I first thought of writing this piece shortly after reviewing the conspicuously mediocre superhero team-up movie Justice League, but it was taking me some time to properly collect my thoughts. When I watched the trailer for Avengers: Infinity War, a little over an hour ago, everything pretty much fell into place.
The first answer that may come to people's minds when asked "why does the Marvel Cinematic Universe work so well" could well be "because they make better movies" but not only would such an answer would be rather facile, it would not even be entirely true.
While the first Iron Man was an unqualified success, what not everyone may remember was that the second film, which came out two years later, was specifically derided by a lot of people for the fact that it felt like a "trailer" for The Avengers rather than a movie unto itself. Could Marvel have made a better movie? Probably, but if it felt to viewers that the priority was to plug their Avengers film, especially after audiences reacted positively to Nick Fury's tiny cameo at the end of the first Iron Man movie, there was a reason for that. Making a good follow up was less important than drumming up awareness for their future plans. Iron Man, to my mind, took one for the team in that movie. For better or worse, people thought about, and TALKED about what an Avengers movie would be like, and a year later, they started introducing the other key players, Thor and Captain America.
As much as I enjoyed the first Thor when it came out, I have to admit, having watched it again, that it has not aged very well. It seemed tonally muddled back then, and is barely even watchable now. With its "fantasy/reality world clash" theme it's sort of like a much more expensive, better-written version of the horrid Masters of the Universe movie back in 1987. Without it, however, we wouldn't have had a proper introduction to Thor, one of the founding Avengers, and more importantly, we wouldn't have had an introduction to Loki, the main bad guy of the Avengers film and arguably one of the MCU's most prominent characters. Like the reviled Iron Man 2, Thor, which often hovers near the bottom of many fans' "favorite Marvel films" lists, was a necessary evil. Even though both Thor and Captain America: The First Avenger both had middling box office when they came out, and nothing like the billions or near-billions of dollars that their successors proved capable of generating, they were absolutely necessary. The Incredible Hulk, another of their weaker offerings, wasn't absolutely necessary in the same vein, but it did bring the character within the Universe, and it meant we got to see William Hurt as Thunderbolt Ross in two movies, which was fun.
In short, it's not all down to the fact that Marvel "makes better movies," because that isn't always the case. It's down to the fact that even when the individual film wasn't a cinematic masterpiece, they were willing to put it out their to lay the groundwork for the bigger plan. Of course Marvel has made it a point to avoid making real stinkers, but ultimately they don't just make good movies, they make COMPLETE good movies, that introduce us in proper fashion to the characters they want us to embrace.
It's one of the key reasons why Justice League failed to generate the kind of excitement WB had clearly been hoping for; instead of introducing us to Aquaman and Cyborg, two characters largely unknown to non-fans prior to Justice League, through modest but complete films, they gave us e-mail attachments. E-mail attachments. Audiences and critics were understandably indifferent to them. Ezra Miller's Flash was a happy exception, but that's in no small part due to the fact the Flash has a TV series (and has had one previously) that helps keep people aware of him.
It's one of the reasons why Universal's "Dark Universe" was basically dead on arrival even with multiple allusions to a bigger continuity (the other being that The Mummy was basically a terrible movie). They tried to go for a payday they didn't really earn.
Finally, it's also why Sony, who fancied a shot at their own "shared Spidey universe" threw in the towel after The Amazing Spider-Man 2 tanked and finally teamed up with Marvel instead. Their lazily-conceived Sinister Six would almost certainly have been dead on arrival at the box office. There was something laughable about how Sony went from aping Nolan's "dark" style with The Amazing Spider-Man to bright colors and universe-building in The Amazing Spider-Man 2 when they realized that shared universes were the next big thing.
The bottom line is that the folks at Marvel took the time and effort to build this world, one character and movie at a time, knowing that the big team-up movie wouldn't work without the individual movies in place. They knew that, apart from appealing to fanboys, they had to get everyone else on board too, and that was a lengthy process. They're basically like the little red hen in the fairy tale in which she does every tedious individual task needed to make bread (or cake, I forget how it goes), while every other animal on the farm just laughs at her. At the end, her bread is made, and she enjoys the fruits of her labor.
