Showing posts with label Chris Hemsworth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chris Hemsworth. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 12, 2020

The Cabin in the Woods (2011)

 Director: Drew Goddard

I actually own this movie and gave it a rewatch - my fourth viewing of it since it came out. It's still a ton of fun, honoring so many great horror standards with its clever "meta" approach. 

The movie follows five college friends as they take a weekend trip to the secluded, titular cabin in the woods. As they approach, things start to take turns very familiar to anyone who has seen popular and cult horror movies from the 1980s and later: the cabin is a dark and foreboding; there's an eerie basement with a vast assortment of creepy objects; and the overly curious visitors accidentally unleash hellish forces that seek to kill them all. Before the proceedings turn wildly violent, we also get some overt sexuality and dashes of budding romance. Again, very familiar tropes of the horror genre. What is new here is that, outside and above everything happening in and around the cabin, is a vast, bureaucratic organization that is orchestrating the entire thing. Their purpose is to stage the entire group execution, all unknown to the five victims, in order to appease a group of Lovecraftian "old gods" who slumber beneath the earth. These titans of evil and destruction only refrain from annihilating humankind if an annual ritual sacrifice is made in order to appease them.

The Cabin in the Woods is so entertaining, especially for horror fans. I'm not a hardcore horror aficionado by any means, but I've seen most of the standards and classics. I've also enjoyed many of the most frightening and clever films in the genre, like The Shining, the Evil Dead trilogy, and An American Werewolf in London, among many others, multiple times. Like many of the greats, The Cabin in the Woods, written by Joss Whedon, finds a perfect balance between giving you legitimate scares, making you laugh, and dazzling you with its mysterious and layered tale. Yes, the main five characters are loose archetypes of the typical slasher victims: the jock, the whore, the nerd, etc., but Whedon added more depth to them and made them genuinely funny and empathetic. They crack good jokes, and when things start to go horrifyingly haywire, we actually care. 

Our five friends begin to sense something 
horribly amiss in their weekend getaway cabin.
Things only get crazier, on many literal and
figurative levels.
The horror elements hit well. While there isn't anything particularly new to most of the scares, they are effective. Creepy zombies. Jump scares. Gut-wrenching fatalities. Chases through creepy a creepy cabin and the surrounding woods. They're all there, and they're all done well. Beyond that, though, is the larger picture of the powers that are orchestrating everything. The desensitized bureaucrats are really funny in their own ways, but their callousness is quietly more frightening than any of the more immediate, grisly horrors that we get.

The third act of this one is what really puts it over the top, though. Once the grand secret is revealed and the two "survivors" uncover the greater scheme at work, this movie supplies so many fun "Oh shit!" moments in the form of revelations, more creepy horror entities, and straight-up action. To cap it all off, it has the guts to supply a rather dark ending, something which I always appreciate, especially in horror movies. 

Back when I first bought a blu-ray player, The Cabin in the Woods was one of two blu-ray discs that I purchased to break it in. I'm glad I did, as I've gone back to it every few years since, and I'll continue to do so. 

Sunday, April 29, 2018

New Release! Avengers: Infinity War (2018) [Spoiler-Free 1st Section]

Spoiler-Free Section - Have No Fear!

Directors: Joe and Anthony Russo

Fans of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) will almost definitely love, or at least highly enjoy, Infinity War. Those who are apathetic or even averse to the ever-sprawling juggernaut of superhero films will hardly be won over. In fact, the latter group may very well despise this movie.

Tying together many tiny threads that have been laced throughout the previous 18 MCU films, Infinity War follows Thanos, the "Mad Titan" from the so-named moon, whose grand ambition is to gather all six of the immensely powerful Infinity Stones, gems that allow dominion over aspects of existence such as mind, space, time, and others. Most of the stones have been intermittently introduced in previous MCU films: the Space Stone back in Captain America: The First Avenger; the Mind Stone in The Avengers, and so on. Thanos is an incredibly powerful alien who has long waged a campaign to basically "thin the herd" of populations which have grown too unwieldy to manage themselves. When he determines that a planet has reached such a point, he brings in his armies to kill half the population, at random, leaving the remaining half more than enough resources to flourish. Thanos's ultimate scheme now is to gather and control the six Infinity Stones, granting him the power to eliminate half of the population of the entire universe with no more than the snap of his fingers. To stop him, the many heroic characters from the previous films must use every resource at their disposal.

