Movie Review: Avengers: Age of Ultron

Avengers: Age of Ultron
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Written by: Joss Whedon based on the comic book by Stan Lee & Jack Kirby.
Starring: Robert Downey Jr. (Tony Stark / Iron Man), Chris Hemsworth (Thor), Mark Ruffalo (Bruce Banner / Hulk), Chris Evans (Steve Rogers / Captain America), Scarlett Johansson (Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow), Jeremy Renner (Clint Barton / Hawkeye), James Spader (Ultron), Samuel L. Jackson (Nick Fury), Don Cheadle (James Rhodes / War Machine), Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Pietro Maximoff / Quicksilver), Elizabeth Olsen (Wanda Maximoff / Scarlet Witch), Paul Bettany (Jarvis / Vision), Cobie Smulders (Maria Hill), Anthony Mackie (Sam Wilson / The Falcon), Hayley Atwell (Peggy Carter), Idris Elba (Heimdall), Stellan Skarsgård (Erik Selvig), Linda Cardellini (Laura Barton), Claudia Kim (Dr. Helen Cho), Thomas Kretschmann (Strucker), Andy Serkis (Ulysses Klaue), Julie Delpy (Madame B).

Avengers: Age of Ultron is good enough to make me wish it was just a little bit better. It continues to deepen the characters in the movie, and bring them into conflict with other – something that started with the end of the first Avengers movie, and continue through the next set of films – particularly Captain America: The Winter Soldier (still my favorite Marvel movie) and Iron Man 3 (Thor: The Dark World, not so much). It gives a little more humanity to previously undeveloped characters like Hawkeye, Bruce Banner/The Hulk and Black Widow. It doesn’t paint the characters as all heroic – but flawed in different ways. And it offers a direct rebuke to the DC world, in which superheroes don’t seem to care about the havoc the wreak, the innocent lives lost, etc. by placing that directly at the forefront of the action sequences. The film is also whip smart, and amusing, and finds fun ways to explain even mundane, exposition like things that are needed. Oh, and it has one of the best villains of any of the Marvel movies – although, some of the things the movie expects to believe about Ultron don’t make sense). And yet, I walked out of Avengers: Age of Ultron wanting a little more. This is because every time the movie seemed to be headed in an interesting direction, the film grinds to a halt so we can have yet another extended action sequence. Yes, the action sequences (mainly) work – they are well handled and exciting. But they are much like every other action sequence in every other Marvel movie. I wanted more of the stuff that made Age of Ultron different from those previous movies, and less of the stuff that feels exactly the same.

The movie opens with our heroes smashing the remnants of Hydra – the evil group who we had learned had infiltrated SHIELD and, basically everything else. They want Loki’s scepter – and more importantly the stone in it – back. After a long action sequence in a forest base – where we are introduced to two new people with special powers with a grudge against Tony Stark – the twins Pietro and Wanda Maximoff aka Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch (Aaron Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen) – they do in fact get what they want. Once they get the stone back to Stark’s lab, Tony realizes its immense power – and thinks he can use it to create A.I. that can protect the entire world from external threats. He and Banner do in fact build that – without telling anyone else – and the result is Ultron (voiced by James Spader). It doesn’t take Ultron very long to come up with a much better way than Stark’s to protect the world – essentially by destroying humanity. For some reasons, this all powerful A.I. decides to take the form of robot – and he continues to clone himself. Suddenly, the job the Avengers thought was done needs to be done all over again. And no one is really happy about it – the team manages to work together, even as it’s clear they are falling apart.

Yes, to a certain extent, the plot of Age of Ultron hits all the same ridiculous notes as the other Marvel movies. There is an all-powerful stone that everyone spends the whole movie obsessing over, and a villain who has a grand scheme to destroy the whole world. We know heading in that the stone is basically a Macguffin, as they’ve been since the beginning of the Marvel movies, just a way to take a storytelling shortcut. And we know that Ultron will not, in fact, destroy the world – if for no other reason than because Marvel has announced release dates for a whole lot more movies over the next decade. These are the types of things you just need to except when watching these movies. If nothing else, when they go on and on about the stones gives us all a chance to go the bathroom, which given the way these movies have ballooned in their running time over the years.

But it’s everything around the basic plot that makes Age of Ultron quite a good superhero movie. I like the way Whedon is pitting Captain America and Iron Man against each other. This is part of what made Captain America: The Winter Soldier so interesting. I think many people – like myself – thought of Captain America was a rather square character – a remnant of the past without much relevance to the present. To Marvel’s credit, they realize this, and having increasingly addressed this – Captain America still represents the “best” of the American character – and how Americans like to see themselves, but in the movies it’s clear that he has increasingly become out of step with the contemporary world – as America has moved on from his idealism. For Stark’s part, his character has got increasingly dark over the series of movies – Iron Man 3’s best parts were him dealing with his PTSD after New York, and finding his way to move on. Here, he’s just further down that same road – and it has led to his hubris overtaking his reason, which is what gives rise to Ultron in the first place – who is essentially an even darker version of Stark. These two will apparently be even more in conflict in the next Captain America movie – Civil War – and I look forward to that.