As a result, when something like the Infinity War trailer drops, it's not just the visual effects or the music or the actors that get people excited: it's the history, it's everything that led to this moment. Of COURSE it helps that the film looks well-made, but the extra mile that Marvel has gone is what spells the difference between a handful of well-made movies, like X-Men: First Class and X-Men: Days of Future Past, and a sprawling, interconnected universe. For the most part, when each hero shows up, it feels significant because we've been with them on their arduous individual journeys, and seeing them together, even though we've seen many of them team up before for the first Avengers movie, it...MEANS something.
It's not just that Marvel did the whole "shared universe" thing first; so far, it's the only company that's really taken the time and effort to do it right.
Wednesday, November 29, 2017
Sunday, November 26, 2017
Not The End of the World: A Review of Justice League
directed by Zack Snyder (with a little help from Joss Whedon)
written by Chris Terrio, Whedon and Snyder
With all that's going on in the world, it seems wrong to exert as much energy as a number of film critics have thrashing the film Justice League (even if giving their opinions is their job), but if nothing else, I appreciate the slew of bad reviews that savaged this movie because they helped me keep my own expectations firmly in check.
Following the events of Batman vs. Superman, which ended with Superman (Henry Cavill) saving the world from Doomsday and dying in the process, the world is in mourning for the fallen Krytponian. Worse still, with the death of its greatest defender, the earth is now vulnerable to a new, terrifying threat in the form of Steppenwolf (voiced by Ciarin Hinds) and his army of parademons, who come in search of three items of power that could destroy the whole world. Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck), recognizing the threat, and remorseful for what he feels was his role in Superman's demise in BvS, decides, together with Diana Prince/Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) to recruit several other heroes such as Arthur Curry, aka Aquaman (Jason Momoa), Barry Allen, aka the Flash (Ezra Miller) and Victor Stone, aka Cyborg (Ray Fisher), all of whom have unique abilities that, together, may just be key to saving the world from annihilation. Getting the team together, though, proves to be a somewhat challenging task.
Really, as action movies in general, and comic-book movies in particular go, it really isn't that bad. It doesn't have the quasi-religious pretensions or the overall dour tone of Batman vs. Superman (though the characters being referred to as gods does happen at certain points of the movie), the action moved along with reasonable briskness, and overall, the movie manages to project an overall sense of fun, which is more than I can say for just about every other movie in the "DCEU" catalog aside from Wonder Woman. Of course, the film does what it can to milk Gal Gadot's newfound popularity as the world's only female superhero with a blockbuster solo movie to her name, but Affleck is still the film's lead. As far as the characters introduced in this movie are concerned, Miller, who had brief appearances in BvS and Suicide Squad, stood out, not only for the fact that he was basically the film's comic relief, but also because he was the only new character with an actual story arc, unlike Momoa's Aquaman and Fisher's Cyborg.
I also found myself enjoying this film more than most of the previous DCEU installments because of the welcome return of elements of past WB/DC movies, like Commissioner Gordon, now played by one-time J. Jonah Jameson actor J.K. Simmons, and well-loved old musical cues, like composer Danny Elfman's own theme from the 1989 Tim Burton Batman film (which, I'd argue, is still the definitive Batman theme), as well as John Williams' legendary Superman theme from 1978. Even without the multiple homages, I humbly submit that Elfman has turned in the best score ever heard in a DCEU film.
Also, this may seem strange considering I didn't particularly enjoy 2013's Man of Steel, but I genuinely enjoyed Superman's brief appearance in this film (and anyone who accuses me of spoiling plot points by revealing that Supes is in this movie is either disingenuous or has simply been living under a rock); it felt more consistent with the character that I know from the comics.
Basically, watching this movie I got the impression that critics had spent a little too much time sharpening their knives for this one, as they had with Suicide Squad, a movie for which I cared little, but which I would hardly consider one of the worst I've ever seen.
That said, Justice League has way too many problems for me to give it the effusive praise that some...enthusiasts have been only too eager to heap on this movie. Reading some of the pieces in praise of this movie I was reminded of myself, back when I was making excuses for the awful Spider-Man 3.
