My Thoughts on Captain America: Civil War

Released after Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice, I was equally excited to see what the latest instalment of the Captain America franchise had to offer. Anthony Russo and Joe Russo have certainly proved themselves capable of directing a mega-franchise. In fact Captain America: The Winter Soldier is my favourite film from the Marvel Cinematic Universe. But the idea of turning one of the most significant comic book events into a 2 hour film was always going to be a challenge. And the end result is something that’s entertaining but also deeply flawed. 

Firstly, the action set pieces are pretty special. The chase scene between Bucky, Cap and Black Panther both shows the Russo brother's eye for filming action, but it also proved to be a well-conceived way of introducing the character of Black Panther. Of course, the airport scene is the clear highlight of the entire film, again suitably introducing the latest Spiderman into the mix. Overall from a typical blockbuster standpoint, it was an action-driven one that looks and sounds good.

However my main problem with Civil War boils down to the writing. Liberties were taken to transfer the renowned comic series Civil War onto the screen, and it evidently proved too grand and complex a challenge. The film attempts to simultaneously highlight and showcase the division within the Avengers, emphasise the changing attitudes towards them, introduce the likes of Spiderman and Black Panther, and pave the way for the Infinity War storyline. And the film never really succeeds at explaining any of those narrative elements. Instead we're given a series of absurd coincidences, woeful justifications and a questionable level of hypocrisy.

But the more worrying problem is that when you step back and look at the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe, the only narrative tread that is connecting it all together is through the arrival of Thanos. Civil War attempts to use the aftermath of Sokovia, New York and Washington (with some laughable death tolls) to justify the film’s conflict; the UN enforcing a registration act on the Avengers. There’s no global tension or resentment towards the Avengers. Instead you have frustrated government officials and passing comments from news stations, but there isn’t an atmosphere of anger towards superhero kind which feels decidedly necessary to the entire story. 

In my opinion, Marvel really needs to actually do something significant with the overall narrative of it’s universe, something with genuine consequences. In fact Marvel did this with the collapse of S.H.I.E.L.D and the rise of Hydra during the events of Winter Soldier, but never really built anything decent from it. Civil War has similar opportunities to instigate real repercussions, but the film plays it far too safe. The death of James Rhodes (Warmachine) would have added some emotional weight to the conflict. Meanwhile the entire premise of a divide and conflict between Captain America and Iron Man is subsequently made redundant through an email between the two at the end. It's all too safe. 

In the battle between the superhero blockbusters, Civil War proved to be the better overall package when compared with Batman Vs Superman. But after watching it, I still think that Captain America: The Winter Soldier is my favourite of the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe. Civil War had the action set-pieces, the characters and the visuals, but I don’t have a urge to watch the film again and continue to ask “Why is there a Civil War in the first place?”. 

Avengers: Age of Ultron Review

I collect the figures, read the comics and watch the films, but the “superhero” film genre is becoming increasingly saturated with the same thing over and over again. You just have to look at Marvel and DC’s release schedules for the next couple of years, and it’s clear that Hollywood and modern cinema in general, are being suffocated by these multi-million dollar franchises. After waiting an eternity for its release over here in Japan, Avengers: Age of Ultron was one of my most anticipated films of this year. Yet for all its bells and whistles, the film feels like a significant step back in Marvel’s recently stellar form. And it can all be simply attributed to one thing; crap writing. 

Tony Stark’s overzealous need to protect humanity from the unknown is rewarded with a sentient A.I. program named Ultron, who unfortunately plans to eradicate the human race. Tensions arise, the team’s chemistry is tested and destruction ensues as the Avengers come to the rescue..?. At the story’s heart, and even in the title, is the introduction of the villainous Ultron. Yet as a continuation of Marvel’s inability to create genuinely threatening antagonists, the physically imposing Ultron fails to really bring anything of stature or note. I can’t fault James Spader’s vocal performance, but this iconic character’s transformation to the screen is bitterly disappointing. The needless, smug remarks and Stark mannerisms belittle the initial menace and threat that’s effectively established with the character in the first act. It’s therefore frustrating that one of the quintessential figures of the Avengers lore is reduced to a tedious and vapid figure with an “evil plan” that’s ridiculous beyond belief. 

This labelled “Age” of Ultron similarly finds little justification through the course of the film. It’s ultimately a weekend of mild nuisance for the Avengers, where each member has minor obstacles they have to overcome as a team. The foundations are there for a film of impressive scale and dramatic weight, but it’s constricted by a lack of drive and ambition from the writing. These inconsistencies and problems ultimately infect the majority of the film. Natasha Romanoff and Bruce Banner’s forced romance falls flat on its face to an uncomfortable degree. Their relationship feels tacked on rather than of genuine affection, which in hindsight had seemingly appeared out of nowhere. It’s an amateurish technique of forcing emotional gravitas to the ensuing events and it shows. 

