X-MEN - A Retro Review

The success of 'Logan' has made me want to go back and check out some of the older X-films to see how well they hold up. So let's dive right in to their cinematic introduction, shall we?

Spoiler Warning - Dudes, this movie is seventeen years old. If you haven't seen it yet, that's your own damn fault, so don't come at me with your accusations about spoiling the movie!

Watching 'X-Men' recently, I was struck by the sort of feeling one gets after re-watching the pilot episode of a beloved TV series. It mostly holds up, but you can't help but be struck by the shakiness of the whole thing when compared to the confidence exhibited by later seasons - or in this case, films. 'X2', 'Days of Future Past' and 'Logan' are all really great films that wouldn't have been possible without 'X-Men' to lay the groundwork, but it's still a bit rough around the edges.

Director Bryan Singer, for the most part, does a pretty good job introducing Marvel's mutants to the big screen. The story, basic though it is, holds up relatively well. But there are some pretty noticeable flaws in the execution, too. Some of the dialogue is pretty bad - especially Xavier's introduction of the team; it's awkward and sounds...stupid. Logan is right to make fun of it, but calling attention to it to poke fun doesn't make it any less silly. Some of the character designs, costumes and special effects haven't aged very well. But the backbone of the movie is strong, and it's elevated by several really good scenes and solid performances.

All the supporting characters do a solid enough job (except Halle Berry who was just kinda...there) but really, the movie hinges on the performances of Patrick Stewart, Hugh Jackman, Anna Paquin and Ian McKellan. No superhero movie is going to be all that great without a good villain and McKellan's performance as Magneto is top notch. The opening of the film still ranks as one of the best sequences in all of the X-Films and the utter anguish of that scene permeates McKellan's whole performance. He's as sympathetic as a genocidal lunatic can be, and the fact that it's possible for the viewer to relate to his fear and anger and the unspoken motto of "never again" makes it a little too easy for us to see where he's coming from, even if his destination is terrifying.

After 'The Usual Suspects' (awesome) and 'Apt Pupil (sucked) I was cautiously optimistic about the job Singer would do in making a live-action X-Men. So when I finally saw it, I was mostly just relieved that it wasn't bad. And that's still kinda how I feel now. It's good - not nearly as good as X2 or DOFP - but it's a pretty solid jumping off point, and it has lead to a franchise that has had more highs than lows, and with 'Logan', one of the coolest movie superheroes ever.

FINAL SCORE - 7/10

'X-Men' has been available on DVD for about 22 years. So if you don't have it, just buy the blu-ray. I'm sure it's only like eight bucks.

MARVEL'S LUKE CAGE - Season One - A TV Review

I'm back! I took a longer break than I'd anticipated, but you know what? It was needed and it was worth it, and now I'm back and ready to tackle the upcoming new seasons of comic book TV shows. Let's start off by dissecting the newest collaboration between Marvel and Netflix, Luke Cage!

Spoiler Warning - Oh, you bet your sweet ass this is gonna be chock full of spoilers, so consider yourself warned sucka!

It's been about what, ten months? Since 'Jessica Jones' dropped on Netflix and we were first introduced to Mike Colter's portrayal of Luke Cage. And what we saw was certainly promising - Colter's tough physicality and leading man looks definitely added to the success of 'Jessica Jones' and stoked up my interest in the series we all knew he would be headlining soon. So what's the verdict?

Honestly, kind of a mixed bag. There are moments of sheer brilliance, some really top notch acting - Colter, Mahershala Ali, and Alfre Woodard particularly stand out - but the plot is frequently unfocused and meandering. While this is not necssarily a bad thing, it can sometimes hamper the overall message of the finished product. Look, I think ambition, especially when working in the comic-book-adaptation genre, is to be aspired to and admired. But showrunner Cheo Hodari Coker wants to say so many things, that while most of it is worth saying (especially his various messages about the nature of being a black man in modern America) maybe some of them could have waited until season two, so that season one doesn't get bogged down in so much plot, and the occasionally ham-fisted speechifying.

While Colter, Ali, and Woodard are the biggest characters with the biggest arcs, other characters definitely stand out. A veteran character of the Luke Cage comics, Misty Knight, played here by Simone Missick, is the kind of cop I wish we'd see more of on TV: smart, capable, and willing to listen to both the evidence and her gut and seek the conclusion that makes the most sense. A native of Harlem, Knight has police IQ to have moved on to bigger and better things, but her loyalty to the neighborhood motivates her to keep it safe more than further her own career. Missick also has chemistry with her partner, Scarfe, played by Frank Whaley, a dude I haven't seen play a good guy since 'Career Opportunities'. So when we're told, fairly early on, that Scarfe is dirty, it comes as little shock. What is surprising however is that Misty, while ostensibly the "good cop" definitely has a dark side, and Scarfe, the "bad cop" has a backstory so heartbreaking that by the time his life hangs in the balance, you're rooting for him to live so that he can redeem himself.

Mahershala Ali brings a real sense of danger and charisma to Cottonmouth

The slow-burn nature of the series also affects the thing a good comic book hero needs most - a good villain. 'Luke Cage' breaks from the Netflix/Marvel pattern of having a season-long big bad. Unlike Daredevil's fight with Wilson Fisk, and Jessica Jones' battle with Kilgrave, Luke finds himself beset by several bad dudes, the most engaging of which is Cornell Stokes, aka Cottonmouth. Dressed to the nines, Ali plays Cottonmouth (he really hates that name) with such magnetism, I can't imagine why the writers would think "yeah, let's kill this dude halfway through the season" let alone act on that impulse.

