Captain America: The First Avenger

The movie has a lot to do and very little time to do it. Captain America: The First Avenger needs to tell its origin story, explain how he got from fighting Hitler to today, and needs to set up for next summer's blockbuster The Avengers all while entertaining the audience. It has only two hours to do it in and must be done this summer to get as much revenue as possible while allowing the whole cast to be available to film the epic team up. That is a lot to ask one movie to do, and to its credit, it does just that. Much like the comic hero Captain America achieves its goals in a no nonsense manner

So how do we get there? Well for starters you need the right director, and the studio went with Joe Johnston. He has done a lot of work for kids movies but he was picked for his work on period pieces and the attention to detail he used for The Rocketeer and October Sky. He didn't fluff up the background, props, and costumes with too many effects or gimmicks (read X-men: First Class) and it looks like everyone belongs.

The only effect that may have made a difference to the viewers’ eyes is how to make Chris Evans smaller. Steve Rodgers starts as an asthmatic 90 lbs nothing and becomes a super soldier. It would be one thing to ask him to pull a Bale and either bulk up or lose weight but the visual that needed to happen here required a body double or some CGI. They went with the computer as Johnston didn't believe a body double would be able to capture some of Evans more subtle body movements. The only downside is that some of the darker backgrounds look hokier as a green screen was needed to fill the empty space. It is noticeable but luckily not too discerning as it could have easily been the 3D cameras demanding sharper focus. Once he bulks up and becomes what would probably be a poster boy for the Aryan race the 1940 visuals become clearer.

What doesn't charge is the charm and modesty of Steve Rodgers played by Chris Evans. Evans is an interesting choice as his past roles have had him playing characters with some pizzazz and wit. He is no stranger to the spandex as he was one of the very few bright spots in The Fantastic Four, and was great in Scott Pilgrim. Here he is asked to play a role that is much more noble and modest. Rodgers as a character has about the same amount of flare as DC's Clark Kent, so why cast someone known for their playfulness when you can't use any of it on screen. For whatever the reason the casting decision works out great and you believe what his character does. Evans is able to play himself down and be the man that is required for the guy behind the shield; he lets the people around him handle the flare.

The cast around Evans is fantastic. I never get tired of seeing Tommy Lee Jones and he brings the same dry wit delivery you are used to seeing him however few and far between that is. Stanley Tucci is also fantastic and appears to be having fun sporting what appears to be a “Hogan's Heroes” rendering of a German accent. Hugo Weaving is a great selection as a go to bad guy, the unfortunate part is when he actually becomes the Red Skull, we lose the facial tics that go with the baritone voice. And our 1940 beau looks like she got plucked right from the era, Hayley Atwell looks the part and stands just as tall as the Hollywood notables that surround her.

This is what you expect from your summer blockbuster. There is plenty of action and star power and the movie is fun, just not exceptional. Of all the super hero movies that came out this summer this is the best one. I don't know how much that says considering the competition it had. It certainly doesn't hold a candle to the charisma of Robert Downey and is nowhere near as good as the bat but it is a good option if you need some action based fun. Plus I'm still really excited to see what all that talent can do next year (make sure you stick around after the credits). Until then Captain America just about hits the spot. B

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

Iron Man

The summer movie season has begun with the first big blockbuster of the season. And it is everything you expect it to be. For better or worse.

Lots of CGI action sequences: Check

Lots of star power: Check

Hot women: Check

Mickey Rourke covered in tattoos: Check

Like many sequels it seems that director Jon Favreau doesn't quite know where to take his story so instead includes almost every possibility. The movie is overrun with different story lines and doesn't seem to focus on one for very long. The same can be said for the cast. If you don't like the interactions between Don Cheadle and Robert Downey Jr. just wait ten seconds till Scarlett Johansson comes walking out in something tight and black (not that there is anything wrong with that).

The beauty of the first movie was keeping it simple, and it is often easy to do with an origin story after that they need to find other stories from the comic book series. "Demon in a Bottle" seems to lend itself to being the next story but then you run the risk of alienating your audience by forcing your character to deal with something real, like alcoholism. So we see glimpses of the alcoholic playboy, and get pieces of his history with S.H.I.E.L.D., and slight nods to the Avengers without a whole lot of detail to any of it.

As a side note The Avengers movie is really starting to look great. Fanboy favorite Joss Whedon is set to direct, and many of the actors staring in their own movies look like they will be tagging along in this movie as well, including Downey Jr. as Iron Man. While Ed Norton still looks iffy the signings of young actors on the cusp of super stardom like Chris Evans as Captain America and Chirs Hemsworth as Thor (both due out in 2011) is brilliant as you can get them for less money and sign them to longer contracts. But I digress

The characters really are the ones that save this movie. Justin Theroux (Tropic Thunder) has some sharp writing where if you tune out for one second you may miss several zingers. I'm not sure how much chemistry there is between Robert Downey and Gwyneth Paltrow but the exchanges are solid. Poorly done romantic comedies should jot down some of the screenplay techniques used. He also does well writing strong female characters for a genre that usually leave the women on the sideline.

But the show stealers are Sam Rockwell as industrial rival Justin Hammer and Mickey Rourke as Ivan Ranko (a mixture of Whiplash and the Crimson Dynamo from the series). Rockwell as Hammer is charismatic, unknowing, and tired of being one-upped by Stark. Rourke is all kinds of bad ass, his fight sequences at the end and during the INDY car race scene are short, which is unfortunate as this is the only time we ever really see Stark in trouble. It would've been nice to get them more screen time but with so many characters to deal with it seemed like too much of a challenge.

Iron Man 2 does its part for opening the summer movie season by being not too much to chew on and visually solid. As long as you don't expect it to live up to the original you should be able to enjoy the flick. C+/B-