One issue that has been a constant problem with the Marvel films of late is the underlying desire to further develop its overall “Universe”. Age of Ultron spends a tiresome amount of screen time on setting up Captain America: Civil War, Thor: Ragnarok and Avengers: The Infinity Wars. Previously, hidden secrets, minor details and easter eggs offered fans glimpses and signs of the bigger composition of the Marvel totality. But with the vast nature and multiplicity of the franchise, it seems that casually inserting mini trailers/ teasers for upcoming films has become the norm. It’s genius marketing, but distracts from the film at hand. Yet even when the decision is made to include these elements, they’re either forgotten about or trivialised. Take Captain America: The Winter Soldier for example. The final moment of that film is the dismantling of S.H.I.E.L.D at the hands of Hydra. It’s a significant event that see’s Nick Fury disappear off the grid, S.H.I.E.L.D’s secrets being leaked to the public, and Captain America, Black Widow and Falcon going their separate ways. But in Age of Ultron a couple of lines of dialogue are deemed sufficient to resolve these major narrative ramifications. It’s an intriguing angle that could have been used to create uncertainty over the Avengers’ public perception, but alas it’s completely wasted. 

But for all my problems with Age of Ultron, it was still entertaining to watch. Even with the massive drawback of an unintelligent script and story, the entire cast do a relatively good job. The chemistry between the team members is on display, and it’s one that remains engaging and charming to witness. While Aaron Taylor Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen’s accents are as inconsistent as the screenplay, they manage to justify their recruitment into the Avengers. I actually really enjoyed Scarlet Witch’s mind games with the rest of the team. Exploring the inner psyches and torments of our heroes, added more weight to each decision and reaction. Heroes with fragility or past trauma are always a lot more interesting than the immortal beings they’re usually whittled down to. Meanwhile the action set pieces are handled well and certainly look the part. The film hits the action beats that a blockbuster should, and the spectacle is, for the most part, satisfying.

Avengers: Age of Ultron is an acceptable sequel, but loses the intellect, charm and cohesion that propelled the superhero team to popular stardom back in 2012. At the time, Avengers Assemble was a surprisingly enjoyable blockbuster that felt sincere and fitting to its origins and the source material. Meanwhile last year’s Captain America: The Winter Soldier brought a sophisticated and thematically, engrossing story of conspiracy and espionage that offered a different perspective to the franchise’s characters and the genre itself. Guardians of the Galaxy took many by surprise with it’s gung-ho attitude and strong sense of humour throughout. This ability to infuse a unique element or personality has become an important factor in defining these individual films. Age of Ultron is an “Avengers” film, and by that stipulation it should be one of grandeur and lasting consequence. Yet while the aesthetics and performances are handled well, the sub-par writing leaves a film of missed opportunities and squandered ambition.

6/10 

Things A "Movie Lover" Collects: Statues/ Figures

A very recent and expensive voyage I’ve taken has been into the world of overly priced and highly addictive action figures and statues. Namely Hot Toys and Sideshow, my unfortunate obsession with the Marvel Femme Fatale ‘Black Widow’ and the LiveForFilm website brought them to my attention after their Avengers line had been announced. Hot Toys, a Hong Kong based company, specialises in 1/6th and 1/4th representations of iconic and recent film characters. Acquiring film licences such as The Dark Knight, Predator and The Avengers, the end result has been a stream of specularly recreated figures that are simply works of art. From the headsculpts and costumes to the buckles on their footwear, Hot Toys’ artists/ craftsmen spend an incredible amount of time and effort to implement these intricate details and screen accuracies: 

 

On the other hand Sideshow, an American distributor of Hot Toys, has also made a name for itself through their foray into 1/4 scale statues. Similarly attaining licences from Iron Man, Star Wars and actual comic books, they have produced an impressive breadth of highly detailed and well crafted representations. With prices ranging from £200-500, my collection only comprises of Black Widow from Iron Man 2, obviously:

I myself had always had an apprehensive train of thought towards the idea of collecting statues and figures. Back in the good old days Star Wars was the craze with the re-releases in the cinemas. Naturally my brother and I collected the figures, sets and ships that are all currently presiding in the attic. Gundam Wing and Totoro Plushes increased with my exposure to my Japanese roots, but the thought of spending £155 on a “toy” never crossed my mind. But are they worth it? Some people collect these things as an “investment”, and while I stand to make a tidy sum if I were to sell them, to me their simply works of art created by fans and enthusiasts of films and cinema. I love the characters and, for the most part, the films. While the likes of Sucker Punch and The Spirit were absolutely terrible, their costume designs and visual look always appealed.  A larger percentage of my collection surrounds The Avengers, primarily because of their creative and unique designs. Whether it’s Captain America’s iconic red/white/blue design, to Iron Man’s impressive stature, there’s a joy in gazing upon each figure and changing their poses. 

In a cynical light, the hobby could be labelled as glorified ‘doll collecting’, but after spending a lot and time staring/ displaying them, I can’t help but appreciate these as a near-perfect, artistic and physical representations of beloved film characters. Like the rise of vinyl toys, these optimise the new pop-cultural nature of "art" in general. Mind you, my wallet is crying. 

