The Dark Knight Rises

Okay, I need to admit I have enjoyed the two preceding Nolan Batman movies, and so my experience of The Dark Knight Rises was most likely coloured by those positive experiences. Which immediately leads me to say that I enjoyed it - a hell of a lot, and I do think it may be the best of the bunch.

It is not perfect - there are flaws for sure, but the same is true of pretty much any story and/or movie - but I found it absorbing to watch, as did Mrs Citizen who struggles with anything much longer than a 90 minute run time, and at two and three quarter hours, this was way past her usual comfort zone!

Structurally this felt more even and rounded than the Dark Knight which fell a bit flat for me once the Joker arc had been resolved; the Two Face stuff just prolonged the film without adding to Dark Knight in my opinion, although it does serve as the spring-board for the Dark Knight Rises and several of its character arcs.

I think Nolan does a masterful job of crafting doubt and tension around the ability and potential fragility of the Batman. We see a hero who may be truly vulnerable to the odds arrayed against him. We also see that the four principle males (Bruce Wayne/Batman, Alfred Pennyworth, Commissioner Gordon and Lucius Fox) from the trilogy are each flawed in their decisions over the course of those movies. Not from self-serving reasons, far from it, there are just motivations for all, yet each has taken a decision that is underlined in this film as being potentially harmful. Contrast that to the fate of the other male characters seen through preceding parts of the trilogy (Jonathan Crane/Scarecrow and Mayor Anthony Garcia), and it shows that Nolan has crafted a story about a (small) world (Gotham) as much about one hero.

The story is on reflection pretty straight-forwards, but various sub-plots and beats roll on which is what made the film compelling for me, even if I did anticipate two reveals (one key to the plot, the other key to the ending). the film did not sag for me as Dark Knight did after the aforementioned Joker arc ended.

This is not a super-hero film in the traditional sense. To me it is more of a thriller with super-hero trappings. Despite that I think it is well constructed and well-crafted and has some amazing set-pieces, though perhaps the sight of the truck flip from the Dark Knight is not quite topped. There are choices Nolan has made that I do not agree with. For example if you make a Batman film, accept his natural milieu is the night and roll with it - too many key day-time scenes for my taste, but hey, a minor flaw at best. The Dark Knight Rises does not have a villain as compelling as I found the Joker to be, yet it weaves a compelling narrative around a whole host of characters and even supporting players get moments to shine. I thought everyone played their parts well and the most difficult role was probably Bane. The theatrics that Ledger could use for the Joker were not available for Tom Hardy, so inevitably the character pales in some ways by comparison. The voice of Bane has been complained about, but the feel it gave me was that of melodramatic megalomaniac - almost as if Nolan was giving a knowing wink to the pulp-y origins of the Batman mythos while still attempting to retain his sense of stylistic verisimilitude. Therefore it worked for me, but I get why not for others, and Bane serves his function in the grander arc.

Lastly some have commented on ambiguity of the ending. Nonsense. It is clear for most characters and open for one in particular, and that was a good trick by Nolan. I was not let down by the ending which was signalled by Nolan through the film so to those who claim 'ambiguity' I saw piffle!

This is a film I look forwards to watching again, and re-watching the whole set from start to finish sometime. I loved it, but then I loved Batman Begins and Dark Knight, and I know neither is universally loved.

Amazing Spider-Man

I finally watched this today.  It has just been 'one of those things' that 'other stuff' has got in the way (like a recent job interview and the necessary preparation etc.; life stuff basically). I liked the Raimi films, and knew I wanted to see this, it has just taken longer to do so than intended.

So what are my thoughts on it? Well I enjoyed it, but even understanding the reasons for the reboot, I cannot say it is significantly better or worse than the Raimi original. Furthermore, given that the Raimi version captured a strong sense of authenticity from the source material for me (whether original or Ultimate Marvel Universe authenticity), at least, then the makers of Amazing Spider-man were always in a tricky situation: depart too far from the source material and I think the movie suffers; adhere closely and you have a lot of similar elements that Raimi already tackled. They wisely chose the latter path, but the end-product is inevitably never going to deliver the novelty of the first Raimi movie, even if CGI web-slinging is replaced with more physically-grounded stunt-work.

So what has in essence been changed is perhaps a degree of tonal shift, and with a more muted cinematic palette. And the end-product is fine, but not spectacular (forgive that pun, Spider-fans). It compares well with Spider-man but does not surpass it. Amazing Spider-man simply cannot be a great film, or even an exhilarating novelty, simply for the sense we have seen films not too dissimilar before. Not so long ago. Starring a character called Peter Parker/Spider-man.

One of the other things that bothers me is that we are in a post-Avengers world. That film set the bar for super-hero movie ambition so high, that there are new standards, and maybe same-old,same-old is just not going to cut it. It also does not help that I strongly feel the Spidey costume in this movie was fussy and inferior compared to the Raimi era suit. The zips and gathering fabric made it look poorly designed rather than engaging a sense of the 'real world', and I feel that some poor design choices were taken with it.