There are lots of other things in the movie that work – but not quite as well as they should have. The blossoming romance between Bruce Banner and Black Widow, the characters of Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch, Hawkeye’s secret life, which seems like a direct response to all the people who have mocked the guy with a bow and arrow teaming up with these other people with much stronger powers. The dream sequences, in which Scarlett Witch gives each of the Avengers a nightmare of their worst fears. A lot of Whedon-esque snappy dialogue. A climax in which, for the first time I can recall, the superheroes care more about civilians that avenging personal grudges. James Spader’s malicious line readings, and the dangers of playing God with A.I.

All of these things work – to a degree. But all needed more time to develop. Every time I thought we were heading in an interesting direction, the movie grinds to a halt so we can get another action sequence. To be fair, the action sequences are all quite good – the best one may well be a fight between Iron Man and a rampaging Hulk. The sequence is also relevant to the larger story – because it has to setup Banner’s actions at the end of the movie, and his fear of losing control and hurting innocent people. It’s an expertly crafted sequence – and exciting. It’s also far too long, and has the feel of trying to settle those long standing arguments comic book fans have (“who would win in a fight between Iron Man and Hulk? – show you work”). Considering the movie didn’t have time to develop many of the characters more – Scarlett Witch joins the list of virtually every other female character in the MCU as not being enough to do – or even make Thor’s whole trip to a cave and back into a coherent part of the story and on and on and on, perhaps we could have done with a little less of Hulk Smash.

 
Apparently Whedon’s first cut of the movie ran close to three and half hours, and the final one comes in at two hours and twenty minutes. What’s missing in that extra hour is probably not action that Marvel spent millions creating, but little stuff like plot, character and thematic development. This is one of the only times in recent memory where I’m actually looking forward to a longer cut on DVD, as I have a feeling that a lot of stuff I would have liked wound up on the cutting room floor. I still find it

Movie Review: Much Ado About Nothing

Much Ado About Nothing
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Written by: Joss Whedon based on the play by William Shakespeare.
Starring: Amy Acker (Beatrice), Alexis Denisof (Benedick), Nathan Fillion (Dogberry), Clark Gregg (Leonato), Reed Diamond (Don Pedro), Fran Kranz (Claudio), Jillian Morgese (Hero), Sean Maher (Don John), Spencer Treat Clark (Borachio), Riki Lindhome (Conrade), Ashley Johnson (Margaret), Emma Bates (Ursula), Tom Lenk (Verges), Nick Kocher (First Watchman), Brian McElhaney (Second Watchman), Joshua Zar (Leonato's Aide), Paul Meston (Friar Francis).

Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing is a pleasant surprise. Whedon, the director best known for his genre TV work (Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Firefly, Dollhouse) and last year’s mega hit The Avengers, has crafted an effortless, utterly enjoyable modern day version of one of William Shakespeare’s best known comedies. Shot in black and white, over two weeks, for almost no money, with a cast culled from Whedon’s TV shows this Much Ado About Nothing manages the trick of setting a Shakespeare play in modern day America, while keeping the Shakespeare dialogue, and not make the whole thing look like a stunt.

This movie is set almost exclusively in the home of Leonato (Clark Gregg), a wealthy man in what looks to be a gated community. Don Pedro (Reed Diamond) shows up with his men – the love-struck Claudio (Fran Kranz) and affirmed bachelor Benedick (Alexis Benisof) in tow, along with his scheming brother Don John (Sean Maher). Claudio is in love with Leonato’s daughter Hero (Jillian Morgese), who Don Pedro agrees to woo in his name, and arrange the marriage with Leonato, while Benedick and Hero’s cousin Beatrice (Amy Acker) engage in a war of words about how much they hate each other – while of course, they love each other. And Don John wants to mess everything up with the help of his friends Borachio (Spencer Treat Clark) and Conrade (Riki Lindhome – inspiring casting, since Conrade is usually a man).

Whedon stages this all as a screwball comedy of the super-rich. Whatever these men do, and it’s never addressed, they’re obviously rich – they look they stepped out of the pages of GQ. All the actors are game – making the Shakespearean dialogue feel more natural given the surroundings than it probably should. Two central scenes – where first the men conspire to make Benedick think Beatrice is in love with him, and then the women do the same thing to Beatrice – are excellent examples of ridiculous physical comedy – complete with pratfalls that work far better than they should. Densiof and Acker are pretty much perfectly matched as the lovers who can’t stand each other, digging into their insults to each other. The best member of the cast however is, surprisingly, Nathan Fillion as Dogberry – the local buffoonish constable who uncovers the plot to shame Hero. Normally an over the top fool, Fillion nicely underplays Dogberry – and still gets many of the film’s biggest laughs – especially the way he obsesses over Conrade calling him an ass.

The problems with the movie, are the same I’ve always had with the play – essentially, why Hero still wants Claudio after he is tricked in believing she has been unfaithful, and goes out of his way to shame her in the most public and humiliating way possible. The scene where he does that is brilliantly handled by Kranz as Claudio, making the old standard of fidelity seem more modern than it should. But why then does he deserve a happy ending with Hero? And why does Hero still want him after what he did? These are probably questions better suited for Shakespeare than Whedon – although I suspect the answer would be the play is a comedy, so of course they end up together.

