Marvel teased us with the release of this film near the end of various previously released super hero flicks like Captain America and Iron Man 2. This would be the movie that unites all the super heroes from the Marvel universe. Well actually, only those that had not been previously licensed to other studios. Hence, you will not find characters from X-Men, Spiderman, or the Fantastic Four in this movie. Director Joss Whedon brings back fond memories of creative television series like Firefly and Dollhouse, but what does he make of a 220 million blockbuster production?

The Avengers was released in the UK as `Avengers Assemble’ to avoid confusion with the 1960′s television series with the same name. The main protagonists in this flick have all had movies of their own: Iron Man, The Hulk, Thor, and Captain America. If I had to pick any of those movies that would be good to watch before The Avengers it would be Thor as it introduces the most important characters, including the antagonist. However, The Avengers can also easily be watched by itself.

This film does not fall in the trap of taking its subject matter overly serious, which I think is key for movies in the superhero genre. The Hulk, not a very talkative character to begin with, in particular has some good `moments’ in this movie. The chemistry among the main cast is excellent, and even supporting characters, like Agent Phil Coulson, deliver memorable performances. Robert Downey Jr. gives an excellent performance as the ever arrogant Tony Stark, and Mark Ruffalo is easily the best Hulk so far.

The Avengers is a special effects extravaganza where no expense has been spared to produce excellent looking computer generated imagery. The 3D is subject to mild strobing effects, particularly during quick pans. It was added in post-production. There were very few scenes in which it actually made any difference, so it might as well have been left out.

Overall the filmmakers do a good job of keeping the fights both interesting and easy to follow. It does not become an unwatchable mess typical of poorly choreographed fight scenes. One scene in which the camera floats by all the heroes fully engaged in combat in the middle of a city-wide attack is particularly impressive for it manages to actually keep the audience engaged instead of invoking disorientation. The music and sound effects were excellent, and combined with the spectacular visuals certainly warrant a visit to the cinema.

If I had to pick on anything: the plot is a little thin with respect to the drive of the main villain. The interactions between him and his allies could have used some more screen time. Whilst shrouding a villain in a cloud of mystery makes sense to some extent, what actually drives him sometimes eluded me.

This movie should be skipped only if you really do not like superheroes, everyone else should go and watch this as it surely lives up to the expectations. So: stop reading, and go see it!

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Trailer hosted by YouTube. Copyright © 2012 Marvel Studios

After a five year hiatus Ethan Hunt is back on the big screen familiarly portrayed by Tom Cruise. Director Brad Bird is perhaps best known for his considerably successful animation films, like The Incredibles and Ratatouille. This affinity with animation is clearly visible in for example the title sequence of Ghost Protocol. But is it any good after that?

Mission Impossible starts with Ethan Hunt being broken out of a Russian prison by former IMF team members. It is immediately apparent during this sequence that the movie leans considerably on funny moments as well as pure action. The main villain Hendricks and his objectives quickly become crystal clear, and naturally Hunt has to stop him. However, he and his team lose support of the IMF after they fail to stop Hendricks at the Kremlin. This is when the ‘Ghost Protocol’ becomes active and the team goes underground to chase down Hendricks and stop him from unleashing a devastating nuclear war. So far nothing that we haven’t seen before. However, especially with a fairly predictable and straightforward plot, it can be hard to get the rest right.

Luckily Ghost Protocol is extremely well paced with enough variation to continually command attention. Simon Pegg delivers a good supporting role as the light hearted Benji, providing all kinds of cool technical gadgets that would make even James Bond’s Q jealous. Jeremy Renner’s character also makes for a good companion to Cruise’s lead. Spectacular views and excellent cinematography make Mission Impossible IV a visual treat. If there’s any criticism: the movie sometimes tends to overplay its comical hand, for example in some of the scenes situated in India.

Mission Impossible IV is over-the-top, and not particulary deep or original. Nevertheless, the filmmakers have managed to create a light and humorous action flick with good technical execution: a treat for any movie goer. Recommended!

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Trailer hosted by YouTube. Copyright © 2011 Paramount Pictures.