I had no problem with the whole alien invasion plot, but the execution was glaringly slipshod. The big bad guy, Steppenwolf, was just all-around atrocious, with risible dialogue and really dodgy CGI which made him look only slightly more convincing than the poorly-realized orcs in Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy from a few years back. He was supposed to be the big threat that brought the team together, but at no point did he seem even remotely menacing.
Speaking of bad CGI, it pretty much permeated the production from start to finish, and considering how heavily Snyder and Whedon leaned on it for their big action sequences, it was highlighted repeatedly throughout the movie. I'm not even talking about Cavill's awkwardly "shaven" upper lip, which was the topic of quite a lot of pre-release chatter. It was like watching an extended video game cutscene, or spending an inordinate amount of time in the much-reviled "uncanny valley." The CGI that brought Cyborg to life looked like really bad test footage for a Transformers movie.
This wouldn't have been as much of a problem if the characters had been better fleshed out, but as I said, with the exception of Miller's Flash, none of the characters who hadn't been previously-introduced had any real development. Momoa's Aquaman came across as a self-absorbed jackass with mommy issues, and Cyborg felt more like a plot device than an actual character as, apart from the fact that he was saved from almost certain death and turned into a robot-human hybrid, we the viewers are told next to nothing about him. Fisher gave the role his best, but the script gave him precious little to work with, and as a result, the laughable rendering of his mechanized body was all the more conspicuous.
Sadly, not even Affleck's Batman was exempted from some shockingly shoddy treatment. His lack of superpowers was repeatedly pointed out, and instead of him saving the team's bacon with his brains and tactical capability, as he regularly does in the comics, all he brought to the table here was the tech that the Wayne fortune could buy. It kind of grated on me that there was even a sequence in which Cyborg described Batman as an "asshole," and not because of Bruce's fabled aloofness, but because he was, in that sequence, actually being an asshole. Even Affleck, who managed to turn in a respectable performance in BvS, looked distinctly uninterested in playing this character again. That feels profoundly wrong; Batman was WB's bread and butter for years, and yet Snyder et al seem all too willing to trample all over him in favor of their newer, more colorful heroes.
What probably peeved me the most was a moment in the film in which the team experienced a collective brain fart and basically handed a decisive advantage to the bad guy. I won't spoil it but suffice it to say that it wouldn't have caused them that much trouble to pick up a certain item before they went to meet a certain someone, especially given the importance of that item. It's one of those really irritating moments in which the plot moves forward simply because the heroes are morons. It felt like egregiously lazy writing.
This film, while an improvement over BvS, is definitely a step down from Wonder Woman which, whatever its flaws, was still a solid piece of entertainment. Unlike that film, which felt very much like Patty Jenkins' vision, albeit with a few studio tweaks here and there, this film has the fingerprints of studio executives all over it.
While the box office grosses of this movie have left a lingering question mark over the future of the DCEU as a shared universe, I, for one, still hope that Matt Reeves' Batman solo movie gets made, and becomes the home run people expect it to be. After the raw deal WB gave Batman with this movie, they owe the character, who's raked in billions for them over the years, at least that much.
6.5/10
written by Chris Terrio, Whedon and Snyder
With all that's going on in the world, it seems wrong to exert as much energy as a number of film critics have thrashing the film Justice League (even if giving their opinions is their job), but if nothing else, I appreciate the slew of bad reviews that savaged this movie because they helped me keep my own expectations firmly in check.
Following the events of Batman vs. Superman, which ended with Superman (Henry Cavill) saving the world from Doomsday and dying in the process, the world is in mourning for the fallen Krytponian. Worse still, with the death of its greatest defender, the earth is now vulnerable to a new, terrifying threat in the form of Steppenwolf (voiced by Ciarin Hinds) and his army of parademons, who come in search of three items of power that could destroy the whole world. Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck), recognizing the threat, and remorseful for what he feels was his role in Superman's demise in BvS, decides, together with Diana Prince/Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot) to recruit several other heroes such as Arthur Curry, aka Aquaman (Jason Momoa), Barry Allen, aka the Flash (Ezra Miller) and Victor Stone, aka Cyborg (Ray Fisher), all of whom have unique abilities that, together, may just be key to saving the world from annihilation. Getting the team together, though, proves to be a somewhat challenging task.
