Captain America: Civil War

Captain America: Civil War, the thirteenth Marvel Cinematic Universe film, is borderline cinematic refuse, an epic movie that may have a consistent mood but nevertheless distrusts its audience to debate the bigger picture. There are working parts that surprisingly do not add up to anything worthwhile. This is not to say that it doesn't have good company, as its predecessor (The Winter Soldier) was only slightly worse. But given that these two film's banality is only dwarfed by other "Cap" movies like The Avengers and The Avengers: Age of Ultron, I'm close to pledging to never watching future Avengers movies. True, Marvel Studios can make good movies. Last year's Ant-Man is an example of that, as well as the near-exceptional Guardians of the Galaxy. But the nicest thing I can say about this part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe is that they just aren't my cup of tea. But there are so many harsher things I can say, and so I shall.

Before my tirade begins, I should at least start by writing that there are some (but very few) enjoyable aspects of this film. Civil War is not as painfully boring as say X-Men: Apocalypse, another dreadfully dull comic book film this summer that lacks as much heart as it does brain. Whereas Apocalypse vomits out some gobbledygook about ancient Egyptian deities (or something), there is an actual allegory in Civil War, a real debate about the role of regulation and oversight, of liberties versus strong offense against the enemy, freedom versus security (which, as we all know, are binary). A successful mission early in the film results (yet again) in high amounts of collateral damage. The Avengers are warned by the Secretary of State (William Holden) that their destruction in the name of peace has cost too many lives. The UN has mandated accords for regulation of the group and their weapons. Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey, Jr.), an industrialist who surprisingly sides with more government regulation, opposes Cap's attitude and approach. There will be blood.  

I hate to give it to them, but the thought behind the movie deserves some recognition. Critics have rightfully criticized the injudicious destruction and carnage of The Avengers and Man of Steel in a post-9/11 world. Civil War tries to convince its audiences that it's better than that, that it recognizes that when those buildings go down, there are people inside them. But this interesting story is quickly gutted for boom! action!, because why should we expect an audience to pay attention for longer than five minutes? The allegories are disemboweled so quickly, and so they are not the best part of this movie. That honor goes to the return of Spider-Man, who's back after several bad movies. Here, Tom Holland is the young hero from Queens, and he is convinced by Stark to join his side against Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans). I haven't figured out how to articulate why Spider-Man is such an appealing character, but he very much is, and it is a treat to see him again. In the original Civil War comics, other characters were included, like those from Fantastic Four and X-Men. We should, though, be reminded that Marvel Studios doesn't own all the film rights to every Marvel character. 20th Century Fox owns X-Men, and Sony has owned Spider-Man since the late 1990s. But the deal Sony and Marvel struck very much should benefit both parties involved. While it would have been far more interesting this time, I think, to have Miles Morales, a Black Hispanic, appear instead of Peter Parker again, Holland still does a pretty good job, though his awkward teenager shtick is a bit over the top. He's charming nonetheless.

Spider-Man isn't the only one recruited to join Stark in preventing Rogers from protecting Rogers' friend Bucky Barns/Winter Soldier, who Rogers believes has been framed for the murder of a Wakandan king at a UN meeting. Because of this murder, Stark is able to persuade the heir to that throne, Black Panther (terrifically played by Chadwick Boseman, and whose standalone film will be directed by Ryan Coogler) to join as well. Also joining Stark is Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), War Machine (Don Cheadle), and Vision (Paul Bettany). Opposed to them are Captain America, Winter Soldier, Falcon (Anthony Mackie), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen), and Ant-Man (Paul Rudd). Just as he did last year, Rudd provides comic relief effortlessly, especially as he causes malfunctions in Iron Man's armor. Most of this fighting, like most of the fighting in the real world, is not necessary. Most, if not all, of it is because of the actions of Helmut Zero, enticingly played by Daniel Bruhl. Love or hate MCU movies, I think the consensus is that most of the villains are dull. Not so with Zero. He may not be as powerful as the Avengers are, but he is just as clever, if not more so. It's easy to accept his decisions when compared to a cinematic world of malicious maniacs.

As I write, I realize that perhaps this movie isn't as bad as I had initially thought. Maybe a second viewing is necessary. But probably not. There's a lot to complain about this movie: Elizabeth Olsen's "accent", a sleep-inducing tunnel chase scene, the superfluous presence of many of these characters. Martin Freeman shows up and does nothing. Seriously--they misused Martin Freeman. I don't know what exactly I'm missing with these movies, and nobody has ever been able to explain why they like them other than they like mindless entertainment, but I suppose I feel happy that so many others seem entertained by them. In the meantime, there are approximately 5,479 MCU movies in the works, so I'm sure I'll like at least a few of them.

