Thor: The Dark World (2013)

THOR: THE DARK WORLD (2013)

Director: Alan Taylor

Writers: Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely, Don Payne, and Robert Rodat

Producers: Victoria Alonso, Louis D'Esposito, Alan Fine, Nigel Gostelow, Craig Kyle, and Stan Lee

Editors: Dan Lebental and Wyatt Smith

Cinematography: Kramer Morgenthau

Music: Brian Tyler

Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, and Christopher Eccleston

Runtime: 1 hour 52 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (intense sci-fi action & violence, some suggestive content)

Genre: Superhero, Action, Fantasy

Release Date: November 8, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: It's really not necessary to see Thor or even The Avengers before watching the movie. Everything is fairly easy to pick up.

Intro: Sorry for not posting more often. I'm in my first quarter of college and it's been a little crazy adjusting to things. Anyway, it's easy to convince me to watch Marvel movies. Though they are not the pinnacle of filmmaking excellence, I always find them entertaining and fun. This one was no different. Thor: The Dark World does exactly what it is intended to do: thrill and entertain as a superhero movie. While it isn't perfect, it is saved by Loki, its humor, action, and visuals.

Plot: Years ago, the Dark Elves sought to bring darkness to the universe, but Asgard and other worlds stopped them before they could dominate. 5,000 years later, after they are all presumed dead, the Elves begin to resurrect under their leader Malekith. When Earth, Asgard, and 7 other worlds in the universe are threatened by the elves, it is up to Thor (Hemsworth), his earth girlfriend Jane (Portman) and his evil brother Loki (Hiddleston) to save everyone.

Things People May Find Objectionable: There's a lot of violence and a couple of mild swear words, but that's pretty much it. It has the same level of content as any other superhero movie.

What was Good:

     -Directing/Cinematography: The movie looks good. There's no denying that. It's a really good piece of eye candy. I was pretty impressed with the directing too. You can actually tell what is going on with the action sequences, which is always a plus with action movies.

     -Action/Suspense: Plenty of action to go around. This is another thing Marvel never disappoints with. It's definitely an exciting movie.

     -Humor: The movie had some seriously funny moments in it! The wittiness was one of the things that made it so enjoyable. It seems like Marvel movies are getting progressively funnier. This is a good thing, in my opinion. The funnier a movie is, the more enjoyable it is.

The poster looks good, but it's almost exactly the same as the Iron Man 3
poster. Lack of creativity, eh Marvel?

     -Loki: Tom Hiddleston as Loki pretty much steals the show. He is in all the memorable scenes of the movie and provides great comic relief, but is also very good in the dramatic scenes. Pretty much any scene with him is better than all of the scenes without him. Not that those other scenes are bad, it's just Loki makes them better. I would love to see a Loki-centric movie. I think it would work really well.

     -Special Effects: Really great. Marvel never disappoints with the visuals. It's hard to distinguish between actual sets and the CGI, aside from the whole alien world thing. It was really convincing. It's a testament to how good CGI has become these days.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Script: Not a great script, but it was ok. The comedic parts were really well-written, but sometimes the dramatic lines seemed a little weak and cliché. It doesn't ruin the movie by any measure, but it feels like the script could've been stronger. You'd think they could do that between 5 screenwriters.

      -Characters: Except for Loki and somewhat Thor, the characters were al relatively flat. The side characters were just that: on the side. Not much attention was paid to their characters.

      -Pacing: The movie moves very quickly. Hardly ever is there a dull moment, but sometimes it seems if as the movie moves a little too fast. It felt like they kind of glazed over some storylines in favor of moving the plot along. My question to the filmmakers is, why include some storylines at all if you're just going to skim over them? I felt like the movie might have functioned better if there wasn't so much involvement with Earth. I think it would've functioned just fine as solely a space opera.

Worth Noting:

     -Story: Look, it's formula, same as pretty much all superhero movies and definitely all Marvel movies. You're not going to get anything groundbreaking story-wise. As far as the way it's told, there's not too many obvious plot holes, though some things are not as well-explained as they should have been. Sometimes you'll get a "wait, what?" moment, but it doesn't make the story hard to understand. It's just some small details that go unexplained.

The Verdict: Thor: The Dark World is a perfectly good and entertaining superhero movie, but not a lot more. It has great visuals, a lot of action, and a surprisingly good performance by Tom Hiddleston, but has cliché writing and weird pacing. I'd almost be willing to say it was as good if not better than Iron Man 3. Anyway, I would recommend this one for a fun and entertaining movie. If you like Marvel's other stuff, you should like this one.

Liking my reviews? Like my Facebook page.

Iron Man 3 (2013) Review

IRON MAN 3 (2013)
Director: Shane Black

Writers: Drew Pearce and Shane Black

Producers: Jon Favreau, Stan Lee, Louis D'Esposito, Stephen Broussard, Victoria Alonso, Alan Fine, Dan Mintz, Charles Newirth, and Lars Winther

Editors: Peter S. Eliot and Jeremy Ford

Cinematography: John Toll

Music: Brian Tyler

Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Rebecca Hall, and Ben Kingsley

Best Credit: Naomi Parshin, Aurelia Rose, and Johanna Yunda as "AIM Ping Pong Girls."