For many people the name of the character alone might make their skins crawl, let alone its tagline: “when patriots become heroes”, but one should keep in mind that the fictional superhero Captain America was created during the second world war. A time in which the global war efforts of the United States were internationally uncontroversial and parodies like Team America: World Police did not exist. It is during this historic period that most of this latest movie adaptation takes place.

We follow Steve Rogers’ struggles in the American army and his transformation into Captain America. The main villain in this Joe Johnston directed movie, the Red Skull, is convincingly played by Hugo Weaving, of Matrix fame, and the protagonist Captain America by Chris Evans. His entertaining transformation from a frail man to a superhero is aided by a defected German scientist, an excellent role by Stanley Tucci.

Captain America does not take itself too seriously and is luckily not without humor and self-deprecation. After his transformation the Captain is turned into an entertainer for troops abroad, a role which quickly loses meaning to him. Hence, his foray into the forefront of battle driven by an additional strong personal objective. Good supporting roles are given by Tommy Lee Jones as army colonel and Hayley Atwell as strong female officer. The movie’s ending hints to a sequel, and of course to the upcoming Avengers movie.

As with any super hero movie, good and bad are portrayed as rather black and white in Captain America. Despite its fine execution: good cinematography and well paced dialogues, it doesn’t feel like this movie has a whole lot to say of its own, which is something we’ve gotten used to thanks to high quality film adaptations of Batman and Spiderman.

My main observation is that Captain America feels to run-of-the-mill and doesn’t add anything to the established genre of superhero movies, but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing if it comes expected. Hence, If you like comic book heroes and are into a light “popcorn” movie with plenty of action, then you will find Captain America entertaining. If you want anything more than that, you’re probably looking in the wrong place.

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Trailer hosted by YouTube. Copyright © 2011 Marvel Studios.

Luc Besson’s two most memorable films for me are The Fifth Element and Léon: The Professional. The latter stars a very young Natalie Portman that wants to learn the trade of being an assassin, and this is in fact the starting point of the French-American movie Colombiana. It opens with scenes from our heroine’s childhood: Cataleya, but quite quickly switches to her story as an adult portrayed by Zoe Saldana.

While Besson has written many over-the-top action flicks over the last decade, he has not directed any of them. This also holds true for Colombiana which was instead helmed by Olivier Fontana. Fontana has given this film the same look and feel as the purely action-oriented production The Transporter. Unfortunately, this does not mix well with a plot which is more reminiscent of the drama and human-condition-driven Léon. Especially, for the scenes with the young Cataleya.

Cataleya wants her uncle to help her become a professional assassin for reasons that are revealed near the beginning of the movie and in the trailer below. At one point she insists on being taught the trade and her uncle’s reaction to this is far too extreme, let alone the lack of reaction of others in that scene: it just feels contrived. These kinds of moments significantly hamper character development making the audience less engaged with the rest of the movie.

Fortunately, Colombiana gets better as focus shifts to the adult Cataleya. Zoe Saldana saves the day with excellent acting, and some well choreographed fight scenes make the second half a treat. However, it is hard for the audience to sympathize with anyone’s faith in the movie apart from Cataleya. This is where Leon so excellently succeeded and Colombiana fails. Perhaps this would have been in better hands being directed by Luc Besson himself. Nevertheless, this is an okay movie to go see provided you like the over-the-top action style and can forgive the lack of character development.

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Video Hosted by YouTube, Copyright © 2011 Sony Pictures

A film with a budget of 200 million and lots of gifted people at the helm, but does all this creative talent lead to a good movie? With Martin Campbell as director, best known for GoldenEye and Casino Royale, and Stuart Baird of Die Hard 2, and more recently Vantage Point, as editor, can anything still go wrong?

Perhaps the problem with Green Lantern is not so much with the people involved in its cinematic recreation, but rather: in the source material and the script based on it. While DC Comics is well known for creating both Superman and Batman, Green Lantern does not share a long history of animation series and feature films with those franchises and is therefore less known. This lack of adaptations seems understandable as its back story requires significantly more suspense of disbelief than Superman and Batman combined. An observation that holds true for this movie as well. The fact that a Green Lantern is limited in recreating physical items only by his own imagination is underused in the script. Although, the few times where it is used are admittedly very cool.

