Marvel's The Avengers (Marvel Review 6 of 11)

In my sixth (and middle) Marvel Cinematic Universe leading up to and including the upcoming Age of Ultron, I look at the film which Marvel placed all of their hopes on. If The Avengers failed, that would probably be the end of the MCU.

So naturally, Marvel Studios put their most precious and important prospect thus far in the hands of Joss Whedon. To anyone looking at this from a purely commercial standpoint, this would seem like a big risk. Whedon had only directed one film prior, 2005's Serenity, which was a flop at the box office despite being well-received by fans and critics alike (including yourself truly). But Whedon had written and worked on numerous film scripts before (some of which he wasn't even given credit for - he did significant work on the production script for 90's action classic Speed, for example) and has had ample experience with direction on episodes of the TV series he's created (Buffy, Angel, Firefly and Dollhouse). Buffy and Firefly (including film extension Serenity) also showcase Whedon's ability to craft a compelling team dynamic between character with differing personalities and abilities, something which fits The Avengers to a tee. 

Loki (Tom Hiddleston), brother of Thor (Chris Hemsworth) has emerged from the hidden realm where he was cast at the end of Thor with "glorious purpose". After he attacks a SHIELD facility and makes off with the Tesseract, the object of mass destruction used by Hyrda in Captain America: The First Avenger, SHIELD Director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) knows that drastic actions have to be taken to thwart Loki's plans. So he re-opens the 'Avengers Initiative', a group of remarkable individuals gathering together to combat threats too big for any one of them. These individuals include Tony 'Iron Man' Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), Steve 'Captain America' Rogers (Chris Evans), Thor, Bruce 'The Hulk' Banner (Mark Ruffalo), Natasha 'Black Widow' Romanoff (Scarlett Johanson) and Clint 'Hawkeye' Barton (Jeremy Renner). But put so many big heroes into one room and some of them will start to snipe...

Every single major character (and plenty of the supporting characters) is brought to vivid life not only through Whedon's terrific direction and writing but through the stellar work of a cast clearly having  a utter ball with the material and giving it their all. Front and centre for most of the proceedings is Robert Downey Jr., who not only portrays the character of Tony Stark with the same rip-roaring presence we all know, but who actually gets new and relevant shades to work with. I've heard some complaints about Tony's character being too 'snarky', but I think that it's actually really appropriate for him. Up until this point, Tony has been the biggest guy in the room, but his quipster attitude has always been a way of covering his anxieties. When confronted by people who equal or surpass his abilities, that side of Tony's personality comes out in spades. This allows Downey Jr. the chance for several great lines which, while partially courtesy of Whedon's top-notch writing, couldn't have been delivered with the same lightning panache by any other actor. However, both Whedon and Downey Jr. recognise the kinks in Stark's armour and explore them wonderfully; when Rogers confronts Tony with one of those kinks, you can see the realisation in Stark's face. Speaking of Rogers, Chris Evans is fantastic once again as the Cap, getting strong comedic material to work with as Steve struggles to connect with modern times. This also provides Rogers with an underlying dramatic core, as he struggles to bring his ideals to a more jaded and modern world, and Evans deliver a immensely likeable and sympathetic performance in bringing that more dramatic side of the character to light. Evans totally convinces as a virtuous leader who never comes across as bland (as will always be a risk with this character), while the dynamic between him and Tony is beautifully played and realised through Whedon's direction and screenplay. As is to be expected of a new superhero casting, Mark Ruffalo received a lot of Internet flak when he was announced as the new Bruce Banner, taking over the role after Edward Norton left following The Incredible Hulk. However, as much as I liked Edward Norton's take on the role, Ruffalo easily makes the best onscreen Banner to date. From his introductory scene with Black Widow, Ruffalo perfectly inhabits this awkward, sympathetic and humourously low-key character. Also, Ruffalo deserves credit for achieving all of this while also managing to give Banner an under-currant of threatening menace, making the build-up to the Hulk all the more satisfying. One of the best interactions throughout the film is between Stark and Banner, which is fantastically written and performed by Downey Jr. and Ruffalo. Also, Ruffalo is the first actor to provide motion capture for the Hulk; this helps the visual effects artists to make this the first Hulk which is a completely recognisable extension of Bruce Banner. Unlike the previous Hulks, which showed at best a passable resemblance to the actor playing Bruce Banner and at worst little to no resemblance, Ruffalo's Hulk looks like Ruffalo's Banner. Both Ruffalo, Whedon and the visual effects artists excel in making the Hulk one of the movie's biggest highlights; it might be a while before he appears, but it's definitely more than worth the wait and his angry, smash-'em-up disposition leads to some majestically uproarious scenes.    

Chris Hemsworth is once again great as Thor, who shares the most personal connection with the villain and keeps attempting to bring Loki back from the brink. Hemsworth nails the approach to Thor; while he wants to help the heroes on Earth, he is still a God and normally operates on a different plane, making his scenes with the other Avengers all the funnier (the first scene he shares with Tony is especially hilarious). All the while, Hemsworth also delivers a fantastic dramatic performance as he struggles to find the Loki he once knew; his first scene with Loki, while having some comedic moments, really shows the emotional turmoil that Thor is going through, and Hemsworth captures that beautifully. As the Black Widow, Scarlett Johansson relishes Whedon's writing of the character and delivers a fantastic turn as arguably one of the wiliest and sharpest of the Avengers. Prior to the film, people on the Internet complained that Black Widow looked out-of-place alongside the 'heavy hitters' like Thor, Captain America, Iron Man and the Hulk. However, both Johansson and Whedon tap into what makes Black Widow such an entertaining and intriguing character. Romanoff is a woman who uses her looks and femininity to disguise her wit and combat skills; this is especially evident in the scene between her and Loki. Johansson is wonderful in the role, giving layers to the role which makes her superfluous role of eye-candy in Iron Man 2 all the more tolerable, while both she and Whedon drop subtle hints of vulnerable humanity to remind us that she is still aware of the risks present in her profession. Hawkeye is easily the least developed of the Avengers, but credit should still be given to Whedon and Penn for the role they give him in the story. Their decision gives the character a genuine reason to want to fight Loki, and Renner does typically gripping work in the role. The relationship between Barton and Romanoff is played with perfect understatement by Renner and Johansson, and the way in which Whedon writes their dialogue shows that they are both professionals who share an underlying emotional connection. As I said before, every hero gets their moment to shine, and Renner gets some strong interactions and action moments especially in the climax (including one of my personal favourite moments from the film, which is followed instantly after by another one of my favourite moments - it's nice when that happens, isn't it?) 

For the threat which unites the Avengers to be viable, the villain has to be a compelling challenge. Thankfully, Tom Hiddleston is still a phenomenal presence as Loki. It's clear that Loki has become a much more confidently villainous character from the opening, when he emerges from a portal with a joyfully maniacal grin before proceeding to slaughter a room of SHIELD agents, and Hiddleston has an utter ball in showing just how comfortable Loki now is with his villainy. However, Hiddleston also excels at showing the different shades and motives which make and propel the character; his reactions whenever someone mentions him in connection to Thor say a lot. Whedon and Hiddleston also have a lot of fun exploring the consequences of confrontations between Loki and the individual Avengers, all of which are tremendously crowd-pleasing and show how both the Avengers and Loki duel not only physically but psychologically as well. In short, Hiddleston is wonderful, and it's no surprise that Loki has developed such a fervent fan base. The SHIELD character roster provide strong support. This is the biggest role Nick Fury has had in proceedings thus far (even more so than Iron Man 2 and much more fitting in the plot), and Samuel L. Jackson relishes the chance to have some real fun with the character. Fury is in an interesting position here; while he is a master spy and manipulator, he is also being stifled by the World Council (an aspect of SHIELD first referenced in Thor Blu-Ray short The Consultant). Jackson serves up a hefty dose of bad-ass heroism whilst also implying grey moral shades in how he goes about saving the day. Clark Gregg returns as Agent Phil Coulson, and he is once again pitch-perfect. Coulson has become arguably one of the most unexpectedly popular characters of the entire universe created by Marvel Studios Whedon ensures that Gregg gets some lovely material, especially with his Captain America fandom coming to the fore when he meets the man himself. Cobie Smulders is solid as Maria Hill, Fury's tough lieutenant, and gets a stand-out action moment in the film's opening action sequence. Gwyneth Paltrow returns briefly as Stark's love interest Pepper Potts, and strikes up the same wonderful chemistry with Downey Jr. as in Iron Man and Iron Man 2. As is to be expected of any MCU films, there are some fan-pleasing cameos.   

