The Amazing Spiderman

Spoilers from the beginning!

This is the kind of film that Marvel can make when they don’t try and tie a number of films together into one two and half hour team up film. While some could see it being too early to reboot the franchise, especially considering the amount of overlap between this, and Sam Raimi’s Spiderman with Tobey Maguire, just over ten years ago. But luckily enough for the viewers, this film grounds itself in a more “realistic” world than the previous trilogy, very much taking a big cue from Christopher Nolan’s ‘Dark Knight Trilogy’.

But back to Spiderman and in particular Andrew Garfield, the man charged with donning the red and blue skintight outfit. Once again, the person cast to play the role of Peter Parker is over a decade older than the character’s age, but Garfield brings the role a more frustrated and misunderstood element than we saw in Maguire’s performance. We also see more of the cocky and smart mouth that was absent in the previous three films, making him a more likeable and more like his age, than the responsible and more emotionally in charge Maguire. The highest praise that I can give to Garfield’s performance is that I look forward to seeing where he will take the character next as well as what will happen to him.

The basic narrative is very similar, as previously mentioned, to Raimi’s first in the his trilogy, only really swapping the love interest from Mary Jane to Gwen Stacey and Willem Dafoe’s Green Goblin for Rhys Ifans Lizard. As with the first film, it takes a long time for Peter to get into the suit and for Spiderman to appear, this obviously prompted by an important event in the Spiderman history. Whilst this story line is developing we also have Peter’s relationship with his fathers former colleague, Dr. Kurt Connors, who is working on trying to mix different species’ DNA to make people “perfect”. As well as the love story between Peter and Gwen Stacey, so barring a few tweaks and character changes, this is very similar to the original.

Like what Nolan did with his Batman films, Marc Webb has filled his cast out with great actors who fit the roles. The three biggest roles after Peter, are Emma Stone’s Gwen Stacey, Rhys Ifans Kurt Connors and Martin Sheens Uncle Ben. Each one does the best with the material put in front of them, Sheen delivers a great Uncle Ben, a man who knows his teenage nephew is much smarter than him, but will do anything to help him. It’s a performance that was easy to predict would have been strong and it is.

Stone plays Gwen Stacey, a more confident member of Peter’s high school year who quickly takes a liking to Peter. It’s hard to say how much Stacey offers in terms of the story, as at times she feels like nothing more than to introduce some stakes into the film and in particular, the climax. But also offers a chance for Peter to meet the chief of police (Played by Dennis Leary) in a social setting, allowing him to meet his pursuer, finally she offers Peter a love interest, something that has been vital to Spiderman films of the past. Stone’s performance is one of a more mature and emotionally stable person than Peter, who seems more angry and confused at times. This idea of the two conflicting emotional states works well, when she talks to Peter about going out to confront Lizard, as to Stacey it seems crazy, but to Peter it makes almost perfect sense and is the right thing to do.

Ifans as Kurt Connors, gives and interesting and largely understated performance, it begins to change and begin louder the closer you get to the end of the film, as he goes through certain changes. To use an analogy for his development, and once again referring to Batman Begins, Connors starts off as Lucius Fox but ends at Ra’s Al Ghul, that is the scale of his change and the somewhat erratic, at times, material that he is given to work with.

The only real question against this film is whether or not this film was needed so soon, because as a piece of summer entertainment and getting the next generation of Spiderman fans interested in the character, it undoubtedly succeeds. Whether it is or was needed is completely up to the individual viewer, I personally enjoyed this one more than the previous Spiderman film, maybe it was because they had tried to ground these extraordinary characters in a relatively normal world, so as a result they stood out more.

One final weakness, if you could call it that, but it could also just be an individual pacing issue with me, was the length of some of the earlier action sequences. Mainly one on the bridge and in the sewers, which are over very quickly and in a way feel rushed, which is a shame, because there was a great chance for a bit of action sequence spectacle there.

While it may not yet been seen as one of the genre’s best films, this could definitely be the start of a new trilogy that could offer more about Peter, potentially, than the previous one, if done correctly.

