hopkins in what was clearly a supporting role was just an absolute coup if I’ve ever seen one.

I am not unsympathetic to the complaint that Natalie Portman (as Jane Foster) was underused in this film, but I think she did great with what she was given to work with, and her interactions with the exiled and depowered Thor really served to humanize the character. The characters who really seemed at the mercy of their role as plot devices were Thor’s friends and fellow warriors, the Warriors Three (whose group name I don’t recall being spoken aloud in the film, and certainly it wasn’t made a very big deal of if it was): Volstagg (Ray Stevenson), Hogun (Tadanobu Asano), and Fandral (Joshua Dallas), as well as Thor’s childhood friend Sif (Jaimie Alexander.) I honestly had to look all of those up, because I had no idea what their names were.

The inclusion of S.H.I.E.L.D. once again helped tie this film in with the other origin films (and would later help tie all of those films in with The Avengers.) It’s both a shrewdly efficient bit of world-building, and yet another opportunity to see the inestimable Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg) in action.

What really impressed me about Thor was how it succeeded both on the epic level and the human level. Given that Loki was going to be the villain in The Avengers and that Asgard is definitely the farthest removed of all of the worlds that needed to be tied together, Thor had a lot of heavy lifting to do. It would’ve been easy for this film to become bogged down by all the world-building it needed to do, but instead it weaved that world-building in seamlessly with a great story. Thor is shown battling giants and saving the earth, but he’s also explored on a deeply human level, especially when he’s bereft of his powers. He is consistently likable, but definitely not without flaws, which he must overcome in order to be worthy again of wielding his hammer and the great power it represents.

The film’s portrayal of the clash between human and Asgardian culture yields humorous moments (like the restaurant scene you’ve probably seen in every trailer), but it also leads to more meaningful moments (like Thor’s line, “Your ancestors called it magic, but you call it science. I come from a land where they are one in the same”). Thor himself is characterized by a sort of dramatic earnestness that would be impossible to pull off if he weren’t literally from another world. After this film, it was pretty easy to see how Thor was going to “fit in” with the Avengers. Joss Whedon was given plenty to work with.

Tagged , , , , , , ,
Jul 19 2012
Leave a comment
Fandom, Film

My Favorite Superhero Films. #16: X-Men: First Class (2011)

Over the next few weeks I will be counting down my favorite (and least favorite) superhero films. For the purpose of this list, the only “rules” for what constitutes a superhero film will be that it reasonably seems like a superhero film. I won’t be applying any ridiculous standards that end up making Batman not a superhero because he has no super powers, or anything like that.

For those of you thinking, “Wait, 23? Isn’t that kind of a lot?” Keep in mind, the past few years alone have seen Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man films, Bryan Singer’s X-Men films, Christopher Nolan’s Batman films, and the unprecedented Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Thanks, and I hope you enjoy reading!

~-~-~

#16. X-Men: First Class (2011)

It is with a certain amount of dismay that I’ve actually seen this film become overrated.

I loved X-Men: First Class for what it represented for the X-Men film franchise: a radical snap back toward the tone the series had established when it was helmed by Bryan Singer. This was likely largely owing to behind-the-scenes factors like Singer’s presence as producer and story-writer, and the selection of self-professed X-Men fan Matthew Vaughn to direct. Vaughn had initially been selected to direct X-Men 3, and was very critical of the product Brett Ratner ended up putting on the screen (which was definitely a good sign.) Another huge factor in this improvement was likely the focus on the relationship between Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender.)

So yeah, I liked the direction this film took the franchise. It was a huge step back in the right direction. The problem is, I’ve seen a lot of people suggest that this film was actually superior to Bryan Singer’s first two X-Men films. I can’t really get into too many specifics in advance of my reviews of those two films, but most of what made First Class good was how it emulated Singer’s previous entries in the series, and it had quite a few flaws that those films didn’t.