Right off, I'll admit that Infinity War isn't the best MCU movie. The scale is so epic, and the number of balls needing to be juggled is so large, that there was no way that a single film could provide satisfaction on every possible cinematic and storytelling level. In this movie's case, what gets sacrificed is real emotional depth and notable character development. The movie does actually provide a bit of depth to the imposing Thanos, a character who has only been shown in brief glimpses a handful of times in the previous six years. And there is a sense of loss concerning a couple of key characters. Also, for those who have followed and enjoyed any of the individual characters from previous MCU film series, the third act is bound to have some impact for you. On the whole, though, this is as purely plot-driven a film as the MCU has offered us to date. Anyone who has preferred the smaller-scale MCU flicks like Ant-Man or Spider-Man: Homecoming, thanks to those films' greater focus on a few people and their relationships, may find the flashy, rip-roaring pace of Infinity War too dizzying and shallow.

Yep - that is indeed Spider-Man and Iron Man grouped up
with a few members of Guardians of the Galaxy. Such cross-
over teamings are part of the fun of
Infinity War.
For my part, I greatly enjoyed the movie. The directing duo Russo brothers had a lot of moving parts to rein into a single narrative, and they actually did an admirable job of it. This movie is bringing together no less than twenty different characters from well over a half dozen different movie "franchises," and having them band together to try and save quite literally half the universe. The main appeal of such an enterprise boils down to two things: what will the dynamics be when different characters interact, and how exactly will they stop an immensely powerful and determined force like Thanos? Well, the tale does an excellent job of entertaining us through these aspects of the film. Within the first few scenes, we get Spider-Man and Iron Man meeting up with Doctor Strange, and before long Quill and the Guardians of the Galaxy run into a very familiar Asgardian. As the disparate characters begin to coalesce into various teams and fill each other in on exactly who Thanos is and what he wants, the tale comes together in a rather satisfying way. As the heroes attempt to rebuff the initial attacks by Thanos's underlings, their powers, creativity, and mettle are tested in ways that make for some fun viewing.

The ending of this film is already causing some mixed reactions among movie-goers. Though one can assume that certain developments will be undone (the Infinity Stones are virtual game-breakers), there were certainly a few heroes who seem to have truly met their ultimate end. This was bound to upset fans of those particular characters. And while I was expecting a slightly more self-contained movie, I found the ending fine for what it is. The MCU overlords have always billed this movie as the first of what is basically a two-part story, with the second, still-unnamed, chapter set for release in May of 2019. It will feel like a rather long wait for the follow-up, but I believe that it is set up to actually be the stronger of the two films. Much of Infinity War had to be given over to set-up and Thanos's blitzkrieg attack, and when it is all said and done, it will likely feel more like acts one and two of the greater whole.

Infinity War is a success, for what it is. It's what DC films like Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman were trying to be in many ways but mostly failed to be. Short of making a TV-style, five or six-hour mini-series, this movie was never going to have enough time to please everyone across the movie-viewing spectrum. I think the Russo's trimmed away what they needed in order to create a cohesive movie. It's far from the most heart-felt or ponderous MCU flick, but it's strong popcorn entertainment for those looking for fantasy action/adventure of the superhero variety.

Fun fact - this exact scene never actually happens in the film,
but scenes very similar to it do unfold. Good to see Okoye get
a few good moments and one-liners in there, too.
Spoiler Section!! Beware!!!

Here is where I get into a few of the details that I enjoyed or didn't, and nearly all of them could potentially ruin some of the fun for you, if you haven't seen the movie yet.

As covered generally above, the greatest weakness of this movie is simply that there just isn't enough time for any character, or even group of characters, to particularly shine. One thing I've loved about my favorite among the MCU movies is that several of the characters have developed clear personalities, which themselves can carry a movie. Tony Stark and Steve Rogers are the two most obvious, but even less prominent characters like Doctor Strange or Bucky Barnes/The Winter Soldier have compelling enough backgrounds to make them engaging. Due to the reality of time constraints, however, no character is given much more than fifteen minutes of total screen time, and much of that is action. Amazingly, the writers did work in several solid dialogue exchanges that included some solid humor, but the scope of the film and its plot demands were such that one was bound to be disappointed by how little exposure their favorite characters would get. Ant-Man and Hawkeye aren't even in the film at all, despite the former having one film on the shelf and a sequel coming in a mere two months.

