THOR review

This summer is going to be expensive.

I usually can count on that based on it being summer, or based on having to drive ... anywhere, but this is especially true of 2011. Why?

Marvel bloody comics.

Ever since I was a kid, I really liked Marvel stories, especially their superheroes. I don't know if it was because they were located in real places, better written than any given Superman story, hadn't been run into the ground by half a dozen bad TV shows and two good ones like DC, or because Wolverine was a badass and Spider-man was a smartass. The fact remains, I loved Marvel. While I always held a spot in my heart for Batman, being the least lame DC hero, Marvel's always been better to me.

Well this summer should be a Marvel Fangasm. We have THOR, CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER, and X-MEN: FIRST CLASS. There are other nerd-originating movies coming out, but those are for another time, when I fully decide if I want to move into the groundbreaking and original realm of movie critiques. THOR and CAPTAIN AMERICA are both lead-ins to the upcoming THE AVENGERS movie, which has been in the works since IRON MAN. I'm not familiar with either one of those comic books, really, having been more of an X-Men fan, followed by not-much-of-a-comic-book-reader. So I can't compare, but I'm more of a judge-movies-as-movies person.

THOR came out at the beginning of May, which means I waited two weeks to see it. I heard plenty of criticism of it early after its release, but I'm fairly sure I don't give a monkey's about that. Frankly, THOR does a good job of telling a Thor semi-origin story and linking it to the upcoming AVENGERS film.

How should I do this? Hmm, why not a list. I know I like to jump right to the part I care about when I read reviews, so why the heck not?

• Odin One-Eye: Sir Anthony Hopkins. I'd be an idiot to say Hopkins did a bad job with something. If he's not been good in a role, I haven't seen it. I wasn't really expecting the understated approach from a bloody Norse God, but given that he had to be conveniently in the Odinsleep for most of the movie, it worked. Nonetheless, I want to see BRIAN BLESSED play Odin Allfather at some point. The epic ... it burns.
• Loki Lie-Smith: Tom Hiddleston. I have never heard of this actor before, but he has worked with Director Kenneth Branagh a few times, and after his masterful approach to Loki, I can see why. Hiddleston made me feel like Loki believed the lies he told, which is sort of crucial when you're pretending to be someone lying to someone else. In the beginning, he also convinced me that he was Thor's younger brother, stuck in the shadows their whole lives. This was told to us, naturally, but Hiddleston's performance drove it home.
• Some Mortal Chick (Jane): Natalie Portman. I haven't had a complaint about Natalie Portman's acting since Star Wars, and I'm happy to see that trend continuing. Having heard her laugh at the Oscars, I'm sure she drew on her inner awkard girl for so many early scenes with Thor. Also, I was very glad to not see her as a damsel in distress, because it's 2011, people.
• Stan Lee's Cameo: Yeah, it's there. It's goofy. It doesn't distract too much from the film, and nobody mistakes him for Hefner. Really, Tony? 
• Effects: What can I say about effects anymore? They're CGI but really good? Come on, you have to be a really low budget flick to not have good CGI anymore. They give away good CGI work in boxes of cereal. I did think to myself that as they were preparing to use the Bifröst, they should've shot that practically, with a bunch of Tesla coils. Maybe that's just because I like Tesla coils.
• Direction: Kenneth Branagh, you are very good. I would say you're awesome, but you really annoyed me with all those 30 degree camera angles you used throughout the movie. I'm okay with using that now and then, but sparingly, please; preferably when something screwed up has just happened, or someone woke up from being hit on the head. In this movie, none of the slanted scenes were those situations, and it actually got noticeable.

But of course, the real test is the eponymous Thor. Played by Chris Hemsworth, which I keep wanting to type as Heimdall, Thor is completely believable as a character and as a spoiled brat of a stormgod. He has surprisingly good chemistry with Portman and you could almost believe they fall in love, despite knowing each other for two days in typical Hollywood fashion. By the way, can we do something about that? Maybe have people who haven't just run each other over with their cars fall in love? An actual basis for a love story? I know, it's a superhero movie, that isn't the point. I'm just throwing it out there.


I won't go into the problems that hardcore comic book geeks will have. This is in part because it's pointless to bother with addressing such things, and also because I don't know what they are. Again, I know almost nothing about the Marvel source material. So is THOR the best movie I've seen this year? Probably not. Is it a great precursor to what I hope will be a firestorm of kickassness that is THE AVENGERS? Oh yeah.

This Star Trek will go on forever

It's official: There is a new Star Trek movie out that lives up to the hype.

Well, perhaps I should clarify: I don't remember any hype from any Star Trek movie. I remember being excited for Star Trek Generations in 1994, but in my own defence I was 9 and obsessed with Next Generation. I quickly dropped that particular obsession in time to barely notice First Contact and Insurrection. I worked in a cinema (two, actually) the year Nemesis came out, and so it became the second Trek film I saw at cinemas. I still don't know if it would have been better if I'd not been spoiled by a friend at school, but as it is, it was "okay" overall.

