directed by Anthony and Joe Russo
written by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely
When I found of that Marvel Studios planned to adapt the 2007 miniseries Civil War into a film I honestly felt a little nervous; though that series was a bestseller for Marvel Comics at the time it was published, it was still a ham-handed commentary on the Patriot Act, and an inherently flawed piece of narrative. It also posed a number of challenges for the filmmakers looking to adapt it. For one thing, the Civil War comics essentially splits, right down the middle, the somewhat massive community of superheroes in the Marvel (printed) Universe, with the question of whether or not they should sign the Superhuman Registration Act, while the movie only has about a dozen or so to work with, even factoring in the inclusion of a couple of new characters. Not only that, but the ending is a bit of a downer, with Captain America going to jail. I feared Marvel had painted themselves into a bit of a corner.
I was pleasantly surprised, then, to discover that this was not entirely the case.
Rather than the explosion in Stamford Connecticut caused by the New Warriors, this film kicks off when an operation in Lagos, Nigeria, in which the Avengers' mission to stop Brock Rumlow (Frank Grillo, last seen in Captain America: The Winter Soldier) from stealing a pathogen that could easily be weaponized, goes horribly wrong, leaving several visiting Wakandans dead. After the destruction of New York, Washington D.C. and Sokovia in previous films, this proves to be the last straw, and United States Secretary of State Ross (William Hurt, last seen in The Incredible Hulk as General Ross) presents the Avengers with the Sokovia Accords, signed by 117 member of the United Nations and demanding that the Avengers make themselves accountable. Tony Stark aka Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.), whose hubris was responsible for the creation of Ultron and, indirectly, the destruction of Sokovia and the deaths of thousands, is the first to sign the document, having been confronted by Miriam (Alfre Woodard) an American whose son was doing volunteer work in Sokovia when the city was destroyed, and who was killed in the resulting chaos. Steve Rogers aka Captain America (Chris Evans), however, still has issues with authority figures, having only just taken down superspy organization S.H.I.E.L.D. after learning that it was, in fact, being run by his HYDRA, the Nazi-created organization he fought in World War II, and refuses to sign the Accords. Cap's friend Sam Wilson aka Falcon (Anthony Mackie) and Wanda Maximoff aka Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen) also decline, while remaining Avengers Natasha Romanoff aka Black Widow (Scarlett Johannson) James Rhodes aka War Machine (Don Cheadle) and recently-created android Vision (Paul Bettany) concur with the Accords. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Bruce Banner aka Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), after the events of the last film, aren't around.
Regardless of how many Avengers sign or don't the document, however, the Sokovia Accords are set to be ratified in Vienna, Austria. In attendance are the King of Wakanda, T'Chaka (John Kani) and his son, crown prince T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman). However, catastrophe strikes the signing, and photographed, clear as day walking away from the chaos, is none other than the Winter Soldier himself, Steve's old pal Bucky (Sebastian Stan). A large-scale manhunt begins, with Stark, Black Widow, and the mysterious Black Panther at the forefront, but Cap senses something amiss, and decides to get to Bucky first, which puts him right in the crosshairs of his old teammates. The war is on, and each side recruits its own soldiers; Tony taps the shoulder of Peter Parker aka Spider-Man (Tom Holland) while Cap lures Clint Barton aka Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) out of retirement, and recruits new guy Scott Lang aka Ant-Man (Paul Rudd).
Meanwhile, in the background of all this tumult, a mysterious traveler named Zemo (Daniel Bruhl), operates silently, putting into motion a series of events that spells trouble for the Avengers.
While the film represents a significant departure from the comic book miniseries on which it was based, the heady themes of state control over superpowers versus freedom to operate unchecked still remain at the heart of this film, which gratifyingly explores the consequences of superheroes knocking over buildings and the human cost of all of the destruction their battles leave behind. Perhaps most interestingly the question of who is right, #TeamIronMan or #TeamCap, is never fully answered right up until the end, just like it wouldn't be in real life.
Also, while the film has a considerably smaller roster of superheroes than the comics did, the expertly-staged action sequences are certainly more spectacular than anything one could ever see on the printed page. There are multiple action set pieces here, each of which drives the story forward and showcases each of the featured character's talents in a fantastic way. Captain America: The Winter Soldier featured some of the most impressive hand-to-hand fight choreography outside of a Bourne movie or The Raid, and there's plenty of that here, too, but considering this film features combatants who are considerably more powerful than just a couple of super soldiers they've had to raise their game quite a bit, and the results are a wonder to behold. A minor issue I have, though, is that some of the Black Panther's appearances appear to have been digitally-manipulated. I can get why Spider-man's fighting would have to be generated by a computer (and it's fantastically done, by the way), but the Black Panther is basically just a very formidable fighter in the vein of Cap and Bucky, and perhaps even less so as, for all his skill, he doesn't have the super soldier serum (or some version of it) pumping through his veins, so the visible use of what appears to be "digifu" in at least one sequence seems a bit unwarranted, and even a little out-of-place amidst other, better-staged action shots.