Another unfortunate result of the massive scale of the movie is that the losses don't have the emotional impact that one would hope for. Part of this is because of the limited dedication to emotional depth. Again, if one has fallen in love with certain characters, then the impact will be there, but that will have to have come from your previous viewing(s) of those characters' own movies. The deepest emotional tale in the movie involved Gamora and Thanos, but Gamora's death will only have resonance if one has enjoyed the two Guardians of the Galaxy movies (and for my part, I never found the connection between her and Quill terribly organic). And the demise of a character like Loki, one of the cornerstone villains of the MCU, lacks the power that it could have had in another stand-alone "Thor" movie. This is all to say nothing of the fact that the mere existence of the Infinity Stones tells us that whatever happens can be changed or undone, which is what I fully expect will happen in next year's follow-up film, though not everyone will be resurrected.

Oh, and we never get to see the Hulk really "smash," which is something I've greatly enjoyed in the previous two Avengers movies and Ragnarok. It is pretty cool that Thanos's raw physical strength is made clear by his almost dismissive thrashing of the jade giant early in the picture, but it would have been nice to see him leaping around and pounding a few platoons of alien invaders into Wakandan rhino meat. I have to assume that this is all a setup for Banner's Hulk persona to make a big splash in the sequel.

Those are my "superhero fanboy" gripes, and they are what keeps Infinity War from being among my absolute favorite MCU movies. When I set aside my fandom and just look at it as an objective cinephile, the movie fares worse, for reasons I mostly cover in the first section of this review. But I am a massive fan of these films, so it is in this vein that I describe what I enjoyed.

The movie does a decent job of elevating Thanos above being
a mere mindless, power-mad force of destruction. This has
been a severe weakness in many of the MCU films.
As stated, I think the actual plot is extremely well-managed. While Thanos's motivation is rather simplistic, I can justify that when I consider that most massive-scale zealots become that way by oversimplifying complex dilemmas. Rather than try to use creativity or imagination to solve large-scale population problems, Thanos falls back on brutal genocide and justifies it by telling himself that he is doing an honorable and difficult task which only he has the strength and will to carry out. I'm glad that the writers did find a way to add a couple of extra layers to the giant purple killing machine in the way of his backstory and his connection to Gamora. They weren't exactly high emotional drama, but they worked well enough.

And the many heroes' planet-jumping dash to find and stop the Mad Titan is spun very well. Especially if one has followed the various characters in the previous films, there is a very logical progression as to how they seek each other out and ultimately muster for their grand defense in Wakanda. Speaking of, I actually rather enjoyed the movie's use of the fictional African country as the staging ground for much of the ultimate battle. Even though I had just rewatched Black Panther the weekend before seeing Infinity War, I was far from tired of the setting.

With where things stand in the MCU currently - with literally half of the population obliterated, including half of our beloved heroes - this should be a great moment for the MCU to "clean things up," so to speak. I think if Infinity War shows us anything, it's that there is a breaking point for just how many "superhero" characters one put in a a movie and still have that movie provide depth as well as rousing action. Captain America: Civil War was just barely on the right side of that line, while I think Infinity War crossed over to the wrong side of it a bit, watering down what is in many ways a fun flick. Now, however, if MCU president Kevin Feige and his creative team play their cards right, they can pare things back a bit. Once Thanos is dealt with and much of his damage undone (I presume the Time Stone will play a fairly big part in this), the universe can probably be reworked a bit, allowing the future films' creators to go in directions different from what we've yet seen. I'm still well on board, even these ten years later.

Re-Watch Report (Still Spoilers...)

I enjoyed the movie enough to go take it in, IMAX 3-D style, ten days after the first viewing. I'm pleased to say that I enjoyed it even a little more upon a second viewing, even if it doesn't change a few of the purely, objective "story" weaknesses that it will never escape. To whit, full enjoyment of this film simply requires that the viewer has seen at least eight of the previous 18 MCU films. Without that familiarity with the characters' backstories, most or all of the emotional weight is simply not there.