Read More →

The Amazing Spider-Man

Film critics are told to go into every movie rooting for it to be a smashing good time.  I must confess that I had no such thinking walking into "The Amazing Spider-Man." I suppose I shared the consensus view that there was no need to re-boot the franchise so soon after Sam Raimi's trilogy.  I think, though, that after the negative reaction fans had towards the "Star Wars" prequel trilogy, there has been considerable efforts from filmmakers charged with the task of rebooting franchises to do it justly, and that's why the James Bond, "Planet of the Apes," "Batman" and other reboots have been so successful. Fortunately, Marc Webb's "The Amazing Spider-Man" is another one of these successful reboots.

Andrew Garfield (from "The Social Network") is Peter Parker, the awkward boy Tobey Macguire portrayed in the original trilogy. Here, as Spider-Man (which he finally becomes at almost an hour into the movie), Garfield suffices, but I suspect he needs one more go-around before getting it completely right. He has had a lot of good training from this one, as his co-stars include Rhys Ifans, Sally Field, and Martin Sheen; those three actors are worth the watch of any movie, so to see all three here is a real treat, and they're all in top form, particularly Ifans, who's given a lot of "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" moments to have fun with. It's just a shame that we don't only see this portrayal but also Ifans disguised in silly-looking GGI effects. When he's in his full metamorphosis as the Lizard, he looks rather silly (but again, as a sick scientist, he's wonderful). Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy is as likable and funny as she was in "Easy A" and "Zombieland," but unfortunately isn't given much to do here until near the end. Denis Leary also appears as Stacey's strict, traditional "law-and-order" father (who also happens to be the police chief who despises Spider-Man). Finally, Stan Lee, as he always does, has a cameo here, and it probably is the best Stan Lee cameo ever.

But as Peter Parker the teenage high school student, Garfield overdoes the awkwardness, overplaying his nervous stuttering in front of pretty girls. The audience is too smart to believe that Peter could be severely punched in the stomach and face several times and then waltz into class. But still, despite this taunting from a school bully whose behavior is way too unrealistic (and considering what demons high school bullies are, that is saying a lot), the audience is probably willing to suspend its disbelief and cheer when Peter has fun humiliating him in the school gym. That's after he gets his mutant powers, of course. And he gets those powers in a science lab when a spider bites him....oh, what's the point of discussing all the details of the plot? By now, everyone knows it.

And that's a problem Webb's "Spider-Man" has: it hastily checks through the "to-do" list of a "Spider-Man" reboot: Peter gets bullied, he's bitten by a spider, he gets new powers and struggles to understand how to use them. This is a lesson in the subtle differences in listing versus telling.  Webb and his team believe that they need to go through the check list with all this stuff, and these scenes usually are the ones that don't work. Case in point is the CGI scenes with Spider-Man flying around the city or his nemesis, the Lizard destroying the city. They are disguised as "show-me" moments. The parts that really work are the ones where we're being shown something genuine. Not necessarily the visuals, but the human element that makes up the "Spider-Man" mythology. As expected, a lot of this comes from the relationship between Peter and his surrogate father, Ben, played by Sheen. Sheen's character is a simple, working-class man, and yet he has a lifetime of powerful education to pass down to his nephew. But there are other show-me moments, like when Spider-Man must act quickly to save a boy from a burning car. It reminded me of those pictures of the window-washers at hospitals who sometimes dress up as Spider-Man to entertain the children.  It's evidence that the world not only needs heroes, but movies about super heroes.



This review is dedicated to Roger Ebert, who died on Thursday. He wrote the following about "Spider-Man 2," one of his favorite films of 2004: "Now this is what a superhero movie should be...it's a superhero movie for people who don't go to superhero movies, and for those who do, it's the one they've been yearning for." (In his opinion, "The Amazing Spider-Man" was the second best in the series.)












Movies, movies, theater, cinema, watch, watching, watches, view,  see, saw, celluloid, cine, cinema, cinematics, cinematograph, feature, film, flick, motion picture,moving picture, photoplay, picture, screenplay, show, silent*, silver screen, talkie,talking picture, videotape, Spiderman, Spider-Man, Spider Man, Martin Sheen, Andrew Garfield, Batman, James Bond, Planet of the Apes, Social Network, Emma Stone, amazing, lizard, rhys ifans, roger ebert

Read More →