Really, as action movies in general, and comic-book movies in particular go, it really isn't that bad. It doesn't have the quasi-religious pretensions or the overall dour tone of Batman vs. Superman (though the characters being referred to as gods does happen at certain points of the movie), the action moved along with reasonable briskness, and overall, the movie manages to project an overall sense of fun, which is more than I can say for just about every other movie in the "DCEU" catalog aside from Wonder Woman. Of course, the film does what it can to milk Gal Gadot's newfound popularity as the world's only female superhero with a blockbuster solo movie to her name, but Affleck is still the film's lead. As far as the characters introduced in this movie are concerned, Miller, who had brief appearances in BvS and Suicide Squad, stood out, not only for the fact that he was basically the film's comic relief, but also because he was the only new character with an actual story arc, unlike Momoa's Aquaman and Fisher's Cyborg.
I also found myself enjoying this film more than most of the previous DCEU installments because of the welcome return of elements of past WB/DC movies, like Commissioner Gordon, now played by one-time J. Jonah Jameson actor J.K. Simmons, and well-loved old musical cues, like composer Danny Elfman's own theme from the 1989 Tim Burton Batman film (which, I'd argue, is still the definitive Batman theme), as well as John Williams' legendary Superman theme from 1978. Even without the multiple homages, I humbly submit that Elfman has turned in the best score ever heard in a DCEU film.
Also, this may seem strange considering I didn't particularly enjoy 2013's Man of Steel, but I genuinely enjoyed Superman's brief appearance in this film (and anyone who accuses me of spoiling plot points by revealing that Supes is in this movie is either disingenuous or has simply been living under a rock); it felt more consistent with the character that I know from the comics.
Basically, watching this movie I got the impression that critics had spent a little too much time sharpening their knives for this one, as they had with Suicide Squad, a movie for which I cared little, but which I would hardly consider one of the worst I've ever seen.
That said, Justice League has way too many problems for me to give it the effusive praise that some...enthusiasts have been only too eager to heap on this movie. Reading some of the pieces in praise of this movie I was reminded of myself, back when I was making excuses for the awful Spider-Man 3.
I had no problem with the whole alien invasion plot, but the execution was glaringly slipshod. The big bad guy, Steppenwolf, was just all-around atrocious, with risible dialogue and really dodgy CGI which made him look only slightly more convincing than the poorly-realized orcs in Peter Jackson's Hobbit trilogy from a few years back. He was supposed to be the big threat that brought the team together, but at no point did he seem even remotely menacing.
Speaking of bad CGI, it pretty much permeated the production from start to finish, and considering how heavily Snyder and Whedon leaned on it for their big action sequences, it was highlighted repeatedly throughout the movie. I'm not even talking about Cavill's awkwardly "shaven" upper lip, which was the topic of quite a lot of pre-release chatter. It was like watching an extended video game cutscene, or spending an inordinate amount of time in the much-reviled "uncanny valley." The CGI that brought Cyborg to life looked like really bad test footage for a Transformers movie.
This wouldn't have been as much of a problem if the characters had been better fleshed out, but as I said, with the exception of Miller's Flash, none of the characters who hadn't been previously-introduced had any real development. Momoa's Aquaman came across as a self-absorbed jackass with mommy issues, and Cyborg felt more like a plot device than an actual character as, apart from the fact that he was saved from almost certain death and turned into a robot-human hybrid, we the viewers are told next to nothing about him. Fisher gave the role his best, but the script gave him precious little to work with, and as a result, the laughable rendering of his mechanized body was all the more conspicuous.