For one like me, on the other hand, who is a big enough fan to have watched every single previous MCU film multiple times, this movie does hold up exceptionally well. As with most movies, the first viewing was all about seeing the plot unfold. With that out of the way, I was able to focus more on the pacing, visuals, intricacies of the narrative, and even the action choreography. Somewhat surprisingly, all of these aspects hold up extemely well under closer scrutiny.

As far as the action, thanks to seeing it on an IMAX screen, I was once again reminded of just how good the Russo brothers are at fight scene design and pacing. I'm generally not a particular fan of action films, but I do greatly appreciate very well-done action sequences that are neither too fast (I'm looking at you Paul Greengrass and the Bourne movies) nor addicted to slow-motion (looking even harder at you, Michael Bay). As they did with their two previous Captain America films, the Russos do brilliantly with Infinity War, which is on a much larger, literally interplanetary scale. It would have been really easy for them to lean too heavily on the CGI and simply send a bunch of digital garbage flying across the screen at all moments. Instead, they actually offer more than a few wide shots, use negative space, and give certain sequences enough room to breath a bit. This all greatly enhances the scope and scale of the larger moments, both those involving action and those which are more meditative.

The other strength that emerges is the larger theme of sacrifice and its connection to one's soul. The running question through Infinity War is: is a single life worth sacrificing, if it is likely to guarantee the safety of many, perhaps millions or more, other lives? From the opening sequences right through to the end, this question is faced by several different characters, with different choices being made. Heimdall decides that his own life is worth losing to give the universe a chance to fend of Thanos. Loki makes as if he's willing to give up Thor's life to save his own, only to turn the tables and lose his own life. Quill faces the choice of having to kill Gamora, at her behest, in order to prevent Thanos from being able to use her. And on it goes. It's not shocking that Thanos is willing to sacrifice the daughter he loves to his greater cause. Much more curiously, though, is that not every "hero" makes the choice to value the single life of a loved one over the many other lives at stake. Quill actually pulls the trigger on Gamora, and Wanda makes the move to destroy the Mind Stone, in effect killing her beloved Vision. The ultimate emotional fallout from these decisions will hopefully be explored in next year's Avengers film, but it all serves as a clear running theme that draws a fairly clear line between Thanos and those who seek to stop his mad scheme.

For anyone still considering it, I would suggest seeing the movie in IMAX. Much of the movie was actually filmed with IMAX cameras, so it fits the screens perfectly, and it really brings out the epic scale of everything. The 3-D is also well-done, so it's worth it, if that's your thing. More importantly is that the movie really is a great one for MCU fans. Few things prove that more than when one enjoys it even more upon a second viewing, as I did. 

Monday, November 6, 2017

New, Spoiler-Free Release! Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

No Plot Spoilers! Have no Fear!!

In one of many entertaining twists, the god of thunder must
learn to cope without his legendary hammer, Mjolnir, as he
fights as a gladiator against a very formidable opponent.
Director: Taika Waititi

Far and away the best Thor movie, which may not be saying much. But I'll also say that this is now among my favorite Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) movies.

Those of us who follow the MCU last saw Thor (Chris Hemsworth) as he helped save earth from the destructive machinations of Ultron in 2015's Avengers: Age of Ultron. While the other Avengers regrouped and formed a new team, Thor and the Hulk/Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) disappeared without a trace. Thor: Ragnarok brings us up to speed fairly quickly, with Thor having been searching various realms around the universe for information about the cosmically powerful Infinity Stones. This search eventually puts him on the trail of his missing father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins). When he and his ever-treacherous brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston), the god of mischief, eventually find Odin, the events that follow unleash Hela (Cate Blanchett), an immensely powerful force of destruction. Thor and Loki are inadvertently hurtled across the universe and land on a remote planet ruled by a barely sane overlord, Grandmaster, who runs a massive gladiator competition. Thor and Loki must figure out a way off the planet and get back to Asgard, which Hela means to take over as a first step towards dominating the universe.