Speaking of Black Panther and Spider-Man, I have to say they were easily the highlights of this movie for me, with Spider-Man being particularly impressive considering that when this script was being conceived there was no clear assurance that Marvel would be able to include him. Of the two, the Black Panther's inclusion is much more organic, probably since his arc was conceived and fleshed out before Marvel could secure the rights to feature Spider-Man in the film, and Boseman, whose screen presence is considerable, does an excellent job on the character both in and out of costume (I'll presume that was Boseman doing at least some of the fighting). Also, I rather liked his accent, which reminded me of Harry Belafonte (even though it isn't a Jamaican accent). I will happily get in line to see this character's solo movie in two years' time.
My affection for the Spider-Man character goes back four decades, so maybe I'm biased, but I can say without any hyperbole that the character's 20 minutes (or so) of screen time in this film completely outshines any of the five full-length features that came before. This is THE best iteration of this character that has ever been put up on the big screen. A large part of that is down to perfect casting; I had some trepidation about the casting of British actor Tom Holland given that I'd never seen his work, but these were swiftly put to rest when he first appeared onscreen. This is what the character has always needed; an actual teenager, rather than someone in their mid-twenties or early thirties, playing a teenager. Holland's earnestness is disarming, and he utterly nails the dichotomy between Peter Parker, nerd, and Spider-Man, motormouthed superhero, something neither Tobey Maguire nor Andrew Garfield ever really did. Sure, ILM rendered his avatar for most of the action sequence in which Spidey was featured (and, take note Sony Pictures, they did a great job), but Holland delivered what really matters about the character. And yes, I WILL be in line next year for his next solo movie, reboot though it may be.
Breakout characters and pyrotechnics aside, this is really a movie about some decidedly grounded themes, like relationships, accountability, and the pain of loss. Though this may nominally be a Captain America movie, it's Downey Jr. who flexes some serious dramatic muscles here, reminding audiences of why he was nominated for an Oscar at the tender age of 26. Truth be told, while Evans holds his own in a solid performance, honed over four previous films, Downey's pathos-fueled stance tends to advance his cause just a little more effectively, even though the script puts forward some pretty solid arguments for either side.
The running time is the longest any Marvel movie has ever had, but the film never drags. Still, some characters work better than others. Bruhl's Zemo, while a step up from forgettable villains like the ones that featured in Thor: The Dark World and Guardians of the Galaxy, is not at all the flamboyant second-generation Nazi his purple-masked comic-book counterpart is, and doesn't leave anywhere near the impression that Tom Hiddleston did as Loki. To be fair, he wasn't written to be a big bad guy at all. If I elaborate anymore I will spoil plot points, but suffice it to say there's room for improvement. Martin Freeman is somewhat wasted as Everett Ross, a G-man whose sole purpose seems to be to bark at the leading characters. Still, given that the character is most closely associated with the Black Panther, I imagine we'll see more of him in the solo film. It would be fun if Marvel could dream up an excuse for a Dr. Strange cameo in a movie featuring Ross so as to facilitate a reunion of the Sherlock co-stars Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays Doctor Strange. Hurt successfully dusts the cobwebs off of "Thunderbolt" Ross (no relation to Everett) and imbues him with a new sense of purpose befitting his new role in the United States government. Of the supporting characters he got easily the most screen time, but that wasn't a whole lot either. Then again, that's a necessary casualty of a movie with a cast this big, especially an action movie: people will fall by the wayside.
One last very minor quibble for me was some pretty sloppy continuity in terms of editing. The film was, as most films are, clearly shot over several months, and it shows in Chris Evans' haircut, which fluctuates from scene to scene. With a huge, highly-anticipated Hollywood production like this, it seems a bit silly that something this insignificant but nonetheless conspicuous got left out. In fact, only movie nerds like me would notice this, though now I'm sure anyone who watches the movie after reading this review will too.
Funny haircuts, muted bad guys, underused characters and other flaws aside, this is really an excellent film in terms of conceptualization and execution. What makes this remarkable is that, even more than in any of the actual "Avengers" movie, this was a film that had so many moving parts that it could have gone horribly wrong, but the Russo brothers kept it all together and delivered a film that really ticks all the boxes. It doesn't quite have the subversive appeal of The Winter Soldier, but it definitely makes for some rock solid entertainment.
This truly bodes well for the next Avengers film.
8.6/10
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Thursday, April 28, 2016
An Open Letter to Marvel Regarding Stepping Out of the Box
Dear Marvel,
So the infamous Hollywood whitewashing machine, which has been actively sweeping minorities (often Asians) off the big screen practically since the dawn of cinema, has claimed yet another victim: the distinctly Tibetan character The Ancient One from the upcoming Doctor Strange adaptation, who in the film is portrayed by the distinctly Caucasian Tilda Swinton. While it was easy to fume at yet another example of racial re-casting, I chose instead to be highly amused with the musings of one of the film's screenwriters, C. Robert Cargill, in a recent interview in which he said, in a refreshing moment of candor, that one of the bigger problems with casting a Tibetan character was the distinct possibility of aggravating China, which is quickly turning into the biggest market, outside of the United States itself, for Hollywood movies.