As with any of the MCU films, a big selling point of The Avengers will be the action. Here, Whedon builds spectacularly on the promise he showed with the big-screen action in Serenity. The first action sequence, in which Loki makes his destructive entrance, serves as a strong introduction and deserves credit for giving supporting heroic character outside the Avengers a moment to shine (only one Avenger is involved). Outside of a fight scene which illustrates how deadly Black Widow can be and a mission to capture Loki which is complicated by a misunderstanding between heroes, The Avengers stays mainly focused on the interaction between the characters. This works really well, as Whedon is building the characters and their camaraderie so that the finale will hold more importance (this is particularly relevant in the case of Bruce Banner's struggle with the 'other guy'). Come the final hour, though, Whedon and the visual effects department let rip with two extended action sequences. The Hulk particularly gets to really shine here, getting several audience-pleasing moments. However, that doesn't mean that the other heroes get overlooked, with every character getting at least one 'hell yeah' moments. The final battle sequence, which is around 25 minutes long, is one of the most thrillingly entertaining finales in recent memory primarily because the action is crafted to suit the characters and because Whedon adds great touches whether bad-ass, hilarious or dramatic. Whedon does this during every action sequence with help from the actors and visual effects artists, but it's particularly brilliant in the finale due to the sense of pay-off. Along the way, we have some explosively exciting superhero fights which not only deliver in terms of blows, but actually make sense in terms of who's fighting who.   

Technically, The Avengers is suitably amazing. As I've mentioned before, the visual effects artists do sensational work here. There are some genuinely awe-inspiring moments (such as the reveal of SHIELD's base of operations) which work spectacularly well due to both the conception and the realisation through the visual effects. Alan Silvestri returns after scoring Captain America: The First Avenger to do the music here, and his music is just as fittingly and soaringly heroic as before. Silvestri is more than capable of producing thrilling musical accompaniments, and his work is no exception, especially his main theme for the Avengers which sums up all the giddy brilliance one would hope for from a team-up like this. But, much like his work on Captain America, Silvestri also knows how to build atmosphere and an underlying emotional resonance, which makes this so much more than just a uncontrollably bombastic accompaniment. Cinematographer Seamus McGarvey creates some truly exceptional comic-book shots; the shots of the Avengers operating together as a team are just as exceptionally chill-inducing as you'd hope for. But most importantly, McGarvey doesn't try to create an epic shot too often. When the scene is meant to be intimate, McGarvey focuses on the characters with very few tricks. This means that, when he cuts loose and frames some spectacular action and visual effects shots, McGarvey's grasp of the massive events on display feels like it's been built up rather than trodden out one too many times, making it all the more easier to appreciate and salivate over the incredible proceedings on display. Editors Jeffrey Ford and Lisa Lassek keep the film moving at a fantastic pace; in my opinion, one of the complaints I fail to understand is when people say that the film spends too long with the Avengers staying and talking at the SHIELD base of operations. Every bit of this segment is building the characters and scenarios, something which I love, and the dialogue and performances are perfectly tuned, delivering one skilfully concise quip after another whilst adding to the conflicts, character arcs and the sense that, in Banner's words, the 'time bomb' is about to go off. When it does, it does so spectacularly and the film rarely lets up in terms of action from then on. But the breathless action in the final act would mean little if the characters and their struggles weren't as brilliantly conceived. In my opinion, the editing nails both the character-driven and action-orientated moments of the film, giving time to breathe and leaving very little left to desire.     

In terms of noticeable problems, I only really have one which bugs me. While nearly everyone else in the principal cast gets at least moment or two to shine, Stellan Skarsgård is notably side-lined as Dr. Erik Selvig. He occupies the same role that he did in Thor minus the humour and humanity, which makes him the rote expositional scientist. Given how much character saturates the rest of the film and how great an actor Skarsgård is, this is a minor disappointment. Also, there are moments when, as incredible as they are, the visual effects obviously crowd the screen at points. This is a minor complaint though, as the vast majority of these effects are creating truly jaw-dropping scenes of comic-book glory. As for those who complain about the silliness of Loki's alien allies, I can see their point, but I honestly can't criticise it. Throughout the film, Whedon seems to be winking at the audience, acknowledging how silly the scenario is but daring us not to enjoy the experience with so many outrageously awesome moments unfolding before our eyes. Personally, I'm happy to say that I enjoyed it a lot, which is a pretty big understatement.  

As brilliant as the performances and the technical credits are, the real star of this film is Whedon. His direction and script are pitch-perfect (although credit should also go to Zak Penn for his work on the film's story). Whedon clearly understands these characters and how they would interact within a group, and he uses both small and big moments to emphasise the characters, their personalities and their 'powers'. Even in the final huge action sequences, Whedon is still wrapping up character arcs which have been wonderfully built over the preceding events, and giving character fantastic action moment which also say something about their characters. I've given Whedon much praise throughout this review, and he deserves it. I doubt that any other director could have made The Avengers such a beautifully entertaining experience and given both each character and their interactions as a team as much presence and flair. I don't know what else to say except that I'm in awe of the man. If Whedon's work on Age of Ultron is anywhere near as spot-on as it is here. I will be more than satisfied with his apparently ending tenure in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, even though I'll probably miss him nonetheless.    
              
Final Verdict

After four years of build-up starting with 2008's excellent Iron Man, writer-director Joss Whedon delivers on all expectations and then some with The Avengers. This is, in my opinion, one of the most gloriously fun comic-book films ever made. The cast is amazing, with every member of the principal ensemble given their moments to shine like a supernova (to the point where I can't pick a stand-out). The technical credits are superlative, from the breath-taking visual effects to the immensely rousing score by Alan Silvestri. The action sequences encapsulate blockbuster spectacle at its most thrillingly giddy, with the final battle royale being a particular delight. But, far and away, the true hero of this film is Whedon, Given a big budget for the first time and given such a highly-anticipated project, Whedon makes it look easy by delivering a comic-book extravaganza which puts real care and attention into its character, whether they're arguing, throwing quips or fighting physically. This never seems like a 'job' for Whedon; it feels like he's genuinely giving everything to this film in a bid to delight both laymen and comic-book fans alike. From the layman's perspective, he pulled it off incredibly. Is The Avengers perfect? No; I wish that Stellan Skarsgård had more to do (particularly given that nearly everyone else gets at least one spot to make a big impression), Loki's alien allies are a bit silly and there are points where the visual effects are almost overwhelming. But when those are my only really issues (and when the film actually acknowledges and plays on the silliness of both the aliens and the central premise and the latter only comes to the fore briefly amidst moments of unabashedly magnificent comic-book imagery), I can't really complain that much. This is a landmark achievement in comic-book film-making which many will aspire to, but few will match. I don't know what else to say, except that The Avengers is a marvel (pun intended).  

Rating: 4.7 out of 5  

Mini-Review: Item 47

The Blu-Ray Short Item 47 focuses on SHIELD Agent Jasper Sitwell (Maximiliano Hernández) as he tries to deal with the fall-out from the final battle of The Avengers. The main assignment involves going after criminal couple Claire and Bennie (Lizzy Caplan and Jesse Bradford), who have somehow managed to activate one of the alien weapons left in the debris. Item 47 also introduces Agent Blake (Titus Welliver), who Agents of SHIELD fans might recognise. It's great to see Hernández really get his moment in the spotlight, and he delivers a strong and quick-witted performance. Sitwell proves that he is a clever and resourceful agent as he chases the couple with unexpected results. Both Caplan and Bradford deliver likeably naive performance as the loving couple who just so happen to have a powerful alien item at their disposal, while Welliver is terrific as always as Agent Blake. What makes Item 47 an enjoyable short are the interactions between the characters; the formal yet cheeky banter between Sitwell and Blake, the familiar and loving interactions between Claire and Bennie and the final, brilliantly delivered tête-a-tête. Does it really add anything to the MCU? Not really. But I love the fact that it gives Sitwell a chance to shine and that it introduces Agent Blake before his appearance in Agent of SHIELD, giving his appearance in that show some establishment. While it's nothing spectacular, Item 47 is still an enjoyable short which I'd recommend to MCU fans.         

Captain America: The First Avenger (Marvel Review 5 of 11)

In the fifth outing of the MCU, we travel back in time to witness the birth of the First Avenger, the 'Star-Spangled Man with a Plan'.

With Thor coming out three months prior, 2011 was definitely a year of risks from Marvel Studios. Both the God of Thunder and Captain America are two characters which could have come across as detrimentally silly. If you've read my review for Thor, you'll know my thoughts on whether or not that film managed to avoid that downfall. My confidence in Captain America: The First Avenger was boosted when director Joe Johnston announced as the director. Johnston proved with 1991's The Rocketeer that he could capably craft an old-fashioned, comic-book adventure along the lines of a lighter Indiana Jones. For me, that sounded great for Captain America's introductory film.

