CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER.

I've read reviews all over the map for this film. Some people thought it was the best Pre-Avengers film. Some thought the worst. Most are, like the inside of a tauntaun, relatively Luke-warm (thanks, Kai!). But where do I fall in? We meet Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), a scrawny lad from Brooklyn who simply wants to join the Army and do his duty for his country, like his best friend Bucky (Sebastian Shaw). But when Dr. Erskine (Stanley Tucci) chooses him for a top secret project, he meets Colonel Philips (Tommy Lee Jones), Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell), and Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper). He becomes a super soldier, but also learns he's not the only one. There was a Nazi named Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving), whose procedure didn't go as planned, and now he's looking to walk the Earth as a god, forming his own faction, and working with another scientist named Dr. Zola (Toby Jones) to build the weapons necessary for his takeover. He runs Hydra now under the moniker Red Skull.

This has been compared to Thor quite a bit seeing they are the last two Pre-Avengers films and they came out pretty close to each other. This is what I'll say about the two: There's a pretty strong connection between them, as the McGuffin of this film is taken straight from the mythology of Thor. However, if I were to compare the entertainment value of both... I'd say Thor wins.

Captain America's worst problem can be summed up in one word: boring. The character himself isn't all that interesting. He's kinda like if Superman were human... except Superman seems more human. Steve Rogers is almost too perfect, and despite Red Skull's claims that he does have weaknesses, you don't see them. He's super fast, super strong, has a great body and personality, can heal at super speeds. He can't even worry about drinking and driving as he can't get drunk (though some may see this as a fault--that's really the only one played up in the film). He even takes (SPOILERS) waking up 70 years in the future relatively well.

And then there's the film itself. If you're to formulate the superhero origin story films, I'd say they're typically 20 minutes 'beginnings', 20 minutes 'origin', and about an hour in full costume and what have you. This movie is about an hour and 45 minutes, and it's not until about the last 30 that he even gets his official costume and shield. And they spend way too long in the "joke" costume, which was funny at first but did get old after a while. They even go into the first major action set piece in this costume. Imagine if Spider-Man had first faced off against the Green Goblin in his wrestling uniform. So yeah, there's definitely a pacing and/or story issue. I think I looked at my watch at least 3-4 times throughout the film.

Otherwise... it's actually not as bad as I've made it sound. The acting is good. Chris Evans does quite well with what he's given. If I were to say any actor stole the show, it would be Hugo Weaving, but honestly not until you see him entirely as Red Skull, which isn't until the second half of the movie. The makeup and whatnot looks good, and he actually seems more menacing like this than with his actual face.

The action was probably the best thing about the movie. While none of it was particularly OMG WOW, it kept my attention. The train sequence was, I think, the best full action scene in the film, though the short zero-gravity fight near the end was really cool (despite its Inception-esque feel). They also did a good job making the shield come back to him more naturally as if it bounced rather than acted like a full-on boomerang (returning weapons--another Thor connection!). Though I'm not hugely knowledgable on Captain America lore... isn't his shield supposed to be made of adamantium, not "vibranium" or whatever. Or did I get that wrong?

Anyway, I just wish the movie didn't take itself so seriously. There are maybe less than 5 jokes in the whole movie (or at least good jokes), but the rest is so serious in an uber-patriotic way that part of you is waiting for Spider-Man to land in front of Captain America posing in the wind. And the actual cheesy section (with the joke costume) goes on too long for it to stay humorous. I don't think it's the worst of the Pre-Avengers films, but it's not the best, either. I'd say it's somewhere in the middle. I guess you could fit me in with the other tauntaun's.


Stop Saying OK! OK.

(P.S. I also wanted to add that this film looks very nice, as well. The cinematography is pretty dang good, so that's another plus.)

(P.P.S. I almost forgot! I think they destroyed a bit of continuity with the other Pre-Avengers flicks. Isn't there a hidden shot of Captain America's shield under the ice in one of the movies (I think Incredible Hulk)? That takes away from what actually happens according to this film.)

SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD.

This was one of the greatest, nerdiest, most stylish movies I've ever seen, and I have no qualms whatsoever about declaring it pretty much my new favorite movie. Scott Pilgrim is a bassist in a band with Kim (Alison Pill), Stephen (Mark Webber), and Young Neil (Johnny Simmons). He has a promiscuous gay roommate named Wallace (Kieran Culkin), who is constantly texting Scott's personal issues to Scott's sister, Stacey (Anna Kendrick). And he's dating a 17-year-old Chinese, catholic schoolgirl named Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). But then he meets Romona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Just knowing she's the girl of his dreams (literally), he'll do anything to be with her. But once he's with her, he realizes he has to fight the League of Evil Exes, Romona's seven exes that pretty much all have superpowers. These include Matthew Patel (Satya Bhaba), Lucas Lee (Chris Evans), Todd Ingram (Brandon Routh), Roxy Richter (Mae Whitman), the Katayanagi Twins (Keita and Shota Saito), and Ghideon (Jason Schwartzman). The movie also co-stars Aubrey Plaza as a girl who hates Scott and appears to work everywhere.