Shorn of all of his other ramblings, Cargill's statement basically boils down to "Marvel doesn't want to piss off China and lose all that gleaming money" which of course, you guys will vehemently disown, if you choose to acknowledge the statement at all. But in a world full of double-speak like Hollywood, I find myself appreciating Cargill's utter honesty (even if he did have to backtrack eventually and explain that he was only speculating or speaking for himself). This particular Asian forgives you (even if you obviously didn't ask for it) for your whitewashing, even though, with the exception of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (which, let's face it, as a television show, doesn't really count) Asian people have been pretty much at the periphery of the Marvel Universe all throughout, so much so that the Asian actress at the end of Ant-Man didn't even get to speak her own dialogue (though really, that was an inspired bit of comedy).
I do hope, however, that you can make this up to me and any other Asian who might have felt slighted by this recasting. I, for one, have thought of how you could make it up to us.
Yesterday Phase 3 of your Cinematic Universe kicked off in fine style. You look all set to make a bundle with Captain America: Civil War (great movie, by the way) and for all the brickbats you're enduring for the recasting of the Ancient One, you'll probably make a tidy sum for Doctor Strange as well. Heck, barring a serious dip in quality I don't see any reason why Phase 3 cannot be the most profitable string of movies for you guys yet.
Let's talk about Phase 4.
I'll cut straight to the chase: Nate Moore, co-producer of both Captain America: Winter Soldier and Captain America: Civil War and I have something in common: both of us want to Brian K. Vaughan's and Adrian Alphona's Runaways made into a movie franchise. It's arguably Marvel's best original property in the last twenty years, and the two lead characters, at least in the beginning, are Alex Wilder, an African American, and Nico Minoru, a Japanese American. I'm pretty sure you can see where this is going.
By the time Phase 4 rolls around in 2020, given your current trajectory at the box office, you'll probably have raked in something like $8 billion at the global box office. You will have shown the world, if any doubt remains, that your brand alone is enough to give a decent movie a fighting chance at the tills.
I exhort you to step out of your comfort zone, considering there's a lot of material in your library that departs from the established norm. Runaways is a good start; it's got an original, solid premise, plenty of potential for high-octane action sequences, strong female characters towards which the young girls that made The Hunger Games a box office smash could gravitate, and an African-American and an Asian-American sharing the lead role. It's got everything you like and diversity besides.
Also, launching a new franchise will give you the opportunity to give your megafranchise the Avengers and the solo films of the individual members a much-needed rest while you shop around for new cast members to replace the fortysomething Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth and Scarlett Johansson, as well as the well-into-fifty Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo, Don Cheadle, Paul Rudd and Jeremy Renner. We all know the Avengers will be back in theaters, but maybe they could return in Phase 5 with a fresh cast? Please think about it, because we need new blood in more ways than just recasting old roles. We need new characters to whom we can relate and new legends to capture our imagination. And considering the global audience that consumes these films voraciously (including myself), it would be nice to see someone in the lead role other than the "straight white male" that has become a staple of most action movies, including yours. Civil War was a bit of a watershed moment in terms of your storytelling; it's hands-down the ballsiest movie you've made so far, so clearly taking risks is not an issue for you.
You guys clearly pride yourselves on telling good stories, and in Runaways, you have an absolute gem of a story to adapt. More than Guardians of the Galaxy or any other movie you've released to date, this can be a real test for your brand, one I'm confident you will pass with flying colors.
Yours truly,
Jim
So the infamous Hollywood whitewashing machine, which has been actively sweeping minorities (often Asians) off the big screen practically since the dawn of cinema, has claimed yet another victim: the distinctly Tibetan character The Ancient One from the upcoming Doctor Strange adaptation, who in the film is portrayed by the distinctly Caucasian Tilda Swinton. While it was easy to fume at yet another example of racial re-casting, I chose instead to be highly amused with the musings of one of the film's screenwriters, C. Robert Cargill, in a recent interview in which he said, in a refreshing moment of candor, that one of the bigger problems with casting a Tibetan character was the distinct possibility of aggravating China, which is quickly turning into the biggest market, outside of the United States itself, for Hollywood movies.
Shorn of all of his other ramblings, Cargill's statement basically boils down to "Marvel doesn't want to piss off China and lose all that gleaming money" which of course, you guys will vehemently disown, if you choose to acknowledge the statement at all. But in a world full of double-speak like Hollywood, I find myself appreciating Cargill's utter honesty (even if he did have to backtrack eventually and explain that he was only speculating or speaking for himself). This particular Asian forgives you (even if you obviously didn't ask for it) for your whitewashing, even though, with the exception of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. (which, let's face it, as a television show, doesn't really count) Asian people have been pretty much at the periphery of the Marvel Universe all throughout, so much so that the Asian actress at the end of Ant-Man didn't even get to speak her own dialogue (though really, that was an inspired bit of comedy).
I do hope, however, that you can make this up to me and any other Asian who might have felt slighted by this recasting. I, for one, have thought of how you could make it up to us.