Sadly, not even Affleck's Batman was exempted from some shockingly shoddy treatment. His lack of superpowers was repeatedly pointed out, and instead of him saving the team's bacon with his brains and tactical capability, as he regularly does in the comics, all he brought to the table here was the tech that the Wayne fortune could buy. It kind of grated on me that there was even a sequence in which Cyborg described Batman as an "asshole," and not because of Bruce's fabled aloofness, but because he was, in that sequence, actually being an asshole. Even Affleck, who managed to turn in a respectable performance in BvS, looked distinctly uninterested in playing this character again. That feels profoundly wrong; Batman was WB's bread and butter for years, and yet Snyder et al seem all too willing to trample all over him in favor of their newer, more colorful heroes.
What probably peeved me the most was a moment in the film in which the team experienced a collective brain fart and basically handed a decisive advantage to the bad guy. I won't spoil it but suffice it to say that it wouldn't have caused them that much trouble to pick up a certain item before they went to meet a certain someone, especially given the importance of that item. It's one of those really irritating moments in which the plot moves forward simply because the heroes are morons. It felt like egregiously lazy writing.
This film, while an improvement over BvS, is definitely a step down from Wonder Woman which, whatever its flaws, was still a solid piece of entertainment. Unlike that film, which felt very much like Patty Jenkins' vision, albeit with a few studio tweaks here and there, this film has the fingerprints of studio executives all over it.
While the box office grosses of this movie have left a lingering question mark over the future of the DCEU as a shared universe, I, for one, still hope that Matt Reeves' Batman solo movie gets made, and becomes the home run people expect it to be. After the raw deal WB gave Batman with this movie, they owe the character, who's raked in billions for them over the years, at least that much.
6.5/10
Sunday, November 12, 2017
Art Imitating Art and Oh So Well: A Review of Loving Vincent
directed by Dorota Kobiela, Hugh Welchman
written by Kobiela, Welchman and Jacek Dehnel
It's not often one gets to see a truly extraordinary piece of work unfold on the big screen, and I count myself fortunate that I was able to catch one such piece, the astonishing independent animated film Loving Vincent, before it's banished from theaters in favor of some blockbuster du jour.
The film, which boasts the distinction of being the world's first fully-painted feature length animated film, tells a story set a year after the death of renowned Dutch painter Vincent Van Gogh (Anastazja Seweryn), using people who were actually the subjects of his paintings. Armand Roulin (Douglas Booth), the son of Van Gogh's postman Joseph Roulin (Chris O'Dowd) is tasked with delivering Vincent Van Gogh's last letter to his brother, Theo (Bartlomiej Sroka). Reluctant at first, Armand agrees when his father explains why it is important that this letter be delivered personally after a failed attempt to mail it. Armand learns from one of Van Gogh's acquaintances, Julien "Pere" Tanguy (John Sessions) that Theo has passed away as well, but it then occurs to Armand to take the letter to Dr. Gachet (Jerome Flynn), the physician who attended to Van Gogh just before his death. As Armand travels to the small rural village where Van Gogh met his end, he learns many things about Van Gogh and the circumstances that surrounded both the last few days of his life and his actual death, all of which challenge many of the notions he once had about the man.
It's impossible to describe this film without some form of superlative. The technique with which it was made, which makes use of live-action photography, some computer-generated imagery, and, most importantly, actual oil painting, is nothing short of amazing, and watching the scenes unfold is probably the closest we'll ever get to seeing the art of a master like Van Gogh come to vivid life. Filmmakers Kobiela and Welchman, rather than simply use computers to simulate the effect of paintings come to life, went with a decidedly more difficult, but at the same time more striking approach. Sure, actors like Douglas Booth and Saoirse Ronan (as Marguerite Gachet, another of Van Gogh's subjects) needed to lend their likenesses and performances, but it's the painstaking work of the 100 or so painters that sets this film apart. These incredible images create a transcendent experience, and elevate the film from some art house murder/mystery about the death of an artist almost as renowned for his mental illness (for how else would you describe someone who chopped off his own ear and gave it to a prostitute as a gift) as he was for his craft to something that will be remembered for years.