But the real controversy came when Chris Evans was cast as Captain America. Now there will always be controversy over casting choices in superhero/comic-book films (remember how mad some people were over the choices of Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark in Iron Man and Heath Ledger as The Joker in The Dark Knight?) Evans had proven in the past that he was a likeable and charismatic screen presence in films such as 2004's Cellular, the 2005/2007 Fantastic Four films (in which he was another Marvel superhero) and 2010's The Losers and Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World. He even showed genuinely strong acting chops in 2007's Sunshine. So when he was announced as Captain America, I was ready to give him a chance. Did he pull it off? We'll see...

1943. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is desperate to join the fight against the Nazis, but his physical handicaps means constant rejections from his every attempt to sign up. When one of his attempts catches the attention of scientist Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci), Steve is recruited into the 'Super Soldier' program, a effort by the Allied forces to create the perfect soldier. After being chosen for the final experiment, Steve is turned into a towering, powerful and supremely capable soldier. While Steve wants to join the battle, he is initially put into a war bond campaign by a opportunist senator and given the name of Captain America. However, when Steve does finally get onto the battlefield, he is recognised for his power and use and is sent after the Nazi science division Hydra, led by fellow super-powered being Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving), who has nefarious plans and a new weapon to carry them out.

In the director's chair, Joe Johnston proves to be a brilliant choice. He completely captures the sense of fun and fleet-footed adventure that one would hope to experience from a film like this. While he does strong work in the action scenes, Johnston and writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely deserve credit for focusing more on the characters and their interactions than on the super-powered antics. It's easy to understand the character of Steve and to relate to him; in fact, he's one of the relatable and likeable of the Avengers. While a lot of the kudos for this should go to Evans and his performance (more on that later), Johnston, Markus and McFeely still do a great job of bringing Steve, his ideals and his relationships to life in a way which embraces the coic-book aesthetic without being overwhelmed by it. Some of the most memorable sequences from the film are ones where nary a (real) punch or explosion are seen. For example, there is a lot of fun to be had watching a newly-empowered Steve being used as a propaganda piece in a series of live performances and films as part of that war bond campaign. While this is a very colourful and entertaining scene (props go to Alan Menken's gloriously catchy song The Star-Spangled Man), it is also deceptively clever on the part of Johnston, Markus and McFeely because the aggressively corny nature of Cap's exploitation in this scene paradoxically makes the symbol of Captain America once Steve goes into battle a more realistic concept within this world while showing just how badly the film could have gone wrong. Johnston, Markus and McFeely spend ample time with the character (both good and bad) interacting, thus allowing us to glimpse their personalities. This makes it easier to become invested in the final outcome. Plus, the MCU connections are integrated brilliantly. Tony Stark's father Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) is a supporting character in this film, and the first time we see him, he's displaying some familiar flight equipment. There are plenty of references to the world of Thor. There's a similar sequence to Iron Man 2 involving awards, with both scenes set in what looks like the exact same location (and the different attitudes of both Tony and Steve to that event indicate the differences between the characters, something which is touched upon in The Avengers). In a nod towards the fun adventure vibe that the film-makers are clearly aiming for, there are even some great references to Raiders of the Lost Ark, with one of them being surprisingly bloody for an MCU film. 

A large part of that investment has to be attributed to the performances. These are all capable actors having a lot of fun whilst also establishing humanity when possible. One character clearly devoid of positive human traits is Johann Schmidt, and Hugo Weaving is clearly having a ball as this bad to the bone, power-hungry maniac. Weaving created one of my favourite film villains as Agent Smith in The Matrix films, and while his work here isn't quite as entertaining, it's still a ton of fun to watch him dominate the screen every time every time he appears. Most of Schmidt's scenes rely on pure villainous presence, and Weaving nails that along with Schmidt's arrogance and cold intelligence. Much like Tim Roth in The Incredible Hulk, Weaving revels in his corrupt character. He may lack the rich complexity of Thor's Loki, but you still can't deny that Schmidt's got nasty style. Also, Weaving is aided by first-class make-up once his true colours are revealed. Much like villains, most superhero films aren't complete without a love interest, and The First Avenger is no exception. Now I like Gwyneth Paltrow's Pepper Potts from Iron Man and Iron Man 2, Natalie Portman's Jane Foster from Thor and Liv Tyler's Betty Ross from The Incredible Hulk. But, in my honest opinion, this film has the best romantic interest from the MCU thus far in Hayley Atwell's Agent Peggy Carter. From her very first scene, in which she teaches a disrespectful private some manners, Carter proves that she is just as bad-ass as the men. Crucially, Atwell and Evans are given scenes together to establish a relationship between Peggy and Steve pre-transformation; this makes Peggy's belief in the man behind the muscles all the more believable and sweet. The romance between them is excellent and there are several fun touches. Atwell is never anything less than beguiling, whether sharing a moment with Steve or proving that she's strong enough to survive without the men's help. Also lacking complexity but still having a grand ol' time is Tommy Lee Jones as, well, Tommy Lee Jones. Colonel Phillips is almost exactly what Agent K would be like if thrown into WWII (there's even a nice little reference to Men In Black during the climactic action sequence). But even if he's not doing anything new, Jones is still reliably enjoyable, nabbing many of the film's best lines and delivering them brilliantly. As Arnim Zola, Schmidt's second-hand scientist, Toby Jones is brilliant as always, adding possible shades of moral ambiguity to the character as he is faced with Schmidt's ensuing madness. Dominic Cooper is wonderful as Howard Stark; he nails the arrogance and charm of the character, making it clear where Tony got those qualities from. Stanley Tucci is typically terrific as Abraham Erskine, crafting a lovably quirky character whose scenes with Steve work really well. As James 'Bucky' Barnes, Steve's childhood friend and fellow soldier, Sebastian Stan acquits himself well and there is enough screen-time between him and Steve to cement their relationship. As the Howling Commandos, Steve's back-up team, Neal McDonough, Derek Luke, Kenneth Choi, Bruno Ricci and JJ Feild are all enjoyable. And, as with most MCU films, there are a few camoes to be enjoyed.

Now we come to the Star-Spangled Man himself. While I wasn't ready to make this statement before seeing the film, I can now say wholeheartedly that I can't imagine anyone other than Chris Evans in the role of Steve Rogers. Evans taps into what makes Steve such a aspirational superhero effortlessly; he is a man who wants to help people being beaten down by those with more power, something which he can easily relate to. The powers granted to him by his transformation allow him to do this, But Evans never allows his undeniably impressive physicality (he looks Herculean) to carry the character, instead giving him a real human decency. This is a character who could have been a 'goody two-shoes', but Evans instead creates a protagonist worth caring for. The character's inner strength is as important as his outer strength, and all praise should go to Evans for capturing that inner strength in an immensely likable way without being too restrained as to be undistinguished or too over-the-top as to be cartoonish. Also, I have to give the film-makers credit for drawing parallels between Schmidt and Steve. In their first scenes, Schmidt has plenty of power and is using it to terrorise others and further what plentiful power he already has, while Steve has little power and is still volunteering for battle and standing up to bigger guys who can clearly beat him. This only serves to make Steve an easier character to root for, as in Erskine's words, "a weak man knows the value of strength and compassion". This quote is only more appropriate when compared with Evans' performance, which is a compassionately strong realisation of a potentially goofy character who instead becomes one of my favourite superheroes of recent years. While I love a complex superhero, there is something to love about a superhero who has ideals and who refuses to break them, no matter what challenges are thrown at them.              

As I said before, while Captain America: The First Avenger handles its characters very well, the action sequences are all strong. The first action sequence, in which Steve charges into a deadly pursuit shortly after acquiring his powers, is made all the more entertaining because Johnson shows sly joy in showcasing Steve's lack of control. This not only makes the scene more exciting, but it also shows that the film-makers haven't lost sight of Steve as a character. The other action sequences are all handled with aplomb, with the climactic action sequence being particularly thrilling. An attribute of all the action sequences is that they never lose sight of its characters, with each sequence adding detail to characters, especially Steve (with the second, facility-set action scene showing that Steve tries to use his wit and his strength to mutual advantage, opting for initial stealth over simply but loudly beating the enemies up).