Yesterday Phase 3 of your Cinematic Universe kicked off in fine style. You look all set to make a bundle with Captain America: Civil War (great movie, by the way) and for all the brickbats you're enduring for the recasting of the Ancient One, you'll probably make a tidy sum for Doctor Strange as well. Heck, barring a serious dip in quality I don't see any reason why Phase 3 cannot be the most profitable string of movies for you guys yet.
Let's talk about Phase 4.
I'll cut straight to the chase: Nate Moore, co-producer of both Captain America: Winter Soldier and Captain America: Civil War and I have something in common: both of us want to Brian K. Vaughan's and Adrian Alphona's Runaways made into a movie franchise. It's arguably Marvel's best original property in the last twenty years, and the two lead characters, at least in the beginning, are Alex Wilder, an African American, and Nico Minoru, a Japanese American. I'm pretty sure you can see where this is going.
By the time Phase 4 rolls around in 2020, given your current trajectory at the box office, you'll probably have raked in something like $8 billion at the global box office. You will have shown the world, if any doubt remains, that your brand alone is enough to give a decent movie a fighting chance at the tills.
I exhort you to step out of your comfort zone, considering there's a lot of material in your library that departs from the established norm. Runaways is a good start; it's got an original, solid premise, plenty of potential for high-octane action sequences, strong female characters towards which the young girls that made The Hunger Games a box office smash could gravitate, and an African-American and an Asian-American sharing the lead role. It's got everything you like and diversity besides.
Also, launching a new franchise will give you the opportunity to give your megafranchise the Avengers and the solo films of the individual members a much-needed rest while you shop around for new cast members to replace the fortysomething Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth and Scarlett Johansson, as well as the well-into-fifty Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo, Don Cheadle, Paul Rudd and Jeremy Renner. We all know the Avengers will be back in theaters, but maybe they could return in Phase 5 with a fresh cast? Please think about it, because we need new blood in more ways than just recasting old roles. We need new characters to whom we can relate and new legends to capture our imagination. And considering the global audience that consumes these films voraciously (including myself), it would be nice to see someone in the lead role other than the "straight white male" that has become a staple of most action movies, including yours. Civil War was a bit of a watershed moment in terms of your storytelling; it's hands-down the ballsiest movie you've made so far, so clearly taking risks is not an issue for you.
You guys clearly pride yourselves on telling good stories, and in Runaways, you have an absolute gem of a story to adapt. More than Guardians of the Galaxy or any other movie you've released to date, this can be a real test for your brand, one I'm confident you will pass with flying colors.
Yours truly,
Jim
Friday, April 22, 2016
The Jungle Comes Alive: A Review of The Jungle Book
directed by Jon Favreau
written by Justin Marks
The 1967 animated film adaptation of Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Book came out a full eight years before I was born, but I did enjoy it on home video. Still, it wasn't exactly my most cherished of Disney films, though perhaps the song "Bear Necessities" was one of my most early "earworms."
I am, however, a fan of director Jon Favreau's work, and have been ever since he and Robert Downey Jr. launched the Marvel Cinematic Universe with 2008's Iron Man, and when I found out late last year that he was doing a live-action adaptation of the popular animated film I immediately took interest. Knowing that heavyweights Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley and Christopher Walken would be getting some pretty plum roles as the voices behind (respectively) Baloo, Bagheera and King Louie got me even more interested.
The story begins with Bagheera narrating how he found the boy Mowgli (Neel Sethi) alone in the jungle, his parents dead, and entrusted him to a pack of wolves. Having been raised by Raksha (Lupita Nyong'o) Mowgli is now around ten years old and running through the jungle. His wolf father chides him for his "tricks" which is how they refer to his human ingenuity. When a drought brings all of the jungle animals to the one spot of the river where there is still water, with predators and prey observing a "water truce," the tiger Shere Khan (Idris Elba), approaches, and sniffs out the man-cub, his most hated enemy, telling the wolf pack that, while he will respect the truce, the moment the rains come and normalcy is restored, he will hunt Mowgli down and kill any wolf that gets in his way. In short order, the rains return, and just as the wolves debate on what to do with Mowgli, he makes their decision easier by leaving the wolf pack and, accompanied by Bagheera, makes his way to the human village. When he and Bagheera are attacked by Shere Khan and separated, however, Mowgli finds himself alone, where he meets various colorful characters, like the giant python Kaa (Scarlett Johansson), the intimidating and amusing gigantopithecus King Louie (Christopher Walken) and the endearing con-artist of a bear Baloo (Bill Murray). Shere Khan, however, upon learning of Mowgli's departure, is angered and, after a display of frightening brutality, asserts that nothing less than his death will satisfy him. Mowgli will soon need every "trick" he can think of to stay alive and to save those he loves from the threat of Shere Khan.
From the time that Disney started this business of adapting its animated classics into live-action movies (which actually started in 1996 with 101 Dalmatians, not in 2010 with Alice in Wonderland, as many people are asserting), I wasn't really fond of any of them prior to this movie, with the possible exception of last year's Cinderella, which I found charming, if noticeably flawed.