The script, however, isn't quite as strong as I would have wanted to it be; the attempt to reconstruct Van Gogh's death from multiple points of view, has a vaguely hackneyed feel to it, even though Booth, who was last seen as an evil intergalactic prince trying to harvest earthlings for beauty care products in the Wachowskis' wretched flop Jupiter Ascending, tries his level best to engage the audience in the mystery he is investigating. Ultimately, it is the script that lets Booth and the rest of the cast down as it comes to a conclusion that feels a bit more sentimental than satisfactory. The movie's treacly climax and denouement feel distinctly disappointing after all the buildup.
All that said, thanks to solid performances by a great cast and the mind-blowing work of the painters who brought this movie to such colorful life, it's relatively easy to forgive these narrative shortcomings. It is a visual experience unlike any other, ably abetted by heartfelt performances and a stirring musical score by Clint Mansell.
This is a movie that has to be seen to be believed, and the Herculean efforts of those involved deserve utmost recognition. I hope this movie is at least nominated for an Oscar.
8/10
written by Kobiela, Welchman and Jacek Dehnel
It's not often one gets to see a truly extraordinary piece of work unfold on the big screen, and I count myself fortunate that I was able to catch one such piece, the astonishing independent animated film Loving Vincent, before it's banished from theaters in favor of some blockbuster du jour.
The film, which boasts the distinction of being the world's first fully-painted feature length animated film, tells a story set a year after the death of renowned Dutch painter Vincent Van Gogh (Anastazja Seweryn), using people who were actually the subjects of his paintings. Armand Roulin (Douglas Booth), the son of Van Gogh's postman Joseph Roulin (Chris O'Dowd) is tasked with delivering Vincent Van Gogh's last letter to his brother, Theo (Bartlomiej Sroka). Reluctant at first, Armand agrees when his father explains why it is important that this letter be delivered personally after a failed attempt to mail it. Armand learns from one of Van Gogh's acquaintances, Julien "Pere" Tanguy (John Sessions) that Theo has passed away as well, but it then occurs to Armand to take the letter to Dr. Gachet (Jerome Flynn), the physician who attended to Van Gogh just before his death. As Armand travels to the small rural village where Van Gogh met his end, he learns many things about Van Gogh and the circumstances that surrounded both the last few days of his life and his actual death, all of which challenge many of the notions he once had about the man.
It's impossible to describe this film without some form of superlative. The technique with which it was made, which makes use of live-action photography, some computer-generated imagery, and, most importantly, actual oil painting, is nothing short of amazing, and watching the scenes unfold is probably the closest we'll ever get to seeing the art of a master like Van Gogh come to vivid life. Filmmakers Kobiela and Welchman, rather than simply use computers to simulate the effect of paintings come to life, went with a decidedly more difficult, but at the same time more striking approach. Sure, actors like Douglas Booth and Saoirse Ronan (as Marguerite Gachet, another of Van Gogh's subjects) needed to lend their likenesses and performances, but it's the painstaking work of the 100 or so painters that sets this film apart. These incredible images create a transcendent experience, and elevate the film from some art house murder/mystery about the death of an artist almost as renowned for his mental illness (for how else would you describe someone who chopped off his own ear and gave it to a prostitute as a gift) as he was for his craft to something that will be remembered for years.
The script, however, isn't quite as strong as I would have wanted to it be; the attempt to reconstruct Van Gogh's death from multiple points of view, has a vaguely hackneyed feel to it, even though Booth, who was last seen as an evil intergalactic prince trying to harvest earthlings for beauty care products in the Wachowskis' wretched flop Jupiter Ascending, tries his level best to engage the audience in the mystery he is investigating. Ultimately, it is the script that lets Booth and the rest of the cast down as it comes to a conclusion that feels a bit more sentimental than satisfactory. The movie's treacly climax and denouement feel distinctly disappointing after all the buildup.
All that said, thanks to solid performances by a great cast and the mind-blowing work of the painters who brought this movie to such colorful life, it's relatively easy to forgive these narrative shortcomings. It is a visual experience unlike any other, ably abetted by heartfelt performances and a stirring musical score by Clint Mansell.
This is a movie that has to be seen to be believed, and the Herculean efforts of those involved deserve utmost recognition. I hope this movie is at least nominated for an Oscar.
8/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)