Adapting Shakespeare in a modern setting is a tricky proposition – one that doesn’t work out very well much of the time. But Whedon and his cast pull it off. The somehow make this play that is hundreds of years old feel fresh and new.

Movie Review: The Avengers

The Avengers *** ½
Directed by: Joss Whedon.
Written by: Joss Whedon and Zak Penn based on the comic book by Stan Lee & Jack Kirby.
Starring: Robert Downey Jr. (Tony Stark / Iron Man), Chris Evans (Steve Rogers / Captain America), Mark Ruffalo (Bruce Banner / The Hulk), Chris Hemsworth (Thor), Scarlett Johansson (Natasha Romanoff / Black Widow), Jeremy Renner (Clint Barton / Hawkeye), Tom Hiddleston (Loki), Clark Gregg (Agent Phil Coulson), Cobie Smulders (Agent Maria Hill), Stellan Skarsgård (Selvig), Samuel L. Jackson (Nick Fury), Gwyneth Paltrow (Pepper Potts), Paul Bettany (Jarvis), Alexis Denisof (The Other), Powers Boothe (World Security Council).

Marvel has been building to The Avengers since 2008 – when both Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk came out. They followed up those movies with Iron Man 2, Thor and Captain America so they could introduce us to the four main heroes of this movie. Along the way, they’ve introduced to the supporting heroes – Black Widow and Hawkeye, along with their leader, Nick Fury, and the main villain, Loki. How would all of these characters – and more – interact in one movie? Finally we have a chance to find out – and the answer is surprisingly well. Yes, some of these characters have to take a backseat in The Avengers – Thor especially – but The Avengers is so enjoyable, I didn’t really care. Written and directed by Joss Whedon, best known for TV series like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Firefly, he turns out to be an inspired choice. TV shows often have larger casts than movies, and often have to jump back and forth between all of those characters. Whedon is also a gifted comedic writer, and his screenplay for The Avengers is witty throughout. Some critics have compared The Avengers to the Westminster Dog Show (Roger Ebert) or decried it as just corporate product (AO Scott) – and you know something, they’re not wrong. But The Avengers was so much fun, I didn’t really care.

Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is back – you will remember, he is Thor’s bitter adopted brother, who thinks he is the rightful King of Asgard, the world that the brothers are from. So when he is approached by a strange Other, with the offer of  an army to invade Earth, where he can rule, he jumps at the chance. They only thing they want in return is the Tesseract – introduced in Captain America – a cube with untold powers. Loki gets what he wants, stealing the Tesseract from SHIELD – run by Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) – and taking Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Dr. Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) along with him by brainwashing them. His endgame is unknown, but Fury knows they need something special to stop them. So, he reaches out to Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Bruce Banner/The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo, taking over for Edward Norton), Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans), along with Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) to track Loki down, and get the Tesseract back. Sooner or later, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) shows up to try and stop his adopted brother as well.

I couldn’t help but think of Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai (1954), one of the most influential movies ever made, which of course, inspired a direct remake in The Magnificent Seven (1960), and really is the blueprint for all of these movies where multiple heroes unite (a movie like The Expendables is a more recent example). The first act introduces the threat, and brings together a group of “heroes” that seem like an odd match that will never possibly work. The second act contains an action sequence where everything goes wrong for the heroes, and they really look like a disaster instead of the only hope humanity has. Then something brings them together, and they have an even bigger action sequence to climax the movie, where the heroes finally work together as a team and defeat the threat. The Avengers pretty much follows this formula to a T.

But did you really expect anything different from The Avengers? Haven’t all four movies leading up to The Avengers pretty much followed the typical superhero formula exactly like you expect them to? The charm of the four movies leading up to The Avengers, and The Avengers itself, is not in this originality, but in the details. Like we expected, Robert Downey Jr. is the anchor of the movie – and his charm as Tony Stark shines through. The role suits Downey perfectly, and like he did with both Iron Man and Iron Man 2, he elevates the movie with his performance. Chris Evans is well suited for the square, patriotic Captain America (whose movie, by the way, is probably by favorite of the movie leading up The Avengers, and it’s disappointing to me that all of his follow-ups will be in the current era, so we’ll miss the retro feel that made the first one so enjoyable). Chris Hemsworth takes a beat seat as Thor – he’s just kind of there. Same goes for Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye, who spends most of the movie brainwashed. But Scarlett Johansson elevates her game as Black Widow – she’s actually excellent this time around, as she has more to work with. The most pleasant surprise is Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner. After two decent, but still somewhat disappointing Hulk movies, Whedon and Ruffalo nail it this time. It is undeniable that Hulk has far and away the best moment in the movie (“Puny God”).

So yes, The Avengers is as formulaic as big budget blockbusters can be. But the movie was fun, funny and entertaining all the way from beginning to end. To expect more from this movie is setting yourself up for disappointing. The Avengers is exactly what it wants to be.