So when he is killed at the hands of Black Mariah (Woodard), I found myself thinking, oh, ok, I guess she's the REAL bad guy of the season. And then she's supplanted by Willis Stryker, aka Diamondback, a few episodes later. Diamondback's sneering monologues are almost a diametric opposite of Cottonmouth's slick speeches, and I found myself missing Mahershala Ali's charisma nearly immediately. While Stokes' death does provide Woodard's Mariah Dillard with a powerful character turn, I wish we'd have spent more time with her than with the clearly batshit insane Diamondback. Played by Boardwalk Empire alum Erik LaRay Harvey, Stryker - while given a "tragic" backstory to motivate his hatred of Luke - is too much of a one-note psycho to be as interesting as Cottonmouth, or as compellingly  insidious as Black Mariah. And unfortunately, during his final battle with Luke, Coker and co. elected to put him in an outfit straight out of the comics that looks so dated and silly that I was unable to keep from rolling my eyes during what was otherwise a pretty badass fight. And then there's also Shades (Theo Rossi) a guy who evolves from lacky to genuine threat over the course of the season. He's interesting, for sure, but he's also one more dude to follow in an already full cast.

Shades, Diamondback, Black Mariah and Scarfe

Yet while the plot definitely takes its sweet time getting where it's going, it's never boring and most of the stories it slows down to tell are actually rather compelling. One in particular, the origin story of Luke's powers is fascinating because of the way it turns what we know about Luke's late wife on its head. When last we saw the late Reva Conners, she was Luke's beloved saint of a wife who was punched to death by Jessica Jones (while under Kilgrave's control). Reva's death was a painful ghost that hung over both Luke and Jessica in her series' first season. Yet Coker and company twist things up, first introducing Reva in that same saintly light before revealing her as a lying and manipulative cohort of the scientist whose inhumane experiments granted Luke his abilities. And yes, Reva eventually helped Luke in his escape from prison and they apparently did get married at some point, but the revelations we're given here change Luke's perception of his wife so much that he's able to more or less move past her death. And it also gives him enough freedom from his grief to gently pursue a relationship with Claire Temple.

Speaking of Reva and Claire, while there are numerous references to other MCU entities - particularly 'Daredevil' and 'Jessica Jones', the latter of which is actually pretty necessary to understanding a good portion of this series - 'Luke Cage' never feels too beholden to whatever else is going on in the Marvel world. Oh sure, there are plenty of easter eggs, and Justin Hammer's company plays a significant part in the story (under apparently a far more effective R&D leader, because the tech they provide to Stryker actually works). But with all the hubbub about Luke and his abilities (which become public knowledge as the season progresses) it does seem a bit weird that no one ever mentions The Avengers, or the events of Civil War/the Sokovia Accords or any of the other massive plot points that have to do with "protecting" normal humans from superhumans. That Chinese wall between Marvel films and TV appears to be holding up strongly, even when maybe it shouldn't be.

Despite the fictional public's uncertainty about Luke, in our real world, I can't imagine a better time to tell a story about a superhuman black man who wears a hoodie and is literally bulletproof. That is, until the police grow to fear him so much that they unwittingly get into bed with criminals so they can use bullets that WILL kill Luke. It says a lot about the current atmosphere of racial tension and fear in America, particularly between the police and black men. In an extraordinary, late-in-the-season sequence, we see many people in Harlem sporting bullet-riddled hoodies in a show of solidarity with Luke as the police publicly denounce him. It's also completely and totally badass that this sequence is shot over an original song from Method Man who has maybe the coolest cameo this side of Bill Murray in Zombieland. This is Coker's message at its best.

Shortcomings aside, Coker is clearly the right person for this job. And the reason I say it is because the way every shot it set up, the lighting, the composition of the frame, the set designs shows a real love and respect not just for the source material and characters, but for the other major character of this story - Harlem. As much as he as a million things to say about Luke, Coker has a million more to say about Harlem. And while sometimes he is eloquent, and other times less so, he is certainly and undeniably at his best when he lets his handpicked soundtrack do the talking. From the stage music in Cottonmouth's throwback club, Harlem's paradise, to the scoring, which sounds at times as though it could have come straight from a 70's blaxploitation movie, the music is the lifeblood of this series, and elevates even some weaker scenes and sequences into pretty good stuff.

It's abundantly clear Coker and the writers had a lot to say, and a lot they wanted to do, because they tried to do so much. I have no doubt 'Luke Cage' will be picked up for a second season, so maybe it would have been better served if some things had been left for later. That being said, this is still a very solid first season, and if/when Luke returns for season two (and there are several dangling threads that Power Man has to tie off if I'm to be satisfied!) I'll definitely tune in and binge watch the shit out of it.


Final Score - 7/10

Misty Knight and Luke will be back for The Defenders

All thirteen episodes of 'Luke Cage' are currently streaming on Netflix. Luke will next be seen in next year's ensemble mini-series, Marvel's The Defenders, where we'll see him team up and kick ass with Daredevil, Jessica, and Iron Fist. Sweet Christmas, I can't wait!

SWEET CHRISTMAS, IT'S A FULL LENGTH LUKE CAGE TRAILER!!

Holy...moly. This looks both amazeballs and unlike anything Marvel has done to date. I can't wait!!!

 

The full first season of Luke Cage premieres on Netflix on September 30th! Stay tuned to Park Row Comics for any news and for a review of that first season!

OLD MAN LOGAN - A Comic Review

I'm on vacation this week, but that doesn't mean I'm not all business! SO...the rumor came down a while back that Hugh Jackman's final outing as the Wolverine would be based on Mark Millar's 2008 story arc "Old Man Logan". And then I decided to read it. And review it, because it really is quite good!

Spoilers up in hurr - they're not really big spoilers, but they're still spoilers nonetheless.

I'm not the world's biggest Mark Millar fan. He's quite talented, for sure, but fairly inconsistent, too. I dug his run on "Ultimate X-men" and I enjoyed "Kick-Ass" (and "Kick-Ass 2", though not so much "Hit-Girl" and "Kick-Ass 3") "Wanted" was weird and not really my cup of tea, and "Secret Service" was just plain awful. But he also wrote "Civil War", which is a truly amazing mini-series. Inconsistencies aside, when Millar is on, damn...he is on. So when I realized Millar had re-teamed with Steve McNiven, the artist on "Civil War", to bring us the story of a dystopian future starring a nearly unrecognizable Wolverine, I was on-freakin'-board.

