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. 

New-ish Releases, Spoiler-Free Reviews: Justice League (2017); It (2017)

Justice League (2017)

No Spoilers!

Director: Zack Snyder

This one was OK, which actually qualifies as a pleasant surprise to me.

Justice League was the fifth film in the "DC Extended Universe" (DCEU). After paying to see the underwhelming Man of Steel in 2013 and then the utter mess that was Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice a couple of years ago, I swore off paying theater prices to see any of the DCEU flicks. While I broke that vow to see Wonder Woman, after all of that movie's mostly-deserved high praise, that initial boycotting paid off by my avoiding the sloppy Suicide Squad. While I am glad that I didn't shell out theater price for Justice League, I have to say that it was a reasonably satisfying at-home rental.

The story picks up several of the ostentatiously dangling and flapping threads left over from Batman v. Superman. With Clark Kent/Superman's apparent death at the hands of the Doomsday monster, the alien conqueror Steppenwolf sees his chance to lead an assault on Earth and take over the planet. It's an attempt which he had made in the past, only to be rebuffed by the collective forces of several of earth's mythically powerful races. Now that Steppenwolf is back with a massive army of fear-feasting insectoids, Batman recruits one known ally, Diana Prince/Wonder Woman, to enlist the aid of other people with apparent superpowers. These lead them to band together a group that includes Barry "The Flash" Allen, Arthur "Aquaman" Curry, and Victor "Cyborg" Stone.

In most ways, the movie is fairly paint-by-numbers. I will admit that I suspect Joss Whedon, who was brought in to take over as writer/director after Snyder had a family tragedy to deal with, probably was responsible for some of the more intriguing and clever narrative ties in the film. I also wouldn't be surprised if he had a hand in writing some of the more engaging fight sequences. The one which I found most entertaining seemed very much like something we would have seen in The Avengers. Whether it was Whedon or co-writer Chris Terrio, this movie definitely had the lighter tone and funnier gags that Batman v. Superman was painfully lacking. It still wasn't nearly on par with the best MCU or even X-Men flicks, but it was a clear improvement.

Jason Momoa certainly cuts a striking figure as Aquaman, but
the outline and dialogue never came together for me. Most of
the other characters were handled more deftly.

The core characters are a mixed bag. The villain Steppenwolf is dull - a typically one-dimensional warmonger who wants to crush everything in his path. The voice acting by Northern Irish acting veteran Ciaran Hinds is powerful, though. In terms of "The League," I found it hit-and-miss. I've personally never had a problem with Ben Affleck as Batman, and he continues to be fine here. Gal Gadot continues to be great as Wonder Woman, as well. Ezra Miller was rightfully hailed as maybe the biggest revelation in this one, as he plays the iconic Flash exceptionally well, lightening things up nicely. Cyborg, however, I found extremely dull, and this particular vision of Aquaman felt completely off to me. As a group, though, the good outweighed the bad, and the dynamics work well enough.

I can't say that Justice League won me back over to the DCEU, but it did give me an enjoyable two hours. Looking ahead, the film franchise's next movie is Aquaman, headed up by James Wan, known for recent "Fast...Furious" films and the recent Star Trek Beyond. Given my feelings for how Aquaman was handled in Justice League, and my apathy towards the Fast and Furious movies, I don't anticipate that I'll be seeing that one. I do hope that the powers behind the DCEU take some note of what worked in Justice League, though, as they really are sitting on a wealth of great fantasy characters whom they could use to make some wildly entertaining movies.

Spoilers!! You've Been Warned!

Great intro sequences with Wonder Woman. While her solo movie last year had some solid action scenes, her rescue at the bank was top-notch. And the sequence with the Amazons trying to defend the Mother Box from Steppenwolf's attack has some really fun visuals, too.

It was a brief moment, but I absolutely loved the moment when the Flash is running up on a still-deranged Superman, thinking his he has the jump on him, only to have the Man of Steel's eyes turn directly towards him, well aware of the Scarlet Speedster's approach. I have to think that that was a Joss Whedon addition, as it seems like just the type of subtle-but-awesome moment that Whedon has a knack for.