This film, however, I thoroughly enjoyed.
It was amazing to see how far we've come from the days when films featuring actors shot entirely against bluescreen looked like Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, or even 300. The world that Jon Favreau has wrought essentially using a single live actor interacting with puppets and the magic of computer imagery is easily the most extraordinary-looking jungle adventure since Avatar, and it definitely has that film beaten hands-down in the character development department.
The film is, at its heart, Mowgli's journey from boy (or wolf-cub) to man, and it was therefore essential for Favreau to get the casting absolutely right. I'm happy to say he did exactly that by picking newcomer Sethi, a New Yorker of Indian descent. This is a kid whose first major acting job involved him acting against puppets and non-existent backgrounds, and yet with the fully-realized film Sethi's acting feels very much at home. His chemistry with key characters like Bagheera, Baloo and Raksha is all the more remarkable for the fact that he was not actually acting against any of the actors playing them, all of whom recorded their lines elsewhere while the digital wizards at Moving Picture Company created their digital avatars. Finally, and I shouldn't even have to be saying this, it was so refreshing that for once, Hollywood finally cast an ethnically-appropriate actor as the lead, and not some token sidekick, in a major blockbuster. If Sethi, who's only 12, chooses a career in acting, I sincerely hope we get to see more of him, and not just in the probable sequel to this very successful movie.
As for the voice actors, while it was given that talented thespians like Kingsley, Murray, Nyong'O, Johansson, Elba and Walken would deliver sterling performances, I still found myself with how much they put into these roles. Elba's Shere Khan, for example, was utterly terrifying, and a huge improvement over George Sanders' comparatively effete take on the character. Kingsley brought a regal presence to Bagheera, which was something I dearly missed, especially after his somewhat strange turn in Iron Man 3. Murray's Baloo was quite distinct from Phil Harris', and while Harris is a better singer, I have to say few people can make con-artists as endearing as Murray can. Baloo was basically a furry Peter Venkman. I enjoyed the cameos from Jon Favreau, Sam Raimi (!) and the late Garry Shandling as smaller animals. I also liked Nyong'O's Raksha; the wolf mother character was largely absent from the 1967 film and I'm glad writer Marks gave her a much more significant presence here as I think both Mowgli's character and the story are all the richer for having her around. Walken's Louie is a highlight of an already impressive movie; there's a brilliance to how Favreau just strikes the right balance between menace and humor for the scene that introduces this character, a fifteen-foot ape that's a mixture of the Godfather and Apocalypse Now's Major Kurtz. Walken's King Louie even belts out the character's signature song from the 1967 film "I Wanna Be Like You." It's equally impressive that the eightysomething writer of that song managed to craft new lyrics for the song that included the word "gigantopithecus." Composer John Debney did an excellent job updating these classic tunes and composing a full-bodied score from the movie with both old and new material.
Finally, due credit must go to the wizards at MPC and Weta, without whom this movie would have just been a kid in orange trunks just walking around a bunch of blue screens and talking to a bunch of puppets and stand-ins. As impressive as their previous bodies of work may have been (and in the case of Weta, that resume is considerable), this basically puts all their previous work in the shade.
This movie is utterly charming, deserves at least one viewing in the theater, as well as a spot in any Disney movie lover's home video collection (whatever the format).
8.8/10
written by Justin Marks
The 1967 animated film adaptation of Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Book came out a full eight years before I was born, but I did enjoy it on home video. Still, it wasn't exactly my most cherished of Disney films, though perhaps the song "Bear Necessities" was one of my most early "earworms."
I am, however, a fan of director Jon Favreau's work, and have been ever since he and Robert Downey Jr. launched the Marvel Cinematic Universe with 2008's Iron Man, and when I found out late last year that he was doing a live-action adaptation of the popular animated film I immediately took interest. Knowing that heavyweights Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley and Christopher Walken would be getting some pretty plum roles as the voices behind (respectively) Baloo, Bagheera and King Louie got me even more interested.
The story begins with Bagheera narrating how he found the boy Mowgli (Neel Sethi) alone in the jungle, his parents dead, and entrusted him to a pack of wolves. Having been raised by Raksha (Lupita Nyong'o) Mowgli is now around ten years old and running through the jungle. His wolf father chides him for his "tricks" which is how they refer to his human ingenuity. When a drought brings all of the jungle animals to the one spot of the river where there is still water, with predators and prey observing a "water truce," the tiger Shere Khan (Idris Elba), approaches, and sniffs out the man-cub, his most hated enemy, telling the wolf pack that, while he will respect the truce, the moment the rains come and normalcy is restored, he will hunt Mowgli down and kill any wolf that gets in his way. In short order, the rains return, and just as the wolves debate on what to do with Mowgli, he makes their decision easier by leaving the wolf pack and, accompanied by Bagheera, makes his way to the human village. When he and Bagheera are attacked by Shere Khan and separated, however, Mowgli finds himself alone, where he meets various colorful characters, like the giant python Kaa (Scarlett Johansson), the intimidating and amusing gigantopithecus King Louie (Christopher Walken) and the endearing con-artist of a bear Baloo (Bill Murray). Shere Khan, however, upon learning of Mowgli's departure, is angered and, after a display of frightening brutality, asserts that nothing less than his death will satisfy him. Mowgli will soon need every "trick" he can think of to stay alive and to save those he loves from the threat of Shere Khan.