Second Thoughts: Iron Man 3 (Spoilers)

Rants and frustration galore as Jack and Nick tear into Iron Man 3. Why didn't it blow them away? 

Podcast Powered By Podbean

Have a listen to the original review: http://lights-camera-critic.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/respawningcouch-podcast-audio-review_30.html

Iron Man 3 Review

Back in 2008, Marvel Studios restored some pride and integrity back into the “Marvel superhero” genre with Jon Favreau’s Iron Man. Favreau’s feature showed that a great combination of engaging writing and characters, with exhilarating set-pieces and action, could create a highly successful and highly regarded blockbuster. 5 years later, Shane Black’s addition to the Iron Man franchise has to rectify the issues instigated by Iron Man 2 and manage to complement last year’s impressive The Avengers. 

After his near-death experience during events of The Avengers, Tony Stark is suffering from the mental anguish and subsequent anxiety attacks as his relationship with Pepper and his persona as the “Iron Man” is put under the test. Meanwhile the terrorist leader known as The Mandarin, is organising the destruction of the US through a series of bombings using Aldrich Killian’s unstable “Extremis” serum. 

Like its predecessor, Iron Man 3 suffers from fundamental problems in its writing, especially in its mishandling of characters. In hindsight it’s a real shame as Black and Drew Pearce have clearly tried to set a darker tone that attempts to balance the entertaining action with “human” drama. Rebecca Hall’s Maya Jansen, is a perfect example of the film’s unfortunate lapses in character development. Immediately introduced in the film’s opening, she’s given a context to the “Extremis” formula, the foundations of a charming personality and a “minor” romance with Tony Stark. She’s then completely forgotten about, managing to reappear midway through the second act for absolutely no reason or explanation, to then be rendered completely pointless. Similarly Don Cheadle only proves to serve as Tony or the President’s lackey for the majority of his scenes. Thus the fan-hype surrounding the Iron Patriot is defused into yet another suit with a paint-job that’s utterly redundant. 

Ben Kingsley’s Mandarin is a genuinely interesting character whose threatening menace is shown through his flamboyant appearance, ruthless actions and “unique” accent. Kingsley really relishes the freedom offered by the role and thrives with it. Yet some horrendous writing during the third act undoes everything he’s crafted and built into the character, merely reducing him into an insulting mess of insignificance. Even the lead protagonist doesn’t survive the rather problematic nature of the film’s script. Tony Stark’s “debilitating” mental anguish is conveniently solved by the philosophical reasoning of a child, rather than using this narrative element as a persistent source of tension and threat to the character, which would have been far more interesting.  Add the tiresome use of cheap pratfalls and slapstick humour, and the screenplay is a bit of a shambles that doesn’t have the intrigue or consistency of the first Iron Man. 

However even with the gaping flaws surrounding the characters and their intentions, the excellent cast manages to overcome some of the issues. Robert Downey Jr offers his same charismatic and enjoyable performance that flourishes under the name of Tony Stark. His romantic relationship with Pepper is far more prominent than in the previous instalments, and still maintains the charm and chemistry. Paltrow’s performance is an impressive one that shows the strengths and faults of her character’s bond with Tony. However I still feel that the couple faired better in The Avengers, even with their limited screen-time, and managed to form a cohesive and poignant relationship without the need for the “damsel in distress” methodology that unfortunately overpowers Iron Man 3’s last act. Supporting cast wise, the likes of Guy Pearce and James Badge Dale offer some intense and sinister moments even when their characters are deflated by the script in humorous ways. 

So what does Iron Man 3 do right? Simply put, its action and visuals. With a great mixture of small-scale brawls and large explosive fights, Black persists in the intensity and energy we’ve come to expect from the series and from Marvel’s blockbusters. The final fight is a fan’s wet dream as 30 Iron Men face off against the Extremis test subjects in a frantic “Battle Royale”. Even with some minor blips in the visual effects Iron Man 3 looks fantastic. From the snow-covered communities of Tennessee to Tony's accommodation in Malibu, the film has a stunning contrast of colours, tones and designs that really bring the look together. The sense of weight and speed to each confrontation is gloriously mapped onto the character models and the amount of detail on Tony’s battle-damaged armour is astonishing. By the end, watching him jumping between different suits is an exhilarating flux of fluid animation and meticulous arrangement. 

Iron Man 3, like its predecessors, has the scale and action befitting a superhero film. And while that and Robert Downey Jr. may be the sole reasons for people to flood their local cinemas, Black and Pearce have attempted to add something darker and human. Yet even with its intense set-pieces and impressive visual effects, the film can’t escape the problematic nature of its writing. Whether its the ill-structured narrative or the throw-away attitude to its characters, Iron Man 3 left a disappointing end to an initially promising trilogy. 

6/10 

Audio Review: http://lights-camera-critic.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/respawningcouch-podcast-audio-review_30.html