The Avengers Review

Reaching the end of The Avengers (or Marvel’s Avengers Assemble for us apparently easily confused brits), it finally dawned on me why Josh Whedon was put at the helm rather than say; a director with more summer blockbuster experience than the guy who directed Serenity.

Heck, someone who directed one of the five movies that have led us to this huge team-up would have been the logical choice. But, like the medium this film is adapted from; logic goes out the window or, so it seemed, because there is method in the studio’s madness and that is;

Thor Review

OK, let's get to the point, The Avengers is here next year, we're at the homestretch of origin stories for our keyplayers, how does Marvel's Norse incarnation Thor stack-up against his allies?

After the disappointment that was Iron Man 2, I wasn't particularly bothered by Thor. It wasn't something I grew up with as a kid, it was something I barely had any knowledge of and any comic crossovers involving the hero basically told the same thing; he's mighty, he has a hammer and he's blonde.

To it's and Marvel's credit, I should have had more faith, given Marvel's track record of origin stories, the film is very entertaining. The fish out of water premise is as old as time itself but it works well in the movie.

The story in a nutshell is Thor is banished from Azgard by starting a war with the Frost Giants by his father Odin. He lands on Earth and ran over by Natalie Portman and crew who are chasing strange storms. They think he's crazy, he simply wants to find his Mjolnir (the hammer in the post-credit scene in Iron Man 2) and a shitstorm is taking place in Azgard curtosy of Thor's brother Loki.

A beefy Chris Hemsworth plays the titular character to all degrees. At the beginning, he plays a king in waiting, arrogant, non-caring and wishes to cement a legacy like his father (played by Anthony Hopkins). By the time he defends New Mexico, he's discovered love in the form of Natalie Portman, betrayal, grief, loss and eventually hope.

It's a very tight picture and full credit to director Kenneth Branagh for delivering a film with no filler at all. We constantly travel back and forth to Azgard and New Mexico and constantly are told new advancements in the plot which eventually come together in an explosive third act which wraps the film up in time for it's inevitable sequels and major crossovers.

There are a few problems with the film but to be honest it's nitpicking. The most annoying thing is, as mentioned before, the constant cuts between Azgard and New Mexico. After five minutes of story, we cut back and then we cut back again. This work's fine in something like Lord of the Rings were each action in it's respected region is within the same world, or even The Matrix were despite they're being a real world and a computer world, they're so vastly strange and unique, it's easier to take in. In Thor, it's too distracting at times and you can't help but feel they were perhaps terrified the audience would get bored by staying in one setting for more than a few minutes.

Although Thor himself is a well developed character, when you look at the maths at it all, he's pledge to save the Earth takes place in the space of two days. You could argue and say he's a god, it's what he's supposed to do and it gives the film escalation, but it just happens far quickly. Same with Loki's inevitable uprising, which takes place in the same amount of time.

Finally, the 3D isn't too fantastic and there were occasions where the film looked like a pop-up book. You don't lose anything from watching the film in standard 2D and if anything, the experience is fortified by not being constantly distracted how certain things stick out (Thor's cape being the major one).

Of course, this it nitpicking in an otherwise highly recommended debut for those who want to know more on the principal players of next year's biggest competitor to The Dark Knight Returns.

It ranks up there with the original Iron Man (which is all the more impressive considering Thor doesn't have Downey Jr. to fall back on) but, like Iron Man, just falls short of Batman Begins and Spider-Man. The settings, whilst cutaway far too many times are distinctive and Azgard and the Frost Giant's realm look especially fantastic. It has a very believable and likeable cast, great action sequences and brings new life to an old tale of Earth's "mightiest hero".

Comic book fans will love it, but if you're someone who's came by this nerdy blog and doesn't care for references to the Hulk or the odd Stan Lee cameo, it's a very good popcorn flick.

7/10

H

Iron Man 2 Review

Jon Favreau's Iron Man was somewhat of a surprise hit. In a year where the entire universe and it's nan eagerly awaited The Dark Knight eventual arrival, it was pretty clear that anything other would pale in comparison in terms of story, direction, box office intake and the rest.

And yet when Iron Man hit screens in May 2008, an almost surprising amount of acclaim and satisfaction came soon after. The movie was easily the best adaptation of a Marvel superhero since the Sam Rami's first Spider-Man and had the movie not appeared in the midst's of Bat-Mania '08, it would have easily been the best superhero movie of 2008.

A sequel was inevitable and luckily for us, our main key players were returning. I mean, this is it right? This was going to be fantastic! Favreau had done the origin story in one highly entertaining swoop but now it's time to bring in new stuff with far more freedom.

Would he introduce the now legendary "Demon in a Bottle" storyline? It seemed all too perfect with how Robert Downey Jr (who if you've lived under a rock on Mars for the last two years plays Tony Stark aka Iron Man) had triumphed over his own demons before becoming a box office juggernaut.

Although Favreau had ruled out The Mandarin, there was plenty of other villains to make into household names. Would he build upon the Avengers initiative that was hinted at to patient viewers at the end credits of the first movie? Could Don Cheadle surpass Terrence Howard?

Well it's here and well, yes, to a certain extent, but in the worst possible way imaginable.

So the story, in short (and boy this is going to be fun) is set almost immediately after Stark's revelation to the media that he is Iron Man at the end of the first movie. The U.S. government in stereotypical fashion is full of slimey arseholes who want the Iron Man weapon for their own purposes before America's enemies develop their own Iron Men suits. Stark argues the world is safe because of his presence and that he doesn't need to.