From the time that Disney started this business of adapting its animated classics into live-action movies (which actually started in 1996 with 101 Dalmatians, not in 2010 with Alice in Wonderland, as many people are asserting), I wasn't really fond of any of them prior to this movie, with the possible exception of last year's Cinderella, which I found charming, if noticeably flawed.
This film, however, I thoroughly enjoyed.
It was amazing to see how far we've come from the days when films featuring actors shot entirely against bluescreen looked like Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, or even 300. The world that Jon Favreau has wrought essentially using a single live actor interacting with puppets and the magic of computer imagery is easily the most extraordinary-looking jungle adventure since Avatar, and it definitely has that film beaten hands-down in the character development department.
The film is, at its heart, Mowgli's journey from boy (or wolf-cub) to man, and it was therefore essential for Favreau to get the casting absolutely right. I'm happy to say he did exactly that by picking newcomer Sethi, a New Yorker of Indian descent. This is a kid whose first major acting job involved him acting against puppets and non-existent backgrounds, and yet with the fully-realized film Sethi's acting feels very much at home. His chemistry with key characters like Bagheera, Baloo and Raksha is all the more remarkable for the fact that he was not actually acting against any of the actors playing them, all of whom recorded their lines elsewhere while the digital wizards at Moving Picture Company created their digital avatars. Finally, and I shouldn't even have to be saying this, it was so refreshing that for once, Hollywood finally cast an ethnically-appropriate actor as the lead, and not some token sidekick, in a major blockbuster. If Sethi, who's only 12, chooses a career in acting, I sincerely hope we get to see more of him, and not just in the probable sequel to this very successful movie.
As for the voice actors, while it was given that talented thespians like Kingsley, Murray, Nyong'O, Johansson, Elba and Walken would deliver sterling performances, I still found myself with how much they put into these roles. Elba's Shere Khan, for example, was utterly terrifying, and a huge improvement over George Sanders' comparatively effete take on the character. Kingsley brought a regal presence to Bagheera, which was something I dearly missed, especially after his somewhat strange turn in Iron Man 3. Murray's Baloo was quite distinct from Phil Harris', and while Harris is a better singer, I have to say few people can make con-artists as endearing as Murray can. Baloo was basically a furry Peter Venkman. I enjoyed the cameos from Jon Favreau, Sam Raimi (!) and the late Garry Shandling as smaller animals. I also liked Nyong'O's Raksha; the wolf mother character was largely absent from the 1967 film and I'm glad writer Marks gave her a much more significant presence here as I think both Mowgli's character and the story are all the richer for having her around. Walken's Louie is a highlight of an already impressive movie; there's a brilliance to how Favreau just strikes the right balance between menace and humor for the scene that introduces this character, a fifteen-foot ape that's a mixture of the Godfather and Apocalypse Now's Major Kurtz. Walken's King Louie even belts out the character's signature song from the 1967 film "I Wanna Be Like You." It's equally impressive that the eightysomething writer of that song managed to craft new lyrics for the song that included the word "gigantopithecus." Composer John Debney did an excellent job updating these classic tunes and composing a full-bodied score from the movie with both old and new material.
Finally, due credit must go to the wizards at MPC and Weta, without whom this movie would have just been a kid in orange trunks just walking around a bunch of blue screens and talking to a bunch of puppets and stand-ins. As impressive as their previous bodies of work may have been (and in the case of Weta, that resume is considerable), this basically puts all their previous work in the shade.
This movie is utterly charming, deserves at least one viewing in the theater, as well as a spot in any Disney movie lover's home video collection (whatever the format).
8.8/10
Saturday, April 2, 2016
Please Keep Your Religion Off My Popcorn
In Superman #204, the first issue of the year-long "For Tomorrow" storyline by Brian Azzarello and Jim Lee published from 2004 to 2005, a Catholic priest is in quiet contemplation in his church somewhere in Metropolis when he receives a special red-and-blue clad visitor: Superman appears before him, floating in the air. The priest is about to get down on one knee when Superman stops him, saying "I don't think you want to do that."
With that brief sequence, Azzarello, and possibly DC Comics editorial, sent across a pretty straightforward message to their readership and anyone else: no, Superman isn't Jesus and we're not trying to portray him that way, so please stop treating him that way. I'm not sure exactly why they felt the need to make this clarification or who, if anyone, they were responding to, given that the Christopher Reeve movies that featured Superman as a messiah were decades in the past, but it is possible that they had glimpsed the scripts in the pipeline for the Superman reboot-sequel. In Brian Singer's doomed 2006 sequel Superman Returns the Superman-as-Jesus theme isn't quite front-and-center, but it does feature quite prominently. In 2013's Man of Steel the reference is even more blatant as Clark Kent actually sits in a church as he ponders what to do. As he disembarks the Kryptonian ship in space, he actually assumes the pose of the crucified Christ.