Green Lantern starts with a narrative which tells us a bit about the history of the Green Lantern Corps. This is a welcome addition, as the story would be difficult to follow without it. From this we transition to a nice and light part until the main character, Hal Jordan portrayed by Ryan Reynolds, becomes a Green Lantern. Near the middle the movie starts to drag and suffers from taking itself too seriously. The beautiful renderings of the Green Lantern home planet Oa and excellent use of 3D can not disguise a somewhat lacklustre plot. While the movie regains proper pacing after the break, the “this is too easy, what was all the fuzz about?” ending leaves much to be desired: it feels far too rushed.

It is surprising that the more interesting storyline is not about Hal Jordan at all. It’s Peter Sarsgaard that, apart from one cheesy scene, delivers an excellent performance as the son of a powerful senator. His character is an under-appreciated scientific geek: Hector Hammond, who turns into a vehicle for the main villain: the Parallax. The film explores the interesting theme of the fear and hate driven Hammond versus the willpower and courage of the Green Lantern. However, the Hal Jordan character is not carved out deep enough to make this conflict interesting.

The film makers do a nice job of letting elements early in the movie recur later at appropriate times. As such the movie is easy to follow and understand. Had the main character been more believable Green Lantern would have had a more positive critical reception. Perhaps Ryan Reynolds will be a better fit for the Marvel universe? We will find out when Deadpool (2014) appears.

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Trailer hosted by YouTube. Copyright © 2011 Warner Brothers

I recently finished viewing the first season of NBC Television Series “The Event”. I’ll try not to give too much away, but its twenty-two episode run reminded me of 24, although: it does not share the “real-time” format for which that series is famous. The first half season of “The Event” also uses elements found in Lost and there are some moments similar to those found in X-Files and The 4400. Regardless of these comparisons, the question is: can the series stand on its own feet?

Belgian series creator Nick Wauters motivated the start of the series: “It’s about a normal guy, Sean Walker, gradually getting caught in a huge conspiracy”. Sean’s girlfriend Leila is kidnapped on a cruise ship which sets the main plot in motion. We also see the story from the perspective of the President of the United States where an airplane on a collision course vanishes right before hitting the ground. The pilot of the plane is the father of Leila, and also a member of a mysterious group of people of whom the majority are imprisoned at a secret facility. The series revolves around the origins and plans of these people, first encountered over 66 years ago, and their leadership, particularly a woman named Sophia.

The Event veers into a wide number of directions early on and there is a lot of jumping around in time: flashbacks. This makes for a somewhat discontinuous and awkward feel as it is not executed as well as in Lost. Add to this that the acting seems somewhat wooden in the early episodes and we have an explanation for why the shows ratings plummeted very quickly. This is not entirely deserved though, as the characters and acting get more believable as the season progresses and the actors grow in their roles. The story is interesting and entertaining, and explanations for what is happening are never too far away, which prevents disappointment over unanswered questions. Nevertheless, there are a few things that are left unexplained. The format changes with less jumping around in time mid-season. Although this makes the series easier to follow, it sacrifices deepening of the characters. Nevertheless, this seems to be a good choice that fits the more action-packed second half of the series.

I was not too impressed by Laura Innes portrayal of Sophia in the early episodes. There is just something off with her voice. However, there is a lot of improvement towards the end of the season when she faces a number of moral dilemmas. Blair Underwood delivers a strong role as the president of the United States, but I was particularly pleasantly surprised by Zeljko Ivanek‘s memorable role as Director of National Intelligence Blake Sterling.

Where 24 provided us with a seemingly superhuman lead character that could solve everything: Jack Bauer, The Event has the somewhat impulsive and clumsy Sean Walker, portrayed by Jason Ritter. Even though the way in which he gets a sidekick later in the season is one of the weaker parts of the overall plot, his clumsiness works surprisingly well for the series, making the character much more believable and not as one-dimensional as Jack Bauer. Add to this that when viewing The Event you swing back and forth between sympathising with the mysterious group of people and the rest of the planet, and you have an entertaining and thought-provoking ride.

