Showing posts with label Stellan Skarsgard. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stellan Skarsgard. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
The Avengers
Director: Joss Whedon
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, Tom Hiddleston, Clark Gregg, Cobie Smulders, Stellan Skarsgard, Samuel L. Jackson
Running Time: 143 min.
Rating: PG-13
★★★ (out of ★★★★)
So, how is it that nearly every Marvel superhero movie leading up to this has been either a mixed bag or flat-out failure, yet when the characters assemble in The Avengers, it somehow clicks? It's good, not great, but that it works at all is kind of a miracle considering how uneven the build-up was in getting here. The only explanation is that they found the right guy for the job in Joss Whedon, who clearly understands how this material should be treated and avoids many of the pitfalls made in the movies leading up to it. While it's kind of unfathomable to me that this ranks as the third highest grossing film of all time, at least it's a lot of fun and delivers for the fans what's asked of it, if not more. Yes, it's an overblown, CGI spectacle with a ridiculously mindless finale, but for once in the Marvel universe at least the filmmaker seems aware of it and in on the joke. Most interestingly, all these characters function much better together in one tightly scripted story than apart in their own separate franchises, making the thought of a sequel (especially under Whedon) actually seem somewhat enticing. Though forgive me for just being glad it's over, since I've about had enough of entire Marvel features functioning as trailers and cheap plugs for this effort, which thankfully turns out to be a lot of fun.
The six superheroes known collectively as The Avengers are brought together when Thor's (Chris Hemsworth) evil, adopted brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) breaks into SHIELD headquarters, gaining possession of a powerful glowing energy cube known as the Tesseract and brainwashing Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Professor Selvig (Stellan Skargard). Given no other options, SHIELD director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and agent Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) recruit Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.), Captain America (Chris Evans), Dr. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) and Thor to try to put a stop to Loki's plan to rule Earth by opening a wormhole that would allow the Chitauri alien race to descend upon this planet and attack. All of these superheroes being able to co-exist and work effectively together is one challenge, but stopping Loki's army from completely decimating New York City and its inhabitants is an even bigger one.
The plot is ridiculous and there isn't a surprise to be found other than how quickly the two and a half hours fly by, but that's fine. The real draw is seeing these familiar characters interact with one other in a fresh, humorous story that plays to the strengths of everyone involved. That all the backstories involving these characters have (for better or worse) been taken care of in the previous Marvel installments allows this one to get down to business right away, and Whedon takes full advantage in the exciting opening prologue that effectively gets the ball rolling with little time wasted. At first I cringed at the prospect of Hiddleston's Loki being the film's chief antagonist, if only because the feud involving him and his brother in Thor was such a slog to get through that the thought of revisiting it on a larger scale would seem to be asking for trouble. Luckily, Loki's depicted as much more of a conniving, menacingly slimy presence this time around than the wimpy whiner we saw in that film and Hiddleston's performance really benfits from it, likely making an impact for even those unfamiliar with the character. The same could be said for all the featured players who are about ten times more intriguing here than they were in their own films. Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark/Iron Man was the best developed superhero leading into this, but even his act, which was starting to show fatigue, is given a shot in the arm when he's surrounded by all these characters he can bounce his sarcasm and cockiness off of. Also along for the ride again is Gwyneth Paltrow, who makes a barefooted cameo as Pepper Potts, and Clark Gregg, who successfully builds on his previously undefined role as Agent Coulson. Even Samuel L. Jackson feels like he has agency and purpose as Nick Fury, leading an actual mission instead of just popping up during or after the credits of every summer superhero blockbuster.