Snow White and The Huntsman

Thank god for good casting. Because without it, this film would have dragged on for even longer than it did and this isn’t a particularly long film. It’s just over two hours, but it felt closer to two and a half with how it came out. But that is not to say that the film is all bad, far from it indeed, but there was a lot that could have been trimmed here, or changed with quicker editing in parts.

Potential spoilers from this point on.

As mentioned earlier, the casting of the primary cast is the biggest draw of the film, as well as its biggest strength. For the second time this summer Chris Hemsworth delivers a great “heroic” performance as the titular Huntsman, Eric. In other less capable hands, this could have come across as a blocky character that switches from initial comedic fool, to more than capable warrior to finally being a sort of love interest, a very loose one at that. But in Hemsworth’s portrayal we get a complete character that plays all these parts simultaneously.

Charlize Theron and Kristen Stewart, like Hemsworth bring a complete character to the screen, rising above the scripts’ sluggish pace and obvious dialogue that cuts through the film. Theron’s queen is genuinely dangerous and offers the film a level of threat that most of these kind of films sadly lack and as a result make the ending all the more predictable. But considering how well known this story is and no doubt the chance of a sequel now likely, whacking either Snow White or the Huntsman would have been a stupid business decision.  Back to the performances, Stewart offers a performance that is light years ahead of her Twilight films (although I have only seen the first and third, I think) where she is restricted to dull ham fisted scene’s, but here she thrives on the scenes where she has a chance for decent character interaction and development, most often with Theron of Hemsworth.

The basic story for the film is that Snow White’s father, the king, is seduced by Ravena (Theron), who he then marries but is murdered by on his wedding night, allowing her men to storm the castle and take Snow White captive. Ravena then declares herself queen and rules the land for the next decade, ruining the land as she “feeds” on the young women of the land to stay young. Years later and with the knowledge that by taking Snow White’s beauty and youth she will be stay young forever, she sends her (creepy looking) brother to bring her to him, but as he does, Snow White escapes and makes her way into the dark forest. It’s at this point that the Huntsman is brought in. in exchange for bringing his wife back from the dead, all he has to do is deliver Snow White. All of this happens in the first ten-fifteen minutes of the film, so the stakes and basic premise is quickly established before we are straight into the main part of the film.

Another positive of the film is it’s look, offering up a good mix of real and CGI based characters and locations, Sanders has created a complete world, one that has different looks and regions depending on where the characters go, which is essential for any fantasy based film or narrative.

However, as previously mentioned, where the film comes unstuck and falters is in the second act when the plot slows down, this could be either through the writing or the editing, which is more a possible reason. There a number of action sequences, although most of them are just standard chase scenes, where Snow White and The Huntsman are fleeing Ravenna’s men which can grow tiresome with no variety to the sequences. Only a short one on one fight with a troll offers anything different until the siege on the castle finale.

Know normally I am not one for tacked on romantic sub plots, but Snow White and The Huntsman sure could have used one. A childhood friend, William, who meet at the beginning, but who then disappears for the next forty minutes, to only then again appear sporadically through the rest of the film, seems to have been set up as some kind of red herring of a love interest, but ultimately comes off as an expendable character who offers very little in terms of character or plot. The Huntsman would have been a more fitting romantic interest, but due to his past, he is unable to truly fulfil that role, which meant that as a result the script had written itself into a hole, as neither man could have been used to be the love interest. One was too minor a character and the others past forbid him from doing it.

I was disappointed by this film in the end, I had high hopes for it given the cast and the mature tone that it had according to the trailers. It needed to either lose ten to twenty minutes, or gain the same amount to flesh out some of the supporting characters, William in particular and also give us more back story on what happened during the decade or so that Ravenna was in control.

Definitely worth a trip to the cinema, just don’t expect a great story.

Prometheus

Spoilers ahead, you have been warned!

