Thor

The superhero movie has been a staple of the big budget studio blockbuster for a decade now. They always make it one of their tent pole movies; and even if it gets bad reviews the studio always gets their money back, and then some. Since movies like ‘The Dark Knight’ and ‘Iron Man,’ the bar is now so high it may not be possible to just crank these movies out. Unless you are looking to only use this plot as a jumping off point to a huge ensemble undertaking next year that already have fanboys excited in their pants. Then maybe it’s acceptable, maybe.

Marvel's newest addition in preparation for next year's ‘Avengers’ epic is ‘Thor.’ One of the more boring heroes in the Marvel Universe, the Norse God, much like others who share his mythology, are defined by what they oversee. The God of Thunder is a warrior who wields a powerful hammer, and that is about it. But he has always been a part of the Avengers so why not give him his own movie.

The story breaks down into two different narratives, one while Thor is on Asgard and one while on Earth. While they do overlap, they also seem to be fairly different in tone, which may well be explained by the stable of writers that worked on the script. While on Asgard he is set to take the throne until his father Odin realizes his son is an arrogant shit and banishes him to Earth. While on Earth he tries to adapt to his new life. There is a lot more to it, stuff involving a hammer and his brother but I don't like giving away too much in these reviews. And frankly the story is kind of all over the place with the objective of the movie changing every 20 minutes or so realizing they need to do something else.

I saw this movie in 2D and am glad I did, as there is rarely an instance I feel the need to shill out more money for a pair of glasses. That is until they re-release ‘Apocalypse Now’ into theaters in 3D. The computer generated worlds were very impressive, I wonder if they looked better in 3D or if it lost some of the sharp contrasts in the conversion. Asgard seems like a wonderful place to live especially with Anthony Hopkins as your leader, I don't think I would have a problem living under his rule. While I may have a problem living under the rule of Stringer Bell, I don't think I would have as much of a problem as these people did. But the stand out deity in the film is Loki.

Loki has always been kind of a dick, both in Norse mythology and in the Marvel Universe. Tom Hiddleston does a great job making him a little more complex than that. One of the very few things I knew about the Thor series was that Loki was not only Thor's arch-nemesis, but his half-brother. Hiddleston does a wonderful job capturing Loki's evil ways but also conveying the love he has for his family. The jealousy he feels for his older brother is something that siblings everywhere can relate to making this villain one of the few I have ever felt sympathetic for, an impressive piece of acting.

Hiddleton may have had the upper hand landing this role as he was working at the West End Stage with his future director Kenneth Branagh. It was an interesting choice having a director typically associated with Shakespeare to take on a superhero movie, but maybe considering the source material it wasn't that far off. Branagh takes what he is comfortable with and applies it to his blockbuster; 'Henry V' is about a young prince who goes to war while courting a girl from a different country, sounds a lot like what I was watching the other day.

Branagh was also essential in snagging Natalie Portman who was quoted as saying "I was just like Kenneth Branagh doing 'Thor' is super-weird, I've gotta do it." She, much like Hopkins, didn't add too much to the story except for a name on the poster. Her role was fun, but all she was asked to do was to look sexy-smart and to give her hero the googley eyes. Mission accomplished.

The best part of the Earth portion of the story was Chris Hemsworth. The lead didn't have too much going for him in the opening part of the story. He had his hammer and that was about it. He does his best as a god trying to fit into a mortal world; it is there you see glimpses of charm and charisma which is why he landed the role. Oden was right to banish his son, it definitely made Thor a better person, or at the very least, more interesting.

As a standalone movie it really is nothing but fluff. This is fine for an early summer flick to get us ready for the other blockbusters. It also helps build the anticipation for 'The Avengers.' While some people are getting sick of all the hype already I am not one of them, I mean come on it’s being directed by Joss Weadon. Hopefully the other superheroes of the summer will have a little bit more to say than Thor did. C

2011 Oscars: Actress

One would think that the lead actress role would be locked up by now, but some people in the industry are seeing a late surge that could change some voters’ minds late in the game. Before that let’s look at the supporting actress category.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Amy Adams, "The Fighter"
Helena Bonham Carter, "The King's Speech"
Melissa Leo, "The Fighter"
Hailee Steinfeld, "True Grit"
Jacki Weaver, "Animal Kingdom"

First let’s get a couple of these out of the way. The King's Speech is as patriarchal as you can get. This movie is all about the men, and while The Queen Mum has an important place in history, she had little or nothing to do in this film, so she's out. Not everyone takes their role of Academy voter as seriously as Sir Elton John so if there is a movie people are going to sit out it will probably be the Australian import Animal Kingdom. If you haven't had a chance this movie is definitely worth a spot on your Netflix queue. Then it comes down to two movies The Fighter and True Grit. Melissa Leo did fantastic in the movie and I thought her performance would go unnoticed behind that of Christian Bale but boy was I proven wrong with that. Melissa Leo has already won Screen Actors Guild and Golden Globe gold for her performance as the selfish mother. She has been acting since the eighties and has paid her dues. But then comes along this little 14-year old girl to muck the whole thing up. Hailee Steinfeld not only held her own in True Grit but at times outshines two past Academy winners. One could argue that she isn't really a supporting actress but rather the lead with Jeff Bridges. I doubt she had much say in the whole thing as this is only her FIRST MOVIE (I think at 14 I was growing a mullet). Compound the fact that Melissa Leo took out ads for herself just as people were starting to talk about the kid. Put the performances next to each other and I think Hailee Steinfeld did more to help Jeff Bridges grow as a character than Melissa Leo did for Wahlberg. All the big blogs out there go with an upset pick. So I'm going with Hailee Steinfeld to upset the veteran actress.

BEST ACTRESS
Annette Bening, "The Kids Are All Right"
Nicole Kidman, "Rabbit Hole"
Jennifer Lawrence, "Winter's Bone"
Natalie Portman, "Black Swan"
Michelle Williams, "Blue Valentine"

This was supposed to be a lock, no one has been hotter than Natalie Portman and frankly that helps. Usually the Academy will deal out Oscar to the next big PYT (read: Hallie Berry, Reese Witherspoon, Charlize Theron). Natalie Portman has been steaming up the scene ever since The Professional (that's a joke people). She has gone from child actress, to blockbuster starlet, to indie queen and this Sunday she seems poised to grab the statuette. And rightfully so, the performance is frightening and the movie will stay with you long after you have left the theater. But recently there has been an upswing in support for Annette Bening in The Kids Are All Right. Now I personally thought that Julianne Moore had the better performance in this movie, but this time Bening won't be competing against her co star because Moore was not nominated. While the Academy tends to not support comedy movies they do love gay movies, as one Hollywood observer noted "If you play gay or retarded you get an Oscar. I'd take in the ass for an Oscar." The now four-time nominated actress will eventually win the award, but this is not her night. Portman's performance is too captivating to go unrewarded plus Oscar also loves to break up marriages (read Hallie Berry, Reese Witherspoon, Sandra Bullock). The recently engaged and knocked up Portman may walk away a winner Sunday, but the tabloids will make sure to bring her back down within a couple of years.

Tomorrow we'll look at the men. Who do you think will win for Best Actor (hint: it rhymes with Colin Mirth). What about this category, do you smell upset? Let me know what you think.

Black Swan

The beginning of the movie, is the movie. It tells the whole story of what is to come the rest of the way. Unlike the movie it takes place while our main character is asleep so we know that this isn't happening, the rest of the way the audience can never be sure what in the movie is real and what is not. From there we dip in and out of the mind of Darren Aronofsky as he places Natalie Portman in prime position to win an Oscar.

SYNOPSIS

Portman plays Nina Sayers, a girl with the singular obsession of becoming the prima ballerina at her New York Company. She works the hardest and her technique is perfect making her the best choice for the White Swan but the artistic director has decided to combine the White and Black Swan into one role and she lacks the passion to play the antagonist. Enter Mila Kunis, the sexy, free spirited transfer from San Fransisco. Her character Lily is everything that Nina wishes she could be and embodies the spirit of the Black Swan. In any other production the casting would be clear, in this production Nina must take Lily in as a rival, friend, and mentor.

FIN

The movie entices you in the opening sequence, the music will keep you entranced. Clint Mansell was brought on to score the film, and has worked with Aronofsky before. For Black Swan he created the entire score using only elements from the original 1876 ballet. The music elevates every sensation during the movie and hits at all the right times. While many will want to forget some of the things they have just witnessed it will be impossible to leave the theater without Tchaikovsky's original composition stuck in your head.

Portman's performance as the singularly minded professional is haunting. The character's transformation to reach perfection seems almost effortless. The most challenging part of the performance was no doubt the ten months of dance lessons along with the 20 pounds she needed to drop to look like a dancer. It pays off as Portman looks solid doing most of her own dancing. Her own transformation helps makes the character's transformation more believable. If she had not gone through ten hour days of training, seven days a week her performance may have suffered. Instead we get nothing but intensity. The rise of evil is a story not usually shared as it tends to do so poorly box-office. Plus there are many of us who have been Disney-fied to believe that all stories have a happy ending, when in actuality the story of Swan Lake itself is a tragedy. Nina seems to suffer from an idealistic state of naivety exemplified by her pink room filled with dolls. She is forced to go through both a psychological and physical transformation to achieve her ultimate goal.

The people Nina surrounds herself with do little to help with finding the correct balance to achieve her goal. Vincent Cassel plays the director pushing her to embrace her sensual side to become The Black Swan. Her desire for his approval allows him to take full advantage of his pupil, Nina speaks highly of her director yet we see her being treated in a poor manner. It's tough to tell if this is a power play and deception or a brilliant artist looking to get the most out of his players. The ambiguity leaves the audience to wonder whose side is he on, is he playing the part of Prince Siegfried or von Rothbart. In all actuality it is probably intended to be a combination of both, much like his leading lady.

Nina still lives with her mother, played perfectly by Barbara Hershey, and is a former ballerina herself, who no doubt pushed her daughter into this career path. Her mother simultaneously tries to coddle Nina and subvert her as she is envious of her daughter becoming more successful than she could ever be. The other older figure we see is the former prima ballerina, forced into retirement. Winona Ryder shows our lead what happens after the limelight is taken away, and what could be awaiting her. Her presence in the film adds to her fear of being overtook by another actress in the company.

Then there is the seductress Mila Kunis, who mirrors Portman in almost every facet. The difference being the free-spirited nature she posses which threaten Nina as the prima ballerina. Lily is the most difficult character to decipher in the film as Nina may be influencing the audience by projecting onto her rival slash fried. Lily leaves the audience enchanted and unsure what to believe as she shares the same ambition as Nina and seems willing to do what is necessary. She, along with some of the other ballerinas, highlight the competitive nature of the theater and adds to the pressure of the protagonist to excel or risk being bypassed. It is a delicate balance of ruthlessness and friendship that Kunis shows well on the screen. Rarely are there many movies that deliver so many strong female characters, it is a credit to writers Mark Haymen and Andres Heinz. Oh and the girl on girl stuff is hot.

Taking away from the character development and evolution in the film is some of the dialouge. There is little to no subtlty in this film. Darren Aronofsky has a certain way he wants his viewers to feel and then beats you over the head with it. The writing also possess this trait by having the characters around Nina scream things at her that the audience should be inferring for themselves. This is in direct conflict with the rest of the film as Aronofsky rarely gives up his hand in showing what is real.

Similar to The Wrestler, Aronofsky chooses to use a hand held camera for most of the movie, using a lot of medium and close-up shots. The shakey camera work adds to the rocky experience that embodies the transformation. It forces the viewer quickly to encompass the style of movie and emerge yourself completely into the film or risk being left by the wayside. And no one wants to walk out of a movie disheartened, especially after spending all that money on popcorn. The movie at points is very ridiculous, in its premise and writing. To fully enjoy it, much like the performers in the play the directors ask you to submerge fully into the art, allowing it to take complete control.

The movie is all about artistic obsession and if the art is supposed to reflect the artist than you have to wonder what is going on in Aronofsky's head. Especially considering so many of his films deal with a protagonist reaching for greatness in their career at the cost of everything else around them (read: The Wrestler, Pi). I just want someone to make sure he is okay, and let him know that people like his stuff. A