Runtime: 2 hours 10 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (intense sci-fi action and violence, language)

Genre: Superhero, Action, Sci-Fi

Release Date: May 3, 2013

Before Watching the Movie: Just know that it isn't necessary to see the other two Iron Man movies or The Avengers beforehand. Really all you need to know is that Pepper (Gwyneth Paltrow) is Stark's girlfriend and that his friend Rhodes (Don Cheadle) was given an iron man suit and works for the government. The rest is pretty-well explained or easily picked up. It's very possible to go into Iron Man 3 without ever seeing a Marvel movie before and enjoy it just as much as someone who has.

Intro: Iron Man 3 is one of those movies that I knew I was going to see as soon as I heard it was being made. I've seen the other two Iron Man movies and enjoyed them and I had also seen The Avengers. I expected it to be a fun summer blockbuster, as that's pretty much what all of Marvel's movies are. Iron Man 3 definitely lived up to this expectation. The movie had a fairly weak story, but if you ignore this and dwell on what's good: mainly the acting and special effects, it is a very fun and enjoyable summer blockbuster.

Plot: Iron Man 3 takes place after the events of The Avengers, which have traumatized Tony Stark (Downey Jr.). Meanwhile, mysterious, destructive, and seemingly random bombings have taken place all over the world, and a man named The Mandarin (Kingsley) takes credit for the them and threatens the world through video messages similar to the ones Osama bin Laden would put out. After Tony threatens The Mandarin, he finds himself having to fight for his life, his friends, and the world.

Things people may find “objectionable”: The main thing here, as in any superhero movie, is violence. There is a lot of people getting blown up, hurt, or killed. It's not as much gory violence like in Django Unchained, but there is fighting throughout the whole movie. There is also some mild swearing and references to sex, though it's not very pervasive.

Ratings: I'm going to try this new format for the ratings where I separate it into what I thought was good and what I thought could have been improved on. I feel it will better answer the question of "did I like the movie and why."

What was Good:

     -Acting: Definitely a strong point. I love Robert Downey Jr, and Gwyneth Paltrow, Guy Pearce, and Ben Kingsley are all great as well. Though he has a minor role, Ben Kingsley's character is worth seeing the movie for just because the scenes with him are really great. The movie has a very talented cast, and it really shows.

For lack of anything better, here's a bad Iron Man-related pun.

     -Special Effects: When watching the credits, I swear at least half of them were special effects artists of some sort. This should tell you something about where the real emphasis of the movie is. The special effects were really pretty amazing, both for Iron Man and the bad guys. My favorite special effects were used for Tony's suit that he builds that will fly to him (I don't consider this a spoiler since it's in the trailer and it's introduced within 10 minutes into the movie). It's pretty incredible how good those effects look.

     -Humor: This was one of the best parts of the movie. I loved how the movie could go from serious to funny and back again fairly easily. I love Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark. The character, because he is the giant arrogant jerk he is, is absolutely hilarious at times.
    -Adrenaline: It's an action movie, so if Iron Man 3 didn't have action and tension, it'd be failing at its job. It was exciting for a good portion of the movie, and the action scenes, as expected, keep you on the edge of your seat.

    -Directing/Cinematography: Pretty good. The visuals all looked nice and it was actually possible to tell what the hell was going on during action sequences, which for an action movie is a very good thing, since often times this is not the case.

     -Script: Pretty witty at times. Some of the lines were pretty funny. Otherwise, I didn't feel it was all that special. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't special.

     -Music/Score: Kind of a typical-sounding superhero movie score, but that's a good thing. It helps increase tension and I did like it. It wasn't an oscar-winning score, but I thought it was good.

What Could Have Been Better:

     -Story: Not a bad story, but it pretty much followed the superhero formula. Granted, the superhero formula is a winning formula, but it still wasn't ground-breakingly original. Also, there were some plot holes, concepts the movie just skimmed over, and parts of the story that were never really explored, even though they seemed important. I'd list a few of them, but I think most of them include spoilers. Still, if you just shut your mind off to this stuff, it's enjoyable.
    -Characters/Emotional Involvement: Look, do you really go to see a Marvel movie for the characters? I mean, for a superhero movie, they're not bad, but it's clear to about everyone that they are not at all the emphasis of the movie. This really doesn't detract too much from the movie though. In seeing Iron Man 3, just try and shut your mind off to these types of things and you'll enjoy it much more. Know that you're not seeing it for the characters.

     -Intelligence: Not really at thinking person's movie, but that doesn't detract from it at all. Like the characters, you should just go into the movie, shut your mind off to these details, and just go along with it and you'll enjoy it much more.