Speaking of Superman, it was probably the least surprising "twist" to bring him back in this one. It was handled fine, if not exactly in a compelling or creative way. The iconic superhero does serve as a half-decent deus ex machina, but he does raise the eternal concern with such a powerful character - how do you find a villain strong enough and interesting enough to contend with him, let alone him and his super-powered buddies?

It (2017)

Director: Andy Muschietti

A solid horror movie, if one that is drawing from several wells that have been heavily tapped by earlier scare flicks.

Based on the hit 1986 novel by popular horror master Stephen King, It follows a group of young kids in their pre- and early teens in the fictional town of Derry, Maine, a seemingly quaint little area that has a history of disturbingly high rate of missing children and horrific disasters. This tale begins in the summer of 1988, when a little boy, Georgie, is apparently sucked into a drainage opening by a monster masquerading as a circus clown. We fast forward a year, with Georgie's older brother, Bill, and his friends wrapping up the school year and looking forward to a summer of freedom. Soon, however, other children start to disappear, and Bill and his friends start to have terrifying hallucinations embodying their worst fears. Wrapped up with these fears isthe same clown, which calls itself Pennywise, that took Bill's kid brother Georgie. Sure that Pennywise means to take and devour them all, Bill and his friends must decide what to do in order to survive and possibly find any of the other children whom Pennywise has already taken.

The movie is a very solid horror movie that I put in the same box as recent horror hits like The Conjuring - it's not really doing anything new, but it uses tried-and-true horror movie techniques extremely well. You get the creepy piano music, a scary clown, creaky doors, dark basements, a spooky and dilapidated house, and almost every other trope you can imagine from such films from the past. Fortunately, director Andy Muschietti executes everything effectively, and he does implement some creative visual scares with sharp editing and a few truly startling moments. On the whole, though, I wasn't dazzled by any wealth of novelty here.

Although this movie is based on a much earlier novel, which had previously been adapted for TV in 1990, it's almost impossible to ignore its similarities with recent nostalgia-laden smash hit TV show Stranger Things, which itself is a bit of a love letter to fiction creators like Stephen King. If the 1980s setting, small town, and gang of 12- and 13-year old misfits isn't enough to make the comparison clear, It even features Finn Wolfhard, one of the young stars of Stranger Things. It doesn't do quite as good a job as the Netflix TV show of invoking the sense of fun and camaraderie, but the bond between the young kids - who dub themselves "The Losers' Club" - is effective enough.

Dank, shadowy sewers are only one of many well-known horror
tropes here. We also get eerie old houses, creaky doors, and
more, to go right along with the scary clown at the center.

The movie isn't one for subtlety, beyond even the standard horror elements already covered. The secondary characters leave no scrap of doubt as to their roles. The bullies are sneering, cackling, jackal-like predators whose every actions are despicable. The single, sleazy father of female Loser's Club member Emily simply oozes lecherousness. The shut-in mom of hypochondriac Eddie seems to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. And on it goes, with anyone who is not a Loser's Club member being no more than two-dimensional, and basically of no help to the kids. This is an overly convenient narrative device, as it is about the only way that the kids are left to fend for themselves. It's not a fatal flaw, as the movie does need to keep its focus on the kids themselves, but I would have appreciated seeing one or two adults who actually seemed to care about their kids suffering through hellacious trauma.

Though It didn't stun me with anything exceptionally novel, it was a decent enough horror flick. It was always meant as the first of a two-part film series, with the sequel It: Chapter 2 set for a September 2019 release. I doubt that I'll bother seeing it in theaters, but I'll check it out eventually. The concept of a horror movie flashing forward 27 years to see the adult versions of the first movie's children protagonists deal with the returning horror is an interesting concept. 

The Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

Director: Joss Whedon

Spoiler-Free Review

Good fun, but dare I say that the thrill is gone?

I suppose that this was inevitable. I absolutely loved (and still love) the first Avengers. I loved it so much that, despite my very best efforts to temper my enthusiasm, the sequel was bound to disappoint me. The good news is that it isn't more than a minor letdown, which in reality is a "win".

Age of Ultron gives fans all of the superhero action that they could want, with plenty to spare. Of course, this isn't what set the first one apart, and it's not what sets this one apart. This movie has some great set pieces, well-choreographed fights (albeit often composed mostly of CGI constructs), and confrontations which are compelling due to the combantants' motives. The battle that takes place in the middle/end of the second act is worth the price of admission, alone. I never found the finale to be as much pure fun as that of the first movie, but it is certainly impressive and entertaining.

What may turn some people off a tad is the complexity of the story. It's actually rather clever and intriguing, and the more I dwell on it, the more I like it. However, like much of the movie, the points are often laid out rather quickly, leaving viewers scrambling to catch up a little too often. I also couldn't help but think that Joss Whedon was having to work a little too hard to connect all of the dots of characters and story lines from other movies and TV shows in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Again, he's probably one of the very few who could even manage it in any way. His weaving of these various elements is rather well done, but it does seem to have put a bit of a strain on the pace and rhythm of the story.

The movie definitely fell prey to one of my greatest worries going in - character overload. There are simply WAY too many characters. Even the first Avengers was a bit of a stretch, giving us six "main" characters who have to come together. In Ultron, we get the six primary Avengers, two minor heroes from other MCU movies, and three new wildcard, superpowered characters. There simply isn't enough screen time to build any real connection with the newer additions. I will, however, say that I appreciated how the story focused a little more on characters and relationships that got short shrift in earlier movies. Whedon was clearly not content to simply revisit old ground, which keeps the movie fresher than it might have been.

He looks pretty cool, is certainly powerful, and has a unique
backstory. But it's a little tough to get past Ultron's moving
"lips" and the one-liners.

I did find a slight lack of satisfaction in the villain Ultron. He's actually curious and compelling in many ways, but a few aspects of the character strike odd chords. Most obvious is the robot's dialogue. Ultron mostly speaks in imposing dicta, though he will throw in glib one-liners here and there. It strikes an odd note, given his grand plans of mass destruction. There may be an explanation for this, though I have to work rather hard to get to this "maybe." Such unresolved conundrums are not what I look for in a superhero flick.

The ultimate test of the MCU movies to me is whether I feel like watching them a second time. For me, with Age of Ultron, it's a definite "yes." However, unlike the first movie, I'm unsure as to whether my opinion will improve or degrade upon repeat viewing.

Update!! (Still no Spoilers!!!)

I saw the movie again. Two things:

1. I can't recommend the 3D and/or IMAX viewing enough. My first viewing was on a smaller screen, in standard visuals. I splurged for the 3D IMAX experience this second time, and was blown away with how much it added. I typically don't care about such things, but the scale and planning of this movie lent itself to massive 3D visuals.

2. The movie holds up quite well upon watching again. Many of the weaknesses described above still stand, though a few of the more subtle plot points became clearer when seen again. This is actually a positive to me, since I appreciate tales that reward second or even third exposures.

I was quite glad to have my return trip rewarded. I have to give the movie a solid, if not wildly enthusiastic, recommendation.

Looking Over The Avengers Movies

Caveat: This entire post is a full-blown, five-alarm dork-out. If you've no interest in comic book superhero movies, you'll likely want to skip this one. The rest of you...

With the current release of Captain America: The Winter Soldier, I've been re-watching some and rethinking all of the entire Avengers movie catalog. The Winter Soldier is the ninth in the series, with at least several more coming within the next few years, as well as the TV series Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. currently in its first season.

Being a formerly serious comic book superhero geek, I still have a great affinity for well-done superhero tales. The wave of film adaptations done in the last 15 years or so has been impressive, with the Sam Raimi Spider-Man series, Bryan Singer X-Men series, and Christopher Nolan Batman series being the exemplars. and the entire "Marvel Cinematic Universe" is an amazingly ambitious project. It's a venture that does have its problems, but has overall produced a solid, in not completely consistent, set of movies that allows for constant evolution.

Here's my own personal ranking of all nine films, from weakest to strongest, with a few brief thoughts on each:

#9: Iron Man 2 (2010)

Easily the weakest in the entire series. Though Downey Jr. carries much of the film with his phenomenal acting and delivery skills and natural fit for the Tony Stark character, there's far too much nonsense. The Ivan Vanko character was slightly intriguing, but too much of a contradictory enigma to really breed much interest. Justin Hammer was made out to be too dumb to run a Waffle House, much less a multi-billion dollar arms company. The grand finale of the movie was massive smash-up of armored suits, which amounted to a dull fireworks show in my eyes. Between all of these things were a lot of half-baked ideas and action set-ups.

In short, it lacked the intelligence and solid writing of its predecessor, making it a movie only worth watching if you're an Avengers completist or a very serious fan of the Iron Man movies.

#8: The Incredible Hulk (2008)

The attempt to reboot this classic Marvel character fell flat,
yet again. It wouldn't be until Joss Whedon got his hands
on him that the Hulk would reach his full awesomeness. 

Ed Norton could have been a perfect Bruce Banner to carry this into a solid film franchise. As it was, the movie was pretty mediocre. Liv Tyler's breathy, doe-eyed etherealism seemed far out of place in this movie. The basic story was decent enough, but it tried to do a little too much by having two classic nemeses in General "Thunderbolt" Ross AND Emil Blonsky, a.k.a The Abomination, neither of whom was given enough time to develop into an interesting adversary. The writing was a bit lazy, too, with a lot of pseudo-science, and my biggest pet-peeve: far too many wink-wink, nudge-nudge "homages" to the classic TV series. One would have been enough, but this movie had at least three, only one of which was mildly clever. The final fight with the Abomination wasn't terribly impressive, either.

This one was a missed opportunity that, in some ways, was outdone by the also-flawed Ang Lee Hulk movie that preceded it by five years.

#7: Iron Man 3 (2013)

Definitely better that Iron Man 2, but not nearly as tight as the first installment. Brings back some of the smarts of the first, though not completely. Some missed opportunities in how they deal with Tony Stark's PTSD after the events of The Avengers. A slightly longer review is here.

#6: Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

The first on my list to be a "good" movie that I would continue to rewatch every year or two. It actually has more genuine heart than any of the other Avengers movies, and it nails exactly what makes the Steve Rogers character primarily a "super man" rather than just being a "superman." It has a good blend of humor and action, balanced fairly well throughout. There are a few odd jumps in pacing, and one thing that I truly missed: his training. It's one thing to be turned into a physical specimen and be given a badass shield. It's another to learn how to fight and command troops. We never got to see just how Steve Rogers learned how to do those things, which could have been tremendous fun to see.

#5 Thor (2011)

The Avengers character with by far the
richest history in actual human myth
has been given solid treatment.

Really fun movie. It did drag in a few places, and I have trouble buying Natalie Portman as a brilliant astro-physicist, but it's overall a good action/adventure movie. Chris Hemsworth was a perfect choice for the Norse god of thunder, as he exudes the physical presence, majesty, and joy of warfare that the mythical character demands. From the initial team attack into the Frost Giants' world, to Loki's exile, to the final battle against the Destroyer, there was plenty to like about the movie. There were a few slower, duller moments, but they didn't overly muck up the movie.







#4: Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Some may find me odd for liking the sequel over the original, but I do. Not by much, but I do. See my full-length review here.

#3: Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

I finished watching this not two days before I write this. Longer review forthcoming. After consultation with a fellow comic geek, my main issue concerning what seemed to be a serious plot hole is mostly smoothed over. With that mostly rectified, I place this one very high on the list, as it has so much of what has made the absolute best Avengers movies so much fun.

#2: Iron Man (2008)

The first "Avengers" movie and still the best single-character film of the entire series. It blended the intelligence of the Nolan Batman trilogy with the fun of Singer's X-Men films, and allowed Robert Downey Jr. to take it all home. While the final battle between Stark and Obadiah Stane isn't all that interesting, everything else leading up to it is a blast.

Watching Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark reinvent himself and construct
 the Iron Man armor and character is still the most entertaining 
of all of the Avengers solo flicks.

#1: The Avengers (2012)

I knew Joss Whedon had a way with comic book/fantasy/science-fiction on film, but I had no idea that I could still have that much fun at the movies, even at a somewhat cynical (then) 36-years old. I could gripe about a thing or two here or there, but I just rewatched this movie (for the fifth time) about a week ago and am not even close to getting tired of it. Slightly longer review here.

Random Avengers-Related Stuff:

Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. television series (2013 - current)

I've seen most of the episodes of this show, of which there are about 15 right now. It's been fairly average, so far, though it seems to be heading in an interesting direction. The core characters are interesting enough and played fairly well, though I feel as if Ming-Na Wen is trying way too hard to act tough all the time, with her permanent scowl long past old for me.

So far, the individual episodes have been teasing a larger and much more intriguing plot at an agonizingly slow pace, but this is the curse of the 22-episode network television series model. My hope is that, during these final 5 or 6 episodes, a solid payoff is coming. As of now, it's no better than the more mediocre Avengers films.

Avengers: Phase 2:

So Guardians of the Galaxy looks like it might be a fun ride. I'm not exactly sure how it's going to tie into the rest of the cinematic universe, but the trailer seems to convey a playful tone that could make for a very entertaining science fiction flick that may hearken back to the days of sillier, more light-hearted space travel adventure movies.

Avengers: The Age of Ultron has my hopes set extremely high. So high, in fact, that I'm bound to be disappointed. I have a lot of faith in Joss Whedon, but I do have a fear that the film might bite off even more than his fertile and agile mind can chew.

Avengers: Phase 3:

The lineup for the next wave of Avengers movies has been put out. After the Age of Ultron, the next series of films in the cinematic universe will include (in no particular order) Ant-Man, Thor 3, Captain America 3, and Doctor Strange. Notably absent are Iron Man and the Hulk, the latter of whom created a ton of interest due to how well he was handled in The Avengers. Thor and Captain America are virtual no-brainers, as the characters are strong enough to carry more stand-alone stories. The choices of Ant-Man and Dr. Strange, though seemingly odd ones, do emphasize just how flexible the Marvel Cinematic Universe can be. As actors grow older or weary of playing a character, others characters can be written in to keep the team concept going for as long as it remains profitable for the movie studios. And, judging from the mountains of cash the movies have made so far, that doesn't seem to be ending any time soon.

One potential problem that the entire concept of the "shared film universe" has is that it may continue to grow more and more difficult to maintain the individual characters' integrity as having their own stories. Case in point: in Iron Man 3, which takes place after The Avengers, one has to wonder why, at some point when all hell is breaking loose and Tony Stark's entire mansion is being blown to bits and he and his lady friend Pepper Potts are in perilous danger, he doesn't just call his bff Bruce Banner (who works in his R & D Department at Stark Industries) to Hulk up and help a brother out. Or how about a phone call to Nick Fury and S.H.I.E.L.D.? Or Captain America? Anyone? As Marvel keeps adding more and more interesting super-powered characters to the roll call, this kind of question is just going to multiply, unless the stories are very carefully plotted in ways that would preclude the interference of the other super-powered characters. And if it's one thing you don't want to do, it's start annoying overly analytic fanboys and girls by mucking up the logic and continuity of their imaginary universes. Bad things follow.

The Avengers series hasn't been a streak of brilliant cinematic gems, but it certainly has been consistent enough and epic enough to keep me very entertained and interested. I'll be right there with them for at least the next few films, and hopefully beyond. It's pure escapism, which we all need from time to time.