I’m not going to get into specifics that I’ve discussed elsewhere, but this film makes an enormous mess of the continuity of the X-Men films. The easy defense here is that this is a reboot… the problem being that it isn’t. And anyone who wants to make the argument that “that’s just Matthew Vaughn’s take” (since he was only, you know, the director) should probably know that an X-Men Origins: Wolverine sequel is forthcoming. Really, they seemed to be in a pretty huge hurry to get Erik into Magneto’s cape and helmet, which sacrifices a lot of the implied backstory of the original X-Men film series, and the depth and history implied in Charles and Erik’s relationship, which had been a huge strength of the series.

Continuity issues were not this film’s only problem. The secondary villains were developed quite poorly, the most egregious example being the fact that I had to look up Riptide (Alex Gonzalez) to make sure that’s who he actually was, since his name was never spoken aloud in the film and he really wasn’t memorable in any way aside from constantly being beaten up.

“Now wait a second,” you might protest, “this film had a lot to accomplish in limited screen time, including introducing all of the main characters and developing them. It didn’t have time for memorable henchmen.” Oh. You mean it faced exactly the same challenges as Bryan Singer’s first X-Men (2000)? A film whose villainous henchmen (Sabretooth, Mystique, and Toad) were all extremely memorable despite fairly limited screen time?

Speaking of henchmen, Emma Frost is not a henchman. This is quite possibly this film’s most unforgivable sin: including perhaps the most interesting X-Men character of all time and all but completely ruining her. Emma Frost is a badass with questionable morals both as a hero and a villain, but she isn’t a woman you hand a glass and tell to get you some ice. The character was written pretty poorly to begin with, but on top of that January Jones was not an inspired choice to play the role. She seemed harmless, which is the last thing that Emma Frost should ever seem.

These problems weren’t just limited to the villains. Angel Salvadore (Zoe Kravitz) seems to be introduced mainly so we can get a scene with Charles and Erik recruiting someone from a strip club. She actually manages to make a turn from hero to villain without really saying or doing anything of any consequence. (Really.) And Darwin (Edi Gathegi) mainly seems to be introduced to give the film a random black character to kill off (the dangerous film cliché there really rubbed me the wrong way.)

All of that being said, there was an equal amount that made this film great. As already mentioned, the film took this franchise back in the right direction by focusing on Charles and Erik’s complicated relationship and taking on the tone and pacing of the first two films. Aiding this were strong performances by McAvoy and Fassbender, both as individuals and because of their excellent chemistry with each other.

McAvoy plays a younger and somewhat smug Xavier; you can clearly see how he’ll “grow into” the role he’ll occupy later in the series, when his undeniable charm will be tempered by wisdom and become the charisma of leadership. Fassbender’s Magneto has an incredible intensity and single-mindedness which actually won’t change all that much as the character evolves. Both had unenviable tasks having to follow the likes of Sirs Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen, but managed to rise to the occasion.

Kevin Bacon was a surprisingly spectacular choice as the film’s primary antagonist, Sebastian Shaw. His performance absolutely struck the right chord for a comic book villain. He believably played an arrogant, megalomaniacal genius, and he was damn entertaining in the process.

Out of all the secondary protagonists, I think Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) and Beast (Nicholas Hoult) were pretty easily my favorite. I’m still not entirely sure I like what Charles and Mystique’s relationship does to the subtext of the future films (they don’t acknowledge each other at all in X2, which seems pretty odd if they had that close of a relationship in First Class), but Mystique’s struggle to be herself is one of the most thoughtful notes the film strikes. The way that internal conflict comes into play with her budding friendship with Beast is one of the more interesting subplots of the film. As is the beginning of her relationship with Magneto, which this film actually did a pretty spectacular job with (and managed to sneak in one of its two hilariously awesome cameos.)

All in all, the positives far outweighed the negatives in X-Men: First Class. It isn’t quite on par with X-Men or X2, but it still represents a return to form for the series that started the 21st century’s explosion of high-quality comic book films.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
← Older posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers