Captain (Almost) Marvelous

Let's do a little math. Confident hero + diverse cast + political relevance + lighthearted banter + story about displaced peoples + strong women = success...right? Considering that all those elements put together form the heart of the MCU's best outing so far, Thor: Ragnarok, yes. The movie blended them together in a seamless, nuanced manner. Thanks, no doubt, to Taiki Waititi's assured direction.

Can this formula repeat itself? I don't know. The first test has not been conclusive.

Captain Marvel opts to repeat the quirky balance between someone in pain struggling to find themselves and maintaining a light and breezy atmosphere. Hell, if we can laugh at someone faceplanting out of a plane when an entire planet is being destroyed, we can certainly laugh at a digitally de-aged Samuel L. Jackson (good luck young actors on breaking through when we can make him and Kurt Russell looking 20-30 years younger without being too noticeable) cooing at a cat in the middle of an important mission.

Well...

I hate to say it, but I think Ragnarok is a bad influence. Opting for humor over tension can be rewarding sometimes. It can also be, meh. Waititi's a great comic. Laughs are his bread and butter. Not so much with the five credited writers on this film. At moments, it's like watching a sitcom without the laugh track. Oof.

What we get, then, is a weird shallowness that is 100% at odds with Carol Danvers's emotional journey. The tone never quite matches the moment. That's unfortunate because Brie Larson knows how to act. She sells the role to the best of her ability. She can't do it alone, though.

The scattered tone feeds into the film's other aspects.

I believe the directors were told to go all in on telling a positive, heartwarming tale about a free-spirited woman who shakes off the shackles of her male oppressor. She has a mind of her own, and she's not about to take crap from anyone. That's awesome. It's an attitude we need to see more often.

Yet, because of the film's aversion to emotional nuance, her struggle does not feel tense or hard or much like a conflict at all. Storytelling needs pain like an Olympic sprinter needs fast-twitch muscles. Without pain, how are we going to care about someone who is essentially an all-powerful being? We know she can beat her enemies in a flash.

All it would've taken was a slight shift away from playful banter towards tension. Just a handful of changes keeps an uneven yet enjoyable flick from nesting in alongside the franchise's best installments.

That said, maybe the world needs a movie where the end is never in doubt, where a woman can buck the system, where unjustly criminalized people can have a hero that leads them to the promised land. Maybe that's where we are right now.

Solo: A Star Wars Story (We've Seen Before)

Han Solo takes his cues from the classics. He’s one-part John Wayne, two parts Captain Blood, and a drop of James Cagney. Rather than solve his problems in a calm, rational manner, he’d rather whip out his blaster or crack a (somewhat cornball) one-liner about not understanding Princess Leia. His heart of gold, however, refuses to leave a lost cause alone.

More than that, he likes to improvise. Han revels in breaking the rules, going outside the box, and manages to work things out despite not hitting all the checkboxes when they’re supposed to be hit. This freewheeling essence, in theory, should be at heart of Solo: A Star Wars Story.

Instead, Solo operates like a car (or spaceship) fresh off the assembly line. The engine runs smooth, the different mechanical parts work in the way they are supposed to, and there are no hiccups in the latest technology to ruin the experience. No problem, right? For a vehicle, sure. A movie, however, needs a little nuance and narrative invention.

That is nowhere to be found.

The Kasdans’ screenplay feels rote rather than robust. Ron Howard’s direction is distinctly uninspired. Given what appears to be his most well-remembered movie, A Beautiful Mind – which borrowed heavily from the film noir aesthetic and other Hollywood tropes – it should come as no surprise that he does the same with Solo and shamelessly.

The movie takes the worst quality of the Star Wars franchise – the strict adherence to the Joseph Campbell formula and the rehashing of plot points seen in old sci-fi films and westerns – and makes that the foundation. How many times have we seen the “destroy the Death Star” plot? At least four, perhaps more.

To be fair, Solo has its brighter moments. Almost all of them come from the cast. Alden Ehrenreich is not Harrison Ford, and it shows. He may not have the same charm, but he has enough to make him a passable Han Solo. Emilia Clarke, who plays Qi’ra, Solo’s love interest, puts in a solid performance. Woody Harrelson almost makes you forget that his character resembles every other on-screen bandit nearing their career’s end.

Donald Glover’s Lando Calrissian puts them both to shame. The man possesses a particular set of skills; skills that make him and his abundant charisma an enjoyable watch whenever he appears on the screen.

Following another common theme in the Star Wars universe, the most colorful and interesting character is not a human. It’s a robot. L3-37 (Phoebe Waller-Bridge) commands every scene she is in. She provides much-needed humor, energy, and personality. She could also teach Korg a thing or two about starting a revolution. Without her, the movie would be flatter than a tabletop.

The cast makes the movie watchable.

At the end of the day, Solo is what the Old Hollywood studios would call “harmless entertainment.” No attempts to convey a deeper message beyond the tale. A one-dimensional good-guy, bad-guy plot.

Pure escapism. 

Follow @WinBribach on twitter. 

Too Big To Fail - Avengers: Infinity War Review

Alfred Hitchcock defined suspense as involving dramatic irony, letting the audience in on the danger facing the heroes and building the tension from there. He considered this superior to surprise, where the audience knows nothing before the trap is sprung, but he did allow an exception: where the twist or shock is "the highlight of the story."

Avengers: Infinity Wars relies heavily on that exception.

The unfolding of the story revolves around surprise. Without it, there are no stakes, no emotional core, and no reason to make the movie besides adding another mega money maker to the Disney machine.

Before going further into the movie itself, the challenges must be mentioned. During the past 10 years, there have been 18 installments in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and 14 different directors. Of those directors, Ryan Coogler, Kenneth Branagh (old enough to make King Lear now), and Taika Waititi could be considered "Auteurs" - filmmakers who leave a distinct stamp on their work. Shane Black and James Gunn also possess a certain uniqueness. Fitting these visions into a single, cohesive movie is a difficult task, and the Russo brothers are mostly successful.

The movie operates like an episode of a TV show, with an A, B, C, and D story. Each plotline involves separate characters, giving them enough time to be relevant players in the grand scheme. That said, the movie would be overstuffed at half the characters. Age of Ultron proved that. There are too many players and too many stories, and not enough time. Some scenes feel thrown-in just to shed the spotlight on characters who might seem neglected had they kept moving the A-story forward without them.

Again, the Russo brothers manage to make it work despite the challenges and the shortcomings.

Their bag of surprises begins with Thanos (Josh Brolin). An all-powerful being who is hellbent on destruction could have easily resulted in another X-Men: Apocalypse or Justice League, where the villains receive no character development and destroy for the sake of destroying.

But Thanos is a genuine character. The writers, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, give him an arc that reveals who he is, why he does what he does, and what he cares about. Brolin's performance, easily the strongest in the entire film, brings the mad titan to life.

Thor (Chris Hemsworth) provides another positive performance. Marvel appears to have learned its lessons after Waititi's successful Ragnarok. 

Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Captain America (Chris Evans), Black Panther (Chadwick Boseman), Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and the others do not receive enough time and space, and their development is mostly dependent upon the previous films in the MCU canon.

The biggest surprise comes at the end. This is the twist that makes the story work. Those who live and those who fade into dust will provide plenty to talk about in the year-long gap until Avengers 4 comes out.

The caveat? It's a cliffhanger meant to drive audiences to see the true conclusion to the saga that started with Iron Man. Look at the film like Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1. Evaluating it on its own is difficult, but if it turns out to be anything like The Deathly Hallows: Part 2, then audiences won't mind.

(P.S. For those needing assurances about their favorite characters, look at the movies already slated for production and to recent successes the studio wants to capitalize on. Disney knows better than to blow up the bread wagon.)