Most recently the notion of Superman as Christ was pushed quite aggressively in the superhero film Batman vs. Superman, where Superman dies in his climactic battle with the monstrous Doomsday, a creature fashioned from the corpse of General Zod and Lex Luthor's blood. In the scene in which Batman and Wonder Woman are handling the fallen Superman's body, he is wrapped in his cape and a cross (or something that looks exactly like it) is quite visible to the left of the screen, which seems to symbolize being taken down from the cross. The imagery is about as subtle as the sledgehammer Batman swings against a tire earlier in the film, and while few of the vitriolic reviews that I have read of this film take issue with this, I have to say that I do.
I'm no theologian, but I'm fairly certain Jesus hasn't done any of the boneheaded things that Superman has done, whether in the comics, the cartoons or movies in which he's been featured, thanks to the idiosyncrasies of the dozens of people who have written him over the decades. Jesus' history, his life and ministry, are contained in a very specific volume of books, which, while it has had different versions over hundreds of years, has not been serialized or been subjected to countless "reboots."
My own convictions aside, though, there's another reason I detest (and yes, I know this is a somewhat strong word to use), the "Christification" of Superman.
An atheist, a Catholic and a Muslim all walk into a bar and start talking about comic books and pop culture. That's not a setup for a joke. That is a description of my Facebook feed, where I have at least one Muslim friend on FB who happens to be a huge pop-culture nut, and at least two atheist friends, probably more, who are similarly-inclined. While we certainly share common interests (many of us are lawyers), we do not often talk shop, especially since, as lawyers we have different specializations.
In pop culture, however, and in particular superheroes, we have a common ground that enables us to relax and speak freely. We are voracious consumers of superhero fare, whether in print, on television or up on the big screen, and we love to talk about it. It's our safe zone.
On a related note, it makes me feel good when I'm sitting in an airport and I see a Muslim-Filipino lady with a little boy wearing a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles t-shirt. It's nice to feel that common ground with them, especially in view of the decades old conflict between the government and a portion of the Muslim-Filipino community (with some, obviously hard-core Muslim-Filipinos even taking exception to being referred to as "Filipinos"). This is more a conflict dictated by resource allocation than religion, but the differences (and prejudices) are there, which is why pop culture is something of a comfort to me; it's a language that, these days we all speak. It may not be a fundamental belief system, but at least it's something we can commonly claim as our own.
Superheroes, in particular, are a beautiful thing to share; they stand for all that is good in humanity, or at least the collective good that the writers believe in. Fortunately, for the most part comic book writers these days tend to have enough social consciousness to at least try to identify what is truly beneficial to society as a whole. The X-Men stand for equality among all, Superman stands for truth, justice, etc. Different religions have deeply-rooted differences that date back thousands of years, and it's no surprise that these differences are among the most difficult in the world to iron out. Our superhero mythology, by contrast, is only about eighty years old, and while Marvel and DC fans can often get each other's hackles up, I've never heard of wars being started over whether Batman could beat Captain America, or even suicide bombings. In fact, people can be (and often are) fans of both Marvel and DC (and Image, and many, many other comic book companies besides), something that cannot exactly be said about different religions.
And lately, diversity and inclusiveness have been top priority among the "Big Two" comics publishers, DC and Marvel. One of the most important new superheroes in the last several years is Kamala Khan, the Pakistani-American and Muslim who took on the Ms. Marvel identity vacated by Carol Danvers when she was "promoted" to Captain Marvel. She was very well-received among comic book readers and media and showed that Marvel recognized that many of its readers were no longer pimply-faced white Americans and were ready to have their characters reflect, at least to an extent, the diversity of their readership. Kamala Khan is no token, either; she has her own book and is a prominent member of the Avengers. DC Comics is doing something similar; they're introducing a Latin American Green Lantern and a Chinese Superman in upcoming comics.
It's kind of bad enough that the majority of the "big superheroes" remain and will probably always be heterosexual Caucasian males, but to an extent, at least having them religion-neutral keeps them from belonging to one specific demographic.
By making Superman a Christ analogue, Warner Brothers and whoever in their brain trust thought of it, are basically closing the door on that notion; that by not having any religion, Superman can belong to any religion. "Superman's for Christians only!" seems to be the declaration, and I can just about hear the thick Southern drawl of an imaginary televangelist pronouncing it.
At a time when truly evil people seek to divide humanity along racial and religious lines, whether with hateful words or unspeakable acts of violence we could really use something to help keep us together. It's a small thing in the great scheme, I know, but sometimes we need the small things.