Understandably, Downey could very well be considered the lead in terms of screen time, but what's most impressive about the tight script is how it literally gives everyone something to do without the film feeling overstuffed. The biggest benefactor just might be Scarlett Johansson who after being poorly introduced and developed as Black Widow in Iron Man 2 is redeemed completely as kick ass heroine who basically has a co-leading role alongside Downey, really delivering this time around. It feels like she's in every scene of the movie even when she isn't, which is a sure sign Scarlett gets it right. The only character that genuinely seems underutilized is How I Met Your Mother star Cobie Smulders' Agent Maria Hill. The actress's first semi-substantial big screen role has her unfortunately relegated to merely giving info to Nick Fury and taking orders. I guess it's a start, but here's hoping it's built on and her character is fleshed out more in the sequel since she's given nearly nothing to work with here.
Chris Evans' Captain America benefits from having the most interesting built-in backstory and that's exploited to full effect and his arguments with Downey are a hoot. But the true standout is Ruffalo as Bruce Banner, stepping in for Edward Norton who actually did a fine job in 2008's The Incredible Hulk. On paper, Ruffalo wouldn't seem to be the ideal choice to follow him but his take on the conflict within Banner ends up being the most intriguing performance in the role since Bill Bixby set the gold standard in the late 70's-early 80's TV series. All the movie's best scenes involve the character's complicated relationship with his giant green alter ego and what it takes to keep him in check. When The Hulk does come out it's the most efficient CGI rendering of the character thus far. This entire concoction is enjoyable as a live action cartoon but when Ruffalo's the focus, it feels like more because of his concerted effort to make Banner actually seem like a complex person. While "Complex" and "Avengers" probably shouldn't be used in the same sentence the amusing back-and-forth dialogue between the characters comes the closest it ever has in a Marvel film to approaching genuine cleverness. The third act's is a silly mess for sure, but at least it's an entertaining one with impressive looking effects and crisp editing that still managed to hold my interest on the small screen and in 2D.
This getting a pass because it didn't do enough wrong probably isn't the most glowing recommendation, but I've slowly coming to the realization that these Marvel movies just might not be my "thing." So that I really enjoyed it despite feeling let down by just about every other superhero movie they released prior, might be more of a compliment than it seems. They're a lot of people's thing though and those fans couldn't reasonably be disappointed with any decision Whedon made. There's no getting around the fact that this would be compared and pitted against The Dark Knight Rises over the summer and it might be the ultimate compliment to both filmmakers (okay, mainly Nolan) that I don't even count the two wildly different films as belonging to the same genre. But if we are comparing, they're not even in the same league since the impeccably crafted TDKR actually feels like it's about something, whereas this is just plain fun for the sake of it. It's good to have options and The Avengers most definitely falls in the wheelhouse of a more traditional, ripped-from-the-pages comic book movie. It doesn't change the game in any way, but it's enormously successful in what it's trying to do and makes for legitimately great time. Considering the the mixed bag of Marvel movies preceding it, that's just about as big an accomplishment as it gets for a franchise that doesn't seem to be running out of gas anytime soon.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Thor
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgard, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba
Running Time: 114 min.
Rating: PG-13
★★ (out of ★★★★)
Even if writing Thor off as a complete waste of time is probably something I should wait on doing until officially viewing The Green Lantern or Captain America: The First Avenger, the fact still remains that it's pretty underwhelming. It's yet another 2-hour commercial for Marvel Studios, who still seems more interested in promoting their other superhero properties than focusing on the task at hand. At this rate, considering the amount of time and effort they've spent promoting next year's The Avengers, that movie could turn out to be the second coming of The Dark Knight and no one outside its core fanbase would even care since it's been shamefully shoved down our throats for three years. They're at it again here, indulging in silly clues and distracting cameos. It's a big misstep, but hardly the worst of Thor's problems. Not when you have a sleep-inducing backstory for the protagonist, an overabundance of distracting CGI effects and a charisma deficient villain. Things get a little better once the story starts to play out and at least the most prominent role is well cast, but Marvel really needs to get its act together moving forward. As a mix of action-comedy and fantasy, Thor's somewhat original in its approach, but a disappointment just the same.