It’s definitely set in the same universe as the other Alien films (I’m not including the AVP films, as they have their own continuity), and has aspects from them that help to anchor in that universe. But whether it’s a direct prequel to Alien or just set in the world of it, has been something of puzzler given the conflicting statements from both Ridley Scott, Michael Fassbender and other cast members. Having seen it a few days ago, I think I have got a grips on where it stands in regard to the series and primarily Alien and the events both preceding it and following it.

Prometheus, as far as I take it, acts as both an origin theory for mankind, and in the smaller scale, an origin of how the xenomorphs (the series primary antagonists) came into existence, as it is clear from the outset of this film, that they were engineered as a biological weapon, and a pretty efficient one going off what they get up to in the future. As for the origin of mankind, the opening sequence (or prologue, depending on your personal taste) offers up an alternative theory, with one of the engineers sacrificing himself to create life on what is almost certainly Earth.

I wouldn’t give a blow by blow account of the film’s story, but following on the prologue, we are introduced to our heroine Dr Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace), an archaeologist who is searching for the creation of life (I think, but I could be wrong on this point), but finds evidence pertaining to the engineers and shortly after, her and the rest of the crew of the ship, also called Prometheus, are heading towards LV-223. Not the fabled, and possibly the worst holiday destination in cinema history, LV-426.

Like the core Alien films, we follow a selection of the crew, focusing on their stories and developments, and keeping the others in background (to be sacrificed when it is called for). These main characters are the aforementioned Rapace, Michael Fassbender as the android (a perfect piece of casting), Idris Elba as the ship’s captain Janek, Charlize Theron as the Weyland Industries executive, and Logan Marshall-Green as Rapace’s colleague and “love interest”. Of these, the stand out is, as usual, Michael Fassbender as David, who along with Shaw are the films central characters, once again the Alien series has avoided using the traditional heroic male character, instead of two unlikely, but interesting characters. A doctor and an android.  David, occupies the position of being both inferior, and yet superior to his shipmates, acting as both the human to the crew’s engineers, and also being the engineer at the same time, firm is his superiority and coldness when it comes to decisions and experiments. Prometheus is in all honestly, watching just for Fassbender’s David.

Visually, this film is stunning, as all Ridley Scott’s films, and makes you wonder what Alien would have look like with this budget and freedom, but perhaps that film would have suffered for it. Prometheus however, does not, the glorious claustrophobic interiors of the dome, hark back to the darker parts of the Nostromo, and the basements from LV-426, while giving us a scale and history that adds to the previous films. Showing what happened to the engineers, and the birth of the xenomorphs.

Some people will be unhappy that it doesn’t dovetail nicely with Alien, but I am not one of them, this films acts as fork in the road, in one direction we get Alien, Aliens, etc, the history of the xenomorphs and Ripley. Where as the other direction will hopefully take us off into the direction of the history of both the engineers and more ideas about the creation of humanity. Did it need more action and facehugging action? Maybe, but I found the bigger questions and ideas it raised more interesting than seeing someone torn to pieces. Not that there are no horror moments, there are three genuine, squirm in your seat moments, one features the classic sc-fi convention of the excess crew members in the wrong place, at the wrong time. The second is a brilliant, tense piece of self preservation and on the spot surgery that even Dr Nick wouldn’t be so hasty to get started, and the final is a struggle, in very close proximity featuring all three species.

Ignore the negative comments, and go and experience this film in the cinema where it is at it’s best. My only piece of advice, is don’t go in expecting a carbon copy of Alien, because you will let a great, thought provoking film pass you by.

Men In Black 3

I remember when the first Men in Black came out, and I saw it on VHS, I enjoyed the hell out of it, and looked forward to the next one which again I saw on video or maybe on TV, but anyway, I wasn’t exactly over enthused by it, it just seemed to lack something, or maybe try and follow the formula of the previous film to closely. Fast forward to now, and the basic story of the film, I’ll get to it later, is something much more interesting and shows the series embracing the more technological side of the science fiction universe that these characters inhabit.

Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith reprise their roles as the series protagonists, agent’s J and K, picking up where they have left off, with great on screen chemistry, powered forward by zipping, witty dialogue. Whilst due to story reasons, I’ll get to that soon, I promise, Will Smith has more screen time, Jones’ character and portrayal of K is the main motivation for both Smith and the story, giving the character a more vulnerable side to him, than we have seen in the previous two films. Smith is on top comedic form as he interacts with various alien and human characters, especially in the period of the film set in 1969.

Josh Brolin is the main addition to the series, playing a much younger K, in 1969, a performance which hits perfectly, avoiding the potential risk of it becoming nothing more than an impersonation of Jones’ older version. Instead he plays him amusingly, giving the character a more rounded performance, capable of being happy, and showing it. A fact that J frequently points out, and calls him upon. This films villain is probably the most sinister, but also the most entertaining, played by Jermaine Clement, Boris the Animal is first humanoid(loosely speaking) villain that we have seen, and one who is both intentionally funny and unintentionally funny at the same time, sporting a Macho Man Randy Savage look.. A roaring stand off between him and an early version is one of the films witty moments, not featuring J and K.

The basic plot of the film, is that Boris the Animal escapes from Lunar Max (a prison on the jail) and manages to travel back in time and kill K before he can stop him and arrest him. From there on we follow J as he follows Boris back in time to stop him from killing K. The film manages to keep the time travel aspects both simple and easy too understand, as well as using it in clever, complicated ways to give us some new uses for the theoretical technology.

Humour has always been one of the driving forces in the Men in Black series, the first one had some great physical and dialogue based comedic moments, shared equally by J and K, as well as the other supporting characters and villains. The second fell short, because it didn’t have the amount or overall quality and diversity of jokes. Almost all of the humour comes from either J or K. But this third sees some what of a return to the diverse humour of the first, although the first act is at times somber and very foreboding, there are still streaks and promises of what is come. But it truly starts after the jump back into 1969, the clash of cultures between J and a younger K offer up some of the highlights, along with a scene with Andy Warhol and two policemen who take, somewhat of a dislike to J, are probably the comedic highlights of the film.

Men in Black 3 is a return to the form of the first film, bringing back the laughs and adding more a personal stake to the story than the two previous films. The ending of this film, undoubtedly has more emotional weight than the previous two films, and in a way ties the whole series together. I thoroughly enjoyed the film, because I was surprised with how much fun I had with it. Compared with the other films of the summer, this may not be one of the big events, but it’s certainly worth a trip to the summer. Tonally, I imagine it will sit closer to The Avengers than The Dark Knight Rises or Prometheus, and stands up as a classic enjoyable summer blockbuster.

Premier League XI 2012

The idea for this article came from a friend of mine who suggested doing a review of the season, but as I missed parts of the season due to other commitments, it seemed to wiser to do it as best eleven. No doubt some readers will disagree with my choices, but that goes with the territory.

Goalkeeper – Joe Hart

One of the two defensive towers that Manchester City’s has built upon, he rarely has a bad game or even makes mistakes. During some games when City weren’t performing, it would often be Hart that made the difference between the results, pulling off saves that he had no right to make. Commands his area with an authority that the great goalkeepers have. Bound to be City and England’s number one for many, many years.

Right Back - Tony Hibbert

Maybe a strange choice for some, but he offers a reliable and no nonsense style of defending. Always reliable and ever the professional, although sometimes sacrificing the offensive for the defensive, it allows the man in front of him to go forward freely and do the damage whilst knowing that he behind him, Hibbert is their offering him a safety net.

Centre Back – Vincent Kompany

The second defensive tower in City’s team, like Joe Hart rarely under performs, always giving true captains performances, which seem to inspire the rest of his team. Reads the game very well, like world class defenders can, seeing the danger early and cutting it out before the attack has the chance to gather any momentum or allow the ball into dangerous areas. Easily Manchester City’s best signing, and at around £6million, an absolute bargain.

Centre Back – Fabricio Coloccini

After an initial rough period early in his English career, Coloccini has come back as a true well rounded defender, capable in handling one on one encounters with attackers and of organizing his defence tightly. After this great season, Newcastle will no doubt field offers for him (and many of their other players) after he has finally reached his potential that showed many years ago with Boca Juniors.

Left Back – Ashley Cole

The most consistent left back, not just in the league, but probably the world in the last year, surpassing many of the other left backs that peaked for a few years before sliding back down into mediocrity. His pace is enough to get him out of bad situations, but with his solid defensive abilities and tactical knowledge, a mistake is often a rare occurrence. Offers as much going forward as he does defensively, making him an even rarer commodity, a well-rounded full back.

Right Wing – Antonio Valencia

One of the few consistent performers for Manchester United this season, sometimes criticised for his predictability, preferring to hug the touchline as opposed to following the lead of other wingers and drift inside, he offers his team something difficult and a problem that full backs don’t often come across in the modern day game. A traditional winger, with plenty of pace and good crossing ability, his intricate footwork may not be up to that of Cristiano Ronaldo, but Valencia’s game is all about isolating and defender and beating him with his pace, and getting to the goal line.

Centre Midfield – Yaya Toure

The player of the season. As capable going forward as his is at sitting back, and the man who makes Manchester City tick. Plays best in a more advanced role where he is offered, a frequently takes, the opportunity to run with the ball, often carrying it for long distances before laying it off to a team mate or having an effort on goal himself. Always seems to make the right decision, which shows an intelligent reading of the game, but also that he is willing to give it to the man in the better the position, playing for the team.

Centre Midfield – Luka Modric

The little magician, and probably rightly considered as the only man to be able to replace Paul Scholes, despite the likelihood of him moving to Manchester United diminishing with every passing season. Controls games with an effortless flair, collecting the ball deep and driving Tottenham forward, giving it to the more offensively focused members of the team, although Modric is perfectly capable of scoring and doing damage in the final third, making him one of the most well rounded midfielders in the league. Spurs did well to keep him last summer, fighting off the advances from Chelsea, and as a result constructed probably the most balanced midfield in the Premier League.

Left Wing – David Silva

Responsible for most of City’s early season dominance, tearing through teams with his ridiculously close control and eye for a pass that made even the most organized defence look like amateurs. Despite a slight dip in performance in the middle of the season, mainly due to injury and not being rested, came back strong to play a vital role in the run in. A player, along with Yaya Toure, that City must hold onto in order to realistically hope to retain their title next year.

Forward – Robin Van Persie

An injury free season, probably the first one that he has had since arriving in England, and he demonstrates what he is truly capable of. At times single handed kept Arsenals hope European football alive next season, amongst a team that suffered from injuries and poor performers equally for the first half of the season. The bad news for Arsenal though is that with just one year left on his contract, Van Persie will no doubt be in hot demand, and they will have to step up and offer assurances of investment and trophies in the near future.

Forward – Sergio Aguero

A great first season from a player that has promised so much from his years in Spain with Atletico Madrid, like Carlos Tevez before him, they share the same kind of build and ability, although Aguero seems to want to play football as opposed to Tevez, who seems hell bent on wasting his talent. Deadly with both feet and in the air, and willing to work hard for the team, he is possibly the complete forward, even capable of out muscling some of the bigger players in the league.

Dark Shadows

This is the second in the series of reviews on 2012's summer blockbusters. As a note of warning, whilst I have tried to avoid spoilers, there is always the risk of something I don't consider to be a spoiler, potentially ruining a film for someone else. So be warned.

Quite simply this is one of the strangest films I have seen in a long time, and this was my reaction after going into the cinema knowing that this was a Tim Burton film, and based off a 1970’s supernatural soap opera. The film tells the story of the Collins family, and primarily Barnabus Collins (played by Johnny Depp), a family that moved to America 200 years before and built the family’s business and wealth on fishing. But when Barnabus becomes intimate with maid, Angelique (Eva Green), a witch, he sets in motion a series of events that will cause the deaths of the people he loves the most, and ultimately is transformed into a vampire by Angelique’s curse.

As with most Burton films, there is a unique look to it that can only be identified as belonging to Tim Burton, some people often find his worlds and characters somewhat over the top and overtly gothic, despite it being an important and trademark part of his filmmaking style. Yet with this film it seems to suit Dark Shadows, and suit it’s 1970’s setting, emphasising certain characters looks, especially the colour that is associated with each character, Barnabus’ character is almost black, while Hoffman (Helena Botham Carter) is mostly dull coloured but for her bright orange hair, Angelique the witch stands out in her bright coloured clothes and almost white hair. The villain of the films, is the most brightly coloured character in the film, a typical turn on conventions by Burton.

Despite being based on TV series (one I haven’t seen), the plot of the film is thin. The main story seems to focus on Barnabus restoring his family business to its former glory whilst dealing with Angelique’s rival firm. This seems like an albeit but fairly standard story, but would have given the film as a whole a solid direction in which to drive in, but instead numerous other storylines are thrown in throughout the film, none of them truly fleshed out. Perhaps it was an attempt to distil the essence of the show into the film, but the very nature of a film prevents that, especially with Dark Shadows run time of 113 minutes.

However erratic the plot, there is always a new fun scene or sequence just around the corner. Some of them ranging from the amusing bizarre to the brutally shocking and the cold blooded. Burtons mixes comic moments backed by seventies classics with brutal actions, mostly performed by Barnabus Collins, shot calmly and with a sharp eye for the final moments between the predator and his prey.

The cast Burton has assembled, helps the film significantly. With lesser performers, the film could have descended into a gothic farce.  For the most, each actor/actress brings their character to life in a realistic way, the outstanding performer is probably Eva Green who mixes Angelique’s vengeful side, and her longing to be loved by Barnabus. David Collins, played by the young Gulliver McGrath is criminally underused, his is one of the stories that is introduced, but never fully developed before it is closed in the climax of the film.

Johnny Depp, a Burton mainstay (this is their eight or ninth collaboration) constructs another memorable character in a way that is uniquely him. He skirts the edges of being the loveable hero, a cold blooded killer and comic relief (a lot of the humour of the film comes from him adapting to a world unlike anything he knows) brilliantly, giving us an interesting new character, a new take on a vampire that differs from that currently seen in modern mainstream films.

It’s often easy to judge how much you enjoyed a film by how long you discuss it with the person you went with to see it. I discussed Dark Shadows with my fiancée for about five minutes, roughly the point at which we reached the car, for the rest of the journey we discussed the trailer for Prometheus, that screened before the film, till we got home. Whether that means the film is not worth thinking about, which I don’t believe is the case, or if simply it didn’t connect with me, as it isn’t the kind of story or film that I normally go and see (this is only the third Burton I have seen since Planet of the Apes (2001), or if I simply found Burtons style of filmmaking and design taking me out of the film, but I have enjoyed many of Burtons early films, which share much of the same artistic vision as this, and his other films.  I would say that is simply a case of the story not being strong enough to hold the audiences attention, or encourage discussion of the ideas and memorable moments in the film.

Finally, a lot of people seem to be saying that Burton should try and cast someone else as his leading man other than Depp. But perhaps it would be more of an idea to embrace more narrative-focused projects. No one has ever doubted , or should Depp’s ability, nor should they doubt Burton’s talent and vision.  So maybe it would be better to experiment with story, rather than cast for Burton.

The Avengers

This summer sees the release of a number of highly anticipated blockbusters, three of which are based on comic book characters, one a debateable prequel (I am sure some people will disagree with me on this point, to varying degrees) to a science fiction classic, another is based on a 1960s TV show that aired on the ABC network in America. There are others, I am sure, but these will be the five that I will, in all likely go and see during this summer. Some would look at this and see it as more evidence that Hollywood, especially when it comes to it’s tent pole films is running out of imagination, but only time will tell with that, and which will ultimately come with the release and reception to these films.