Even more than the nearly uncut entertainment that is the Guardians of the Galaxy films, Thor: Ragnarok is unadulterated fun. Purists and fans of more intense superhero movies like the Dark Knight trilogy or even Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Civil War (all of which I love, by the way) may take some umbrage to the generally silly, even campy, tone of this latest MCU offering, but I loved it. Admittedly, I am a fan of New Zealand director Taika Waititi's goofy sensibilities. Even when I could see the gags coming, they were executed so well that I always got a chuckle out of them. And anyone who's enjoyed the odd, deadpan humor of Flight of the Conchords (several episodes of which Waititi either wrote and/or directed) or the vampire mockumentary What We Do in the Shadows will catch on and laugh heartily at the banter and comedy in Ragnarok.

My main concern going in was whether or not Waititi would be able to offer some worthy action sequences, given that he'd yet to tackle any sort of big-budget project of this sort. I was glad that he eased these worried by giving us several highly entertaining, well-executed fight and battle scenes. I won't put them on par with the best of what we saw in The Avengers or the Russo brothers' two Captain America movies, but there are more than a few spectacular displays of mythical might in the film. Many of us viewers in the theater were ooh-ing, ah-ing, and basically having fun with many of these sequences.

Cate Blanchett cuts a menacing enough figure as the blood-
thirsty Hela, even if the villain is yet another mostly one-
dimensional adversary in an MCU replete with them.
I can't say that the movie fully delivers in terms of any touching or emotional beats. Yes, there is a bit more exploration of the love/hate relationship between Thor and Loki, and the theme of vengeance and maintaining bonds with one's people. But these always take a rather distant backseat to the action and humor. Another aspect where I would say the movie falls a bit short is one that has been a blind spot for most MCU movies - not being able to conjure up a completely well-rounded, thoroughly compelling villain. Cate Blanchett plays the role of Hela just fine, and the character is certainly powerful. And her backstory does offer more than many other MCU villains, making her out to be a bit more than simply a massive force of inexplicable rage. The rage is there, but there is some explanation for it this time around. Still, she is ultimately just a baddie who wants to kill everything and everyone in her path who won't bow to her will. Far physically weaker villains like Adrian Toomes in Spider-Man: Homecoming or Helmut Zemo in Captain America: Civil War were better developed and more compelling.

A final note to those who may be wondering just how inundated with the MCU one has to be in order to enjoy this movie: you don't need to know a ton. Even if you haven't seen earlier MCU films, the key points are summarized within the movie fairly well, if briskly. While I can't call Ragnarok a complete stand-alone movie, it does quite well on its own merits. Of course, if one wants to do all of their homework, I would recommend watching the first two Thor movies, The first two Avengers movies, and maybe even Doctor Strange, which does have a minor connection here. If you've the time and inclination to take in those five films, you'll completely understand all of the main references and connections in the film.

So this one is plenty of fun. It might not be the tightest movie we'll ever get in the MCU, but it has a cheeky, high-spirited, and playful attitude that makes it a joy to watch. I already have my tickets to see it again in a few days. What other endorsement need I make?

Saturday, October 29, 2016

New(ish) Releases: Zootopia (2016); In the Heart of the Sea (2016)

Zootopia (2016)

Directors: Byron Howard, Rich Moore, and Jared Bush

I wouldn't call it a hands-down classic, but Zootopia is a highly respectable entry into the canon of modern animated family films that don't condescend to younger viewers.

The movie mostly follows the story of Judy Hopps, an upbeat rabbit with dreams of being a police officer in the cosmopolitan super-city Zootopia, where all species of animals live in ostensible harmony. The world Hopps lives in is populated by all manner of animals who have long since evolved beyond their basic predator/prey hardwiring. Instead, they live in civilized manners, with jobs, homes, and families. This does not mean, however, that certain problems and prejudices don't exist. Some animals types are presumed to have or lack certain skills for certain tasks. In the case of Judy Hopps, as a rabbit, she is assumed not to have the strength, tenacity, or instincts to be a police officer. She has her chance to prove everyone wrong when she finds herself in the middle of a case of several missing animals in Zootopia.

The very clear theme running throughout the movie is that individuals shouldn't be stereotyped or generalized. While this may seem trite to mature adults, the movie sends the message in rather savvy ways. There is also the added depth of the larger notion that certain types of individuals are more prone to bestial, primitive behavior than others. This clearly touches on racism and other dangerous ideas which are still relevant topics, even early in the 21st century. As someone who didn't watch this movie with any children - just his fellow Generation X wife - we both felt that the movie was rather clever in how it got its points across.