In the end the only point of this film is to make money since there is no new lead character to truly expose here, or an unfamiliar tale to tell. Not a bad movie, and I certainly enjoyed it, and as stated I do understand the rationale for making it, but really, it was not needed, and maybe Spider-man 4 and 5 would have been preferable.

Avengers (UK: Avengers Assemble) [movie]

I watched Avengers Assemble last night, when I met up with most of my Thursday night gaming group at the cinema with reasonable expectations of the movie we were about to see.

Wow.

Those expectations I had? They were surpassed and then some.

I thought the film had a great cast; had some genuine surprises; some great action sequences; moments of humour that had the whole cinema laughing - two key moments with Hulk were hilarious (and intentionally so!); and most of all - it felt 'right' and it 'worked'.

Every character had their moments to shine, and in allocating Joss Whedon to writing and directing duties I think he proved himself a very capable director within this genre, but much more importantly, all of the dialogue felt unique to the characters in question: lines by Tony Stark/Iron Man, Steve Rogers/Captain America, Thor et al all felt true to the previously established Marvel Cinematic Universe interpretations and continuity.

It is a big movie. yes at two and half hours is the longest of the Marvel movies. It is not the longest super-hero movie (Watchmen probably), nor the most narratively dense (again Watchmen I believe, or possibly The Dark Knight), but it was a packed film. There is a little sagging in the middle which was more to do with positioning characters and characterisations, but in all I would rank this as one of my favourite super-hero movies of all time.

Thinking about the list that would probably include The Dark Knight (Avengers does not over-run as I feel TDK did), X-Men 2 (which starts amazingly and never quite lives up to that opening scene again in terms of action - Avengers builds better), Spider-man 2 (Avengers wins in scale, Spider-man 2 in evenness of tone), The Incredibles (I think The Incredibles has the similar problem of sagging a little, but also mixes too much spy-fi into the mix at the expense of spectacle - Avengers has an amazing array of spectacle). On balance Avengers is so strong in so many areas that it may be the contender. That said, I will be very curious to listen to Mark Kermode's review today on BBC 5 Live.

And to anyone going to see it - do, do, stay for the couple of minutes necessary after the initial post-film credits - it is worth it for anyone with some Marvel knowledge.

Possibly my favourite super-hero film ever. I want to see this again - NOW!

Avengers Fan Trailer!

Avengers/Avengers Assemble is almost upon us, and I have just seen this mash-up fan trailer; soundtrack from the actual trailers, clips from mainly 60's Marvel cartoons and some Nick Fury shots from 90's Marvel cartoons. Loved this!

The creator says this:

"I recreated the Avengers Trailer from February 2012 with animation clips from 1960's Marvel TV cartoons. The only cheat was Nick Fury, but the clips are from his first appearance in an "Iron Man" episode from 1995. I also borrowed a Paramount logo from the same era to fit with the look. Black Widow was a tough find since she was a shadow character and appeared very rarely."

Avengers Trailer!

"I have an army."

"We have a Hulk."

Ace! The latest Avengers trailer, shown during the Superbowl yesterday. I am very, very excited (and impatient!) to see this movie.

Avengers Trailers!

As a big Avengers fan from my earliest exposure to the team in the early 80's (which in turn imprinted some of my favourite Avengers personnel), I am very excited about the movie next year (with some reservations such as on-set stills of Cap's costume - the First Avengers one worked better, but then the non-movie stills of that were a little ropey, but I digress...).

Ahead of the movie I have watched the trailer, but on one of the fora I frequent I found this brilliantly funny lo-fi/no-budget recreation of the trailer! I wholeheartedly recommend clicking the side-by-side option (find it after clicking play, top left corner). Enjoy:

Thor (Movie)/Ultimate Comics: Thor

Painting Perun - a Slavic analogue to Thor in some ways - in recent days amid seeing the Thor movie and re-reading Ultimate Comics: Thor prompted me to put down a few thoughts.

Thor (movie)

I really enjoyed the movie; I am a comics fan and so I am occasionally wary of the (necessary) liberties taken with film adaptations, but this felt faithful enough to the source material to be recognisable and respectful in my view. I thought it was a well-structured film that managed to incorporate a lot of the Thor/Asgardian comics-mythos without being overwhelmed in doing so. I enjoyed that they got the explanation of what the Asgardians were/are done and out of the way so quickly that the movie could get on with being what it was.