If interested, follow @WinBribach on Twitter. 

Captain America: Civil War Review - More is Just Fine

Less is more - a phrase so often used to address a film's merits that it has become a cliche. In most cases, the designation holds true. Many products from Hollywood's dream factory could do with some trimming, especially ones involving costumed crusaders. Captain America: Civil War, however, breaks this rule in style.

If the future installments of the Marvel Cinematic Universe are as action-packed, entertaining, and well-conceived as this one, then the series' fans are in for a great deal of excitement and there should be no concern about a drop in quality.

Interestingly, the Hero vs. Hero concept is eerily similar to the failure that was Batman vs. Superman, but Marvel succeeds in every way that DC failed.

Civil War is an engrossing and engaging journey into the grandiose struggles faced by superheroes. When they slip-up, the consequences are large. For the Avengers, that means the public calling for oversight and accountability. In other words, turning them into soldiers rather than autonomous do-gooders with the best intentions.

The tension begins to build. As advertised, Captain America (Chris Evans) believes that no government, not even the United Nations, has the right to order the Avengers around. On the other hand, Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.) is with the public. The ties that held the group together are ripped apart. Heroes align themselves according to their beliefs or even their personal motives at the time.

Spiderman gets into the game.

Now, this may seem like a set-up for an intensely personal drama about the limits of friendship and how far one is willing to go for brotherhood. Joe and Anthony Russo, the film's directors, and Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, the writers, have other ideas. While those aforementioned themes are prevalent, what sets Civil War apart from other superhero flicks is the comic timing. Just when the conflict and suspense-filled action is built-up enough, the gags are thrown in. At this point, Marvel and Disney seem to have mastered the comedy required to create a solid counterbalance to the action and drama in their movies.

Of course, Spider Man's introduction was always going to be a popular move, and Tom Holland does a solid job in this new take on the web-slinging character. The more impressive introduction, however, comes from Black Panther, as Chadwick Boseman gives the vengeful African prince-turned-king the right amount of emotion and energy. The other players, such as Paul Rudd, Anthony Mackie, Scarlett Johannson, and Elizabeth Olsen, also play their parts satisfactorily.

Them cats are quick! Black Panther on the run.

With all of these elements in place, the filmmakers returned to a familiar Marvel premise - one grudge-bearing man (Daniel Bruhl) attempting to get the heroes to start fighting each other. The concept is the launching pad for what could very well be the best movie yet to come out of the Marvel franchise. The story, the conflict, and the execution could not get much better. Perhaps the only hero film to top it, though incomparable in many ways, is Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight.

High praise, but earned. Here's hoping for more top-notch productions down the road.

The only thing to be said against this film is the first part of the title - Captain America. By no means is this a Captain America movie. It is, unquestionably, an Avengers movie.

The Jungle Book Review - Misleading but Good

Sometimes, even Disney can get carried away. They chose to call their newest spin on The Jungle Book a "live action" film. That implies real actors, real settings, and real animals being involved in the production process. Everything listed there, except for the actor (Neel Sethi) playing Mowgli, is far from anything we would see in a natural location. The movie is built around animated figures, who might possess the movement patterns of their actual counterparts, which look like they should be featured in a Disney Animation production.

Now, imagine a scenario where an entertainment kingpin hasn't misled you into believing the movie depicted real-life action. After that, eliminate any notions of the movie seriously addressing the environmental and endangered species issues present in our society. Yes, the setting is supposed to be in nature, but still cut out those political expectations. If you can do this, then you will find The Jungle Book remake to be a competently carried-out and entertaining film.

Sorry folks, this isn't a live action film. But, hey, it's still good!

At the risk of being obvious, perhaps, let us say the creative minds who turned out the picture were successful because they didn't deviate too much from the original animated feature. That starts with the writing. Justin Marks's screenplay is light, tight, and hits all of the right notes. There's essentially no self-gratuitous fat, a trap filmmakers all too often fall into.

Jon Favreau's capable direction was also definitely a positive. He doesn't veer off on tangents and chose to keep just enough of the 1967 version's music, especially the "Bare Necessities," which is one of the main reasons why it remains an endearing and indelible piece of animated cinema. Although Favreau makes it clear throughout that this isn't a musical, the music keeps the film tied to its lighter roots.

Let the cat fight commence!

Where this version sets itself apart is in the tone. While obviously upbeat at various points, the majority of the movie is shrouded in darkness and danger. That seems to fit right in with the story's central point - a hunt. Shere Khan, the ruthless (British) tiger, is hell-bent on killing the "man-cub" Mowgli. That hunt is always in the background. Also, the natural world is not kind to the lone human character. It's always fighting him and making life difficult for him. This lends a cynical edge to the generally heartwarming Disney story.

Another aspect that cannot be overlooked is the voice cast. Almost every actor plays their role to perfection. Idris Elba gives Shere Khan the brutal British bite that George Sanders did before him and Ben Kingsley's Bagheera is the epitome of a sagely panther. Bill Murray is perfect for the "Bare Necessities" spouting Baloo, who happens to be a shade more opportunist in this version than the original. Not to be overlooked are Lupita Nyong'o as Raksha the wolf who raises Mowgli, Christopher Walken as the large monkey King Louie, and Scarlett Johansson, who gives Kaa a seductive element.

Tell me, does that look real?

For those of you who know the story, there's no need for a summary. For those of you who don't, there won't be any spoilers here.

What should be mentioned, however, is that this film seems to be less about humanity's relationship to nature or the environment and more about religion. The metaphors appear to point upward (if you will) rather than around us. Mowgli can be seen as a messianic figure who unites individuals from a multitude of backgrounds. Also, since the elephants seem to be the powerful, omniscient creator figures, Mowgli's ability to gain their trust and get close to them like no one else can would add greater weight to the messiah view.

Anyway, here's the final word. 2016's Jungle Book is definitely worth seeing.

Review: Episode VII Awakens New Life Into the Star Wars Franchise

I will start by saying that I have never been a Star Wars fanatic. No part of my childhood included pretending that Darth Vader was my father. In fact, I spent my time figuring out what links existed between any of the Godzilla movies, though now I cannot understand my obsession with the super-breath empowered dinosaur. Regardless, I have seen all of the Star Wars films and even played the LEGO Star Wars video game when it came out years ago, so I am very familiar with the world and the lore. That being said, however, I found myself highly skeptical of the praise surrounding The Force Awakens, as I am often reminded of the disastrous Episodes I, II, and III.

Abrams is right in his element with Star Wars.

Now, having seen the film, I must say that I was very surprised to find a little substance behind Disney's massive marketing mask. Actually, I will take it a step further. In some ways, Episode VII is the best movie to come out of the Star Wars franchise. The most important arena where this holds true is character development. I can remember this being the most disappointing aspect of the six previous installments in the pop culture staple. Thanks to the work of J.J Abrams, the driving force behind this sequel trilogy, Lawrence Kasdan, who helped make the original Star Wars what it was, and Michael Arndt, a relatively unknown writer with a Best Original Screenplay Oscar to his name. I'm convinced that this renewed devotion to the human side of the characters is due to the involvement of Arndt. Yes, he left before the product was finished, but his quality had to have influenced it.

The First Order, which has taken up where the Empire left off, has been given a very European look.

Anyway, as I was saying, the characters do not come across as stock heroes thrown into a mosh pit of sci-fi world made for nerdist worship. While there are plenty of those features and little asides to the old days depicted in the original three films, The Force Awakens spends more time on allowing the audience to truly connect to Rey, Finn, Poe, and Kylo Ren, the want-to-be Darth Vader. They struggle, internally and externally, with who they are and what they are meant to do. The force calls to them or rips them up inside, leaving them to fight it out. Nothing is made easy for them. Rey is forced out of her element and she has find a way to thrive in the face of near-constant immediate danger. Finn rebels against the anonymity and lifelong conditioning of being a storm trooper, using Poe's capture as a means for an exit. Then there's Kylo Ren. He does not know what he wants to be. Darth Vader or the man his parents and mentor taught him to be.

Being a self-proclaimed critic, however, I have to find something to tear down. This film was made by J.J Abrams, who has been labeled a Star Wars "superfan." True to form, he made a movie that fans would love. Complete with visual references to Episode IV, V, and VI as well as new creatures and technology tailor-made for a killing in the merchandise sales, there is no question that the guiding hand was a fan fashioning out a labor of love. Also, this influence is clearly carried out in the plot, which seems to follow A New Hope just a little too closely. Some parallels and references would have been fine considering the franchise, but some of the story elements resemble Lucas's first installment more than they should. The new elements are great, especially how storm troopers are not merely addressed with stock anonymity. I'm just saying that maybe more originality could have been included in the plot. Then again, who am I to argue with the box office receipts?

Rey and Finn do not disappoint initiating the flagship roles for the sequel trilogy.

All things considered, The Force Awakens is exactly what the doctor ordered for Disney investment in Star Wars. It mixes the old and new in a way that opens up many avenues to exploration during the subsequent films. Not only that, Abrams has not forgotten the first rule of entertainment--don't be boring. Episode VII is nothing to snooze about.

How will these characters be expanded upon in Episode VIII?

The Star Wars Craze

If social media is an indication of what's going on with our society, then there is an epidemic going around. It's not necessarily deadly, unless people have gotten overzealous with their imaginations, and it's nothing that should concern a doctor, except maybe the amateur psychologist I'm sure everyone knows. More than anything, it's annoying...and it's everywhere--the Star Wars Craze.

Big celebrities these days.

Advertisement after advertisement, even highly unrelated ones, added to this malady. Instagram post after Instagram post feature Star Wars costumes and themes. Not to mention, your countless memes. For someone who chooses to remain level-headed and intelligent about the new update on what has become a cultural phenomenon, this is extremely bothersome. A massive number of people have bought into the marketing campaign set forth by Disney, who has a big stock in making sure this operation is promoted to every possible wallet. They've created an army with only one thing on its collective mind: Star Wars. To some, those two little words mean nostalgia. A little mental trip back to 1977, when hippies were still in style and dads like Red Forman were left dumbfounded by there children's behavior.

This says it all.

Of course, not everyone was around during those days. I certainly wasn't. However, the craze was inherited by following generations. Whether that was by parental prodding or curiosity over what the hell is the big deal will probably differ in each case. Whatever the reason, George Lucas managed to create a pop culture staple. Disney, the blood-sniffing money oriented shark of a studio, felt it was time to throw its hat into this influential and profitable ring. Also, they decided to make Lucas, already a billionaire, four billion dollars richer. While he's on easy street, Disney has to do all the work. So what do they do? Promote it more than any movie has ever been promoted and make sure it has the widest release (the most screens) in history (much to the chagrin of Quentin Tarantino). Also, they decided to throw in lots of kids' books, dime novelizations, animated TV shows, and whatever else they could think of. No wonder the cost to market Episode 7 was more than the actual cost of producing the movie. 

Old meets the new.

By doing this, Disney has succeeded massively in creating battalions of wallet owners who will march, like storm troopers, to the theaters. Ex-hippies, ex-hipsters, and ex-diaper dandies (meaning people of all ages) will drop loads of money into Disney's imperial coffers. These movies are probably the surest-fire profit makers Hollywood has ever seen. 

The masters of marketing and making back all of their money.

As one of those who's managed to stay free of this disease, I will hold judgement on the merits of the movie until I actually see it. The last time someone tried to add onto the series ended in disastrous but sadly profitable results.