Showing posts with label 2012. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2012. Show all posts

Saturday, February 29, 2020

Score Sample: John Carter (2012)

Probably been too long since I mentioned Michael Giacchino on this blog, right? Right! So let's his score from the 2012 sci-fi adventure film John Carter another look. Through most of the 2010s Giacchino has been attached to Disney related film scores. Could be Pixar, Star Wars or even one off films like this one. Of course Disney wasn't hoping for a one off with John Carter, there were looking for their own Star Wars saga (before they bought Lucasfilm).

Unfortunately the film did poorly in theaters and with a budget that could almost fund mission to Mars itself, John Carter is considered one of the biggest financial failures in film history. Ouch. All that said, the movie is actually solid entertainment, with plenty of eye candy to keep a viewer engaged. Helping along with that is Michael Giacchino's score. Giacchino goes full adventure epic with his style. You'll hear all kinds of golden age influences in the score including a little Lawrence of Arabia in there. But you also have those kinetic Giacchino action tracks.

One of my favorites is Sad Than Pursues the Princess which just blasts along with action. But I also love the end titles which gives you a nice sampling of all the theme Giacchino crafted for the film. So enjoy both in this entry!



Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Movie Music Musings: The Goldsmith Award 2012

I'm noticing a disturbing trend with these Goldsmith awards. One composer's name pops up time and again. This makes sense since to win a Goldsmith award you need to create great music for an unsuccessful film. This composer is constantly writing great music. But it seems that his film selections don't always pan out. This is the third time he's shown up as a candidate or winner for this award.

I'm talking about Michael Giacchino. He is really living up to the Goldsmith mantle. Not only has he scored three Star Trek films and is catching up to Goldsmith on that front. But he manages to be tied to some big earners as well as these poor performers. Luckily I don't think this is hurting his career. The man keeps on working year after year and heading up some of the biggest hits of those years. But in 2012 he hit a dud. Man did Disney spend a massive amount of money on John Carter and wow, did no one really care about seeing it. I've seen all kinds of reasons why the movie didn't do well in theaters, most of them revolved around how similar the trailers made it look to the Star Wars prequels. But the few people that I've run into that actually saw the movie said it was a solid bit of fun space opera adventure, just like the books it was based off of.

Michael Giacchino tackled this score with his usual gusto, crafting a theme rich score that certainly reminds listeners of the adventure scores of the 1980s and 1990s. Big orchestral bombast, exciting action music and even a sweeping romantic love them. The score has it all, even a bit of that Lawrence of Arabia feel with all the red desert landscapes. There are plenty of great tracks from the score to John Carter, but I really like this exciting track Sab Pursues the Princess. It drives along with a great intensity and then the heroic John Carter theme kicks in as he leaps in to save the day.


Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Sinister (2012)

Introduction:
Ever since I watched Misery and later read the book, I was afraid of becoming the writer in a horror story. They never seem to catch a break. Even artists and writers in Lovecraft’s fiction usually come to bad ends. Is it because writers tend to have open imaginations that cause them to be susceptible to the uncanny and horrific? Or is it because they are so darn needy that they people get sick of their whining and decide to off them? But I kid my fellow writers… a little. So it was with some trepidation that I watched a story about a writer who discovers a terrible secret in his new home.

Summary:
Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) is a struggling writer who has just moved his family to a new home. He got the house for a steal and his hoping to write a blockbuster true crime book based on a murder that happened in this new town. Well more specifically in the back yard of the new house he just moved his family into. And more specifically, the whole family was hung from a tree in the back yard and the daughter went missing. So yeah Oswalt isn’t a little creepy for doing that.

During the move Oswalt finds a box in the attic that contains a super 8 projector and some home movies. He pops one of them in, and watches as the previous family has a good time… and then witnesses their death! The rest of the films area similar showing happy families being brutally killed. Oswalt finds clues uniting the deaths and starts digging deeper. With this source material he knows he’ll have a best seller for sure! But ominous things start happening. His son starts having night terrors. Oswalt starts hearing and seeing strange things in his home. And then he finds evidence that these murders may be tied to a cult worshiping a child-stealing creature. Is this delusion starting to break Oswalt’s grip on sanity or is there something more Sinister at work?