Technically speaking, Captain America is terrific on all fronts. The visual effects are fantastic, whether being used to craft a spectacular visual tableau or shrinking Chris Evans. The effects used to make Evans look small and feeble are particularly impressive, rarely calling attention to themselves. There is also gorgeous imagery which feels like it was ripped straight out of a comic book; one of my favourite shots in the film is of Steve and Schmidt facing each other from opposite ends of a factory walk-way with explosions rampaging in the background. I could actually imagine that shot being framed and hung on someone's wall. It's important to remember how unique The First Avenger is in the MCU for being a period piece, which is something relished by costume designer Anna B. Sheppard, production designer Rick Heinrichs, set decorator John Bush and the art direction team. All of Sheppard's costume feel appropriate within this period and only call attention to themselves when they have to. The two examples of this are the Captain America costume, which goes from something intentionally silly and pantomiming during Steve's performances to a much-more battle-ready outfit later in the film (signifying Steve's journey to become a genuine hero), and a red dress worn by Peggy during a small but crucial moment in the relationship between Steve and Peggy. This might seem minor, but given Peggy's mostly tough exterior prior to this scene, the red dress shows her revealing her softer side to Steve. Rick Heinrichs, along with John Bush and the art direction team, does a top-notch of bringing this period to life with certain moments of comic-book flair. There are great vehicular designs (I'm particularly fond of Schmidt's V16 Coupe) and terrific re-creations of 1940's New York and London, along with wonderful lairs for both the good guys and the bad guys; again, while the hide-outs and labs of the SSR are very well-realised, Schmidt still takes the cake with his main base of operations. Aside from one scene and certain moments which I'll get to later, the editing is fantastic, giving each scenario enough time to breathe while giving the film a strong sense of pacing. Finally, it would be remiss to discuss the the technical icing on The First Avenger's cake without mentioning Alan Silvestri's superb score, which could be my favourite score from any film in the MCU thus far. Silvestri's work here nails the inherent heroism of the titular character so perfectly that, outside of Henry Jackman's rousing score for Captain America: The Winter Soldier, it's difficult to imagine any other music fitting the First Avenger (although, thanks to some internet videos, the Team America theme comes to mind). Silvestri is a tremendous composer, and his work here is typically expert at generating old-school atmosphere and excitement. However, while Silvestri nails the adventure vibe, he also does beautiful and moving work for the film's conclusion where things take a more decidedly emotional turn. In musical terms, Silvestri will always be the one who created Captain America. And I get to fawn over his work again in my next MCU review...      

Now, as enjoyable as Captain America: The First Avenger is, there are some issues. While the ending is still commendable in how emotionally bittersweet it is, there is a significant plot hole which is difficult to explain away (and I have tried). If you want more of an idea what I'm talking about, watch this video after seeing the film. Be warned; once you're aware of the plot hole, it's nigh impossible to get it out of your head. Also, a key montage showing Captain America and the Howling Commandos in action seems a bit rushed, as if the film-makers wanted to spend more time on this scenario but knew that they had to wrap other things up. Comparatively, the rest of the film is well-paced and well-balanced between character and action. Finally, I found some of the shots, particularly during the final battle, to be oddly cut. It felt like certain shots were cut unnecessarily short, so that some seem to last only a couple of seconds. However, that last point is only a small complaint and it's not a frequent issue.

So, out of the 2011 MCU double bill, which do I prefer: Thor or Captain America? With no disrespect to the God of Thunder, I'm going to say Captain America for a few reasons. While both characters of Thor and Captain America both have unique environments, the team behind Captain America went for it and immersed themselves in the character's unique environment for almost the entirety of the running time. Again, I'm not having a go at Thor; if the makers of that film hadn't taken the character out of his environment for a significant portion of the film, there would have been almost nothing to link him to the Avengers. But that character's own environment is explored in more detail in 2013's Thor: The Dark World, whereas this is the only film given to explore Captain America in WWII mode. Plus, I am a sucker for well-executed, old-school Indiana Jones-style adventure. Next, I personally like the character of Steve Rogers more than Thor. Chris Hemsworth is terrific as Thor, but I love how Chris Evans has taken a character who could have easily been so bland and injected him with real heart, warmth and integrity. In all honesty, Captain America's probably my second favourite Avenger just behind Iron Man. Lastly, while that plot hole is annoying, the ending is still an impressively emotional conclusion. Both the film-makers and cast understand how to bring the weight of the finale to the screen, and for anyone who has become invested in the film up to this point, it's a genuinely moving ending with a couple of genuinely tear-jerking moments (the moment which personally hits me involves a photograph). Are there areas in which I think Thor is stronger? Absolutely; as much as I love Hugo Weaving's Johann Schmidt, Loki is still the better villain with more emotional complexity, more unpredictability and more motivation, along with a near-perfect performance from Tom Hiddleston. I can easily understand why, out of the 2011 double bill, someone would prefer Thor. But, in terms of which film gave me personally a more satisfying and complete experience, I have to go with Captain America: The First Avenger.         

Final Verdict

In my opinion, Captain America: The First Avenger is the best MCU film since Iron Man at this stage of the game. The 1940's setting gives the film a pleasingly retro style, something which the film-makers know and play upon. Joe Johnston is confident in his direction, and is aided by the engagingly witty script by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely; they all deserve special credit for emphasising how corny and silly the concept could have been while never allowing themselves to fall into that trap (this is particularly true of the 'musical' scene, driven by a terrifically catchy tune from Alan Menken). The cast is fantastic, with the stand-out appropriately being the Cap himself Chris Evans for bringing the titular character to life with such effortless likeability, charm and presence. The action sequences manage to be giddily exciting while never losing sight of the characters involved. The technical credits, from the often spectacular visual effects to the terrific costumes and production/set design and the pitch-perfect score from Alan Silvestri, are all expertly done with care, while the editing keeps proceedings moving at a solid pace for the most part. There are definite issues; a key battle montage is rushed, an unshakable plot hole does somewhat demean the logic of the film's final 10 minutes and there are some oddly cut shots, particularly during the final battle. With all that being said, the finale is still surprisingly emotional, and while the contributions of the film-makers and other cast members shouldn't be overlooked, this is where Evans' success in the titular role shines through. If the role of Captain America wasn't capably performed, the emotional climax would have rung false. But, thanks to the heart and humanity which Evans invests in the role, there is a genuinely bitter-sweet sting. Come the spot-on final line, which is delivered with pained sincerity, there is a real sense of loss for Steve and those who had become invested in his journey. The nostalgic glow and viewpoint of The First Avenger is only too appropriate, as things are about to get much more complicated...      

Rating: 4 out of 5        

Mini-Review: A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor's Hammer

In the second Blu-Ray short from the MCU, we see SHIELD Agent Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg) get caught up in the middle of a gas station hold-up... And that's it. There are no connections to any other MCU films, it doesn't add any new significant detail and it's only 3 minutes long. Why would I recommend it to any MCU fan then? One reason: Clark Gregg. Over Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Thor and the Thor Blu-Ray short The Consultant, Gregg turned Coulson into an unexpected stand-out character. Thor's Hammer (for short) not only brings the character's charm and dry wit to bear, but it also shows that Coulson is one great guy to have in a crisis. In a situation where many people would panic, Coulson is as cool as a cucumber and sets up the situation to his advantage before proving to be a credible bad-ass in his own right, something which we hadn't seen from the character prior to this point. That bad-ass moment is brilliantly done, almost like those 'planning' scenes from Robert Downey Jr.'s Sherlock Holmes films. This is also a very funny short, with well-written dialogue and terrific delivery; Gregg's final line is effortlessly, warmly winning. It's a small short without any of the MCU connections which could be found in The Consultant, but for those who are fans of Clark Gregg and Agent Phil Coulson and who want to see a different yet completely welcome side to the character from what had been revealed prior, this is still a short I'd recommend.        

Thor (Marvel Review 4 of 11)

In the Thorth (sorry) review of the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe), the latest Avenger brings the thunder. Whomsoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor.

Out of the MCU films thus far (including Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2), Thor was arguably the biggest risk from Marvel Studios. After all, how do you introduce a Norse God, his family, fellow warriors and enemies, along with the mystical realms, into a universe of formerly Earth-bound heroes without it coming across as too silly? The risks appeared to be stacking up when Kenneth Branagh, a director with no prior experience in the arena of blockbuster film-making, was announced as the man at the helm. Then relatively unknown actor Chris Hemsworth was cast in the titular role. While Robert Downey Jr. was considered a risk when he was cast as Tony Stark AKA Iron Man, he had previously proved himself as a terrific actor capable of spectacularly carrying a film (1992's Chaplin is a strong example of this). Hemsworth's biggest credits were roles in TV soaps Neighbours and Home and Away, a small yet pivotal role in 2009's Star Trek as James Kirk's dad, a supporting role in thriller A Perfect Getaway and major roles in then-shelved films Red Dawn and The Cabin in the Woods. Sure, it's not like Hemsworth hadn't had acting experience, but he'd never proven himself as being able to carry a film. With these apparent risks, Thor could have spelled a recipe for disaster. So does the God of Thunder bring the lightning? Let's find out.

For centuries, there has been unrest between the Norse deities of Asgard, ruled by Odin (Anthony Hopkins), and the Frost Giants of Jotunheim, ruled by Laufey (Colm Feore). When a bid is made by the Frost Giants to take back the source of their power from Asgard itself, Odin's son Thor (Hemsworth) disobeys his father and enters the forbidden realm of Jotunheim looking for answers. His brash actions result in a declaration of war, leading to Odin angrily banishing Thor to Earth and stripping him of his godly powers. On Earth, Thor encounters scientists Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård), along with his assistant Darcy (Kat Dennings). While adjusting to life on Earth, Thor searches for his mystical hammer, Mjolnir, so that he can reclaim his powers, but finds a potential obstacle in the form of SHIELD and Agent Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg). Meanwhile, on Asgard, Thor's scheming brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) sees an opportunity to gain the power he feels he deserves...  