To start, Millar creates a truly desperate image of the world. Imagine a future where the supervillains teamed up to finally, completely destroy almost every superhero in the world, and seize control. America is cut into quadrants, each with a tyrannical villain ruling over it. Imagine fifty years later, an old farmer lives in extreme poverty, desperately struggling to make rent or face the wrath of a bunch of redneck, violent, sociopathic Hulk descendants threatening the farmer's wife and children. They promise his family terrible violence, yet this farmer could easily kill them all, if he weren't a pacifist, sworn to avoid violence at all costs. Now imagine that old farmer is Wolverine, who hasn't picked a fight, killed a man, or even popped his claws in half a century.

That is the backbone of "Old Man Logan". Wolverine has essentially been de-fanged, and is trying to lead a normal, if difficult, life in peace and quiet with his young family. When he finds himself a month behind on rent, he must take a job with an old friend (spoiler alert - it's HAWKEYE!) to travel across the wasteland that America has become, or risk the lives of his entire family.

There are really two stories wrapped in one here. The first really begins when Logan and a now-blind Hawkeye ride across the country, they come across various towns and people in need of a hero, yet Logan refuses to fight, refuses to get involved, almost to the point of absurdity. The second story is the mystery of why that is. First of all, what exactly happened to all the heroes? And how was Wolverine defeated so badly that he swore to never fight again?

Both stories are good and interesting in their own right, but finding out the truth of what really happened fifty years ago is far more brutal and devastating than I can describe without ruining the story. But rest assured, "Old Man Logan is Mark Millar at the height of his talent. He is ON in this book.

Millar brings sympathy when it's due, anger when it's deserved, and an insane amount of excitement when the action breaks out. Though Logan may have sworn himself to peace, that doesn't mean everyone around him has, and the sight of a glaucoma-ridden Hawkeye still having plenty of tricks up his sleeve is certainly a ton of fun. There are plenty of twists, turns, and unexpected surprises along the way. What happened to the cities that just seemed to disappear overnight? Who's is the President? Where is Mjolnir? Why is that Ultron clone wearing a Hawaiian shirt and khakis? And just how did those redneck Hulks even come about? There's a ton of story to explore, and Millar handles it all with aplomb.

Art-wise, Steve McNiven brings a similar art to his previous work on "Civil War" to this book, creating both a cinematic and realistic feeling to the serenity of Logan's peaceful life, and the chaos that results when that serenity is broken, either by violence, or by the emergence of an unexpected villain. Logan spends nearly the entire book refusing to show his claws, and when he finally breaks his oath, McNiven spends three pages giving you an ear-to-ear grin at the unbridled badassness of it.

Millar and McNiven craft a wonderful complete story, create a horribly dystopian future, and expertly weave in awesome action, humor, and even some heart-wrenching poignancy, too. If 'Wolverine 3' decides to go this route and adapt the "Old Man Logan" story arc for their movie, it's going to have a tough time living up to the quality of this book. I really, really hope they succeed.

FINAL SCORE - 8.5/10

AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON - A Retro Review

The MCU's Phase Three kicks off this Friday (actually, Thursday evening) with 'Captain America: Civil War'. We here at PRC couldn't be more stoked about this movie, and we've been spending the last few weeks taking a look back at all the MCU movies that tie into 'Civil War'. Today's entry wraps up this look-back as we check out the climax of Phase Two, 'Avengers: Age of Ultron'.

You may have noticed by now that when I do these retro reviews, I tend to give some history on the project. Some backdrop for the lead-up and release of the movie. Sometimes it's just for color, sometimes it's tied directly to whatever my particular thesis for that critique is. This is a case of both, because this is not a strong movie, and maybe the expectations and demands put upon it played a part in that.

Following the runaway success of the first Avengers team-up, Marvel Studios had earned so much goodwill among its fanbase, that they could have done 'Avengers: Reading the Yellow Pages' and anticipation would still have been through the roof. Most people assumed that given his tease at the end of 'The Avengers', Thanos would be the main villain. However, in July 2013, MCU honcho Kevin Feige announced Joss Whedon was going to hold back on the Mad Titan, and pit the Earth's mightiest heroes against one of their deadliest foes - 'Avengers: Age of Ultron' was coming in Summer 2015.

Even though it was not a direct adaptation of 2012's comic arc of the same name, the fact that Ultron of the comics had just finished wiping out humanity sold him on die-hard fans as a worthy opponent for Earth's Mightiest Heroes. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this was one of the most anticipated movies of all time. The SDCC announcement and teaser footage was all but wiped from the internet, creating a sense of mystery and heightened demand for any glimpses of the film. When the first trailer hit, it broke YouTube records. The public thirst for all things Marvel reached fever pitch. Phase Three was announced nearly a year before Phase Two would even end. The hype could not have been bigger.

Then it was released. And for a while after 'Age of Ultron' came out, nobody wanted to admit the truth. For all the hope, the hype, the awesome trailers, the promise of a darker story with a nigh-invincible foe, the second Avengers film was just plain disappointing.

The initial response might have been to say to yourself "well, my expectations were just too high", and there's probably some truth to that. But there's another truth, too. It's just not a very good movie. It's not a wholly bad one either, but it damn sure isn't a good one.

There is something hollow and empty at the center of 'Age of Ultron'. From the opening sequence, the movie is almost too slick. The good guys toss around CGI bad guys in a way that makes everything seem more cartoonish than realistic, and is definitely a departure from the much more polished first film. So much is going on in nearly every frame of the opening battle that it is, at times, difficult to keep up with who's doing what to whom. There are shots of the Hulk and Iron Man that clearly look like unfinished work, and some rigging on Captain America that survived a digital eraser. Stuff like this makes the film feel rushed and slapped together.

And that, I think, points to a fundamental problem with this movie. Everything feels forced. The screenwriting is lazy and the story advances, whether or not it makes any sense at all. And unfortunately, it frequently make no sense. So the poor(ish, by Marvel standards) reception can't be blamed on too-high expectations. And if that's the case, then the blame must fall on director Joss Whedon. He wrote it, he directed it, all criticism is his. Maybe his heart wasn't in it, maybe he just ran out of ideas. But we'll get to his shortcomings in a little bit. For now, let's look at the story:

A would-be world conquerer, fueled by selfish rage, steals the film's macguffin, which turns out to be an infinity stone. There's a mid-movie squabble, in which the Hulk is out of control and must be subdued by one of his own teammates. A likeable supporting character is killed, and the villain has an army of paper soldiers that the Avengers must battle, but are not very tough. The primary villain has a plan for global domination that isn't terribly well thought out and has a glaring fatal flaw. Cap and Stark bicker until they get a pep talk from Nick Fury, put aside their differences, team up, and defeat the bad guy, with the help of a more in-control Hulk. Thanos shows up in the credits. Which Avengers movie am I talking about?

Even Ultron is confused by what he is.

While undeniably a retread, this story is advanced by the villainous robot Ultron (voiced by James Spader). Ultron is originally intended by Tony Stark and Bruce Banner to be a good guy, until he turns evil after he's given consciousness by...who exactly? The movie never stops to actually state that. Was it Stark and Banner? Was it the mind stone*? Aside from that, just what the hell does Ultron want? We're told very little about what his original purpose is, other than "global peacekeeping", but what does that entail? And once he's created, there are no growing pains. He is birthed, as it were, evil, with burning hatred for the Avengers, and Stark in particular. But no reason is ever really given for why he wants them all dead. And once that is done, then what? What is his endgame?

*unlike the tesseract (a.k.a. the space stone), which is more or less a key, the mind stone as a macguffin is much more problematic. Yes, I understand that it's a macguffin that is mostly just waiting around to be used during 'Infinity War', but still -  while it's ok to tease something for a future film, it's not ok to just flat out leave shit unexplained. Does the mind stone have a consciousness of its own? Does it have will? Did it create Ultron, or corrupt him? Why is Vision different from Ultron? Too many questions.

Ze twins.

Of course, Ultron is not the only character to suffer a lack of development. The Maximoff twins, Pietro (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Wanda (Elizabeth Oslon) are, for two-thirds of the movie, painted as villains who team up with Ultron because of their vendetta against Tony Stark. But why? Because their parents were killed in a bombing and Stark Industries manufactured the bomb? That makes as much sense as someone who gets shot being angry at the bullet manufacturer. Once they figure out they're totally expendable to Ultron (because what bad guy ever really gives a shit about his henchmen?) they switch sides and help the Avengers. I guess their blood feud with Stark wasn't so deep, after all. The villain who kick starts the plot, Baron von Strucker (Thomas Kretschmann) may as well be just another faceless Hydra goon, as he only has a few minutes of screen time, and is killed off-screen (about which Stark has to make a joke) because...why?

I won't front. This was dope.

In addition to Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, the Vision (Paul Bettany) is a new addition to the team, but with a personality and abilities so nebulous, all we are given to go on is the fact that he can wield Mjolnir. About that... I won't lie, that shit was badass, but still...he is an artificial being, with no soul. Or is he? Does he have a soul? How can he be worthy if he's just an android**? We should have seen Ultron trying to hold Mjolnir and failing, so we can know the rules. Even Stark and Cap concede Vision's ability to do so doesn't mean much. Without fully knowing what he is - man or machine.

**Far too often, the team uses the term AI to describe what Ultron is. And I'm by no means an AI expert, but I think they're still misusing the term. Do they mean artificial consciousness? Or just intelligence? It's actually important in the case of this movie for two reasons - Ultron has emotions that counter his logic and reason, and Vision can lift Mjolnir. They should at least discuss it for a minute. 

One of the bigger "why is this really necessary?" moments in the movie, the Hulkbuster sequence is wonderful fun. It's a geek's paradise, seeing Stark in his suit, taking on one of the most powerful beings in the Marvel Universe, and holding his own! Triumphing, even! And it goes on for just...far too long. Stark fights him instead of just trying to get him out of the city. The one time he does, Hulk escapes and Stark never tries again. And this is problematic within the course of the movie itself. 'Age of Ultron' goes out of it's way to show the Avengers attempting to protect civilians from the destruction their battles create, but at some point, it just becomes tedious to see them shuttling bystanders out of danger's way.

With so many unfinished ideas, I'm not convinced Whedon really knew what to do with this story. And far too many times, his fingerprints are visible in the clay, so to speak. You can tell when he just wanted to make a joke. Like Maria Hill's explanation of the twins; "He's fast and she's weird." Well, that's just...wildly unhelpful in explaining the powers of Scarlet Witch, and not the only time he opts for humor instead of clarification or exposition. And you can tell that he really wanted some kind of romantic angle to explore. In one of the least convincing character pairings I can think of, Black Widow and Hulk are in some kind of weird and painfully uncomfortable flirtation. Their chemistry is so non-existent, that Whedon has to rely on other characters actually pointing out that they're being romantic. And he's not incapable of doing it. In just a few moments, you buy Jeremy Renner and Linda Cardellini as a married couple. So why did things feel so wrong with Romanoff and Banner?

We know from various interviews and articles that Whedon really fought to keep Barton's family and home in the movie. This is a 16 minute sequence that grinds the movie to a halt and the purpose it serves is unclear. Yes, the Avengers need a place to lay low after Hulk's freakout and Scarlet Witch's mindfuckery, but what do they gain from going to Barton's home? Other than some knowledge they didn't previously have, none of them have any sort of epiphany, or reach any sort of conclusion that the farmhouse specifically provides. Whedon fought for it because he wanted it, because he liked it - not because it was a particularly good or creative idea. It could have happened anywhere.

There are two "rules" of writing I think about when I think about Whedon; one is that every sentence should either reveal your characters or advance the plot; the second is that you can't be afraid to kill your darlings. And so much of this film is just that - Whedon opting to go with what he likes over what best serves the story. Jokes over exposition, forced characterization that comes out of nowhere, unnecessary subplots. After production, he took not so subtle jabs at Marvel Studios, claiming studio interference, blaming them for forcing changes. But in the end, Joss Whedon is still responsible for the finished product. He can blame them all he likes, but he didn't walk away. Edgar Wright walked away from Ant-Man, Marvel wanted a more brand-friendly picture, and they got it from Peyton Reed. But Reed also delivered a solid movie. One can criticize 'Ant-Man' for being too similar to the plot of the original 'Iron Man', but it still works. 'The Force Awakens' is very similar to 'A New Hope', but it still works. A retread of old material can work, if you bring something unique, either to the plot, or to the characters. Whedon didn't do that. He held on to his darlings as tightly as he could, and he turned in a half-finished movie. And that is why it doesn't work.


FINAL SCORE - 6/10

Captain America and most of the Avengers will be seen starting tomorrow night in the insanely anticipated kick off to Phase Three of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, 'Avengers 2.5 - The Stark Knight'...I mean, 'Captain America: Civil War'. Shit looks tight, yo.

CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER - A Retro Review

We're now one week away from the US release of 'Captain America: Civil War' and to celebrate this highly anticipated superhero smashup, let's take a look back at the best film in the MCU - 'Captain America: The Winter Soldier'

Spoilery Alert - This movie came out two years ago, so there actually may be a few of you who haven't seen it. Well, that's still your fault, because it's damn good, but whatever. You're warned. Spoilers are mentioned all up in hurr. 


Prior to the release of 'Captain America: The Winter Soldier', Phase 2 of the MCU had gotten off to a rocky start; 'Iron Man Three' was a disaster, 'Thor: The Dark World' lacked much of the fun as well as the character development that made the original work. But when the trailers for Captain America 2 started to drop, anticipation started to build, and the feeling was that this film would put Phase 2 and the MCU back on track.

And man alive, it succeeds. It is a wonderfully intense movie, filled with intrigue, twists and turns (the first film's bad guys, Hydra, has been infiltrating S.H.I.E.L.D. for years, positioning themselves to carry out a horrifying endgame) that actually are in service to the story. There are action scenes that are among the best in Marvel's entire 12-film library. And it still has time makes a few jokes that don't detract from the overall serious tone of the picture. Brothers Joe and Anthony Russo took the director's chair from Joe Johnston, and despite only having two small comedy credits to their name, they infused Cap 2 with something truly extraordinary. With direct influences from a spate of 70's political intrigue thrillers, 'Winter Soldier' is easily my favorite film in the entire Marvel catalog and the only one that could stay in a conversation when one compares the MCU with Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy. It also manages to feel like the most interwoven of the MCU's stories, while still maintaining the ability to stand on its own. You don't need to know that Senator Stern (the late, great Garry Shandling, reprising his role from 'Iron Man 2') has butted heads with Tony Stark, but if you do, it definitely paints a clearer picture of his motivations.

Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is back in uniform, after the events of 'The Avengers'. Still a man out of time, he's making the best of things, while working directly for Nick Fury* (Samuel L. Jackson) and S.H.I.E.L.D. He makes peace with his lost-to-time love Peggy Carter (a digitally aged Hayley Atwell) and has a semi-friendly relationship with the Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) even if he maybe, kinda, doesn't totally trust her. Once he figures out that he can, though, Evans and Johansson have such a wonderful chemistry together, that the few moments where Steve and Natasha can just quietly talk to one another work very well.

*This is easily Sam Jackson's best turn as Nick Fury; he's not being Sam Jackson-y, he's exuding both the confidence and the moral flexibility that being the head of an intelligence agency must have. For the first time since he appeared in the MCU, Fury doesn't seem like he's all-knowing and infallible. He seems like he's on his heels, and unsure both of who he can trust and where he can go. But just because he's been knocked on his ass, doesn't mean he doesn't still have a few aces up his sleeve.

Anthony Mackie also joins the MCU as Sam Wilson, aka The Falcon, a retired soldier who now helps other veterans with PTSD. Mackie's integration into the fabric of the story is nearly effortless. A shared military background gives Wilson and Cap a quick connection, and Wilson's admiration for Cap's heroics leads him to offer his help with no hesitation. Mackie is also just plain cool in the role. He comes across as genuine and friendly, but also as a very charismatic and capable ally. And his wings look totally awesome.

In addition to the principal characters, the film boasts a large supporting cast, and even though some of them don't get a lot of screen time, what they do get is used very effectively, and gives us enough insight into their character's personality that we have a clear view of where they're coming from and what drives them. Robert Redford plays Secretary of Defense Alexander Pierce, who starts off as an ally, but still exudes a faint whiff of menace, enough of which tips off Steve to his true intentions. Maximiliano Hernandez's turn as recurring/rogue S.H.I.E.L.D. agent Jasper Sitwell (he's the bald hispanic fella who usually pal'd around with Coulson before he died) not only shocks those viewers who follow the MCU closely enough to know his name, but also gives you a very efficient way of illustrating the depth of the Hydra infestation, while also undermining the trust Steve has in S.H.I.E.L.D. itself. Frank Grillo, Callan Mulvey, and Emily VanCamp also bring their own depth to the goings-on at S.H.I.E.L.D. headquarters.

Despite the huge cast, which can bog down lesser films, the story moves along at a brisk pace, and the action scenes in this movie are thrilling. They feel intimate and brutal, and never so big that you lose track of what's going on. The Russo brothers wanted it to look as real as possible, so they took cues from Chris Nolan and shot as much as they could practically. The resulting visuals are fantastic. Steve running down a hallway, smashing through doors and walls that seem to have real weight to them gives the viewer a useful idea of how strong Steve has become. A freeway confrontation with Hydra and the Winter Soldier is probably the strongest action set-piece in the movie. The masked-and-metal-armed Winter Soldier always seems to be just a half-step ahead of the good guys, and unlike his battles with the Nazis, Steve has to actually put real effort into just trying to stay alive, never mind escaping or defeating these goons.

Aside from the edge-of-your-seat action, this is a movie that takes its emotional realism very seriously, as well. Steve is just starting to get used to living his life after a 70-year ice nap, and all of a sudden, the ground he'd grown so comfortable on suffers a cataclysmic shift. Drawn in by their actions, Cap gets understandably pissed at Fury's and Romanoff's moral relativism, and hates being manipulated into doing their potentially illegal bidding. Yes, they're the good guys, but that doesn't mean that sometimes they don't do the wrong things. And yes, the eponymous Winter Soldier is revealed to be Cap's "dead" friend Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) but just because he's now a brainwashed assassin doesn't mean Steve suddenly hates him and will have no trouble killing him. Bucky was Steve's friend before he was Captain America, and he can't just let that go because everyone around him is saying "he's your enemy now." Cap cannot and does give up hope just because it seems like there is none.

In fact, things look so grim for Cap by the end of the film, you actually start to wonder if "jesus...are they really gonna kill Captain America??" Even if you rationally know "ok, they can't kill Cap", the fact that the story can suck the viewer in so much that you think, even if just for a moment, that he may die is quite an achievement.

For the Russos, the idea of putting the most honest superhero in the Marvel Universe in a sea of deceit and duplicity is a pretty solid plan. And most of the time, when you talk about a character arc, you're talking about a character who changes the way they are because of the events in the world around them. What makes 'Winter Soldier' so unique is that Cap's arc isn't how he changes because of the world, but how he changes the world itself, through the sheer conviction of his principles. Cap, the character, is just about as close as you can get to being an absolute force for good, and the Russos do a truly wonderful job of taking this character someplace unique and fascinating to watch.


FINAL SCORE 9/10


Captain America: Civil War is out next Friday (or really, Thursday night). The first trailer was amazeballs, so check that out on YouTube, and then go see the movie next week, because for the first time, I'm going to try write a timely review.

IRON MAN THREE - A Retro Review

I've been dreading this one. It's time to look back on the insult to not only comic book fans, but moviegoers everywhere, 'Iron Man 3'.

Rarely...RARELY do I walk out of a movie angry. I may be disappointed. I may be bored. I may be dismissive. But I left 'Iron Man 3' angry as hell. For starters, I was mad because the trailer for the film promised something completely different from what we were given. Not only were we promised Iron Man's arch-nemesis, the Mandarin, but we were also promised Extremis and several scenes that hinted that this might finally be a foe too strong for Tony Stark to defeat.

Long before this movie came out, when they announced that Jon Favreau would give up director duties, I thought "ok, maybe it's for the best." Iron Man 2 wasn't the greatest, and putting in the writer of 'Predator' and 'Lethal Weapon', two of the all-time great 80's action movies seemed like an interesting idea.

Basically...yeah.

Instead, what we got was a snarky, disdainful movie that has a major tonal shift from everything that had preceded it, and a handful of half-baked plot threads all leading to a major twist which is completely unnecessary to the story. Not only that, but there was a major change to the character of Tony Stark that comes totally out of left field.

Director Shane Black seems more interested in putting together a series of scenes for varying reasons, rather than a coherent story. Aldrich Killian hates Tony for being an asshole to him way back in the day, but how do you go from business rival to complete psychopath? The movie never stops to explain. However, since he felt compelled to create a piecemeal story that never really coheres into an actual movie, I'm just going to rip his efforts apart, piece by shitty piece.

Throughout the first two acts of the movie, Tony struggles with PTSD following the Battle of New York. All we ever get for explanation is that he is struggling to understand those events. It's never even hinted that he's dealing with his own mortality. Not only that, but once the third act arrives, Tony's PTSD seems to have vanished without any sort of resolution.

Man, fuck this bullshit.

The kid. Oh god, the kid. The kid makes me think of that line in 'Barton Fink' (if you haven't seen it, good lord, rent it or stream it. It's one of the Coen Brothers' best) where Judy Davis is talking about the famous screenwriter and how he developed a formula for "wrestling pictures" that usually involved the protagonist becoming invested in the life of a small child. Harley, the kid, brings literally nothing to the table. He exists to elicit laughs and to be a foil for Stark's quips, once Tony is removed from the company of Pepper, Rhodey, and Jarvis. The kid is just there for Stark to antagonize. If you disagree, ask yourself if the kid was removed from the film, would it be fundamentally different?

And remember how in 'The Avengers' Iron Man got hit with Mjolnir and took the hit rather well? No dents or explosions or anything? Well, apparently Tony Stark was done building suits with that sort of durability, because MK42 suit is routinely broken apart by things like getting hit by a truck, getting hit with its own faceplate, and getting tugged on by a small child. Killian's Extremis thugs, too, have very little trouble in dispatching Tony's many autonomous suits with their hot hands. Nevermind that Tony's armor has, in the past, absorbed lightning (which, if you google it, burns more than five times hotter than the surface of the sun), Extremis people are indestructible, regenerating monsters! Except when they're not.

I MADE IT ALL UP FOR...REASONS!!!

Let's examine the Extremis issues. The main conceit of this particular Macguffin is that it will heal your broken body, regnerating severed or damaged tissue and also, if you can control it, allow you to burn things with your hands. And spout fire (an idea so ludicrous, even the movie stops to be like "wtf?"). The Extremis explosions, passed off as bombings carried out by the Mandarin, are caused by Killian's test subjects not being able to regulate their body temperatures (although what exactly that entails and why it's so difficult is never really explained. I can't regulate my body temperature either, but somehow it manages to regulate itself pretty ok). So if Killian's goons can go off at any moment, why the hell does he let them out of his sight? This leads to the idea that Maya Hansen (Rebecca Hall) will manipulate Tony into fixing the flaws in Extremis. However, why she doesn't just come to him straight up is never explained either.

The regeneration thing is also inconsistent. Killian's two top goons, Savin (James Badge Dale) and Brandt (Stephanie Szostak) are both seen regenerating from severe injury repeatedly until the moment when they just don't. Tony tosses Brandt into a transformer, and he blows a hole* through Savin's chest. But instead of regenerating, they just die. Why? Did they run out of Extremis juice? And how was it Savin and Brandt managed to master the whole 'regulating' thing? Why are they so special? With so much Extremis nonsense, it's really annoying that the only purpose it really serves is to provide a reason for the Mandarin to exist.

*while everyone gets all up in arms that Superman and Batman kill in the DCEU, nobody seems to give a shit that Stark kills...a whole lot of people, too. Also, Captain America is a total killing machine. Just sayin'.

From the outset, the Mandarin is presented as a grave threat, responsible for numerous deadly bombings (that turn out to be bogus) around the country, but right from the start, we see that Killian is the one that is somehow tied to the explosions and that is clearly has something to do with Extremis. But before the big reveal, the Mandarin is so shortchanged in screen time that, even though we know he and Killian are somehow tied together, he still doesn't seem like the primary threat.

We were promised this.

Which brings us to the twist. The Mandarin is not a real villain, but an actor portraying a terrorist. This is a plot twist that makes absolutely no goddamn sense at all, except to generate laughs because Ben Kingsley plays actor Trevor Slattery as a debauched lout who is barely aware what is going on around him, let alone capable of being a dangerous terrorist. Nevermind that he's claiming responsibility for actual deaths and acts of terrorism; nevermind that he shoots a dude in the head; Trevor claims that none of it is real. Shane Black did this because he thought it'd be funny. Not because it served the story. How am I so sure? Because it doesn't serve the story**.

We got this. THIS is bullshit.

Killian claims he created the Mandarin so that the the U.S. government would be too distracted looking for him to really investigate the Extremis explosions. But there is literally nothing to indicate the government doesn't trust Killian or AIM (his company), or even suspect that there is anything out of the ordinary about the bombings. The Mandarin was created by Killian to throw off a hunting party that doesn't exist. Therefore, he doesn't serve the goddamn story one bit.

**a good plot twist makes you want to go back and watch the movie again. The Sixth Sense, The Usual Suspects - you go back and watch the film again and look for clues that should have tipped you off to the twist ending. It's enjoyable to see what you missed. But aside from the twist itself, it usually helps if said twist is in service to a good story in a good movie.

This is physically impossible. 

'Iron Man' was good. 'Iron Man 2' was flawed, but still had its moments. Tony's turn in 'The Avengers' was at least fun, and provided him with a nice little soliloquy about the shrapnel in his chest and the role it plays in motivating him to do the most with his life as he possibly can, as well as leading Bruce Banner to accept his Hulk powers and channel them into heroics. Shane Black literally undoes everything that was good about those three outings as he decides to end Tony Stark's solo tales with Tony just up and deciding to have heart surgery to remove the shrapnel, despite the fact that we've been repeatedly told it's too dangerous. It proves that Shane Black was only interested in telling a Shane Black story, not an Iron Man story. He was the wrong writer, the wrong director, and the entirely wrong way to go for this complete and utter failure of a movie.

I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

FINAL SCORE 1/10

Iron Man will next be seen apparently making a lot less jokes in 'Captain America; Civil War' out Friday in most of the world, and next Friday in America. Which is totally unfair. America created Cap and Iron Man and we gotta wait an extra week to see them? F that S, Feige, you rat bastard!! 

ONE MORE WEEK??? GAHHHH!!! 

THE AVENGERS - A Retro Review

Ed. Note - I meant to edit and publish this yesterday, but then Prince died, and his Royal Badness took up most of my attention the rest of the afternoon. If we get halos in the afterlife, I'm sure his will be purple and funky shaped. Also, I'm going to go back and revisit not only Burton's '89 'Batman', but Prince's kooky/genius addition to the finished product. Rest easy, Prince. 


The MCU's Phase Three is about to begin with 'Captain America: Civil War'. And so we're taking a look back at all the films that feed into this conflagration. Today, we review the end of Phase One, 'The Avengers'.

Disney made no attempts to hide which actors they favored.

Summer 2012. It all came down to this. This was the end result of four years of teasing end-credit stingers, cameo appearances, linked macguffins, and public knowledge that the team-up was coming. No studio had ever tried what Marvel/Paramount/Disney was trying to do. Aside from the Fantastic Four and the X-men, who were already established superhero "teams", no one had ever succeeded in bringing individual superheroes from their own solo movies into a team-up situation. And now it was about to happen. Anticipation was sky-high. Expectations? My own thoughts were along the lines of "just don't fuck it up, and I'll be happy."

Let me break for a moment to say that usually, when I think about/review a movie, I want to focus more on what was intended by both the director and the screenwriter more than what *I* expect and want from the story. Yes, my preference is for darker stories, with a more emotional impact than action for the sake of action. I'm not saying that lighthearted or fun or just plain action movies are bad - not at all. I'm just saying my preference is for something with more substance. And even though a movie might aim for just being a crowd pleaser, it still has to have a good story. And a good story should always have an answer for any moment where someone asks "why?"

Back to my expectations. When I saw 'The Avengers', I was happy. It is a very fun movie, that succeeds in doing what it sets out to do - entertain audiences. The acting was about what you'd expect, the visuals were colorful and vibrant. The superhero action was exciting. And the film's many money shots were satisfying.