Good Points:
  • Atmospheric and filled with a sense of impending doom
  • Hawk gives an excellent performance as the complicated Oswalt
  • Those murder films are disturbing and creepy as hell

Bad Points:
  • The overall mood is so dower and dreary it may turn some viewers off
  • Works as a slow burn, those looking for quick thrills will be disappointed
  • The revelation of the reason for the murders just didn’t quite click for me

Overall:
This is a dark film, both visually and thematically. The whole movie is saturated with a shadowy creepiness that is unsettling. Hawke does a fine job creating a man we can sympathize with, even if we don’t like him. But what works is the combination of the mystery of the murders with the sense of doom that hangs over Hawk and his family. By moving into this house he has invited the evil into his family and that evil begins working. While I found the reason behind the evil to something less then compelling, I will say that the overall it is a disturbing and creepy ride. Not a fun horror film, but certainly a chilling one.

Scores (out of 5)
Visuals: 4
Sound: 4
Acting: 4
Script: 3
Music: 4
Direction: 4
Entertainment: 4
Total:  4


Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Friday, June 12, 2015

Red Lights (2012)

Introduction:
You know me, I love supernatural thrillers. I get drawn into the concepts and think there are some really good stories that can be told in that genre. So I’m a bit of a sucker for them. And when you get a cast that includes Sigourney Weaver and Robert De Niro… well I tend to ignore the one star ratings on Netflix. I figure, there has to be something good in the film to attract those kinds of actors, right?

Summary:
Margaret Matheson (Sigourney Weaver) has dedicated her life to studying the supernatural. Well, let me rephrase that, she has dedicated her life to proving all supernatural events as natural events misinterpreted or outright hoaxes. Helping her in her regular forays into “ghost busting” is Tom Buckley (Cilian Murphy) a student at the university that Margaret teaches at. The two are enjoying themselves quite a bit and even torment fellow professor Paul Shackleton (Toby Jones) who is attempting to prove the existence of supernatural events.

Then, the ultimate test arrives, Simon Silver (Robert De Niro), a man who was very famous back in the 70s for using ESP and other amazing mental powers to wow large audiences. After an event where a cynic confronted him and was killed mysteriously, Silver disappeared from public view. Well he is back with a vengeance, and Tom sees this as the perfect opportunity to put the paranormal on trial very publicly. But Margaret refuses, and Tom becomes more and more obsessed with going after Simon himself. Is Margaret hiding a secret? Is Simon more dangerous than anyone can guess? And what is driving Tom’s obsession. Check out Red Lights to find the answers.

Good Points:
  • The basic plot and characters are interesting and set up well
  • The cast does a fine job in the roles
  • Some wonderfully dark and atmospheric scenes

Bad Points:
  • Some horribly over the top and badly edited scenes
  • Starts to spin its wheels about half way through
  • The final “twist” at the end just doesn’t make the impact it should

Overall:
This is one frustrating film. I can see a really good movie struggling to get out, but the final result is something that seems messy, unfocused and in the end not thrilling or creepy at all. When you look at the whole thing on paper, it probably reads fine, but the execution is what hurts the movie. With strange editing choices, some bombastic sequences that pull you out of the film and a twist that just feels contrived and empty, the end result is a movie I can’t recommend.

Scores (out of 5)
Visuals: 4
Sound: 4
Acting: 4
Script: 2
Music: 2
Direction: 2
Entertainment: 2
Total:  2


Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

John Dies at the End (2012)

Introduction:
You’ve got to love a movie that gives you a spoiler right in the title of the film. But Don Coscarelli is one of those directors who enjoys going bold in his films. I heard quite a bit of good buzz about this odd film when it came out. It sounded like an amusing mix of comedy, dark fantasy and a dash of the uncanny. Plus it is from the director of Bubba Ho-tep, which is reason enough for me to check this one out.

Summary:
Dave (Chase Williamson) and John (Rob Mayes) are in a bit of a bind. You see they’ve managed to get their hands on a bizarre drug known as soy sauce. Once you take it, the laws of space and time cease to be an issue. Instead you get to experience other dimensions, other times and all kinds of oddball people. Unfortunately, it also has the side effect of trashing reality – so, that could be a small problem.

At first the drug trip seems to be nothing more than surreal. But Dave begins to wonder if what he is seeing is actually occurring. Are aliens really spilling into our dimension Lovecraft style and slowly taking over the earth – or is Dave just really, really high? There isn’t much time to decide because now Dave has a detective hunting him a down, a reporter trying to get his story, and a Las Vegas magician who may actually be able to warp time and space himself. Before it is all over time will be traveled, universes pierced and yes, John Dies at the End. Keep an eye out for appearances by Doug Jones, Clancy Brown, Paul Gamatti and Glynn Turman in key roles.