I really liked the designs - echoing the source material sufficiently in so many instances. I thought Chris Hemsworth played Thor as a good translation of the early comic book persona, and I loved the Clint Barton (Hawkeye) cameo, as well as the end credits scene. The three central male Asgardians - Thor, Odin and Loki - were all well-cast, and I thought Tom Hiddleston's performance was great and subtle where it needed to be. Thoroughly recommended, and after the end-credits scene, roll on Captain America and next year the Avengers. I wonder if we have seen a plot point for the team movie?

Ultimate Comics: Thor

Following on the heels of New Ultimates, this series concluded just before the movie launched. The art is great as I love Carlos Pacheco's work on stuff like Avengers Forever and Ultimate Avengers, and the writing was great on a book which essentially sets out to define an origin for Ultimate Thor, a character from the first Ultimates series. What we see is a story not weighed down by decades of regular Marvel continuity, but that at once sets out to reconcile the Mark Millar vision of Thor (Ultimates; Ultimates 2) alongside the version seen in New Ultimates (which, under the oversight of Jeph Loeb, alas resorted to the old-Marvel cod-Shakespearean Asgardian dialect - a big mis-step in my view), while explaining both Thor's ablities and his relative lack of power compared to the reality shaping power possessed by Loki in the earlier Ultimates stories. The story takes place across 3 eras, and features Ultimate Asgard, Frost Giants in the German WWII army, a small side-mystery, and a neat explanation that posits Thor into the Ultimate Marvel Universe. I really enjoyed it at first, second and third sitting so wholly recommend it to anyone interested.

Iron Man 2 (movie)

I went to see this today, and I must say I really enjoyed it. The first had some great moments for me (and a fantastic first half), only falling flat with the climactic battle. Thankfully the sequel had a more even tone, even if it did not quite recapture the dizzying and perhaps unorthodox (by superhero movie standards) tone that was set in the origin sequence within the first movie.

The casting was great and no-one felt out of place. I liked the interplay between all the leads and the supporting actors, and Don Cheadle was an improvement over Terrence Howard in my opinion. Probably the most enjoyable performance for me was that of Sam Rockwell as Justin Hammer, basically a Tony Stark-wannabe who is at once pathetic and would-be Machiavelli; a great performance throughout, and hopefully Hammer will be back along with promised appearance of the Mandarin in Iron Man 3.

It isn't high art. It doesn't push the boundaries of the genre in the way that movies such as Dark Knight, Watchmen and Kick-Ass have arguably done, but I really enjoyed it nonetheless, and this time the all-action climax which was always going to be part of the movie felt more tense and fitted better with the progression of the various story-lines.

And to anyone who hasn't been to seen it yet; consider staying for the end credit scene. My friend Wayne was a little indifferent to that scene when he reflected on it to me, and my wife was much more so when she did so after we left the cinema (the only two in the audience who did stay to watch it mind you), but I really got a kick out of it being a fan of comics, comic book movies, and especially the idea of an interconnected superhero movie universe that Marvel is building. No spoilers, but it is one of the longest waits through credits I have sat through for a 'bonus' scene.

Kick-Ass (the movie)

So having shared my thoughts about the comic book serialisation/graphic novel of Kick-Ass recently, I went to see the movie with a few friends last night; and boy, was I impressed. In fact, we all five of us were thoroughly impressed.

The film was amazing. I laughed so much at the sheer gratuitous spectacle and gratuitous dialogue. I went in expecting ultra-violence and profanity, and got exactly that. However such ingredients are no guarantee of quality, yet this was a quality movie through and through in my view. Easily one of the best super-hero movies I have seen I feel, and I have seen a lot.

Recent years have seen a number of movies change the stakes when it comes to the super-hero genre, so much so that I think many movies are transcending the boundaries of the genre (the Dark Knight is a thriller at heart; Watchmen and V For Vendetta play on politics; etc). In other words maybe the super-hero movie is no longer a genre in of itself. Kick-Ass is one of those movies, upending the established super-hero movie tropes, and doing so with verve and commitment to the story and characters. It is an unflinching tour-de-force that could have been terrible exploitative rubbish, instead I was carried along in a story I was already familiar with. Great stuff.

And as for the star of the film - Hit Girl. Easily. The coolest 10-year-old girl in comics or cinema for my money, no contest. Setting aside the ethics or morality of such a character creation (there is a clear argument to say that she effectively suffered abuse given her dedicated upbringing), the actress playing Mindy/Hit Girl was simply brilliant and perfectly cast. To bring in any moral or ethical judgement on the character is to surely miss the point, however. As Mindy/Hit Girl, Chloë Moretz stole every scene she was in except possibly those with Nicholas Cage who was just madly-brilliant. Every member of the cast was great; I can't fault the choices.

As for the deviations from the source material, well that is inevitable when translating 8 evenly paced (page wise) episodes into a 3 act model. I wish I had blogged that before listening to Mark Millar this afternoon, as he said the same thing, but it is true nonetheless.

A great, great film in my view. This deserves to be critically considered outside of the controversy that understandably accompanies it.