Idiot Boxing: Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. Season 2 (2014-2015)

The team at the start of the season. Things do change,
in highly entertaining fashion.

An excellent sophomore season of a show that has really found its footing.

Season 2 of Agents has several interesting stories running through it. The first half, comprising 10 episodes, follows two main stories. One is the attempt of Coulson and the remnants of his team to deal with the remaining Hydra agents in the world, who themselves are attempting to regroup and usurp any advantage which SHIELD might attain. The other story involves the pursuit of Skye's insane father, Kal, and Raina of the strange alien artifact which may hold some key to Skye's origins.

Unlike the first season's initial 10 episodes, season 2 has virtually no tepid "filler" episodes. While there are one or two episodes which stand alone, and do it fairly well, the entire sequence clearly has a long-term purpose in terms of storytelling. The pacing is strong, and it all brings us up to the mid-season break with a great cliff-hanger episode during which a close team member is shockingly killed.

Once the season returned from the hiatus, it picked right back up. The latter half of the season is very much about Skye, who has now had latent superpowers triggered. Her story helped drive the plot along at a nice pace, gaining plenty of momentum by the final three or four episodes.

At this point, the characters are fleshed out well, and we get more insight into the stoic and enigmatic May. The characters introduced in this season begin to shine, as well. While I don't find actress Adrianne Palicki particularly talented in terms of acting, she does certainly have the physique of an intimidating, badass spy. If only the show-runners didn't seem to feel the need to have her hair looking Pantene-perfect in every shot, I might be less annoyed. This is a bugaboo of mine, but when a character has just punched and kicked her way through dozens of heavily-armed adversaries, her hair should not look like it was just primped for a 5-star Glamour Shot sitting.

The revelations and developments of Skye's character
some of the several strengths of this sophomore season.

Little nuisances like this aside, the new and old characters blended and conflicted in highly entertaining ways. The two-part season finale was a great piece of action storytelling, complete with fun twists, clever one-liners, and well-executed fight choreography. Underlying it all is a basic story that has a surprising amount of heft to it, dealing with the concept of pre-emptive strikes. This is something touched upon in Captain America: The Winter Solider, and it is a topic at the heart of the final chapters of this season of Agents. The show-runners work in this rather gray area well, making the ambiguity and chaos of it work for their fantasy tales.

I was very pleased to read, shortly after the season ended, that it has been renewed for a third season. Given the way that this season ended, with more than one fascinating cliff-hanger, I'll be excited to see where the show heads later this year. 

New Release! Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

The opening scene. Things are about to get totally bananas
over that horizon, Max.

No Spoilers!!

Director: George Miller

This movie is ridiculous fun, with a nice dash of stylish social commentary.

Right off, I'll admit that I've never seen all of the original 1979 Mad Max, though I know the gist of the story. I have seen The Road Warrior and Beyond Thunderdome plenty of times. The former is an all-time great movie, while the latter is solid fun, though with some lamer elements that dilute it. Overall, I was rather curious about this reboot of an iconic and original film series.

My curiosity paid off. Big time.

In brief, Fury Road offers the goods on all sorts of levels. Right from the opening scenes, the action gets pumping right along and never really lets up. Yes, there are a few necessarily slower moments, but they give us time to breath with the characters and never drag any longer than necessary. This is something that went far awry in Thunderdome's second act. No such trouble here.

The entire post-apocalyptic world of the series has been updated marvelously. With modern technology and a massive budget, George Miller absolutely went to town. The set pieces are incredible; the countless props and costumes each suggest stories which beg to be told; and the effects and stunts are everything a summer blockbuster could possibly offer. Though fast cars and explosions do little for me, I found myself thoroughly enjoying the fast-paced and cleverly-shot pursuits that were hallmarks of the original trilogy.

Yes, that's Charlize Theron with a robotic left arm. Yes,
her character Furiosa is even more badass than she looks.

There are, in my estimation, two things that elevate Fury Road beyond a simple slam-bang monster truck rally set in the desert. One is that the tale functions as a clear allegory for modern global problems. It takes a little while to be introduced to all of the elements in it, but they are there in their amusing and disturbing glory. While this could have been executed in very clumsy ways, Miller teases them out through the narrative, piece-by-piece. Once you see the full picture, it may seem rather obvious, but I was glad that I was allowed to do the work myself, rather than have some superfluous exposition ruin the magic of it. It all spoke to a respect for the viewer which I found quite welcome.