Most of the first hour is spent on Thor's origin story, and it's a drag. Information that could have easily been dispensed via voiceover or even a brief flashback over the opening credits feels like it's given nearly half the running length of the movie, in addition to those voiceovers and flashbacks. I understand the desire to give a detailed backstory so we care and it's commendable (it definitely worked for Christopher Nolan in Batman Begins), but the problem is that Thor's is silly. It's a weird and not entirely successful mix of mythology and comic books, with a Shakespearean style family feud thrown in for good measure. That the director is Shakespeare veteran Kenneth Branagh explains a lot, as does the presence of Sir Anthony Hopkins as King Odin of Asgard, father to Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Loki (Tom Hiddleston). When the quick-tempered Thor stages an attack against Laufey, the Frost Giant King, breaking a long-standing peace agreement, Odin banishes his arrogant son to Earth. He's discovered in the New Mexico dessert by scientists Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) and Darcy Lewis (Kat Dennings). As he adjusts to life on Earth S.H.I.E.L.D agent Coulson (Clark Gregg) is brought in to investigate, while back on Asgard Loki looks to benefit from his older brother's misfortune, scheming his way to the throne.
The scenes on Earth work much better than those on Asgard, if only because there are some decent comic moments with Thor trying to get used to life in 21st century America and Hemsworth's performance, while not as spectacular as everyone's been claiming, is solid. He looks the part and has surprisingly decent comic timing so it's difficult coming up with alternative actor choices that could have worked any better. Hemsworth (known primarily for his brief role as Captain Kirk's father in 2009's Star Trek) does what he can with the material he's given, even if there's no escaping the fact that a lot of the lighter Earth-bound scenes contrast in tone to the mythological fantasy nonsense it's interspersed with. Hiddleston's Loki comes off as more of a whiner with daddy issues than any kind of serious threat and the intended love connection between Thor and Portman's Jane falls flat and feels thrown together and underdeveloped. If they really wanted to go in that direction it would have been better to eliminate Skarsgard and Denning's characters to narrow the focus on Jane, but considering Denning delivers the film's best one-liners, she may have been indispensable. Given how much she's improved as an actress over the past few years, it's a shame to see Portman take on such a thankless role, but a relief that it likely would have been just as forgettable in anyone else's hands.
On the plus side, he involvement of S.H.I.E.L.D.(Avengers plug #1) Clark Gregg's Agent Coulson wasn't quite as distracting as I expected, but still kind of insulting when you realize we haven't been made to care about Thor to begin with. As for the inevitable Samuel L. Jackson cameo (Avengers plug #2) as Nick Fury, it at least takes place after the film, avoiding the nightmare that occurred at the end of The Incredible Hulk a couple of years ago when a huge, showboating cameo in the final scene nearly upstaged the entire picture, pissing on the title character for the sake of promoting you know what. But there is a cameo during this film from an Oscar nominated actor (Avengers plug #3) that I won't reveal, but that I had to check what character he was and why he was there probably doesn't bode well for the impact it had, at least for more casual viewers who actually want to see a movie about Thor.
Over the closing credits there's actually a message (Avengers plug #4) reminding viewers to "See Thor in The Avengers." Thanks for the heads up. I'm willing to bet most of the people reading this review (and many others) don't even know what The Avengers is. If Marvel really wanted to promote that film a good start would have been to make this one as good as possible so we'd actually look forward to seeing Thor in it. This does some things right, but there's this inescapable feeling of it being just a teaser for something else, which isn't okay since that's what trailers are for. All movies are made to make money, but I shouldn't be able to tell that while watching them and those decisions shouldn't adversely affect the product on screen. The downside in the entertainment industry to the economic crisis is that everyone's playing it safe, not looking how they can creatively improve the movie they're working on, but promote the next one they haven't gotten to yet. And that, despite some inspired direction by Branagh, is the main problem with Thor. It feels like it exists to generate revenue for the studio rather than excitement for audiences watching it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)