About two years ago I heard they were making Star Trek XI. As a subscriber to the theory that all odd-numbered Trek films are crap, I thought "ugh". When I saw the first teaser trailer, the one with the welder on the hull of the Enterprise, I thought "hmm, I might have to give this one a chance." Once I saw casting reports, I was definitely interested and all but guaranteed to see the film. Then I saw the theatrical trailers.

Holy assballs, batman, were those trailers awesome! My only concern was "Where the fuck does Baby!Kirk get a '66 Corvette?" and "Why are they skydiving?" These concerns evaporated a half-second later when the next shot was totally awesome. Then they showed the scene where Uhura is stripping out of her cadet uniform. Upon subsequent rewatchings of this trailer I noticed something I couldn't believe I'd missed before: These people are ridiculously hot.

Okay, sure, there were some pretty people on the original series, and seriously good-looking people on Next Gen, but nobody was NEARLY as hot as New Kirk (Chris Pine), Uhura (Zoe Saldana) and the film's baddie Romulan-from-the-future Nero (Eric Bana). The closest the original series ever got to these never-unphotogenic people was when they used soft lighting on the Lieutenant that Ricardo Montalban's Khan Noonien Singh ended up taking with him and marrying in Space Seed, and that was mostly SOFT LIGHTING.

Moving on from my desire to sex every single person in the film, I have to say the film itself was immensely ballsy. It changes so many details about the Trek universe, something that Trekkies might not like if it weren't for the fact that this film is completely awesome. Kirk is not the same character (although generally the same person) that he is in the original line, or shall we say Prime Universe (as Star Trek Wiki Memory Alpha has taken to calling it). Spock is mostly the same albeit with several backstories changed. And I must allow myself one minor spoiler: Spock and Uhura are totally doin' it. Yes, I said it. Granted, we only see them making out followed by a terrible line delivered by Uhura (who finally has a first name!), but you KNOW there's some hot Pon'farr action going on ... every seven years.

As for how they get away with the changes, JJ Abrams and the writers make use of one of the oldest Trek plot devices: Time travel. Certainly the science is shaky, the continuity is wrong even accounting for the time-travelly alternate-universey wibbley-wobbley-timey-wimey (read up on Star Dates. On second thought, ignore Star Dates completely. The writers always have) but don't let that stop you from enjoying an action-packed summer blockbuster about the importance of interpersonal relationships, especially that of children with their parents. I have seen it twice, and the second time was with my parents on Mother's Day. I think we all took something away from it, and that is the ultimate success of Gene Roddenberry's vision.

Frost/Nixon

I just got back from seeing Frost/Nixon. I would have seen it much sooner than now, but no cinema in the area carried it. Milk was the same situation. I figured it would happen with Milk, this being Southern Indiana and thoroughly homophobic, but Frost/Nixon isn't even a divisive issue ... well, not now. Some may claim it's another instance of "liberal Hollywood elitists tarnishing the character of a conservative icon," but only if they haven't seen the film.

Frost/Nixon, based on the stage play that's based on the actual interview (and lead-up to it), gives a documentary-style account of David Frost's hard-hitting interview with ex-President Richard Nixon, only three years after his resignation. It is documentary-style in that the actors who play certain real-life supporting characters give occasional fourth-wall-breaking interview clips to the camera inter-cut with the story proper. Oliver Platt, known (to me at least) from his work on Huff (as Huff's womanising, drug-addicted lawyer) and The West Wing (as the womanising, four-times-divorced head White House Counsel) plays one of the political advisors and research assistants to David Frost in the lead-up. He also does a hilarious Nixon parody, for the record. Sam Rockwell, whom I must say is one of the best actors to grace the screen, plays another researcher, hell-bent on getting Nixon to confess to any (or all) criminal wrongdoing. 

But Frank Langella's portrayal of Richard Nixon is, dare I say it, moving. Langella does what I never thought possible by making Nixon a more sympathetic character than his real-life counterpart ever appeared to be. There is one scene when the interviewers take a break in the filming for Easter, and Frost stays in his hotel to worry about financing, most if not all of which is falling through. He receives an unexpected call from President Nixon, who has had a little too much to drink. Nixon pours his heart out to the man who is supposed to be dead-set on asking hard-hitting questions and finding out the truth from this criminal of an ex-POTUS. Langella's performance in this scene is brilliantly stirring and even makes me feel for the real Richard Nixon, something I have never said before in my life.

Michael Sheen's portrayal of Frost is perhaps overshadowed by Langella's Nixon, but as an American I know more about the former POTUS than I do a still-living, still-working television presenter and interviewer. I have never seen an interview of Frost's, although I was interested to know he interviewed all British Prime Ministers up to 2007 and all US Presidents up to 2008 (I suppose it's a little early to interview President Obama). His acting was quite good from an objective point of view, however; virtually the whole film Frost is trying to get funding for this project and failing most of the time. Sheen's face throughout has a look of someone up against it, but covering it up to present a brave face to the world, something I recognise quite well from everyday life. 