It quickly becomes clear that the risks taken by Marvel Studios with Thor have paid off. The mythology of Thor could have gone so easily awry that it's very satisfying to see Branagh and his writing team of Ashley Miller, Zack Stentz and Don Payne (along with uncredited script doctor and Guardians of the Galaxy co-writer Nicole Perlman) wrangling it as successfully as they do. There are definite Shakespearean undertones to the film's story, and Kenneth Branagh is one of the definitive champions of bringing Shakespeare's work to life. This serves him exceptionally well in capturing the dramatic tensions and relationships between the characters; his handling of the scheming and confrontations between the Asgardian characters is particularly engaging. Meanwhile, he handles the comedic aspects, especially those which present themselves during Thor's time on Earth, unexpectedly well. If the humour here was handled in the wrong way, it could have resulted in some cringe-worthy reactions. But the humour strikes the right tone between the self-awareness of the plot's silliness and the genuine timing and delivery of the cast. The writers are definitely on the same page as Branagh and hits the same effective balance between the intriguing familial and political dynamics on Asgard and the comedic fish-out-of-water scenes on Earth, even though both Branagh and the writers fall short of convincingly portraying how the romance between Thor and Jane develops into such a deep relationship over such a short period of time (this task falls upon the considerable charm of Hemsworth and Portman and the chemistry between them). Finally, Branagh acquits himself admirably with the stirring action sequences. These effectively capture the wonder of Thor using his powers alongside his friends in battle with the Frost Giants or the excitement of seeing a powerless Thor take on a squad of SHIELD agents which one should experience. The action sequences are definitely more than satisfying, but they're not the highlight of the film. While the final conflict between Thor and Loki may fall short for some on the action-front, I applaud Branagh for focusing more on the personal, dramatic conflict between the characters and the performances from both Hemsworth and Hiddleston nail both the physical and emotional clash.

What makes Thor such a highly enjoyable film is the interaction between the cast, and the casting team put hardly a foot wrong. For Earth-bound support, Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgård and Kat Dennings are all fantastic. I know that many people find the character of Darcy annoying, but I personally like her. Does she really have a point in the narrative? Besides being an audience conduit for some of the scientific phrases flung around by Jane and Erik, not really. But Dennings is a charming and down-to-earth presence nonetheless, giving the proceedings on Earth a likeable zest whenever she appears. Skarsgård, as usual, is excellent here, showing terrific comic aptitude. Selvig is a man governed by what he knows, which means that he views Thor with great scepticism. But he is also a very caring man, as his affection towards Jane shows, and Skarsgård never lets us forget this. Portman is as radiant as always in a somewhat thankless part; neither the script nor Branagh call on her to be much more than the love interest. Nevertheless, Portman is utterly charming and her loveable screen presence goes a long way towards selling how she and Thor could become romantically invested in each other over such a short period of time. And Clark Gregg is once again fantastic as SHIELD Agent Phil Coulson, delivering his dead-pan lines and reactions perfectly. Speaking of SHIELD, the organisation is integrated into this narrative much more effectively than in Iron Man 2. Thor's arrival on Earth feels like something which SHIELD would be involved in, since it is such a world-changing event. Also, there is a cameo introducing the final Avenger involved in the upcoming Avengers.

And then we get to Asgard, where the real dramatic meat of the film lies. This seems as good a time as any to talk about Chris Hemsworth. Despite being uncertain about his acting ability before this film, I can now say that Hemsworth absolutely owes the role of Thor. He nails the charm and swagger, but he also sells Thor's journey from arrogant brawler to humble hero. Plus, Hemsworth is completely aware of just how absurd the premise is, and that awareness is laced throughout his performance. Hemsworth knows that if you're going to sell a character like this, you need to embrace both the obvious silliness and underlying humanity to make it work. He does both those things and makes it look easy. He is equally adept whether fighting Frost Giants and SHIELD agents, uttering funny one-liners with straight-faced pomposity which make them all the more hilarious, romancing Portman's Jane or dramatically squaring off against Hopkins' Odin and Hiddleston's Loki. Speaking of Loki, I know that this really isn't an original comment, but he is easily my favourite villain from the MCU thus far. Loki is a menacing villain, but there is also great complexity and humanity to the character. We can both understand and sympathise with him and his motives and yet wonder what trickery he will deploy next; these definitely help to make Loki an enthralling villain, and Hiddleston brings real emotional heat to the role along with simmering jealousy and rage. And Anthony Hopkins as Odin... That is a brilliant choice. Hopkins has been known for either slumming it or hamming it up in roles in the past, but thankfully he seems genuinely invested in his performance here. The scenes between Hemsworth, Hiddleston and Hopkins are the most dramatically potent that the film has to offer; the scenes when Odin banishes Thor and when Loki confronts Odin are two of my favourite scenes from the film, and that's mostly due to the pitch-perfect delivery of the cast. As Heimdall, the 'Gate-Keeper' to the Bifrost which allows the Asgardians to travel between realms, Idris Elba brings effortless authority and charisma to the character which makes you want to see more of him. There are also solid supporting performances from Jaimie Alexander, Ray Stevenson, Joshua Dallas and Tadanobu Asano as Lady Sif and the Warriors Three Volstagg, Fandral and Hogun respectively and Colm Feore as Laufey. Feore, in particular, makes Laufey a threatening presence, although he is aided by fantastic make-up and visual effects (much like all of the other Frost Giants). Sadly, Rene Russo is utterly wasted as Odin's wife and Thor and Loki's mother, Frigga. Russo is a genuinely amazing actress (I think that she got robbed of a Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination this year for her stunning work in Nightcrawler), but here she only gets a handful of lines and reaction shots. Given that the dramatic core of Thor is the frisson within Thor's family, this makes Russo's underutilisation all the more prominent.

On a technical level, Thor is mostly a success. While this isn't the best of the MCU when it comes to visual effects, the visual effects are still never anything less than impressive and there are several shots which are breath-taking; a great example of this is the very first shot of Asgard. Part of the credit for these beautiful shots should go to the exquisite cinematography from Haris Zambarloukos. Whether on Asgard, Jotunheim or Earth, there are plenty of beautiful, sweeping shots. While there are a few too many shots done at a Dutch angle (tilting the camera so that the scene is on a different axis), Thor still looks fantastic for the most part. Production designer Bo Welch (along with the art direction team and set decorator Lauri Gaffin) creates some wonderful sets, especially for the Asgard scenes; the buildings and monuments really express the opulence and long-lived power of the Gods, as well as the combination between magic and science which drives their civilisation (great examples of this are the 'Rainbow Bridge' and the 'Bifrost', two things which could have resulted in an eye-roll yet come across as strangely plausible within this world). Costume designers Alexandra Byrne and Craciunica Roberto have a lot of fun with the design of the Asgardian costumes; I love the capes worn by Thor and Loki, which look spectacular when billowing in the wind. Frequent Branagh collaborator Patrick Doyle delivers one of my favourite musical scores from any of the films from the MCU. His work here is terrifically suited to the material, whether grandiose, emotional or action-orientated.    

Now I want to bring up an issue with this film which I like to call 'The Curse of the Deleted Scene'. I used to love this film, but my love did decrease when I watched the deleted scenes. Why is this? Well, as much as I love the family drama in Thor, there are some deleted scenes which explore relationships from different angles which I would have loved had they been in the film. There's a scene which definitively shows that there is true affection between Thor and Loki, whilst also providing the set-up for one of Thor's actions on Earth. I think that scene should have been in the film because there are no other moments which show this affectionate side to the relationship between Thor and Loki. This would have added another shade of complexity to their interactions, and also quickly established the relatable humanity to both characters.There are also strong scenes establishing the personalities of Sif and the Warriors Three and showing the relationship between Frigga and Odin. The scene between Frigga and Odin is of particular importance because no other scenes explore their relationship and because it gives Rene Russo something more to do. There are even a few extended versions of scenes which are more effective than the actual scenes in the film. They bring out more of the character's personalities and relationships. So why weren't they put in the film? Some may think that I'm being unfair by judging the film because of scenes which were left on the cutting room floor, but when a lot of these scenes could have honestly improved the film, I'd feel that I'm being dishonest to my own feelings to ignore that. While editor Paul Rubell does solid work in ensuring that the film moves at a steady pace for the most part, he could have put some of these critical moments into the film without affecting the pace in a negative way.  