OK, so I used to be a pretty big gamer. I still game from time to time, but nowhere near as often as I used to. In other words, I'm a total nerd. But I'm sure you could have figured that out otherwise. Anyway, after seeing the first trailer for this movie, I had what one might call a "nerdgasm." I immediately hoped and prayed that this movie would be good and that it would basically end up becoming my favorite movie, which it had a good chance considering my previous favorite movie was director Edgar Wright's comedy classic, Shaun of the Dead. This movie completely reached my insanely high expectations, and then some.

The editing for this movie is insane. It gives it a non-stop flow kinda feel. There's never a slow or dull moment. And that's not to say it's because it's non-stop action. It isn't. In fact, the evil exes don't even show up for maybe 20-30 minutes into the movie. There's a lot of setup for the characters and their friendships. And then it builds into the relationship with Romona, letting them get to know each other just briefly before getting into the exes. But it doesn't stop there. Scott continues to build his relationship with Romona even after craziness ensues.

Of course, the greatest part of the movie (besides the wacky editing) is all the video game imagery. If you loathe the very idea of video games, stay away from this movie. They say Crank was supposed to be a live action video game. Well, not compared to Scott Pilgrim, it isn't. But it doesn't stop there. Scott Pilgrim is like a 20 video games wrapped up in a comic book and saturated in cleverness, style, and heart.

And it isn't purely style versus substance. It actually has both. There is character growth. There are lessons to be learned. But it just looks so damn cool while it's happening. I can't even begin to describe it. So let's get into the action...

The action was very differentiated. It's not all Scott fist-fighting people. Of course, that's there, but that's not all there is. And I really don't want to say much more than that in order to avoid spoiling it. What I do want to mention, however, is how the movie had the vast opportunity to waste potential, but how it didn't. For instance, this kind of movie--I suppose kind of a "Reverse-Revenge" film--has this big build up to a final fight. Take Kill Bill for example. The Bride's whole purpose is the destroy all those who destroyed her, and then go after the boss: Bill. You have this awesome fist-fight at the beginning and an epic Crazy 88's battle at the end of Volume 1. Then you look at Volume 2. The fights are a lot different. They're less epic. And the Bill fight is over in about 10 seconds. It's this major build up and then... anticlimactic. Scott Pilgrim doesn't do this. Every battle is like a Crazy 88 battle (minus the blood), in that they're grand-in-scale, fun, clever, and over-the-top (different from grand-in-scale). But, as I said before, they're all different enough so that you don't get bored with the same thing over and over again. I'm not even sure I can choose a favorite. It'd probably be a tie between Roxy and Ghideon.

However, I will say this: I'm sure this movie is not for everyone. There's probably a good chunk of the population that won't "get" it. And I don't mean this in the way that snooty film fans say people just don't "get" Wes Anderson, or people just don't "get" what Robert Altman was trying to do with Gosford Park. This is a nerd's movie through and through. If you don't have background knowledge in video games or comic books (in general), the humor is gonna go right past you. Now, not all the jokes are game/comic-related. But they're at the heart of the movie, and the whole look and feel of it is very centric to them. You'll probably sit there going "what the hell am I watching? This is dumb." But if you're a nerd, like me, this movie is like an Ode to your whole culture. Granted, I'm not saying it's one or the other, either. You don't have to be a gamer or a nerd to like this movie. I just mean that you'll "get" it more if you are.

All that being said, is it a perfect movie? No movie is. But it's one of the most entertaining bleeping movies I've ever seen. I don't think the smile ever left my face throughout the entire run-time. There was even a moment near the end where a guy in front of me took out his cell to text, and I didn't even care, because the movie had me in such an awesome mood. So after all the stylishness, the fun editing, the gaming humor (and other humor), the great action, and--believe it or not--Michael Cera actually changing it up a bit, I walked out of this movie having had a blast. Currently my favorite movie of the year, and now one of my favorite movies ever.


Royale With Cheese

PUSH.

There was a moment while watching this movie, soon before it began to come to its climax, that I realized this was one of those movies where the ending was either going to really make or really break the whole film. Fortunately, it was the former. Nick (Chris Evans) is a second-generation Mover; in other words, he has telekinesis… and he sucks at it. Cassie (Dakota Fanning) is a second-generation Watcher; in other words, she can see the (ever-changing) future and draw it down… but she’s not the best at it. When Cassie forces her way into Nick’s life, she forces him to join her on a quest to locate a girl—Kira (Camilla Belle)—who has a case that could bring down the Division, a government agency that experiments on all types of people with extra abilities. Kira has been the sole survivor of a ‘power booster’ injection and has escaped the clutches of the Division, but has had her memory wiped. Now she, as well as Nick and Cassie, are being pursued by one of the elite members of Division, a Pusher (somebody who can make you believe and thus do anything) named Henry Carver (Djimon Hounsou).