The true star of the film, of course, was Clint Howard. Clint, better known as Ron's Brother, always plays a bit role and does it wonderfully. Several years ago he won an MTV Movie Lifetime Achievement Award, an award that has never been more deserved by anyone than Clint Howard. Seriously, Clint Howard has probably the best career in the world. He is guaranteed camera time on his brother's projects and has been in other works with significant (if significantly minor) roles. Frost/Nixon is yet another impressive entry on an already-impressive CV.

----------------

Now playing: Opeth - Ghost Of Perdition

via FoxyTunes

Spider-Man 3, or how I learned to stop making Dr Strangelove jokes because they really aren't funny anymore

Last night, Elizabeth and I, along with several friends and half the city of Evansville, went to see Spider-man 3 in Imax. I enjoyed it overall; I would in fact say it was a good flick. But that's not what this review is about, is it? This is the review where I nitpick the stuff that caused me pain or just generally pissed me off.

The first problem was Peter Parker is not supposed to be such an annoying goody-two-shoes. Well, he is, but he shouldn't be the kind of goody-two-shoes that goody-two-shoeses want to beat the crap out of and steal his lunch money. When nerds want to reenact their own life story, starring themselves as the bully and the superhero as them, it's a step too far. I also never really remembered Parker being an attention whore. He seemed to thrive on the Spider-man attention, and it seemed either forced or out of character, or both.

Kirsten Dunst "can't fucking sing", to borrow a quote from KT Tunstall, who can. The song Drunkst does in the first scene is badly lip-synced to the point that I absolutely could not WAIT for it to be over. After the plot dragged a bit, we meet Topher Grace's character, Eddie Brock ... Jnr. Grace was AMAZING as a bad guy in the last act of the film, and awesome as a not-really-bad-guy-but-kind-of-a-douchebag in the rest. The black goop plotline took like INFINITY to develop. As I typed that last sentence I really couldn't remember what the hell took up so much of the time in the movie while the black goop thing wasn't happening, but now I remember. SAND GUY.

Yes, I called him Sand Guy, because I refuse to call him Sandman out of respect for the infinitely superior Neil Gaiman character. Sand Guy AKA Flint Marko is played by the guy from Wings who played the retarded mechanic. At this point of the story, he escapes the police by getting over the fence at a testing facility for a particle accelerator (which proves the writers sure didn't do ANY scientific research beyond "What sounds cooler than 'experimental nuclear reactor'?"

Basing my argument solely on the information in the book Angels and Demons by Dan Brown (I admit, I read that awful thing, but this makes a point), a particle accelerator would not only have to be something like 26 miles in diameter, but would potentially create matter as well as antimatter, which would then collide with each other and destroy everything made of matter in the area. Marko, instead of antimattering into oblivion, is hit by a grain of sand, which goes through his skin, stripping down to its silicon base, and bonds with his body somehow. He is torn the hell apart, as we'd expect, but then a three minute scene has him gathering his sand!body together and walking out of there. Irradiated sand still sounds better, dammit.

Eventually, the movie gets bloody moving along already, and Parker/Spidey is taken over by the black goop, which creates Black Suited Spider-man. Black Suited Spidey is quite naturally less of a pansy, and confronts Sand Guy, whom he finds out is responsible for Uncle Ben's death. This throws off the entire story, apparently, because every time over the past forty years that Spidey has wavered, he thinks back to when he let the guy go, and the guy goes on to kill Uncle Ben. It kind of makes sense, I guess, but I don't care. It worked for this particular movie. After a very cool subway fight (and I mean making use of the WHOLE subway, not just one car like most other films have to) Spidey returns to the surface and rearranges his hair in that god damn Connor Oberst style. There were groans.

He hides away the black suit and has his physics professor study the goop. Meanwhile, Harry remembers all the stuff he's forgotten (which consists basically of the first two movies and reel one of the third) and takes vengeance on Parker. All I can really say is he's GOOOOOOOOOD. He's the best villain I've seen since the first movie. He'd give Darth Sidious a run for his money. Naturally, this drives Parker into a vengeful rage and they beat the crap out of each other in the Osborn Family Study. Peter goes next onto a nice run of douchebaggery that, if it weren't for the painfully craptacular dancing in the street, pelvic thrusting, and gyrating, would've been a refreshing change from Pussy MacWhineyface from earlier in the film. But no, he had to walk down the street like he's John Fucking Travolta. I'm honestly surprised they didn't use the Bee Gees for it. Nonetheless, there were groans.

The "Fancy New Peter Parker" street sequence finishes with the stereotypical "main character walks into a shop and comes out wearing his new threads to reflect him getting his groove (back)" scene. Followed by more dancing. Followed by me shouting "DONE."

Not much else can be said without significant spoilage. Oh, there were cringeworthy scenes, few of which involved EmJay anymore, because her part in the movie by this point was of course the Damsel In Distress. But we get to see Sand Guy, Venom, New Goblin, and Spidey some more. We even get to see Spidey running past a strategically placed American flag.

There were groans.