The Final Verdict: Iron Man 3, though it doesn't have the greatest writing out there, is worth seeing especially if you're a fan of other Marvel, Iron Man, or Superhero movies. It's a lot of fun to watch and is highly entertaining despite its flaws. See it if you like superhero movies, if want to see really good special effects, and if you just want to see a fun and entertaining movie.

       

Enjoying my reviews? Like my Facebook Page. And I promise I'll write more reviews soon. It's been a crazy few months and there's been nothing in the theaters.

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) Review

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN (2012)

Director: Marc Webb (A guy named Webb directing a Spiderman movie? It's a conspiracy, man!!)

Writers: James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, Steve Kloves (based off comic books by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko)

Producers: Michael Grillo, Stan Lee, Avi Arad, Matthew Tolmach, and Laura Ziskin

Editors: Alan Edward Bell, Michael McCusker, and Pietro Scalia

Music: James Horner

Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Denis Leary, and Martin Sheen

Runtime: 2 hours 16 minutes

Rating: PG-13 (sequences of action and violence)

Genre: Superhero, Action/Adventure

Release Date: July 3, 2012

Intro: I'm kind of drawing a blank as to what a good opening sentence for this thing should be, so I'll just use this. I think it works good enough, am I right? Anyway, I'm not exactly sure why Marvel decided to reboot the Spiderman franchise only 10 years after it began and only 5 years after the last movie (Actually, I do. It involves money, money, and more money), but apparently someone thought it was a good idea. But is the movie any good? Yes. While the story is very formulaic, predictable and unsure of its emphasis, The Amazing Spider-Man's effects, acting, and directing make up for it and make the movie enjoyable to watch if nothing else.

Plot: Peter Parker, when he is a young boy, is left suddenly by his parents one night and placed in the care of his Aunt May (Sally Field) and Uncle Ben (Sheen). Now Peter is in his late teens and has not seen his parents since. He is kind of an outcast at school and has fallen in love with one of his classmates, Gwen Stacy. He also has to deal with his overprotective aunt and uncle. One night, he finds a briefcase that belonged to his father in his uncle's basement and starts to look through it in hopes that he can find out what happened to his parents. While searching, he finds out that his father was working on trans-species research with a Dr. Curt Connors who works at the large Oscorp corporation. He goes to visit Dr. Connors one day and while poking around, the "famous accident" happens and Peter gains his powers. He now must learn to control his powers and become a vigilante while trying to get closer to Gwen Stacy and keep the NYPD and the increasingly desperate Dr. Connors at bay.

Things people may find “objectionable”: The only real objectionable thing in the movie (and why it got rated PG-13) is the violence, which you'll find in any superhero movie. 

Ratings:

     -Directing/Cinematography: 9/10. Seriously. How can a guy who's last name is Webb not do a good job directing a Spiderman movie? Regardless of the name, the movie's directing is well-done.

     -Acting: 10/10. The actors all do a good job with their respective roles. I'm impressed at how well Andrew Garfield, a British actor, pulls off an American accent. I've only seen Garfield in one other movie, The Social Network, but in seeing both, I can tell he's a great actor.

     -Writing: 6.5/10.

          -Story: 5/10. The story got pretty cliché and formulaic and was pretty predictable. Also, some of the themes were inconsistent, as it sometimes felt like the writers had a hard time focusing on one. For a while, it focused on Peter finding out what happened to his parents, and then it shifted to Peter trying to learn his powers. The story kind of meandered from one theme to the other throughout, unsure of which one it wanted to focus on. Still, the filmmakers make it work, albeit barely.

          -Script: 8/10. The script was well-written and for the most part, the lines were pretty good. 

     -Special Effects: 10/10. Like anything Marvel does, the special effects are top-notch. This is true for any superhero movie. No matter how bad the story is, at least the effects will be good. It's kind of like martial arts movies: the plot, writing, and characters might be crap, but at least the fight scenes will be good.

     -Music/Score: 7/10. Pretty good score that fits in with the movie pretty well. It's solid, but nothing special.

     -Power/Emotion: 8/10. Some of the things that happen to Peter and Gwen during the movie are horrible and you really start to feel for them after a while.

     -Adrenaline: 9/10. The intent of an action movie is to thrill you, and since this is an action movie, it serves its purpose pretty well.

     -Mind-Bendingness: 5/10. Since it's not a sci-fi movie, there's not a real emphasis on this, but the experiments being done at the Oscorp lab under Dr. Conners can be pretty mind-bending. The trans-species experiments and the concepts behind them provide the mind-bendingness in the movie.

     -Humor: 4/10. There were definitely some funny moments in the movie, but humor was clearly not the emphasis of the movie.

     -Final Score: The Amazing Spider-Man is not at all a perfect movie, but it is still a fun summer blockbuster. I'd recommend it to anyone who likes superhero movies or anyone who just wants to see a fun summer blockbuster. To fit its quality, the movie should be retitled The Pretty Good Spider-Man.