But is the movie funny? It is, after all, and animated family film. The answer is yes - it is funny. I wouldn't put it on the same plane as the very best Pixar movies or other animated films of that caliber, but there are plenty of funny lines and visual gags. There are more than a few jokes and references that are clearly designed with older viewers in mind, but children should never feel lost or bored. The voice-actors all do great work, and the visuals are eye-popping in their vibrancy. There are also plenty of clever visual gags, often relating to how the various animals of different sizes and physcial needs all co-exist within the city of Zootopia.

This was a really enjoyable animated movie. I imagine that kids would love it, and adults are likely to enjoy it plenty, as well.


Movie posters like this one promised a sense of awe at the
incredible profession of classic whale hunting. Some of this
came through, but not nearly as much as I had hoped.
In the Heart of the Sea (2016)

Director: Ron Howard

With so many excellent ingredients there for a great movie, it was surprising to see that this one didn't totally manage to live up to its potential.

The movie is a dramatization of many true events which befell the Nantucket whaling ship the Essex, whose sinking inspired Herman Melville to write Moby Dick. We start with Herman Melville in the late 1840s, convincing an aging man to tell of his time as a cabin boy on the Essex, a whaling ship surrounded by strange rumours. Melville's interviewee eventually tells the author the tale of how the Essex, thanks to the desperation and frustration of its at-odds captain and first mate, went dangerously far out into the Pacific Ocean and were attacked by a massive, frighteningly aggressive white whale. The Essex was sunk, and the crew had to endure the harrowing ordeal of finding some means of rescue while drifting along in tiny boats, well over a thousand miles from any inhabited shore.

The movie doesn't do anything poorly, but I didn't find that it did anything exceptionally well, either. The cast is strong, including the likes of Chris Hemsworth, Tom Holland, Cilian Murphy, Brendan Gleeson, and several other less-know but equally capable actors. All of them do just fine with what they were given, though the script seemed to be lacking the snap that would elevate it above adequate. The tale itself also contains the compelling power struggle between the captain and first mate, which provides some amount of drama, but it feels as if it falls just a bit short of reaching truly gripping heights.

First mate Owen Chase (right) and his friend, Matthew Joy.
The bond between Chase and Joy is more hinted at than ever
fully explored, diluting some of the film's impact.
The pacing seemed to feel a little bit off in certain places, as well. Once the Essex sets out on its journey, we get the excitement of seeing just how complicated the task of operating a whaling vessel is. Anyone with the slightest curiosity for seafaring is likely to be engaged in the ship's departure from port and how it heads into its first major squall. After this, though, it seems as if the story was a bit rushed. The friction between the captain and first mate didn't have enough time to fully simmer before it came to a real head. And when crewmen eventually start dying for various reasons, it felt as if it lacked as much emotional punch as it could have had. Perhaps this could have been improved with a few more scenes of the crewmen relaxing or working on the ship, where we could have seen their personalities a bit more. Whatever the case, the reasonable 122-minute running time could have used a good ten to fifteen more creative minutes to add some emotional heft.

The visuals are probably the strongest aspect of the  movie, but like the other aspects, they weren't as captivating as possible. The majesty of seafaring and, at times, the whales which the Essex hunts are sometimes captured well, and you get a sense of the enormity and grandeur of the oceans and traversing them. And there are a few clever shots here and there. However, I found some of the sequences during the actual hunting to be less exciting than I had hoped. Having read Moby Dick not long ago, I can easily recall how exciting a really well-done film adaptation could be of a whale hunt. In the Heart of the Sea conveys some of this adventure, but here also I couldn't help but be a tad underwhelmed by something which should truly inspire awe. I suppose seeing the movie in a theater may have helped this, but I feel that my television screen should still have been conveying more awe from certain scenes.

This movie was just on the right side of the question "Is it worth your time?" My wife and I certainly didn't feel that we wasted our time watching it, but neither of us will ever return to it. I would recommend it with the slight caveat not to expect greatness. Truthfully, the only lasting effect the movie had on me was making me want to re-watch the underrated Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World from 2003.