Good Points:
  • A crazy plot that takes the viewer on a wild ride
  • Some fun and unique performances by the cast
  • Has a few, “Did I just see that?” moments

Bad Points:
  • This movie is strange
  • This movie is strange
  • Yes you read that twice, but did I really write it twice, or are you just high?

Overall:
Oh boy! Here we have a movie that is not for everyone. It stays true to its style and that style is off center for sure. I enjoyed the twisted and twisting plot, some of the crazy visuals and even the main characters who aren’t quite likable, but in a way it suits the film. But if you are looking for something off the beaten path, with a dark sense of humor and a nonlinear storyline than you’ll have a blast with this movie.

Scores (out of 5)
Visuals: 4
Sound: 4
Acting: 4
Script: 4
Music: 4
Direction: 4
Entertainment: 4
Total:  4


Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Friday, May 2, 2014

Passion (2012)


Introduction:
What happens when The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo meets the meanest of the Mean Girls? Well if Brian De Palma is at the helm then you can at expect some sexy thrills, a few dark laughs and some wonderful camera work. Unless Mr. De Palma wasn’t up for the task. Was this a passion project or just a snooze at the wheel?

Summary:
Christine Stanford (Rachel McAdams) is the star of her company. She can tangle with the big boys, swim with the sharks and always walk away with the deal. Isabelle James (Noomi Rapace) is the up and coming exec, full of bright ideas and energy to make her mark. But one of her bright ideas has just netted a huge client, some major money – and Christine takes all the credit and rewards. At first Isabelle is offended and disturbed by this, but then uses it as a teaching tool.

When she attempts to get back at Christine, she finds herself seriously outmatched. Isabelle endures a very public humiliation, and starts to crack. But just how far will Isabelle go to make sure Christine never does the same thing to anyone else? Is this game of revenge based on cold ego or is it all a serious crime of Passion?

Good Points:
  • De Palma’s mastery of visual style is in full display
  • Has some fun and unexpected twists
  • The cast is having a blast in the parts
Bad Points:
  • May be too stylized for those looking for a serious grim thriller
  • None of the characters end up being very likable
  • May seem a bit tame compared to some of De Palma’s earlier work

Overall:
This film is like a throwback to the 1990s thriller genre, with wicked women, sexy situations and plot twists that are unbelievable but fun. De Palma makes it all work with some wonderful cinematography and editing. He keeps the viewer guessing a number of times as the story progresses. It is a nifty thriller for an evening viewing, and one that reminds you how much fun this genre can be.

Scores (out of 5)
Visuals: 4
Sound: 3
Acting: 4
Script: 4
Music: 4
Direction: 4
Entertainment: 4
Total:  4

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.

Sunday, September 29, 2013

Skyfall (2012)


Introduction:
The Daniel Craig era of James Bond started out with such promise with Casino Royale. But things took a disappointing turn when Quantum of Solace ended up being less than the sum of its parts. The creators decided to switch gears a bit, and get some of the ingredients that were missing from the previous two films back into the mix. They also hired a director who is known for his character dramas, Sam Mendes. Would the gamble pay off?


Summary:
England’s top agent, James Bond (Daniel Craig) is on a mission to keep a list of undercover NATO spies from being stolen in Istanbul. Things get a little out of hand and Bond gets shot from a moving train and plummets hundreds of feet into a river. Rough day. Now M (Judi Dench) is under the gun, because the missing list is used to expose the agents and get them killed. With MPs demanding her resignation, she goes into damage control mode with some help from Gareth Mallory (Ralph Fiennes).

Luckily Bond was knocked down, but not out. He returns from his mini vacation when he sees MI6 headquarters get attacked. He picks up the trail of terror leading him from Shanghai, to Macao and back into London itself. The mastermind is a former agent named Silva (Javier Bardem) who has a love hate relationship with M (mostly hate). Now he will go to great lengths to make her pay, and pay again. Does Bond have a chance to stop the madman before he destroys M’s reputation as well as her life?

Good Points:
  • One of most beautifully filmed movies in the entire series
  • Interplay between Bond and M is excellent
  • We get some classic elements returned to the series

Bad Points:
  • Some very familiar plot and theme elements
  • This villain isn’t going to work for everyone
  • The musical score may be too subtle for fans of the brassy material

Overall:
There is a lot to really like about this film, and most of that rests in the capable hands of Sam Mendes. He brings excellent character moments, wonderful visuals and some top-flight action to the film. Craig is still excellent in the role and everything here builds on the previous films and opens some new doors for the next one. While the script is a little too influenced by other popular films from other franchises, all told, this is one of the best Bond movies in the series, and definitely recommended.