Final Verdict

For a project which could have gone so incredibly wrong, it's still impressive just what an 'un-guilty' pleasure Thor is. Director Kenneth Branagh nails the Shakespearean drama on display and proves surprisingly adept at handling both big-budget action and winking, self-aware comedy. He's aided by a capable screen-writing team and excellent cast who clearly know how best to approach the material: Hemsworth and Hiddleston, in particular, deliver star-making performances which bring real depth, humanity and sympathy to their characters. The action sequences are well-executed, the visual effects are often gorgeous and other technical credits, from Bo Welch's wonderful production design to Patrick Doyle's sublimely operatic score, are very strong, True, Branagh and the writers rush the central romance, the use of Dutch angles is mostly pointless and sometimes disorientating and I do wish that the film-makers had re-evaluated 'deleting' certain scenes or extended versions of scenes which appear in the film. With that being said, I still find Thor a highly enjoyable entry in the MCU which deserves credit for bringing the titular character, his relationships, his enemies and his mythology to the big screen while never letting unintentional giggles threaten to become anything more than a rarity. Come the post-credits scene helmed by Avengers director Joss Whedon, which sets up both that film and the debut of a certain Star-Spangled Man, we see a powerful item with a violent history and, judging from the malicious smirk of someone lurking in the shadows, a dangerous future. Speaking of violent history, while it's unclear who the last Avenger will be, there can only be one First Avenger...

Rating: 4.1 out of 5   

Mini-Review: Marvel One-Shot: The Consultant

Starting with the Thor Blu-Ray, every Marvel Blu-Ray contains shorts which either build on or add to events from prior Marvel films. While The Consultant is a minor effort, that doesn't make it any less enjoyable. Basically a two-man act between Phil Coulson and fellow SHIELD Agent Jasper Sitwell (Maximiliano Hernández), The Consultant also introduces us to the idea of the World Council, one of the highest branches of SHIELD, and how they're not quite on the same level as Coulson and Director Nick Fury. There are two reasons why The Consultant is a gem and I'd recommend it for any MCU fans. One, it puts a fun little twist on the ending of The Incredible Hulk and adds fantastic detail to how the final interaction from that film played out. I love this because, for a scenario which seems so simple, The Consultant switches the final scene of The Incredible Hulk in a wonderfully surprising way which actually makes sense when laid out. Secondly, the interplay between Coulson and Sitwell is fantastic; both Gregg and Hernández share a great deal of chemistry and deliver their rapport perfectly (the 'patsy' discussion is a particular highlight). I love the fact that Hernández gets the chance to establish Sitwell's personality here, as he is just a guy who shares a couple of lines with Coulson in Thor. Here, we can see that these two share an actual friendship alongside their work. So, for those reasons, I would definitely recommend The Consultant. Could you miss it? Yes; it's not essential. But it adds a bit more colour and detail to characters and events in the MCU. If that sounds interesting to you, give it a watch. 
           

Birdman (Or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Note: While I normally try to avoid spoilers, Birdman is too deserving of an analysis. I will be exploring some of the themes and character traits in the film, so if you want a completely fresh experience, I would recommend that you steer clear of this review until you've seen the film. That being said, here we go...

On Sunday February 22nd, the 87th Oscars played out. While some people may have given up on the ceremony (and I can definitely understand why), there is no denying that it is still a big deal in Hollywood. By the end of this year's show, Birdman (Or The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) flew away with the big prize for Best Picture, as well as those for Best Director, Best Original Screenplay and Best Cinematography. But did it deserve them? Let's find out.

Actor Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) used to have it all. As the heroic, all-powerful Birdman, he was beloved by millions around the world. But when he refused to return to that franchise after the third instalment, Riggan started to descend into obscurity. 22 years on, Riggan is trying to make a comeback on stage by adapting, directing and starring in Raymond Carver's What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, but things are quickly going awry. Main actor Ralph (Jeremy Stamos) is involved in an accident, the apparent godsend of a replacement in the form of popular stage actor Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) turns ugly when Mike's ego is part of the package and Riggan is haunted by his inadequacies as a family man through the presence of his daughter/assistant Sam (Emma Stone) and his ex Sylvia (Amy Ryan), as well as the nagging voice and personality of his superhero alter ego, which continues to define him in both his own eyes and those of almost everyone around him for better or worse. Can Riggan pull off the comeback he so desperately wants, or will he be remembered for nothing more than being the guy inside a superhero outfit?

Let's talk about the man of the hour: Michael Keaton. Watching his performance here and looking back at his career indicates that director Alejandro González Iñárritu and his co-writing team of Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris and Armando Bo always had Keaton in mind for the part of Rigan Thomson. Riggan finished playing Birdman in 1992, which was the last year Keaton played Batman (in Tim Burton's Batman Returns). Much like Batman for Keaton, the role of Birdman is what defines Riggan and makes him beloved and revered by many people. And much like Riggan's work after Birdman, nothing Keaton did after Batman Returns has achieved nearly the same level of public admiration and/or recognition. For example, when I was growing up, the role I most associated Keaton with was the titular character in 1998's Jack Frost. I used to like that film, but now I agree with people who deem it a bit rubbish. My point is that, when I finally got around to watching Keaton's performances in the Tim Burton Batman films, I learned that I was wrong to associate him with just one role. In the years since he said goodbye to Batman, Keaton has done strong work in films including 1993's Much Ado About Nothing, 1996's Multiplicity, 1997's Jackie Brown and the 2010 duo of Toy Story 3 and The Other Guys. But all of these performances have been haunted by the shadow of Batman much like Riggan's career post-Birdman has been literally haunted by that character, making Rigan's bitterness and determination to achieve another noteworthy accomplishment to set that defining role aside feel less like a cinematic fabrication and more like an extension of Keaton himself. Like Riggan, Keaton sees the role here as a chance to re-ignite his career, and grabs it with both hands before running with it like mad. This is the best performance I have seen from Keaton thus far. There is great comedic material right in Keaton's wheelhouse which he knocks out of the park (an unfortunate wardrobe malfunction comes to mind), but Keaton is also a powerhouse when Riggan's alternately and sympathetic traits come to the fore. As we learn and see more of Riggan's interactions with the other characters, it becomes clear that his self-pity about the state of his career often results in some vicious behaviour; Sylvia's reasons for leaving Riggan, in particular, emphasises just how despicably self-centred Riggan can be. However, in spite of this, Keaton's performance has such downtrodden and angrily desperate moments that it's hard not to feel sympathy for him. While that aforementioned wardrobe malfunction is very funny, some comments cut close to the bone and indicate just how shallow and casually cruel the public (even those who proclaim to be fans) can be. And towards the end of the film, Keaton is genuinely heart-breaking. I can't think of anything else to say about Keaton's tremendous work other than to say that it's deserving of nearly all of the superlatives that it's been given. This is a career re-defining role for the man who couldn't escape the shadow of the Caped Crusader, and I hope that Birdman gets him the noteworthy, powerful roles he deserves.

While Keaton is undeniably the big star, one of the best parts of Birdman is that none of the other prominent characters are left wanting. All of them are given stories and personalities to define them, which give the actors more room to excel. And excel they do, with many delivering some of the best work of their careers. Edward Norton is sensational as the egotistically committed Mike Shiner, who threatens to override the production with his almost blind dedication to the 'truth' of the performance, much to Riggan's chagrin. The resulting tension between Riggan and Mike is phenomenally played by Keaton and Norton. Much like the role of Riggan for Keaton, there are some parallels between the role of Mike and Norton himself. Norton has a lot of fun exaggerating up the intensity he's often known for as Mike's volatility bubbles to the surface and he takes his dedication to characters to often bizarre extremes. Also like Keaton, Norton played a superhero; that was in 2008's The Incredible Hulk. However, unlike Keaton, Norton wasn't really defined by his superhero stint and abandoned all Hulk commitments due to the clashes between him and Marvel Studios. Shades of that conflict can arguably be found in the relationship between Mike and Riggan; Mike is dedicated to artistic integrity (one of Norton's key arguments with Marvel Studios was that they interfered with the vision shared by him and The Incredible Hulk director Louis Leterrier), while Riggan's defining role of Birdman marks him as an example of the mainstream culture which Mike, along with New York Times critic Tabitha Dickinson (Lindsey Duncan) views with great disdain. However, while Mike initially comes across as too invested in his work (his first clash with Riggan comes out of nowhere), Norton still wills us to stick with the character through his detached charisma while slowly but surely unravelling Mike's character to show why he 'acts' the way he does. Most of this takes place in the scenes between him and Emma Stone's Sam. The chemistry between these two characters is deliciously snarky yet laced with an underlying tenderness, much like Sam herself. Stone is fantastic in perhaps the best performance of her career thus far as a young woman striving to recover from damage inflicted by both herself and by Riggan as a poor father. I'm a huge fan of Stone, but I'm still impressed with how well she stands her ground against the incendiary work from Keaton and Norton. She is never short of captivating, and her scenes with Keaton are compelling through the battling emotions of bitterness over the past, regret over mistakes made and the slim hope for a brighter future between father and daughter. Riggan's mistakes as Sam's father darkn his views of potential parenthood with sort-of girlfriend Laura (Andrea Riseborough). Riseborough is wonderful in this part, crafting an alluring portrait of a woman longing for affection from Riggan and unsure where she'll get it, if ever. Sylvia's occasional appearances serve as a painful reminder of Riggan's past 'affection'. Amy Ryan is superb as a woman who still cares for Riggan but is wary of getting too close. These scenes between Riggan and Sylvia provide a great deal of emotional heat, with one latter scene in particular hitting a raw and painful nerve. Speaking of nerves, Broadway newcomer Lesley (Naomi Watts) is trying not to let her get the best of her, which isn't helped by the presence of the often confrontational Mike. Watts is rarely anything less than spell-binding (although 2013's Diana would have to be an exception), and her performance here doesn't disappoint. She is excellent as a woman who has worked hard to reach this position and is now terrified of losing it. That sense of terror extends to Riggan's best friend and manager, as well as the show's producer, Jake (Zach Galifianakis), who feels a great deal of menace in making a play a success. Galifianakis, probably best well-known as the dim-witted Alan from The Hangover film series, delivers the strongest work I've seen from him thus far. While there are comedic moments which the actor tackles with ease, he also stands his dramatic ground with everyone else in the cast; he shares great chemistry with Keaton, in particular. Finally, we have Tabitha Dickinson, a critic who has devious plans for Riggan's play. Lindsey Duncan is unforgettably vicious in this small role, and a confrontational scene between her and Keaton is one of the best moments in the film; this scene emphasises how the bitter thoughts of one prominent figure can ruin all of the hard work and money put into a project by those putting the project together, and how a critic's thoughts may be based more on their prejudices than their actual thoughts on what they're reviewing.