But nobody was reinventing the wheel. It wasn't genre-breaking, or high art. It didn't really want you to have to think too hard. The characters weren't conflicted, or morally ambiguous. It was just a lark. That's all it wanted to be (and with a director like Joss Whedon, that's all it ever could be)

But this does not mean the movie is without it's fairly major flaws. Super fun, yes, but I wish that it had aspired to be more than just fun. Finally, Iron Man, Captain America, the Hulk, Thor, Black Widow and Hawkeye were on the screen together, taking on the best villain Phase One had to offer. Loki's Shakespearean arc from the first Thor is one of the strongest points of what I consider one of the strongest Marvel films to date, so I was quite happy he was going to be the big-bad who'd necessitate the assembly of The Avengers. While his goal of world domination seems like something that would require six superheroes to band together, his plan is pretty much nonsense.

And there are far too many moments where the "why?" just kinda gets ignored in favor of doing something that looks cool. Thor, Iron Man and Captain America having a fight in the woods. Why? Because Iron Man was mad that Thor kidnapped Loki? Ok, but when you stop and think about it, SHIELD already knows who Thor is, and Tony did his homework ("Am i the only one who did the reading?") so he should know who Thor is, too, and not be so eager to get into a fistfight with him. Maybe try something like asking "hey, who are you? what do you want?" So what's the real "why"? Because it looks cool to have three heroes fight.

Then, in a sequence that seems directly inspired by the Joker's arrest mid-way through 'The Dark Knight', Loki finds himself captured and held prisoner aboard the SHIELD helicarrier. But while the Joker had a reason to get himself locked up, Loki's desire for capture is explained away by "Loki means to unleash the Hulk". Ok. But again, let's think. How and why will he achieve this? What good will it do? Hulk flips out and wreaks havoc for about four minutes before jumping out of the ship. So what's the real "why"? Because it gives us an opportunity to see Hulk and Thor fight.

Why do the Avengers finally assemble? To avenge Coulson, and then to protect from an alien invasion. Except the audience has more of a connection to Coulson than any of the actual Avengers (save Widow and Hawkeye, who are SHIELD agents). Tony briefly interacts with him during 'Iron Man 2', and makes a point that he doesn't even know his first name. Thor briefly meets him during 'Thor'. Cap for a few moments early on in 'The Avengers'. So really, Coulson's death hits us* harder than the Avengers.

*This is one of my main beefs with Joss Whedon. He doesn't know how to elicit a genuine emotional response without killing off a character. Look at Buffy! Season one - Buffy dies. Two - Jenny and Angel die. Three - Angel leaves Buffy (which is a different sort of death), Five - Joyce dies, and Buffy dies again! Six - Tara dies. Seven - Anya and Spike die. Going into 'Age of Ultron' we all knew an Avenger would bite it, because that's what Whedon does. That's ALL he does! YOU CAN'T STOP HIM! HE'LL WADE THROUGH YOU, REACH DOWN YOUR THROAT AND PULL YOUR FUCKIN' HEART OUT!!

Yes, they must defend the Earth from alien domination, and yet, Loki's plan to take over the world is particularly foolhardy. He has an army that can essentially be kept in check by six people, and it only invades from a single bottleneck entry point. Normandy was bigger in scale than the Chituari's attempt to take over Earth. Iron Man's bullets and missiles deal out a pretty good amount of damage to the Chitauri, so military fighters would probably help as well.

The Avengers themselves do a pretty good job of keeping the invading army busy, and yet the World Security Council decides to nuke Manhattan. While this does allow for the great Nick Fury line (I recognize the council has made a decision, but seeing as it's a stupid-ass decision, I've elected ignore it), it REALLY is a stupid-ass decision. The Chitauri are not advancing outside Manhattan, and really, they're not causing all that much damage either, so why the hell would they elect to obliterate a few million people?? Because it affords Iron Man an opportunity to be selfless and risk his own life to destroy the enemy.

I'm rambling a bit, but I'm also making a point - any movie, when you start dissecting a movie, you can discover that it's chock full of flaws, plot holes, silly story choices. Does that take away from the enjoyment of the movie? Sometimes. It depends on how well the movie achieves it's primary objective. And in the case of 'The Avengers', that was to bring all the heroes together in a way that created a sense of fun and wonder. And it did that very well. Not perfectly, but very well. Which is why it's still a movie that I quite enjoy.

FINAL SCORE 8/10


Most of the Avengers will next be seen in Captain America: Civil War, which is coming out in two weeks. Be there, or be square.

BLADE - A Quickie Review

With the success of 'Deadpool', the upcoming R-rated cut of 'Batman v Superman', and the continuing rumors that 'Suicide Squad' is flirting with that line between PG-13 and R, it's time we looked back on the original R-rated superhero. The Daywalker himself, Blade.

If you look at a movie through the lens of what the director is wanting to do, then 'Blade' is an unqualified success. Director Stephen Norrington wants to give you a fun, thrilling ride through a film that trades it's stock in equal parts "cool" and "badass". Seemingly born to play this role, Wesley Snipes plays it completely straight, but still as if he knows he's the hero of the story. The cool, badass hero. When cops shoot at him instead of the bad guy, he shouts "motherfucker, are you outta your damn mind??" as if the cops forgot he was the star of this picture. Stephen Dorff too, as the villain Deacon Frost, exudes such confidence in his role because Frost himself absolutely loves being the bad guy. He dresses cool, he has cool hair, a disdain for the vampire authority, and a whole band of groupies who treat him like a rock star. Any time you question the genuineness of the movie, here comes Kris Kristofferson or Donal Logue to say something with such casual normalcy, it puts you back at ease so you can continue the ride. I mean, this is a movie that casts Udo Kier as a vampire chairman of the board. And anytime you have Udo Kier in a role, you're not going for subtlety.

The action scenes are immensely fun, as it is anytime you have a hero who's just really good at his job. And Blade IS really good at killing vampires in ways that look amazing. Gunplay, swordplay or just good ol' martial arts badassery, no one is a match for Blade until the very end. And even then, it's not like you think he's going to lose the climactic fight. He's Blade, for god's sake! He defeats the bad guy, spouts of a one-liner than makes no goddamn sense at all, and you're still smiling ear to freakin' ear, because you've had such a good time.

FINAL SCORE 7.5/10

How can you root against this shit-eating grin??