Scores (out of 5)
Visuals: 5
Sound: 5
Acting: 4
Script: 4
Music: 4
Direction: 5
Entertainment: 4
Total:  4

In Depth Review
Bond noire?
After Quantum of Solace wrapped up Bond’s “origin” story, I was curious about where the creators would go next. They set up of the criminal syndicate, Quantum. Would they build on that idea and create a new SPECTRE concept? Would they maintain their very Bourne influenced trajectory? Would we have a hope in hell of seeing Q or Moneypenny in the next film?

Well Skyfall addressed all those questions definitively. Sadly, Quantum was dropped from this film, in favor of a more personal storyline for Bond and M. This doesn’t come as much of surprise given Sam Mendes specialty with character dramas. Most folks don’t remember American Beauty or Revolutionary Road for their intense action scenes or villains.

And yes, we don’t get away from the Bourne style visuals that have accompanied the Craig era. But there is a big difference here, Sam Mendes and director of photography Roger Deakins go out of their way to make this one of the most stunningly artistic looking films in the entire series. This should come as no surprise since the two have worked together since Jarhead, and they have created some amazing visuals together.

The movie has a lot of dialogue scenes, and moments where we get to soak in the surroundings. Camera angles, lighting and camera motion end up adding layers to the story, to the characters and to the themes of the story in ways that you just don’t expect in a James Bond film. The first half of Skyfall is gorgeous looking, with the cool blue neon lights of Shanghai contrasting with the rich golden hue of the floating casino in Macao. The vibrant colors add to the exotic feel of the travelogue, something that you come to expect in a Bond film, but handled so smoothly here.

Silva's coat fuses him with the dusty ruins.
The second half of the film introduces Silva, and from that moment the colors become less rich. Dirty whites, cold greys and deep shadows dominate the visual palate. The final confrontation at the Skyfall manor ends with darkness and flames, a visual hell, and one very similar to the inferno in Jarhead. London and Scotland play key roles in the second half of the film, but they are not glorified, but shown in an almost dreary de-saturated state (until the wonderful rooftop shot near the end of the film).  Simply put, this is the best looking James Bond film I’ve yet seen.

But even wonderful cinematography can’t save action scenes, right? One of my major issues with Quantum was the horribly edited action sequences. I ended up laughing in a few places because the chaos on the screen was so confusing it looked ridiculous, like someone trying way too hard. The rapid-fire Bourne influence had gone too far. Well, Skyfall dials all that back in favor of clearly orchestrated action scenes edited for maximum impact.

One of the most visually impressive scenes in the film.
Compared to the Brosnan era, where there was action around every corner, Skyfall keeps its action economical. The pre-credit chase and battle is handled well and gets things off to a great start. But my favorite action scene is the next one, where Bond goes hand to hand against a hired killer in Shanghai. The two silhouettes battling in front of the blazing blue neon is just stamped in my mind. Great stuff, and I love how the camera drifts slowly but steadily up to the combatants with few edits and a surprising fall.

After that the action scenes remain visually interesting and exciting, with a battle at the Macao casino with a surprise attack by a Komodo dragon. There’s the explosive escape and chase of Silva in London. Then there’s the final battle at the Skyfall manor where Bond, M and the old grounds keeper Kincade (Albert Finney) take on a mob of killers with a couple rifles, a knife and lots of old school traps. By this point we are invested in the survival of Bond and M, and the tension is pretty high. Mendes even throws in a huge explosion, just to remind us this is still a Bond flick.

Bond looks ready to take out some zombies.
Speaking of fireballs, the sound effects track is top notch. Explosions, gunfire and shattering glass are well synched and placed in the soundscape. They are also balanced very well, never overwhelming the dialogue and even allowing the music to make it’s mark. The Bond films rarely have any sound issues and always excel in this area.

For the music Skyfall shook up the mix. In 1997 David Arnold came on board to handle musical duties for the James Bond franchise. He took John Barry’s classic spy sound and modernized it with electronica, pulsing beats and a lot of power. The result was some of the best music in the entire series. Arnold had scored six Bond films and most film music fans were hoping for him to continue on. But director Sam Mendes has worked with composer Thomas Newman since American Beauty in 1999, and he saw no reason to drop him now.