While the performances are truly sensational, a review can't be written for Birdman with acknowledging its technical credits. The film's main stylistic trait is that, with only a few exceptions, it is presented as if it was captured in just one shot. While some could accuse this of being pretentious, I personally found this intriguing and wonderfully fitting. Birdman tracks and documents these characters and their situations with such fluidity that the film almost appears to be a live play, albeit with a lot more freedom to play around. Immense credit has to go to cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezski; his camera-work is truly glorious and occasionally awe-inspiring to behold, and means that if you become invested in the story, you will likely never lose interest. It's an incredibly impressive achievement, and in giving even more praise to the actors, the performances show a true commitment which comes with this trying process. Usually, if you slip up on a single take or deliver a false line, you can go back and do it again, Here, because the whole film is presently as mostly being done in a single take, one slip-up or false reaction could be fatal. This makes the fact that there are no wrong notes in any of the performances on display even more impressive. Also almost constantly present is the drum score by Antonio Sanchez, who infrequently pops up playing the drums in person. This is an off-kilter musical choice, but it works for the film, giving the proceedings a propulsive underlying energy. The excellent sound work in the film deserves definite credit for the powerful emphasis of Sanchez's drum score and scenes with different sources of sound which all come across with great clarity (the scene with Riggan's wardrobe problem is the best example of this).

Finally, it's important to discuss the direction of Alejandro González Iñárritu and the script by Iñárritu, Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris and Armando Bo. Alejandro González Iñárritu, despite having worked with stars like Sean Penn and Brad Pitt, has a filmography which is set in firmly anti-Hollywood territory. I haven't seen any of Iñárritu's prior work besides 2003's tremendous 21 Grams, but his straying away from the Hollywood style is clearly evident. With Birdman, Iñárritu and his fellow writers take a stab at Hollywood, particularly the criticism of mainstream cinema (particularly superhero films) and their audiences in refusing to view the actors involved as any different characters. In one terrific scene, Riggan lists off names of genuinely talented real-life actors who could fill the void left by Ralph. However, Jake counters Riggan's suggestions by noting the mainstream commitments which each of those actors have, most of which are to superhero franchises. These are names which the audience will primarily recognise due to these franchises, but anyone who has a knowledge of these actors and their other work know that some of their other, more 'independent' work has just as much right being recognised as their mainstream franchise contributions. I'm pretty sure that Philip Seymour Hoffman's name would have popped up in relation to his role in The Hunger Games if not for his recent sad passing. Another brilliant scene pokes fun at what mainstream audience seem to want from their blockbuster films nowadays (big explosions, over-the-top visual effects etc.) Having sat through the last Transformers film and taking into account the commercial success of that film to the tune of $1 billion plus, I absolutely love the savagery of that scene. The viciously over-the-top nature of that scene is quickly followed by a scene of wonderful, breath-taking transcendence which proves that it would be doing Birdman a disservice to simply call it a comedy (even though it has some truly hilarious moments).

While Birdman is an incredible cinematic achievement, I do have one issue. Towards the film's end, there is a great point where the film could have ended. I won't say when, but anyone who's seen the film should know what point I've talking about. However, the film keeps going unnecessarily for another five-ten minutes. I do understand what they're trying to do and the very ending of the film does provide material for post-cinema debates, but I think that they could have effectively ended the film earlier. But when even the part of the film I have an issue with still provides plenty of material for intelligent discussion about a film's thematic meaning, isn't that great?

Final Verdict

The more I think about Birdman, the more I appreciate it. The more I consider the themes of the film, the more intelligent and relevant yet timeless material I find for discussion. The more I reflect upon the stunning work of the ensemble cast, including currently career-best work from Emma Stone, Zach Galifianakis and an incredible Michael Keaton, the more respect I have for them. Director Alejandro González Iñárritu and his co-writers Nicolás Giacobone, Alexander Dinelaris and Armando Bo, along with cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezski, have achieved here is nothing short of breath-taking, something which will be discussed and analysed. While I wish that the film had concluded five to ten minutes earlier, it is a testament to that final stretch that there's still plenty of material to discuss and analyse. Do I think that Birdman should won for Best Picture? Personally, I would have preferred The Grand Budapest Hotel, Boyhood or particularly the incredible Whiplash to take the prize, but that's just me. As a searing attack on mainstream cinema and how people (even those who claim to be outside the Hollywood system) judge and define people by their involvement in mainstream films, and an exploration of man's need to be relevant and beloved by all above everything else, Birdman is a phenomenal cinematic experience. If you don't like it, that's fair enough. But you've got to give it credit that it still gives you plenty to talk about.

Rating: 4.65 out of 5

Iron Man 2 (Marvel Review 3 of 11)

In the third review of the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe), Robert Downey Jr. dons the armour once again in Iron Man 2.

As anyone who read my review of the first Iron Man will know, I absolutely love that film. It is still one of my favourite comic-book/superhero films to date, and Downey Jr. was simply phenomenal in the titular role. So back in 2010, I was immensely excited at the prospect of a sequel. This is because when you look at the first sequel in a superhero/comic-book series, many of them are considered by most as being as good as and even superior to their predecessors. The Dark Knight, X-Men 2, Superman 2, Spider-Man 2, Hellboy 2... All of these sequels received as much love, if not more, than their predecessors from most viewers. I personally think that all of these sequels surpass their predecessors. So given the strong track record of superhero/comic-book sequels, I had high hopes for Iron Man 2. So did it deliver? Let's find out.

From the outside, it looks like life couldn't be better for Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) He is adored by many thanks to his Iron Man alter ego, he has helped to instill peace in dangerous regions around the world and he has successfully re-opened the Stark Expo, a place where great minds from around the world can come to display new and dazzling inventions. Unfortunately, Tony's life is far from simple. He is facing threats on political, business and personal levels; Senator Stern (Garry Shandling) is trying to take the Iron Man armour away from Tony, business rival Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) wants to assume Stark's position and Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) seeks vengeance for past injustices committed against his family by the Stark family. To do this, he intends to show that Iron Man's not quite as invincible as he might appear. With all of this, you'd think that Tony would have enough to deal with, but he's also being poisoned by the arc reactor in his chest and is running out of time and replacement options.

For its first hour, Iron Man 2 is a lot of fun. Jon Favreau, returning to direct after the original film as well as having an expanded role as Tony's bodyguard Happy Hogan, shows that he really understands the appeal of Tony Stark. From Tony's first scene, where he sky-dives into the Stark Expo with several cheerleaders in the background to the tune of AC/DC's Shoot to Thrill, it's easy to remember why Stark is such an awesome superhero. That becomes even clearer when Downey Jr. goes to work outside the suit. I've said this plenty of times before, but I'll never get tired saying just how perfect Downey Jr. is in this role. Whether he's running circles around his opponents in the middle of a senate hearing, sharing an intimate moment with Gwyneth Paltrow's Pepper Potts or trying to get a lock on Ivan and his motives, Downey Jr. nails every note. Tony Stark is one of the most intriguing superheroes around, and the performance by Downey Jr. fully realises the complexities of the character with incredible ease, charisma and skill. The script by Justin Theroux also shows an understanding of the character and his charm; there are plenty of great one-liners on display, both for Downey Jr. and the supporting cast. The action is fantastic, with Ivan's initial attack on Tony at a Monaco race track being a definite high point. This scene is phenomenally well-staged and intense, and frankly, none of the other action sequences in the film match it (although one does come close). Is this section perfect? That would be a no; John Debney's score isn't as powerful or memorable as Ramin Djawadi's for the first film and, while the visual effects are still more than effective, they fit less seamlessly this time around. But neither of these issues stop me from loving this section of the film.