With the aid of hacking skills the likes of which Hollywood hasn't seen since Independence Day, he reveals that America's government backed weapon's developer has been selling his own protype suits to above enemies and walks away, because, well, plot.

In Russia, Ivan Yanko (played by Mickey Rourke with a Russian accent) watches his father die and decides it's time to take revenge on Stark. In short, Yanko's father half created the first arc reactor but was deported by Tony's dad and thus wasn't rich and famous. So Yanko using his own intelligence creates a weapon from the same technology and heads to America to kill Stark.

Stark leads a playboy lifestyle as usual, gets a new assistant in the shape of Scarlet Johansson, discovers his own artificial heart is slowly poisoning him and, yeah, I'll leave it as that. Things happen, things have to change, character's develop, but I'll leave you to find out who, what and why.

So first things first, no the story isn't "Demon in a Bottle". Yes we briefly see Stark drunk and destructive, but there's no major character arc revolving around it. Instead this, along with several other smaller plot points are just crumbs to the main underlining threat of the movie and that is: Who will get a military contract?

You know guys, this didn't work in Lord of War and that was a movie that centred on Arms Dealers, why on earth would it work in a Superhero movie?

So yeah, Iron Man 2's main villain (to a certain extent) is Tony Stark's rival Justin Hammer, who if he hadn't been played by the ever brilliant Sam Rockwell, this movie would have been far, far worse.

Hammer is ruthless as he is pathetic; he's the PC to Stark's Apple. Thankfully Rockwell is given more than enough time for the audience to become adjusted to his bad jokes, awkward demeanour and two-faced tactics.

The same can't be said for Mickey Rourke's Ivan Yanko/Whiplash who is in the film for about twenty minutes, which is ridiculous when he's the supposed major threat to our hero. Although you'd think Whiplash should give Iron Man a right good beating, he ends up first defeated by Jon Favearu's driving and later in the inevitable conclusion in about two minutes.

It's a shame as I liked Rourke here. He's a calculating madman who doesn't want money but simply to make Stark pay in blood (as chillingly referenced in his eventual interrogation). If anything, we should support him as he's the character who has lost everything to Stark's rich empire but by the end, he plays second fiddle to Hammer's plans to get a military contract and it's just one of the many disappointments the film presents.

Iron Man 2 must be the only superhero movie on earth where's there's too much plot but nothing to show for it. It's like what would happen if Superman Returns' sleep-inducing boringness collided with Spider-Man 3's bloatedness which then finally smashed into Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer absolute direness.

...ness.

I was watching it knowing things were happening but I honestly couldn't care less. The film's main threat is who gets more money from selling weapons? I mean, you have a bloodthirsty Russian terrorist who wants to kill Stark for the sins of his father, you have Stark dying from his artificial heart which brings about the birth of War Machine and the temporary fall of Stark and you have Nick Fury talking about eating "doughnuts" and "Avengers" or something (on a side note; Jackson man, what happened? I know your Sixty-one but Jesus, did Nick Fury declare war on diets or something?).

And these play in the background and have nothing to show for it. I know the last movie's main flaw was the lack of a decent major villain, but Stark's journey as Iron Man and Downey Jr's electric performance as said character was more than enough to make up for it. He was complex and at times borderline insane but intensely likable. Here he is simply a text book megalomaniac with very little redeeming qualities other than being friendly to some and annoying to many. Even his free-flowing almost human-like dialogue with Pepper Potts (played by Gwyneth Paltrow) doesn't help matters and when his eventual fall comes, I was hoping he'd change but in the end, it's the same old Tony, just with less chance of dying.

This film is awful. The main plot is an absolute joke, an overbloated, stupidly long and mind numbingly awful joke. I know people complain how Superhero movies can be stupid for the sake of action but it's like the complete opposite here. You get over two hours of build up and a trailer's worth of action to show for it.

Even when the action comes it's third rate. CGI men in robot suits fight against CGI robot drones is your main event of the evening. It's like a kid cartoon with the violence watered-down and even Whiplash battling Iron Man is so short you barely have enough time to contemplate the consequenes of the outcome and when the rematch eventually rolls in at the end, it's over even faster.

As for War Machine. Well, he's ok and full credit to Cheadle for having to deal with what he had because he was good but he should have had more of the plot. Like everything in the movie, he has an running plot with Tony which is given up in the end to simply have our trailer clip of the two fighting together against drones and considering how much plot the movie tries to devour, his ongoing rivalry with Stark and eventual team up is just so ham-handed that it should have just been cut or rewritten altogether.

But yeah, this is getting long so I'm gonna wrap this up. Iron Man 2 is an atrocious sequel to a fantastic first film. The movie's main plot is padded out with far too many other plots to make up for it, the action is minimal and not satisfactory in the slightest and by the end, you feel like something has happened but nothing has happened (if that makes any sense).

I hope that the third movie will take a step in the right direction by at the very least, make something engaging and entertaining. I mean, the first film got away with adding an antagonist at the end because of making the origin and rise of Iron Man so great but now is the time to test our character's will and determination with a major threat.

It's just a shame it may take until the third film to do this when it should have been covered here and now. Still, live in hope guys, maybe Thor and Captain America will make up for it?

3/10

H