With that brief sequence, Azzarello, and possibly DC Comics editorial, sent across a pretty straightforward message to their readership and anyone else: no, Superman isn't Jesus and we're not trying to portray him that way, so please stop treating him that way. I'm not sure exactly why they felt the need to make this clarification or who, if anyone, they were responding to, given that the Christopher Reeve movies that featured Superman as a messiah were decades in the past, but it is possible that they had glimpsed the scripts in the pipeline for the Superman reboot-sequel. In Brian Singer's doomed 2006 sequel Superman Returns the Superman-as-Jesus theme isn't quite front-and-center, but it does feature quite prominently. In 2013's Man of Steel the reference is even more blatant as Clark Kent actually sits in a church as he ponders what to do. As he disembarks the Kryptonian ship in space, he actually assumes the pose of the crucified Christ.
Most recently the notion of Superman as Christ was pushed quite aggressively in the superhero film Batman vs. Superman, where Superman dies in his climactic battle with the monstrous Doomsday, a creature fashioned from the corpse of General Zod and Lex Luthor's blood. In the scene in which Batman and Wonder Woman are handling the fallen Superman's body, he is wrapped in his cape and a cross (or something that looks exactly like it) is quite visible to the left of the screen, which seems to symbolize being taken down from the cross. The imagery is about as subtle as the sledgehammer Batman swings against a tire earlier in the film, and while few of the vitriolic reviews that I have read of this film take issue with this, I have to say that I do.
I'm no theologian, but I'm fairly certain Jesus hasn't done any of the boneheaded things that Superman has done, whether in the comics, the cartoons or movies in which he's been featured, thanks to the idiosyncrasies of the dozens of people who have written him over the decades. Jesus' history, his life and ministry, are contained in a very specific volume of books, which, while it has had different versions over hundreds of years, has not been serialized or been subjected to countless "reboots."
My own convictions aside, though, there's another reason I detest (and yes, I know this is a somewhat strong word to use), the "Christification" of Superman.
An atheist, a Catholic and a Muslim all walk into a bar and start talking about comic books and pop culture. That's not a setup for a joke. That is a description of my Facebook feed, where I have at least one Muslim friend on FB who happens to be a huge pop-culture nut, and at least two atheist friends, probably more, who are similarly-inclined. While we certainly share common interests (many of us are lawyers), we do not often talk shop, especially since, as lawyers we have different specializations.
In pop culture, however, and in particular superheroes, we have a common ground that enables us to relax and speak freely. We are voracious consumers of superhero fare, whether in print, on television or up on the big screen, and we love to talk about it. It's our safe zone.
On a related note, it makes me feel good when I'm sitting in an airport and I see a Muslim-Filipino lady with a little boy wearing a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles t-shirt. It's nice to feel that common ground with them, especially in view of the decades old conflict between the government and a portion of the Muslim-Filipino community (with some, obviously hard-core Muslim-Filipinos even taking exception to being referred to as "Filipinos"). This is more a conflict dictated by resource allocation than religion, but the differences (and prejudices) are there, which is why pop culture is something of a comfort to me; it's a language that, these days we all speak. It may not be a fundamental belief system, but at least it's something we can commonly claim as our own.
Superheroes, in particular, are a beautiful thing to share; they stand for all that is good in humanity, or at least the collective good that the writers believe in. Fortunately, for the most part comic book writers these days tend to have enough social consciousness to at least try to identify what is truly beneficial to society as a whole. The X-Men stand for equality among all, Superman stands for truth, justice, etc. Different religions have deeply-rooted differences that date back thousands of years, and it's no surprise that these differences are among the most difficult in the world to iron out. Our superhero mythology, by contrast, is only about eighty years old, and while Marvel and DC fans can often get each other's hackles up, I've never heard of wars being started over whether Batman could beat Captain America, or even suicide bombings. In fact, people can be (and often are) fans of both Marvel and DC (and Image, and many, many other comic book companies besides), something that cannot exactly be said about different religions.
And lately, diversity and inclusiveness have been top priority among the "Big Two" comics publishers, DC and Marvel. One of the most important new superheroes in the last several years is Kamala Khan, the Pakistani-American and Muslim who took on the Ms. Marvel identity vacated by Carol Danvers when she was "promoted" to Captain Marvel. She was very well-received among comic book readers and media and showed that Marvel recognized that many of its readers were no longer pimply-faced white Americans and were ready to have their characters reflect, at least to an extent, the diversity of their readership. Kamala Khan is no token, either; she has her own book and is a prominent member of the Avengers. DC Comics is doing something similar; they're introducing a Latin American Green Lantern and a Chinese Superman in upcoming comics.
It's kind of bad enough that the majority of the "big superheroes" remain and will probably always be heterosexual Caucasian males, but to an extent, at least having them religion-neutral keeps them from belonging to one specific demographic.
By making Superman a Christ analogue, Warner Brothers and whoever in their brain trust thought of it, are basically closing the door on that notion; that by not having any religion, Superman can belong to any religion. "Superman's for Christians only!" seems to be the declaration, and I can just about hear the thick Southern drawl of an imaginary televangelist pronouncing it.
At a time when truly evil people seek to divide humanity along racial and religious lines, whether with hateful words or unspeakable acts of violence we could really use something to help keep us together. It's a small thing in the great scheme, I know, but sometimes we need the small things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)