The second aspect that sets the movie apart is the character Furiosa, played by the ever-capable Charlize Theron. This is the rare moment when a female is given equal footing with a male in an action movie. One could actually argue that Furiosa is more important to the film than Max. What I loved even more is that, while gender plays a certain key element to the plot, it is never any kind of issue in terms of who Furiosa is or what she does. She's not tough "for a woman." She's just plain old tough. It's great to see.

I'm already plotting my second viewing of this dusty monster, envisioning just how much more fun it will be to behold in 3D. I recommend this one to just about anyone who doesn't mind some visceral action and disturbing implications underlying their action movies.

Retro Trio: A Fish Called Wanda (1988); The Man Who Knew Too Little (1997); Killing Them Softly (2012)

A Fish Called Wanda (1988)

Director: Charles Chrichton & John Cleese

A 1980s classic comedy that still has it.

I watched this movie plenty of times as a kid, but it had been at least 10 years since I last saw it. Though there are a few dated elements, in terms of the visuals, the dash of sappiness, and even a bit of the acting, A Fish Called Wanda is still a brilliant blend of British and U.S. humor.

For those who may not have seen it, the story mostly follows Wanda Gershwitz (Jamie Lee Curtis), a con woman who uses her beauty and wiles to horn in on a bank heist, with the intention of stealing the prized diamonds from the primary thieves. Using sex and emotional manipulation, she coldly plays every man involved - the mastermind George, the weapons man Otto (Kevin Kline), the stuttering henchman Ken (Michael Palin), and the repressed and unwitting lawyer Archie (John Cleese).

What allows the movie to stand the test of time rests on the script and the performances. The interactions between the more liberal and maverick Americans - Wanda and Otto - and their British cohorts are hilarious and eminently quotable. The standout scenes are typically between Otto and any of the English characters, whom he despises out of his own small-minded xenophobia and latent inferiority complex. Otto's supremely "ugly American" personifies every laughably obnoxious trait of U.S. travellers that has been the butt of jokes for decades, right up to the present.

Otto may not have been as memorable had it not been for an Academy Award-winning performance by Kevin Kline, which is a rare feat for a comedy film, but completely worthy. He often makes the movie, and his stand-offs with John Cleese's barrister Archie Leach and Michael Palin's Ken are perfection.

Great movie that is still great 25 years later, and will likely be great for decades to come.

The Man Who Knew Too Little (1997)

Director: Jon Amiel

A pretty fun, if not outstanding, little comedy.

I had never seen this one before, and I must admit that I could see why it was never hailed as a "great" comedy, despite having a great cast. The movie is a spoof on the spy thriller genre, following goofy American tourist Wallace Ritchie (Bill Murray) who goes to London and is unwittingly pulled into a plot between English and Russian forces to resurrect the Cold War status quo. Ritchie, however, is sucked into the entire affair, believing that he is the center of a popular television show on which the central "actor" is an average person who must play along with the professional actors around him, ad libbing along the way.

This premise isn't a bad one, as far as spoofs go, though the political elements do seem a few years too late for a film made in 1997. Even still, there was plenty of fodder for better political satire which went unused. That aside, there are plenty of solid setups for the comedic misunderstandings that drive the movie.

Instead of focusing more on the political humor, the film focused almost solely on its star, and one could do far worse than Bill Murray. Even when the dialogue or set-ups fall flat, Murray can carry a scene or an exchange with his hilarious deliveries, reactions, and physical comedy. It's easy to forget, given Murray's strengths with extremely dry and deadpan humor, that he can act the oblivious fool extremely well.

As a whole, though, the humor and goofiness wore thin by the third act. Despite being an obvious parody, the silliness level ramped up a little too high to remain effective. The grand finale scene consists of an overly long dance routine that borders on feeling interminable. And instead of leaving well enough alone and having Wally go on his merry way, we're left with him being recruited by the C.I.A. It was a bit too juvenile for my liking.

Had the script been a bit more clever and abandoned the more slapstick elements, this movie could very well have been a classic. As it is, it offers a few laughs, but doesn't warrant multiple viewings for me.

The social commentary is clumsy, but it
is curious enough to provoke thought.

Killing Them Softly (2012)

Director: Andrew Dominik

I was disappointed, but not necessarily because the movie is bad.

Killing Them Softly was released in 2012 and had a short and quiet run in theaters, despite solid critical acclaim. By the time of its video release, it had attained status as an "underrated film" and "sleeper pick" by critics in many quarters. With all of this "in the know" hype, I had very high hopes. The movie is quite good, but not without its flaws.

I will admit that the movie is fairly original, in terms of its grittiness and willingness to look at the more unglamorous aspects of criminality. The story takes place in a horribly bleak part of Boston, where a couple of dim, low rent street guys rob a high stakes poker game which includes members of the local mob. This sets off a chaotic attempt to assess blame and levy punishment, with noted hitman Jackie Cogan (Brad Pitt) brought in to sort the entire mess out.

The novelty of the story is that it does look at the disorganization and brutality of "organized" crime. The characters come off as extremely authentic, with all of their weaknesses on full display. Whether it's simple base greed, lust, or substance addiction, a viewer gets the sense that the grim and nasty picture painted for us is far closer to the reality than the more palatable portraits given us by more mainstream gangster movies. Instead of the ultra-slick, hyper-intelligent criminals, we see the sad, flawed, and ultimately doomed thugs and lowlifes who stand no real chance at getting what they want. Easily the most poised character is Jackie, who spends far more energy battling his disgust for the stupidity and indecision around him than on actually cleaning up the various messes created by foolish thugs and Jackie's waffling employers.

Jackie spends an awful lot of time in this kind of situation -
explaining a lot of harsh realities to dim or weak wanna-be
criminals. They provide much of the movie's power.

As far as the cleaning up of those messes, they do provide some excellent on-screen suspense and power. There are more than a few scenes that can effectively stun you with their impact. Unfortunately, there are also a few plot lines and scenes that seem to drag endlessly. The main one is the entire character Mickey, played by James Gandolfini in one of his final roles before his death. Mickey is an aging hitman who Jackie brings in to help him, but it soon becomes apparent that Mickey is a broken shell of what he once was. The point of Mickey's descent, though, is belabored so much that it is taxing to watch, and it almost resulted in my completely checking out of the film. Blessedly, it does end, and the main story picks back up in the movie's final 20 minutes.

A greater enigma hanging over the entire movie is the completely unsubtle social commentary. Right from the jump, we see dashes of political posters with Obama and Romney on them, in the throes of the 2008 presidential race. The blatantly obvious message is that the United States is in a state of free-for-all chaos, with our little crime story meant as a microcosm of the entire quagmire. It's not a terrible suggestion, but it could have been handled with far more deftness. It does, however, set up an absolutely classic final line to the movie, which may be one of the most memorable in all of crime cinema.

Killing Them Softly is, despite its weaknesses, a nice addition to the genre of crime films. It does stand apart from most of its ilk, and the performances are more than strong enough to carry a viewer through it. Definitely recommended to any fan of gangster movies. 

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.

Marvel Cinematic Universe Review

I went over most of the "Avengers" movies about a year ago on this post, but I was itching to do an update. I've recently been re-watching the movies and TV shows, along with every last extra feature on the blu-ray discs, so here's a revised overview of what has been dubbed the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" (MCU). While I try never to give "number" scores for films, I'm breaking my own rule to grade this ever-expanding catalogue of movies.

Phase 1

Iron Man (2008)

Still one of the very best of the MCU. I've watched this one at least a half dozen times, and it holds up exceptionally well. The acting and humor still hit, the plot is solid, and the effects and action are exciting. This was all done when the entire concept of the MCU was barely formed, but it still fits seamlessly into the shared universe. I'll never be crazy about the paint-by-numbers final fight, but it hardly ruins the film.

Score: 8/10

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

As a major fan of the Hulk comics as a kid, I greatly preferred
the more simian, tank-like physique that Whedon's team gave
the jade giant. Not the HGH Schwarzenegger we got here.

Arguably the weakest of the entire MCU. After seeing it three times, it simply doesn't get any better than "average." You can see the frame for a decent story in the movie, and there's nothing I would say is "bad" about it. Still, nothing about it is any better than mediocre. The script is very flat, and I simply didn't like the look of the CGI titular creature. It looks like a steroided body-builder painted green, in terms of physique, which isn't what I expect from the Hulk. The Avengers did a far better job with this, along with making the Hulk more smashing.

Something of interest, though, comes from the DVD/blu-ray extras. There is an alternate opening during which Bruce Banner attempts suicide on a snowy mountaintop. It's actually a pretty interesting, if dark, opening sequence that I feel would have made for a better start to the movie. Viewers of The Avengers are probably aware of this, as Banner makes reference to it in the movie.

The movie's not a waste of time, but I would suggest that viewers not expect anything at all special about it.

Score: 5/10

Iron Man 2 (2010)

This one has actually grown a bit better upon further viewing, though it's still one of the weakest films in the MCU. The basic story is fine, and the insertion of SHIELD into the tale is very well done, resulting in plenty of comical moments with Agent Coulson and Black Widow. The additions of actors Don Cheadle, Mickey Rourke, and Sam Rockwell help immensely.

I still think several of the action scenes are forced and silly. The best example is the first part of Whiplash's initial assault on Tony Stark at the Monaco Grand Prix, which is ridiculously bad on a Michael Bay level. However, I've often overlooked some of the rather good action sequences, most notably the very end of the otherwise dull grande finale. When Stark and Rhodes are in the Oracle Dome, their dispatching of the enemy drones is wonderfully entertaining, and I hadn't really given it credit before.

Iron Man 2, though, will always be weakened by many little problems. The Grand Prix scene is just one, but a viewer can't get through ten straight minutes of the movie without some kind of plot hole or silly oversimplification. The banter between Stark and Potts gets a bit annoying; Hammer is still cartoonishly moronic; Vanko/Whiplash is too much of an enigma. This one is just barely on the right side of "OK," though.

Score: 6/10

Thor (2011)

Still one of the better MCU films. I've now seen it four times, and it hasn't dulled to me. The pacing with character development feels a tad rushed at times, and not all of the jokes are great. Still, Kenneth Brannagh did an excellent job bringing the Norse gods to life on screen. The links between Asgard and the tiny fictional town in New Mexico are well done, giving us a great large-scale/small-scale balance that works well. Nice little introduction of Hawkeye, too.

Score: 7/10

The blu-ray of Thor includes the MCU one-shot short film The Consultant. This is actually a cool little piece that ties to the pre-credit scene in The Incredible Hulk, when Tony Stark is sent to talk with General Ross about the Avengers Initiative. In The Consultant, however, we learn that it was not Bruce Banner but rather the Abomination who SHIELD committee members wanted as a recruit. The four-minute short makes for a fun little connection, though it's hardly required viewing.


Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

I still like the first Captain America movie quite a lot. This is due mostly to its great first act and the solid final scenes. It still has as much genuine heart as any of the MCU films, and Chris Evans was a great choice for the title role. He, Hayley Atwell as Peggy Carter, and Stanley Tucci's great turn as Dr. Erskine carry a lot of what makes this movie more than a dull superhero punch-up.

I'll never love the fact that the film completely glosses over exactly how Steve Rogers became such a brilliant tactician and hand-to-hand fighter, and the lack of good one-on-one fighting sequences is still obvious. However, in light of the fact that the Russo brothers did immensely better with all of these in the sequel, it's not hard to suppress my little disappointments with this first Cap movie.

Score: 7/10

The blu-ray of The First Avenger contains the one-shot film A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Thor's Hammer. It's a fairly amusing little piece about Agent Coulson stopping at a convenience store and running into a bit of trouble. It's hardly a must-see segment that's crucial to the MCU, but it's fun.

The Avengers (2012)

The battle in Manhattan is one of best-executed large-scale
film fights in movie history. The epic scope doesn't drown
the individual heroes' skills and personalities one bit.

I've now watched this movie at least six times, and I never tire of it. On this recent viewing, I marveled at how Whedon tied together so many great characters and story elements so well. He used his considerable skills in script-writing and overall directing to create one of the tightest, most entertaining fantasy action movies ever. There are a few moments when the script is trying to be a little bit too clever for its own good, but these are rare. Nearly the entire movie hums along from one great scene to the next, with very little worth missing.

Score: 9/10

The blu-ray of The Avengers contains the one-shot short film Item 47, which is about an average couple who finds one of the Chitauri weapons left in the aftermath of Loki's assault on New York. They use it to rob banks along the east coast, but SHIELD is tracking them down. This is actually a rather puzzling short film, as it raises more questions than it answers, and the resolution is just plain silly. This is arguably the weakest of the five one-shot films the MCU has given us.


Phase 2

Iron Man 3 (2013)

I did a short review of this one a while ago on this post.

An improvement over Iron Man 2, but not as strong as the first Iron Man. I love the greater sophistication of the plot, which involves misdirection, fear, and manipulation of the attentions of the masses. Aldridge Killian is also a far better nemesis than either Whiplash or the idiotic Justin Hammer. Ben Kingsley's Mandarin is a perfect addition, as well. I also revised my opinion about what I perceived as a plot hole: I had always wondered why Tony didn't unleash the "House Party Protocol" far earlier in the film. This is actually addressed, albeit so briefly as to be easily missed.

Some of the story pacing is still a bit forced and rushed, especially in terms of Stark's battle with PTSD and his relationship with the young boy who helps him. I will also never love the final battle, which amounts to the same type of demolition derby of the first two films, although in a more memorable setting. These weaknesses keep Iron Man 3 from being one of the elite MCU films, but it is still one of the better ones. I wouldn't mind seeing writer/director Shane Black come back to do another MCU movie, whether Iron Man or one of the other human characters.

Another thing to note is that Iron Man 3 is where we can first see one of the bigger criticisms of the MCU - that as the universe expands and grows more connected, it gets more and more difficult to tell tales that are fully self-contained. Viewers who haven't seen at least The Avengers are bound to be puzzled by some of the key storylines and little references in this movie.

Score: 7/10

The blu-ray of Iron Man 3 contains the one-shot short film Agent Carter, which is the first time we get to see Peggy Carter since her introduction in Captain America: The First Avenger. Surprisingly, this film seems to break the otherwise meticulous continuity and chronology of the MCU just a bit, in light of the Agent Carter mini-series released in 2015. Still, it's easily the best of the Marvel one-shots, and it spawned the recent commendable mini-series. Anyone who enjoys the character should check it out.


Thor: The Dark World (2013)

Here's my original review post.

This sequel to the solid first Thor film is very similar to Iron Man 2 - it's not terrible by any means, but there are a few too many little problems that limit it to being merely decent. The basic story is fine, and the development of the fraternal relationship between Thor and Loki is compelling. Several action sequences are also rather entertaining, including the world-jumping fight between Thor and Malekith. There are even a few decent moments of levity, and we get more fine acting by the cast.

The flaws, though, are rather obvious. The villain, Malekith, is yet another one-dimensional bad guy, which makes him rather dull. Some of the humor is oddly misplaced in the middle of what should be more intense moments of action or emotion. Also, I'm personally tired of the characters Jane Foster and her annoying little tagalong, Darcy. The latter is clearly meant as pure comic relief, but I've always found her simply a snarky, pesky dimwit. On top of all of this, Thor: The Dark World suffers more than any other MCU film in its reliance on previous entries in the series. If one hasn't seen Thor or The Avengers, much of the tale and many of the references are bound to be confusing.

Score: 6/10

The blu-ray contains the one-shot short film All Hail The King, which is easily the second best one-shot in the MCU. In this one, we see the "Mandarin," Trevor Slattery, in prison after the events of Iron Man 3. A hilarious Ben Kingsley plays the role full-tilt, which is funny enough. Even more than this, though, are the hints that something far greater is at work in the MCU, most likely dealing with Tony Stark and an as-yet-unseen villain. This one is well worth the 13 minutes of your time.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Here's my original review post.

The only solo MCU film that might be as good as or better than The Avengers, The Winter Soldier is a nearly flawless piece of action adventure cinema. I've watched it five times now, and it's skilled execution still amazes me. I'm not a particular fan of extended action or fight sequences, especially in these days of the shaky-camera or Michael Bay "techniques," but the action in The Winter Soldier is phenomenal. I've never grown bored with any of the action sequences, which is a testament to the people who constructed them.

The story is also one of the timeliest and most sophisticated in the MCU. The question of security versus freedom in the information age is eminently relevant, and the movie makes good use of it. I still can't shake the question of what, exactly, HYDRA had in mind after Insight is launched and they kill a few million people in one fell swoop. Did they not think that the rest of the world could and would rise against them? Aside from this, though, the movie is extremely well done, and it's the current gold standard for superhero movies.

Score: 9/10



Agents of SHIELD TV Series, Season 1 (2013-2014)

Spawning mostly from the events of The Avengers, in which the affably wry Agent Coulson is seemingly killed, we follow his mysterious resurrection and his assembling his own team of SHIELD agents. The series of 22 episodes carries two main stories: the mystery of Coulson's return to life and the grand revelation that many SHIELD operatives have been HYDRA all along. These two stories kept things moving fairly well, especially during the last six episodes of the show.

As a whole, the season was a bit uneven, but it found very firm footing by its finale.

The show did go through some duller patches in its middle sections, but the larger story arcs remained present enough to keep things humming along well enough. This was a show that I didn't feel constituted "must see TV" as the episodes aired originally. However, when I rewatched them in more rapid succession, I found them more enjoyable. The twists and the appearance of Bill Paxton towards the series' end boosted the entertainment level greatly. The entire first season proved to be a worthy addition to the MCU.

Score: 7/10


Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

Here's my original review post.

The oddball entry into the MCU. I do really enjoy Guardians, though I don't quite proffer it the "classic" status that some have bestowed upon it. This movie was a great return to the fun action adventure science fiction movies of the 1980s, where things weren't taken too seriously. Sure, I have to turn off the nerd part of my brain that wants to ask questions like "How, exactly, does every alien species in this movie speak English?" and similar queries about logical inconsistencies or overdone silliness. Once I do that, this movie is really good fun.

What sets Guardians apart is, of course, the humor, which holds up thanks to great performances by the entire main cast. I will still always feel that Gamorra wasn't handled quite as well as the others, but not in a tragic way. The plot and action are colorful and playful, while also offering plenty of raucous and dynamic fights. Once again, the MCU offers us a rather dull arch villain, though, in Ronan the Accuser - yet another one-dimensional bad guy with a deep voice and English accent. By this point, I had hoped that the writers could come up with something a bit more original.

Guardians is the quirky, entertaining cousin of the other MCU films, which is its greatest strength. I only hope that it serves as a model for future films, which could be different in tone from past entries.

Score: 8/10


Agent Carter TV Series (2015)

This 8-episode series started out amazingly strong, and faded only a little bit at the end. The writers took the great angle of using Carter to comment on glass ceilings, gender bias, and misogyny prevalent in U.S. society in the 1940s. Hayley Atwell is perfect as the tough, highly skilled Peggy Carter as she battles both the obvious threat of grand evil forces and the subtler threats from her male chauvanist cohorts.

Having Howard Stark be a significant part of the story helped further connect the series to the Iron Man films, but the way Stark was handled was a bit uneven at times. The best addition was James D'Arcy as Stark's upright butler Edwin Jarvis, who added great levity. Bridget Regan also did excellent work as Carter's immediate and lethal nemesis, Dottie Underwood.

This was a fun, rapid-fire mini-series that was another welcome addition to the MCU.

Score: 8/10


Daredevil TV Series on Netflix (2015)

Stunningly good. For the very first time, Marvel gets away from the tone and structure of everything else in the MCU, and it worked phenomenally well.

Daredevil was released exclusively on Netflix, with all 13 episodes available at once. The story that is told over those 13 shows is easily the darkest, grittiest, and most humanized of the entire MCU. Yes, it is yet another "origin story" of sorts, though it hardly dwells very much on the beginnings of the title hero. Rather, the show spends a great deal of time on the inner struggles of the main characters, both heroes and arch-villain alike. Most of these turmoils are teased out through extended dialogue, which can occasionally try one's patience. However, most of the conversations are extremely compelling, as they reveal and explore some rather dark corners of heroism and villainy that no other MCU show has had the time or inclination to look into.

Lest you think that the show is 12 hours of talking, the action is there and outstanding. Eschewing the annoying "shaky cam" phenomenon, we get plenty of fixed camera shots that show Matt Murdock getting into plenty of fisticuffs with all sorts of opponents: thugs, corrupt cops, ninja, SWAT shock troops, and even the Kingpin himself trade blows with "the Devil of Hell's Kitchen," and they are incredibly brutal. This show features fights that are, by a longshot, the most gut-wrenching, blood-soaked, and brutal that Marvel has dared give us. This works to great effect, as a major theme of the show is the constant struggle of Murdock to not only survive one lethal encounter after another, but also his decision about whether and why to get back up and resume the fight after getting knocked down. And he does get knocked down. A lot. This is what makes his war arguably more impressive than those of the heavy hitters of the MCU.

Daredevil does have some flaws that can be seen. The shows dark tone is conveyed in aesthetic darkness. Even the scenes set during the day are often shot in shadowed, lightless rooms. This is fine for a while, but it does wear on one several episodes in. A greater weakness to me is exactly how the Kingpin is portrayed. Without giving anything away, I never found his character to completely cohere well enough. It's as if the writers tried to do too many things with him, emotionally. I applaud the effort, given the number of dull, one-dimensional villains in MCU films; however, this attempt didn't completely succeed. These flaws are hardly fatal, though.

Score: 8/10

In Progress and In the Future...

The second season of Agents of SHIELD has been quite good through its first 20 episodes. Things are more focused and intense, and it's clearly building towards a much larger and more interesting story involving the Inhumans. Perhaps taking a cue from the success of the Game of Thrones series, the show has also displayed that it's not afraid to kill off appealing characters. I'm completely on board with how this ties into the films and future TV series.

I'm proud of keeping myself mostly in the dark about The Avengers: Age of Ultron. Knowing so little about the first one was part of the reason I enjoyed it so much, and I hope to replicate that. My biggest fear is that Joss Whedon and the MCU overlords will throw far too many characters into the stew, spoiling the overall effect. I'm generally optimistic, though.

I'm really not sure what to expect from the other upcoming projects. Ant-Man could surprise me, and this is the final movie in the "Phase II" cycle. I imagine that it will serve as a bridge to the next cycle of shows and films, though I hope that it is able to stand on its own. I was upset when I heard that Edgar Wright left the project, so if the film is not great, it is bound to become the biggest "What if?" in the MCU.

The MCU just keeps expanding, too. There are multiple Netflix series that are slated to come out in 2015 and 2016, including A.K.A. Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, Iron Fist, and The Defenders. Based on the strength of Agents of SHIELD and Agent Carter, I like the odds of the shows making some of these lesser-known characters entertaining.

Then there is the giant list of movies that are in the "Phase III" segment. There are the expected Thor, Captain America, and Guardians of the Galaxy sequels. The more curious ones are the new characters getting mixed in: Doctor Strange, Black Panther, Captain Marvel, and the Inhumans are all joining in. The most buzz-worthy news of late is that Marvel reacquired the movie rights to Spider-Man, who will be joining the MCU. We'll see if they can handle him any better than the latest movie incarnation of the beloved little arachnoid. He and the other characters will apparently have their hands full dealing with the "mad Titan" Thanos, who has been the arch villain teased ever since The Avengers in 2012.

Is the MCU "Destroying" Cinema?

As with all things that grow to the massive size of the MCU, questions have arisen about the downside of its existence. More and more, cinephiles are decrying how this interconnected behemoth of a franchise has sent other movie studios scrambling to get on the bandwagon. This, in turn, leaves less support for innovative, original film stories in the large-scale "blockbuster" mold. This is certainly a fair observation, though I think some are misplacing blame.

To me, what Marvel and Paramount have done in creating the MCU is akin to what Peter Jackson did with the Lord of the Rings trilogy, though it has greatly expanded on it. The MCU has taken pre-existing characters from a different medium - comic books - and created a serialized world on an epic scale that we've never seen. This is not unlike when scribes first took beloved characters from folklore and started to use them as characters in serialized short stories or novels.

These movies are, simply, a blast for me. While I watch plenty of heady films that are steeped in artistry and intellectualism, the MCU has given me a go-to place for all-out popcorn fun. It also scratches that fan-boy itch that I've always had for continuity and large-scale epics that connect many story threads. I love that I have so many more of these to look forward to.

Before I Die #544: The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011)

This is the 544th movie I've watched out of the 1,162 films on the "Before You Die" list that I'm gradually working through.

Director: David Fincher

An excellent adaptation/alternative version of a phenomenally successful novel.

Like millions of readers, I got caught up on the "Millenium" trilogy of books by the deceased Swedish author Stieg Larsson several years ago. I found the first book a very engaging and novel look at deep-rooted, institutional xenophobia and misogyny through the lens of a complex murder mystery.

I saw the original Swedish film adaptation that was released in 2009, and I thought it a solid but slightly flawed take on the story. In 2011, we got a rare treat: a U.S. remake that is actually better than the original European version. The improvements can likely be connected to a much larger budget and the direction of David Fincher, a man who is no stranger to telling very dark and complex tales in films.

For those unfamiliar with the story, it mostly follows two unique characters. Mikael Blomqvist is a crusading but embattled journalist who is hired by an incredibly wealthy businessman to potentially solve a 40-year old murder within his large and largely-dislikable family. Also involved is Lisbeth Salander, a tortured and antisocial genius hacker who becomes Blomqvist's research assistant. There are a ton of curious and sordid details that go into explaining how the two become connected, which make for a dark and fascinating story. Fincher's movie ties the many threads together as skillfully as possible, though an unfamiliar viewer will need all of their attention to keep up.

Yes, Lisbeth can be just as wicked as she
dresses. Fortunately, she tends to direct her
scary smart rage towards misogynists. 

Blomqvist and Salander are great characters in their own rights, and they are brought to life by outstanding performances by Daniel Craig and Roony Mara. Not to slight Noomi Rapace, who admirably portrayed Salander in the original Swedish film version, but I found Mara added just a little more bite to the role. The affable Blomqvist and prickly Salander are different in nearly every way but for two important things: their desire to see justice done and their their unwavering energy to see it through. When the two find their causes overlap, we get some extremely satisfying storytelling.

For those unfamiliar with the details of the story, I have to warn you that it goes to many extremely dark places, with graphic detail regarding murder and rape. If you can stomach such things in your fiction, then this movie is well worth watching. While I found the subsequent two novels not as strong as the first, I do hope that the cast and crew of this 2011 adaptation come together for the rest of the series.

So that's 544 films down. Only 618 to go before I can die...

Before I Die # 543: Shame (2011)

The is the 543rd movie I've watched of the 1,162 films on the "Before You Die" list that I'm gradually working through.

Director: Steve McQueen

If you ever wished to see Michael Fassbender in a porn movie, this is as close as you're ever going to get. If you balk at that statement, rest assured that the movie is a very good one, though highly disturbing.

Fassbender plays Brandon, a handsome and successful Manhattanite who lives alone and regularly indulges his severe addiction to sex and pornography. Whether through one-night stands, hiring prostitutes, engaging in online porn, or arousing himself with sexual magazines and his own fantasies, Brandon can never get enough casual and superficial sexual gratification.

Brandon's sordid patterns of fixation are thrown off when his sister, Sissy, shows up unexpectedly to stay with him for an indefinite period of time. The siblings' relationship with one another is strained at best, and it is made worse when each starts to encroach on the other's destructive behaviors. Sissy, though a very talented musician, is a highly emotional, possibly bi-polar, drifter who tries to connect with her detached brother in various ways. The implication is that the two had an extremely difficult upbringing, which suggests why they are unable to accept and deal with each other in constructive ways. The results are tragic on a highly personal level.

This movie represents a different, arguably much better, take on human sexuality in modern metropolitan society than Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut. The latter is a far more intellectual and mature but overly cold analysis of sex. Shame looks at the subject through a single, damaged man and his chronic struggles with this most basic of human impulses. Shame is also much more explicit and raw in its depictions of sex than Kubrick's earlier film. Potential viewers ought to be aware, so they aren't completely shocked by its graphic nature. The graphic nature, though, brings home the very point that the film is making.

File this one under "excellent movies that only need to be seen one time." With the ever-increasing commodification of human sexuality in the information age, the many themes in Shame are well worth pondering, even when they lead us to very uncomfortable places.

That's 543 films down. Only 619 more to see before I can die...