So we get one of the most unique and atmospheric of all the James Bond film scores. The usual formula is for the composer to create a new theme for the film (at the very least, many have two or three new themes). This new theme is usually tied to the opening song. This becomes the identity of the film. It is mixed with the classic James Bond theme by Monty Norman, and you weave the two with some great action music.

Yellows, golds and reds are prominent in the Macao
casino scene.
Newman goes a different direction. He takes Monty Norman’s theme, and John Barry’s arrangement of the theme as a starting point. Then he uses elements of the theme in a deconstructed form. Or maybe he only uses the rhythm of the theme. Then he unleashes a full guitar version of the theme. Then he goes back to a simplified version that is barely recognizable as the Bond theme. It’s all very subtle but very interesting as well. Nearly every track is based on the James Bond theme in some way. He only uses the tune to the opening song Skyfall once, for a wonderful scene where Bond arrives at the golden casino. Check out a sample here. But other than that, the score ranges from intense action music (with some surprising electronics) to very quiet scenes of tension.

The opening theme song performed by Adele is a good one, fitting well into the classic brassy mold made popular by Shirley Bassey in Goldfinger. It’s a bit of a shame that Newman doesn’t do too much with it in his score. At the same time the song is very much rooted in the same sound as the James Bond theme. So it feels right at home with the rest of the soundtrack.

Skyfall boils down to the story of three lead characters, James Bond, M and Silva. As such, all three actors need to provide some good performances to make the whole film work. Daniel Craig has never slacked in his performance as James Bond, and here he gets plenty to work with. M essentially tells a fellow agent, Eve (Naomie Harris), to take a risky shot at the data thief as Bond is fighting him on top of a moving train. Bond sees this as M doubting his abilities and willing to loose him if the stakes are high enough. But it seems that Bond comes to accept this as a fact of his job. His life is always on the line as a 00 agent, and M always has the final call. Feelings shouldn’t get in the way. Craig plays this all very close, but his eyes tell us all we need to know.

M reflects on the toll her job takes.
Judi Dench has been a wonderful addition to the James Bond cast from since her appearance in Goldeneye. Her tough no-nonsense demeanor has always had an underlying hint of affection for Bond. When Craig came on board for the reboot, this dynamic shifted a little bit turning her into more than just a boss, but also a mentor. Skyfall gives Dench her juiciest role in the franchise since her key part in The World is Not Enough. Not only do we see her under the extreme pressure in her role as head of MI6, but we also see the toll her job has taken on her and the affect that seeing Silva’s rage has on her. Dench does a great job.

I’m a bit torn on Bardem as Silva. On the one hand, I see what they were trying to do with the character. His fury at M and her betrayal has poisoned the man deeply. Contrasting his response and Bond’s response to similar situations is an interesting game. But Bardem adds a deeper level of crazy over the whole thing. It feels a bit too much, more like a made for TV serial killer than the more realistic adversaries we’ve seen in the previous two films. But at the same time, this is a James Bond film and have a good villain is what makes the whole thing fun. I’m just not sure if the performance matches the overall tone of the film. It just feels slightly off. Contrast this performance to Sean Bean’s colder but equally angry performance in Goldeneye and I think we get a better idea of what a rogue ex-agent is really like.

The dead are a price M has to pay for.
That brings me to the other weak point of the film. There is some very obvious borrowing of plot elements in Skyfall. Some of this is intentional. This film was released on the 50th anniversary of the James Bond film franchise. Instead of going the more obvious route that Die Another Day took with working references from each Bond film into the new offering, in this case they were much more subtle about it. Things like M writing Bond’s obituary was taken from You Only Live Twice. Having a sequence on a train in Istanbul connects us to From Russia with Love. Even the casino in Macao is a nod back to The Man with the Golden Gun.

But the film that seems to have the biggest influence on Skyfall is actually Goldeneye. There’s an obvious call back when Q (Ben Whishaw) actually mentions the explosive pen from that movie. But there is also a more subtle thematic borrowing from the 1995 film: the idea of James Bond being an old fashioned, out of touch relic. This same concept was put (in blunt poetics) by M in Goldeneye – “… I think you’re a sexist, misogynist dinosaur. A relic of the cold war…” In the older film, Bond had to prove that even his “old fashioned” techniques were up to the task in a new game where Cold War rules didn’t apply. It put him against a former agent, 006, who became disillusioned with M16 and decided to take his revenge on the country he served.