The first of these films was The Avengers, but with different titles in certain countries, having seen the previous films that have set up this film, ranging from the tedious in Captain America to the surprisingly good (I went in expecting very little, despite the cast and director) in Thor, I was interested in seeing how they would attack the possibilities for this story.

Co-written and Directed by Joss Whedon, whose Buffy the Vampire Slayer series I was a huge fan of when I was younger, he didn’t seem like the kind of choice that Marvel would have gone for, having made his name almost entirely in television, there were no doubt more conservative choices they could have gone with, especially related to directorial duties.

The cast of the film is largely made up of the actors from the previous films but with a few new additions and one recasting, Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/Hulk, the majority bring the exact same character to this film, as they had in the others. For some this isn’t a problem, Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston continue on with their superbly complex brotherly relationship, and Ruffalo constructs probably the most human and likeable version of Banner. The others characters just seem to be going through the paces when it comes to their scenes and others simply carry on with the same version, not bringing anything new to their performance.

There will be spoilers from this point, so please don’t carry on if you haven’t seen it, or don’t want to know any details.

The plot, is simple to say they least, Loki (Hiddleston) returns to Earth, to find an object called the Tesseract, a source of seemingly limitless power, in his bid to take over the Earth, with the help of an alien race, the Chitauri, with the Avengers being the only thing possible of standing in the way. During the first two acts we have to go through two or three giant action set pieces as the team work out their differences, until they finally realise that perhaps they should stop Loki before he brings an army of aliens to Earth.

Now this may seem as though, from how I have talked about it so far, that the film isn’t very strong when it comes to story, and it probably isn’t. But where it makes up for it, and this is plainly down to Whedon’s knack for dialogue is in the more subdued moments between the characters, more often than not a simple one to one conversation. Most of these moments feature Hiddleston’s Loki, the first of these moments is soon after Thor arrives (probably the best entrance of the film), another later on with Scarlett Johansson, even some of the less snappy conversations he has are elevated above what they could have been thanks to his portrayal of the character. As mentioned before Hemsworth brings Thor to life in a realistic way (for a demi-god), in a role that in either film could have, in the lesser hands, been nothing more than cocky meathead.

I saw this film in 2D, as I had heard that parts of the film, especially those set in space are very hard to make out, due to 3D making the screen darker (I don’t know the technical details of 3D, I apologize), so can only speak about this version of the film. The photography of the film is good, none of it is bad, but also none of it pops out as being instantly memorable, there is one long shot in the finale that swoops through New York following the different characters, which is fun but doesn’t linger for two long. The visual highlight is probably the first time Thor arrives to capture an already captured Loki around the end of the first act, and the battle between him, Captain America and Iron Man that follows.

One of the biggest let downs of the film is that none of the characters seem to have an emotional journey or arc throughout the film, maybe this is because of the very nature of “team-up” film, you have to spread out the screen time around the cast, making sure that everyone had their moment. But as a result here, no one really goes through any change, or has sort of epiphany or realization that will alter them (this could also be due to the no doubt already written, or in the process of being written sequels to the individual films), and this is a shame when compared to the other comic book team films, most noticeably the X-Men films, although I must admit they chose to focus on certain characters more than others, primarily Wolverine. However, would have pushing one character to the fore, and others into glorified supporting roles worked for the this film, possibly, but also it could have led to it being received as more of Thor 1.5, which in some ways this could have been seen to be, due to Loki serving as the lead villain.

This is unmistakeable a popcorn film, it doesn’t ask you to deal with too many ideas or to think about how it is a reflection of our world or is even as well made as some of the top echelon of the genre, such as both Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Spiderman 1 and 2, Superman: The Movie or one of it’s predecessors Thor. This could obviously be the film, and Whedon knowing what this film as sticking to it, but with a film that everyone knew was going to make money, and it already has, it’s a shame that it didn’t take more risks, in terms of story, the characters (some of them) or the ideas and messages that would have elevated this beyond what it is.

Ultimately, I enjoyed it for what it was. If you go and see it, don’t go in expecting great things, and you may enjoy yourself, and even be surprised at what you see. But what do I know; I’m a DC guy.