Overall, it’s a pretty simple plot, but just very difficult to describe (mostly because there’s so many new terms introduced in the film). But first let me tackle the comparisons that have been made to such things like last year’s Jumper or the TV show Heroes. First, the movie is nothing like Jumper except that there are people with superpowers. The story is better, the characters are better, and the acting is infinitely better (for the most part). As for Heroes, I can give it that. The powers are incredibly similar to those of the TV show, especially with Watchers, who can see visions of the future (that are liable to change) and have to draw them down on paper. And then there’s a government-type agency involved with injecting people with abilities. Other than that, the story and characters are pretty different.

The story itself, like I said, is pretty straight forward, though it did lose me a few times regardless of that. For at least half the movie, I’m thinking that the Asian group after them is working with Division, then all of a sudden it comes out (or at least becomes clear) that they’re working on their own. So then who are they? Did I just miss that explanation? And something else I liked with the story is that they left it open for a possible sequel, but at the same time kept this one self-containing so a sequel wouldn’t be necessary (unlike the poor past attempts of similar ideas such as Jumper or The Covenant).

Now to discuss the acting. It can really be said with a couple sentences: Dakota Fanning stole the show and Camilla Belle was pretty bad. Chris Evans was somewhere in between. But I’ll expand for you. Dakota Fanning’s Cassie was, by far, the best character of the film. She made you laugh with her spunkiness and made you sad when she was upset. And boy, was she spunky. Though to the filmmakers: why would you give such a young teenager such a short skirt (and I mean short) and then proceed to take every advantage to shove the camera up her legs? Talk about uncomfortable. Camilla Belle did better facial acting than vocal acting, though that’s really not saying much. I know the girl can act (I’ve seen her do it at least once). But maybe something’s just gotten into her recently. Chris Evans, despite being the main character, really felt left out of the film too much to really show off. Sure he was always around, but I guess Dakota upstaged the guy so much that it seemed she was more the main character than he was.

But of course, you’re wondering about the powers. How were they? For the most part, they were really good. Some of the visuals were kinda bad (like any time a Mover floated a gun, which just looked fake), but overall a good job. The best abilities were those outside the telekinesis. Shadows can hide people or places, and the main Shadow of the movie was funny. Wipers can remove memory. Sniffs can smell any object and see the past of where it’s been and where the people who have touched it are now. Shifters can change the appearance of things for a short period of time (the main shifter of the film was pretty cool, too). Stitchers can manipulate the body by either healing it or painfully destroying it. And then Bleeders do some ultrasonic screams that can apparently break glass, explode fish, and disable or kill people. The face alteration of the Bleeders when they scream is just freaky. And I’ve already mentioned Pushers, Movers, and Watchers. But what I loved most about each of the characters with these abilities is that they weren’t just used once and then forgotten. They were continually brought back for different purposes, and you got to see basically every use of their abilities. The filmmakers really didn’t get lazy with this aspect of the film, and it’s very obvious. It really made the film.

But the coolest thing about the powers was toward the end with the Pushers. There’s a bit of a twist, but because of the nature of the Pushing ability, you can never be sure if it’s true or not. I sat there bouncing back and forth, never sure what to believe, even if you think there’s evidence to prove one way or the other. Just like they do with characters in the movie, the movie sometimes acts as Pusher, letting you never be certain if what you’re seeing is true or not until it’s too late.

For more on the visuals (outside of CGI), the cinematography was nice with a plethora of different colors and hues that inked over the picture—blues, greens… it made you feel like you were really in some kind of acid-trip music video, but in a positive way. And I liked the use of the poorer quality video shots to show when a Watcher is watching you. You’re not sure what it is at first (at least I wasn’t), but when you realize it, the rest of the film you’re like “Oh crap, somebody’s watching them” when it happens. Needless to say, the filmmakers made this one heck of an experience. Like I said with the Pushers, it’s like almost every ability of the characters is used somehow within the film itself to clue in or mess with the audience. And I think that was a brilliant tactic.

Overall, I thought I was going to have a difficult time rating the movie, but the more I write about it and reflect back on it, the more set I really am in my score and my thoughts. There were a few confusing bits (especially for what is essentially a straight-forward story), and there could have been a bit more character development with Chris Evans’ character, and they probably should have cast somebody besides Camilla Belle for Kira. But other than those things, I had a really great time with the movie. I didn’t look at my watch once.

A Keanu 'Whoa'