Unfortunately, after a run-in between Tony and his friend James Rhodes (Don Cheadle), Iron Man 2 grinds to a halt for almost 30 minutes. This is simply because the film gives way to setting up The Avengers instead of telling its own story in a focused manner. Iron Man 2 marks the first 'prominent' role for S.H.I.E.L.D. Director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) in the MCU, and while Jackson is as cool as ever and it's fun watching him spar with Downey Jr., he's here more as set-up than as an important character in this particular story. This pushes Rourke's Vanko into the background for way too long, diluting the fantastic impact he makes in the first hour. Rourke is brilliant throughout, but the poor misuse of his character here takes his strong work for granted with decidedly sour results. There are good things about this part of the film; there is still some effective dialogue, there is a truly moving moment in the Iron Man legacy and (as I'll go on to discuss in more detail) the acting is wonderful. But none of this can really shake the sense that Iron Man 2 goes on stand-by during this period to establish future instalments at the expense of its own story, which doesn't sit well with me. Plus, for the amount of time spent on setting up a certain conflict, Tony's resolution is both strangely convoluted and simple at the same time.

Despite the sense of aimlessness which mires that half an hour, one of the things which helps to save that part of the film is the strong array of performances. While I've already praised Downey Jr., the supporting cast still lend great value. Gwyneth Paltrow is once again lovely as Pepper Potts, Tony's romantic interest. The bickering and romantic tension between the two characters is wonderfully written and perfomed, and while Pepper might verge on being annoying for some, it's only because she's trying to express her deep care for and frustration with Tony. I think a few people might come across as annoying at points if they were juggling the emotions and responsibilities which Pepper has in this film, and Paltrow's performance effectively conveys that. While his impression is somewhat diminished by that penultimate 30 minutes, Mickey Rourke is still a great antagonist as Ivan Vanko. Rourke is a truly underrated actor (his work in 2008's The Wrestler was incendiary), and he sinks his teeth into his role here. He fully embraces that this is a comic-book villain with his gloriously OTT Russian accent, but he also brings real humanity and menace to the part. The combination of these qualities makes Vanko an immensely entertaining villain who poses a genuine threat. While Vanko's attack on Tony at the race track is arguably the film's best action scene, one of the best dramatic scenes is when Tony and Vanko confront each other without the armour. This is an electrifying moment, and the portrayals by Donwey Jr. and Rourke are especially terrific here. Sam Rockwell also makes for a fun nemesis as Justin Hammer, albeit in a different way to Vanko. Whereas Vanko wants to tear Stark down, Hammer wants to be Tony. He wants to be the genius inventor, the irresistible charmer and the guy whom everyone admires, but he just can't cut it. That's an identifiable motivation for a villain; there are probably a lot of people who would love to take the place of a greatly-admired public figure and might try if they had the resources which Hammer has at his disposal. This also provides plenty of scenarios for comedy and Hammer's attempts to take Tony's place result in a lot of great humour, with Sam Rockwell having an utter blast in the role. However, Rockwell still emphasises that Hammer's growing frustration at consistently ending up in Tony's shadow could make him a dangerous foe, while also finding time to fit in his uniquely awesome dancing. When Iron Man 2 first came out, Scarlett Johansson seemed like a superfluous cast addition as Natalie Rushman, Tony's secretive new secretary. However, after seeing the character progress in The Avengers and Captain America: The Winter Soldier, I'd argue that this is actually a strong introduction of the Black Widow character. Her previous fault of seeming too much like window dressing is less egregious when one sees in more detail how she uses that to her advantage (the scenes between Johansson and Downey Jr. are very funny in illustrating how she's cunningly luring him into her 'web'), and she is much more smart and lethal than she initially lets on. Plus, her fight scene against a hallway of henchmen in the film's final act is pretty damn impressive. Taking over the role of Jim 'Rhodey' Rhodes after Terrence Howard didn't return, Don Cheadle is arguably a better fit in the role. While Howard was good in the part, Cheadle is able to exude the toughness which Howard lacked in the role. This is imperiative for Rhodey's role in this film; it's important that characters in films feel like they deserve the monikers given to them (see my thoughts on William Hurt's portrayal of General Thaddeus 'Thunderbolt' in my Incredible Hulk review for more detail), and Cheadle's portrayal of Rhodey is essential in us believing his new moniker of 'War Machine' by the film's conclusion. Plus, the relationship between Rhodey and Tony is brilliantly performed by Downey Jr. and Cheadle, particularly when the duo team up for action in the final act. As I said before, Samuel L. Jackson feels superfluous to the film, but at least he brings his usual cool charisma and is effortlessly watchable as a result. Clark Gregg also re-appears as SHIELD Agent Phil Coulson, and is brilliant as always; the banter between Coulson and Tony is fun to watch, particularly their very first interaction. Speaking of fun interactions, Paul Bettany is yet again a dry delight as Tony's electronic butler JARVIS. In a small villainous role, Garry Shandling excels in making Senator Stern a sleazy a-hole of the highest order. The early court-room showdown between Stern and Tony is one of the film's best scenes, as Tony verbally parries and punches both Stern and Hammer at every turn. Also, Shandling gets one of my favourite lines from the film. There are the usual selection of cameo appearances; I particularly loved the dual putdown from Tony and Pepper of a re-appearing character from the first Iron Man. Finally, in a small but important appearance, Mad Men's John Slattery delivers strong work as Howard Stark, Tony's father. This is yet another piece of set-up (the younger Howard, as portrayed by Dominic Cooper, plays a pivotal role in Captain America: The First Avenger), but the theme of family legacy throughout makes this fit in much more smoothly with the film's story than most of the other set-up in the film.   

After that penultimate half an hour, Iron Man 2 kicks back into high gear with a rousing and bad-ass final act. Once Vanko's ultimate revenge plan is revealed, Favreau opens up the explosive goods. As Tony and Rhodey (in his War Machine suit) team up to take down the bad guys, the visual effects carnage floods the screen, but Favreau stages it expertly in a comprehensible way. The only issue I have with this section of the film is that the final showdown with Vanko himself is WAY too short. Otherwise, I have no big problems with the film's final act. The action is phenomenal, the character interplay is great (there is a hilarious visual punchline to the Black Widow/Happy Hogan dynamic) and the film's final one-liner is simply perfect.

Re-watching Iron Man 2 for the first time since 2012 (in the build-up to the first Avengers film), I actually enjoyed it more. Whereas I previously thought that the film started losing steam at the 40-minute mark, I'd actually say that the major issues now start appearing for me after the first hour. As I said before, this now comes across as a fitting introduction to the character of Black Widow given what we find out about her in following films. Finally, while it might be difficult to catch every line of dialogue between Tony and Pepper due to their lines overlapping, their bickering becomes clearer and more entertaining after every viewing. Now does this make me forget my issues with the penultimate 30 minutes and that final boss battle? No. Does it exceed the original film? No. Is it one of my favourite films from the Marvel Cinematic Universe? No. But the latter's simply due to high expectations and what other MCU films I have to measure this film against. At the end of the day, Iron Man 2 is still an entertaining ride. I have to wonder, though... With AC/DC providing songs for the soundtrack, why don't Evil Walks or War Machine play anywhere? The former has the lyric 'Black Widow' and the latter's title is the name of a prominent character's alter-ego in the film, so they only seemed fitting. But that's just me being curious.

Final Verdict

While Iron Man 2 isn't one of my favourite films from the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it's an enjoyable blockbuster nonetheless. The performances are uniformly excellent (with Robert Downey Jr. once again doing spectacular work as Tony Stark), the visual effects are strong (if not as seamlessly integrated as in the original), Theroux' script gives the actors plenty of entertaining dialogue and Favreau's direction is mostly true to the spirit of the characters. Sure, the penultimate half an hour services the set-up for The Avengers at the expense of the film's own story, Tony's solution of one particular problem is both too simple and too convoluted and John Debney's score is rarely anything more than adequate. But the first hour and final act are still a great deal of fun. Come the obligatory post-credits scene, credit is due to the enjoyable experience provided by Iron Man 2 that it's easy to be excited for what will come next. Bring on the Thunder!

Rating: 3.75 out of 5