Q finds himself out maneuvered.
Skyfall follows the same lines, but in this case, Bond is no longer tied to the cold war. He is tied to the physical world, instead of technological one. In this film he is outmoded by Q and the superior technical prowess of his enemy (another former agent who has turned against the country he served). The twist here is that M is now firmly on Bond’s side, tied to his “old fashioned” way of handling problems. In fact the main theme (one that isn’t subtle in the least) is that “sometimes the old ways are best”. Bond’s use of physical violence, old fashioned tailing and observing, and going directly after a targer are what end up saving the day. All the technological marvels that Q uses end up causing more damage. But the simple radio device that Bond uses actually works the way it is supposed to. The final battle is finished with a knife, not a high tech gadget. It’s an interesting expansion of Goldeneye’s basic premise.

"We've caught you at last Loki, I mean Harrison,
I mean Silva."
But there are a few things I’m less fond of. The film works wonderfully in it’s first half, creating an interesting build of suspense, action and thrills. But once we meet Silva, the movie seems to lose its grip a bit. Part of it is Bardem’s performance, but there is also a very familiar vibe to the whole basic plot. Silva allows himself to be captured, then escapes as part of a master plan to unleash even more havoc. Sound familiar? Well if you’ve seen Dark Knight or The Avengers or even Star Trek into Darkness well you’ve seen this plot twist already.

Now in James Bond flicks I’m willing to suspend disbelief, it is part of what makes them fun. But Skyfall and all the Craig films are very serious, very realistic and therefore don’t go for that full-blown fantasy feel that we see in the previous Bond films. Even Dalton’s movies had a bit more fun in them than the Craig films seem to. So when you have the villain execute a plot that is so improbable and depends on so many things to occur just perfectly for it to work – well that wouldn’t stand out in a Brosnan, Moore or Connery film. But here, it does end up looking ridiculous. Luckily the finale scenes at the Skyfall manor bring things back to earth (for the most part) and it makes for a fine ending.

Bond pulls a Batman over the city of London.
The misstep is really not much of an issue in the long run. Skyfall is a very entertaining film. It’s got some great one liners, dry humor and the inclusion of Moneypenny and Q makes this the first Craig era film that really feels like the beginnings of the story is complete. We can now jump into a full-blown Bond adventure with Craig as the fully formed hero. In the final analysis I think I like Casino Royale a little bit more, but Skyfall is a close runner up and certainly shows us that Mendes can deliver an excellent James Bond film. I’m looking forward to what he comes up with next. But please, lets leave the Nolan Batman inspirations aside for now.

Sunday, August 4, 2013

The Avengers (2012)


Introduction:
So we had not just one, but two Iron Man movies. There was a fun Thor flick, and a not so interesting Captain America movie. There were even a couple Incredible Hulk flicks. All this was leading up to the big mash-up that was The Avengers. Now, I was a X-men reader myself, and never got into this area of comics. So I was coming in pretty fresh to all this. Well, I did know that one of my favorite directors was writing and helming – so this should be a good one.

Summary:
You can’t keep an evil god down, and Loki (Tom HIddleston) is a pretty mischievous god. Using a series of tricks, traps and a army of trans-dimensional beings, he’s going to rain the hurt onto the Earth. Why? Because he figures it’s about time someone with a huge horned helmet ruled the puny humans.

That’s where agent Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) comes in. It’s time to gather the superheroes he’s been recruiting for one battle royale to save the planet. So Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Captain America (Chris Evans), The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg) join forces, sometimes not so peaceably, to battle monsters in New York city and cause as much mayhem as possible. Will the Avengers be able to save us all, or will Loki triumph?

Good Points:
  • Does a neat job of tying all the previous plots together.
  • Moves at a perfect pace with a great balance of action and humor
  • Each hero gets plenty of time to shine.

Bad Points:
  • Joss Whedan’s dialogue has some detractors
  • Your favorite hero may not get enough screen time
  • The plot has a number of holes that an alien army could march through

Overall:

Well Joss Whedon delivers a full-blown fun comic book hero mash up. His trademark wisecracking dialogue is back and makes the film a lot of fun. It’s got more brains than the Transformer films, and it’s more fun than Nolan’s Batman trilogy. So all in all, it’s my current favorite of the Marvel flicks. Besides it gave us Cobie Smulders kicking ass with guns and martial arts!

Robin Sparkles doubts the
veracity of your claim.

Scores (out of 5)
Visuals: 5
Sound: 5
Acting: 4
Script: 4
Music: 3
Direction: 4
Entertainment: 4
Total:  4

Curious about a full review, sent me an email and I’ll make additional thoughts to this review.