Even though NBC cancelled the series after its first season due to poor ratings, there is still a possibility of some type of continuation. This would be justified given the first season’s interesting ending. If you like a combination of action, drama and thriller with a light mystery / sci-fi flavour this is for you.

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Trailer hosted by YouTube. Copyright © NBC

The first Transformers movie was a pleasant surprise, the second a let down with a confusing haphazard plot. A friend told me that they should have left the Transformers franchise alone: “Don’t taint my childhood memories”. The best way to deal with that: skip it if you feel nostalgic about the subject matter. So, is the third instalment any good? Does it bring the franchise back to its initial glory? Let’s find out.

Transformers Dark of the Moon starts with a spectacular moon landing that ties in the Transformer’s story with real history. Admittedly, this came across better in the teaser trailer than in the theatrical movie. After this, we return to the familiar character of Sam Witwicky and his sexy girlfriend this time portrayed by Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. The relationship between Witwicky and his car Bumblebee is put to good use throughout. In the first section Sam is eagerly looking to find a job: the comical focus of the movie. This section is relatively slow and light, which works well to draw viewers in and prepare them for the more serious tone in the later sections. Technically, the movie is full of typical Michael Bay shots: showing the main characters from an upward off-angle and movie poster like shots emphasizing the relationship between characters. All things that we have seen before in movies like Bad Boys and Pearl Harbor.

The middle section of the movie is where Dark of the Moon excels. There are a number of original plot twists there. Good supporting roles from Alan Tudyk and Ken Jeong prevent the movie from taking itself too seriously. The confusing and gripping situations in which the main characters are thrown and the fact that during most of the middle section we remain closely with them makes this part particularly engaging and memorable. However, shortly after the break, after scenes taking place in a collapsing building, the movie loses its focus. There are, for my taste, too many scenes in which Optimus Prime comes to save the day out of nowhere. The finale is also drawn out, the last sixty minutes could have been told in half the time. Although, it has to be said: lovers of an action-packed special effects extravaganza will not be disappointed by this part. The Transformers are extremely well modelled and the excellent audio design gives a familiar feel making them very believable. There are few noticeable special effect flaws, and, fortunately, the 3D does not distract and is never overused: there is very little visual strobing and jitter.

Even though it is somewhat unevenly paced, it is almost on par with the first movie in the series, and a lot better than the second: one we’d perhaps better forget about. If you like Transformers, Michael Bay movies or action-packed summer blockbusters then Transformers Dark of the Moon is for you.

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Tip: Watch the excellent Teaser Trailer first.

Trailer hosted by Vimeo, Copyright (C) 2011 Paramount Pictures.

This has been in theatres for a while now, and I have to be honest and say that it is certainly one of the best teaser trailers of the year. The idea of taking something the whole world has witnessed: the moon landing, and then suggesting that some covert operation took place when they went dark: great! We still have to wait a couple of more days, but here is the trailer that shows what director Michael Bay has in store for us with Transformers: Dark of the Moon:

When the first X-Men movie came out in 2000 it stood out particularly because of its intelligent, character driven style. This was not so common in those days as critically panned movies, like Batman & Robin, seemed to mock the superhero genre, rather than making a worthy contribution to it. The trend set by X-Men was nicely followed by other movies in the superhero genre, like Spider-Man and Batman Begins. No longer were these filled with cardboard characters, no: these were people that we could actually care about. Director Bryan Singer managed to raise the bar even higher in the second X-Men movie. However, the third instalment in the series, and the movie dedicated to Wolverine, both made without Singer’s involvement, were less well received.

Luckily Bryan Singer was attracted as a producer for X-Men: First Class, and this undoubtedly has had some positive influence on the development of the movie. Although the CGI-heavy trailer might have you believe otherwise, it is a good cast, realistic characters, and a strong believable backstory that make this one of the best X-Men movies yet. Recommended, even if you don’t particularly like ‘superhero’ movies.

Rating:  

Official Site | IMDB | Wikipedia

Trailer hosted by YouTube, Copyright © 2011 Marvel Studios

I also found this excellent fan-made introduction animation on Vimeo: