Captain America: The First Avenger – A Holdover

Now I know why it took me so long to watch this movie: it’s bad. Well, it’s bad for a blockbuster movie. In reality, all Captain America does it show off the plot line for the Tesseract that would fill the majority of The Avengers, and the rest of the movie gave us the introduction for who Captain America is. It’s a throwaway movie in my opinion, serving no real purpose other than to create the character for The Avengers.

That’s not to say that the movie wasn’t entertaining nor enjoyable. I did like watching it because, well, it’s a superhero movie, and they are always filled with great action sequences and characterization. While I do have my gripes with the plot, it is decent. Set in 1942/1943, Johann Schmidt, also known as Red Skull, finds the tesseract and begins to harness its power for weaponry. In America, Steve Rogers is a sickly young man who wants to join the army. A scientist overhears him talking to his friend James Barnes who is going into the military and decides that Steve may be perfect for an experimental serum he developed.

After some tests with the military, the scientist, named Abraham Erskine, tells Steve about the experiment that would turn him into a super soldier. Steve agrees to it, and after taking the serum, becomes super strong, faster, and just a more powerful person overall. Erskine is killed by one of Red Skulls henchmen after the treatment, and after Rogers chases him and catches him, the henchman kills himself with cyanide.

Following this event, Rogers is made to be “Captain America” in order to promote the war by performing with a group across the nation. While in Italy, he learns that his friend Barnes is MIA, and goes on a rescue mission to find him. This chain of events leads him to become the super hero Captain America.

The biggest problem that I have with this movie, and many other action movies that do this, is have a romance sub-plot that means nothing. In this movie, Cap begins falling in love with Peggy Carter, an officer with the military corps. The beginning of this love stems only because she is the first women to pretty much talk to Steve Rogers in his life, and the rest because he becomes Captain America. This romance serves no purpose other than to fill time and give us something else to watch when nothing is going on. As much as I can enjoy romance every now and again, no action movie needs a love plot unless that’s the point of the movie in the first place. The most pointless scene in the entire movie involves Steve kissing another women and Peggy becoming jealous… and this is something that’s never talked about after it happens, nor does it matter in retrospect.

Also, the ending of the movie is bad. I won’t spoil anything, but let’s just say that while they make Captain America out to be a selfless person who will sacrifice himself to save others, his actions in the end go too far and make little sense to me. All it does is, again, move the plot along for The Avengers; hell, this allows him to even be in the big blockbuster in the first place. One other thing, this movie also introduces Tony Stark’s father just to give us the tie in with the Iron Man series and again, allude to the fact that this is indeed a Marvel film. While Howard Stark is a somewhat important character, it could have been anybody.

The acting is pretty good though. Chris Evans plays the role of Steve Rogers/Captain America well, going from this weakling who wants nothing more than to be in the army, to a burgeoning superhero with a lot of intelligence and courage. James Barnes reflects those sentiments in Rogers, and while I hate the love relationship, Peggy Carter’s character is well done, providing a good female counterpart to the movie. Hugo Weaving’s portrayal of Red Skull is awesome; his mannerisms and actions make his characters more evil. The rest of the cast rounds out a good group of characters playing supporting roles well.

The action, of course, is pretty good. There are instances of “why are the bad guys such idiots” when they don’t try and shoot the good guys, or just kill them outright, but nothing is really over the top. My only gripe with the action is that there is a montage of action events after Steve officially becomes Captain America, and these could have all been explained (or even become a full movie altogether). Instead, we have the romance subplot.

Captain America: The First Avenger isn’t the worst movie, but in my opinion, it’s really just a cash-in and a holdover for the big feature film. While it’s important in introducing Captain America, the rest of the film does little to provide enough of a reason to watch it. The action is good, but not memorable, and the movie itself drags on in the beginning to get to the important parts. Overall, it’s worth watching for continuity in the Marvel universe, but if you don’t care about Marvel movies, this movie isn’t for you.

I rate Captain America a 6.5/10.

Anchorman 2 – The Legend is Not as Strong

It took me a long time to finally watch the first Anchorman movie, and once I saw it, I loved it. The characters were classic, the jokes are always on point, the movie was highly quotable, and for a comedy film, there was a good plot. Everything worked in the first Anchorman movie, and while it took a long time for the sequel to happen, it finally did. Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues is a great movie. Like many sequels, it’s not as good as the first one, but it’s great all on its own.

The movie starts up a few years after the events in the first. Ron Burgundy and Veronica Corningstone are married and working in New York. Ron gets fired from the job while Veronica is promoted, and an ensuing argument forces Ron to leave New York and go back to San Diego. After some work mishaps, he gets a job back in New York for GNN, which is a 24 hour news network. Ron gets his team back together: Champ Kind, Brian Fantana, and Brick Tamland, and the team heads back to the Big Apple to change news history yet again.

Again, the plot of the movie, unlike many comedies, helps to make the jokes funny and make the movie an actual movie rather than joke after joke. There’s plenty of break time to progress the characters, which is why the first movie was so successful: we get to see the characters change and grow. Of course, you have some recurring gags in the film; much like Brian Fantana’s cologne gag in the first, this time he has a condom gag which is as hilarious. There is another news team battle as well, and the special cameos are amazing.

The new additions to the main cast are great, and the interactions the old members have with the new ones are phenomenal. One plot point has to do with a rivalry between Ron Burgandy and Jack Lime, played by James Marsden. The characterization of Lime, and his rivalry with Ron is beautiful and the jokes between them are really funny. Also included in this casting is Kristen Wiig, who I’m a huge fan of. Meagan Good as the new boss Linda Jackson is another great casting choice, and her character is well done. Again, the interactions with Ron are spectacular, and almost satirical in a sense.

That’s one other thing about the Anchorman movies; whether they are supposed to be satirical or not, some of the jokes really hit a certain tone, especially in this one with the “evolution of the news” as it is.

The biggest reason why this movie is not as good as the first are the quotable jokes. There aren’t a whole lot of them unfortunately. Don’t get me wrong, there are great hilarious jokes throughout that will make you laugh and cry at the same time; however, there are a bunch that you watch and forget because they are not memorable.

Another small problem is the pacing of the movie. Yes, its a comedy so pacing shouldn’t matter, but its a smart comedy, so it does a bit. Mostly getting from joke to joke, or plot point to joke, it seems off timed in some instances. Plus, there are a couple of slow spots in the movie; unlike in the firs Anchorman where the punches kept rolling.

The middle of the movie is both good and bad. While it mixes tragic aspects with comedy to create a unique blend of comedy, this is where the movie truly takes a hit in terms of pacing. it is slow, and the jokes really lay off for a bit. The actual plotting of this part in the film makes sense in a humanistic standpoint, but it could have just as easily not been part of the movie and would not have made a difference.

One other point to mention if the character of Brick. While Steve Carell’s character is supposed to act the way he does in the films, it is ramped up a bit more. The first time watching Anchorman 2 I was disappointed in how much time was spent on Brick and, in my opinion, I thought his bits were dumb and close to being unfunny. The second time I watched, however, I found appreciation in what they did with Brick and after re-watching the jokes, I found them to be funnier than I first thought.

Anchorman 2 truly is a tough movie to review. As a sequel to a great comedy movie, it has a lot to live up to, and while it does succeed in being a great movie, it is just not as good as the first. That doesn’t mean don’t see it, but just don’t expect another Anchorman in full. Regardless, Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues is funny, action packed, and greatly characterized, and anyone who watches this film will be laughing most of the time.

I rate Anchorman 2 an 8/10.

Jack Reacher – Did Cruise Pull it Off?

The first thing I need to point out is this: this is NOT an action film; rather, it is a crime-thriller. Funny enough, I went into this movie thinking it was action, and when I was met with a slow-paced crime movie, I was taken aback. Thankfully, I did not stop watching and kept going, because this movie was actually really good.

Second thing, this movie (and other potential movies) is based off of the Lee Child series of books. This Jack Reacher film in particular is based off of One Shot.

Now, onto the movie. Tom Cruise can be hit or miss depending on his role, and depending on if you like him or not. Personally, I am a Cruise movie fan, and he does not disappoint. His portrayal of Reacher as a intelligent badass was well done. His mannerisms and characteristics perfectly worked with who the character is built up to be in the beginning.

Unfortunately, his portrayal also falters because of the physical traits. Jack Reacher is supposed to be a giant man of 6’5”, 220-250 pounds, and just physically imposing. Cruise is a small-fry in comparison. He does try to make up for it with his acting during the action scenes, but it does look funny.

Besides Cruise, the other casting roles were well done. Jai Courtney plays one of the major villains, Charlie, and he pulls it off really well. Rosamund Pike plays Helen Rodin, the defense attorney assigned to the case in the plot and her acting is very good. the interactions between her and Cruise are great, and they work well together. Other casting include Robert Duvall as Martin Cash, a former Marine who owns a shooting range and David Oyelowo as Emerson, the cop who responds to the case.

The plot itself revolves around a man named James Barr, who apparently shoots five innocent people with a sniper rifle. He is caught and arrested after leaving a sloppy crime scene. Instead of waiving his rights to an attorney, he asks Emerson to find Jack Reacher for him to clear his name. Before the two can meet, Barr is beaten into a coma.

The rest of the crime-thriller is about Reacher’s attempts to uncover the real crime. Helen Rodin’s job is to try and save Barr from the death penalty which he is sure to face, and the two work together to clear Barr’s name.

The only thing that I really did not like was the inclusion of “The Zec.” While I just may not  have picked up on his role, until the end, his character seems really unnecessary and he adds little to the plot, mostly because he is only seen in a couple of scenes.

The only other thing is the pacing of the film. Again, it’s not an action movie, so it’s not going to be a fast paced slobber-knocker. At the same time, the movie felt slow if moving forward. Mostly in the beginning things just seemed to take too long to get moving. The opening scene, while cool and setting the plot up for the movie, looks out of place in a way. This scene, and the following scene, confused me for a second, but once the Reacher was introduced and the plot started to move, I understood why the movie began the way it did.

Now, for more of the good things. The action scenes were very well done, and in some cases, seemed unique to the movie. There are small fighting scenes thrown in the first hour which were short but well done, and the car chase in the movie was exciting. Finally, the climactic scene was a little intense and was fun to watch.

Past the slow pacing, the plot itself moves along well enough, and it gets more interesting as evidence is uncovered and new twists and turns appear throughout. You are never left bored as the movie goes on, and you get into the plot. While the beginning already reveals a big twist to the movie, watching Reacher and Helen reach that point in the case is fun and gripping.

The film is also full of twists and turns that you won’t see coming, and unlike some films where the twists make no sense and are potentially convoluted, they work in this film.

Overall, Jack Reacher was an enjoyable film that contained some great action, excellent scenes, a plot that keep you hooked, and twists and turns that you don’t expect. Knowing that this is a crime movie and not an action movie is important, and once you get into the movie, you will want to watch till the end. I really liked the film and hopefully you will to.

I rate Jack Reacher a 7.75/10.

Would You Rather? A Deadly Game and Sub-Par Movie

I’d heard of the movie Would You Rather? a horror movie site that I frequent from Facebook (www.horror-movies.ca), and since I had nothing to do on a boring Sunday night, I decided that I would watch it. And it was entertaining to watch, but not in the best of ways. It was one of the most average movies I have ever seen. And it sucks because the concept of the movie was cool, but the execution was awful.

The plot of the movie is as follows: a young girl is seeking medical attention for her younger brother who needs a bone marrow transplant. However, they have no money to get the transplant done, or a way to find a donor. The girl, Iris, is introduced to a philanthropic billionaire named Shepard Lambrick, and he invites Iris to a dinner party at his house. There, Iris and the seven other guests are forced to play a deadly version of would you rather, where the winner would walk away with monetary support from Lambrick to do anything, while the losers would walk away with nothing. In order to be eliminated from the game, you must be unable to complete a round, whether that means through incapacitation or death.

The concept of the movie was really cool, but again, the execution was poor. the biggest problem with the movie was predictability. It’s obvious who is going to win the game because there is only focus on one main character. With a psychological thriller movie that plays out like this, you cannot focus all of the pre-game attention on one character: that makes it predictable. For most of the other characters in the movie, little backstory is revealed, and so you don’t end up caring if someone dies or not. You don’t know why they are in the game at all, and it makes everything less enjoyable. The writer could have easily spliced backstory together for each individual, and the beginning of the movie should have introduced everyone in some way.

Secondly, there is a sub-plot revolving around the doctor who recommends Iris to Lambrick. He was a winner of a Lambrick dinner party, and once he sends Iris to him, he has a change of heart and tries to save her. It’s a needless sub-plot that eventually amounts to nothing. There is no lesson learned, no moral to this sub-plot, it does nothing to further the main plot at all. This wasted time could have been used on the actual game, or the other characters. Seriously, the doctor has more backstory than half of the characters participating in the game itself, and that’s a problem.

Thirdly, the game kind of sucked. During the game, there is way too much talking out of the psychology behind the choices rather than just showing us through reactions and emotions, and talking at the end. The pacing of the movie should have picked up with the game, but instead it slowed down/ There could have been a lot more with this concept, but they had to add unnecessary plotlines and sub-plots that took away from this concept. The acting was also subpar depending on the person. Iris and Anna (Britanny Snow and Sasha Grey’s characters) were decently acted, Shepard Lambrick was well done as well. The others are really hit or miss depending on the situation, and many times they fall flat.

Finally, and this is just nit-picky, but some of the camera work was shoddy Camera angles cut off some heads, remained on a scene for a second or two too long, missed the action by a second, etc. Just a small thing, but good camera work dictates movies, and it didn’t help.

Overall, Would You Rather? should have been better than it was. The writer and director and everyone involved missed a great opportunity to bring a new concept to the psycho-thriller genre, but it was a misfire. It’s a movie that would be worth watching once, just because it was a cool concept and everything, but certainly has no replay-value.

I rate it a 4.5/10. Watch it once, but never again.