Avengers: Age of Ultron Review

Avengers: Age of Ultron 
3/5

The Short Version: 
While it contains thrilling action sequences and the patented Joss Whedon whit, it almost has too much of both while also being burdened with introducing and establishing new characters, giving time to the old characters, building up the threat of a new villain, AND still moving the MCU forward. The 3D is 100% completely worth the extra cash.

The Long Version:
I try to go into every movie I pay my $12 to see with as clean a slate as possible. I'll watch a trailer or two but I rarely read reviews prior to viewing. I just don't want expectations raised too high only to be let down. In the case of Joss Whedon's followup Avengers Age of Ultron I had hoped that I would be bombarded with some top notch action sequences and dialogue with a touch of creative banter and humor. What I got was entirely too much of both.



We greet our familiar heroes mid-mission as they are in all out assault mode attacking a secrete compound lead by evil German Hydra scientists. These scientists somehow managed to get ahold of Loki's scepter from the first film and have been using it do perform any number of evil experiments - none the least of which is human genetic manipulation in the form of Quicksilver (Aaron Tyler-Johnson) and his twin sister Scarlet Witch (Elizabeth Olsen). For a recap to you kids that don't read comics, Quicksilver can run really fast and Scarlet Witch has magnetic energy powers while also being able to do a little mind manipulation.

After the Avengers clear out the bad guys and reclaim the scepter, they go home the victors, have a party and relax for a few minutes. With the scepter in hand, Tony Stark AKA Iron Man (do I need to say played by Robert Downy Jr.?) and Bruce Banner AKA The Hulk (Mark Ruffalo) decide to play around with the mysterious energy source contained within the scepter. They quickly learn that it is in fact a form of intelligence. The intrepid scientists think "lets make artificial intelligence and we can save the entire world all at once!" So they start tinkering around and that doesn't exactly work out well.

By using Jarvis, Stark's electronic Butler as a roadmap, they inadvertently create Ultron. Designed and intended to be man's savior, the eccentric robot voiced by James Spader decides the world's best hope to survive is without the presence of man. rather than being a savior of the world, Ultron becomes a global threat taking control of robotics stations all over the world and embedding his consciousness in the internet allowing him to know all and see all instantly. Outmatched and outgunned, the Avengers must do their best to rally their strength, unlock Ultron's evil plot, and once again save the day.

While this was fun, there just isn't much of a complete movie here. At a bladder-crunching two hour and twenty minute run rime, this movie feels really long. Being burdened by its status as a sequel to a movie that served as a sequel of sorts to three other films, Avengers: Age Of Ultron tries to do everything a big budget sequel should do - only all at the same time with mixed results. It has to reintroduce all of the familiar characters we already know, give them a reason for being in the film, expand their characters while introducing new characters and moving the entire franchise forward. That is a lot to do for one movie.

Apparently there were several cut scenes and entire sequences that didn't make it into the final cut of the film - and it's noticeable. There is a late second act mission that Thor goes on in order to decipher the evil vision he had when he was infected by Scarlet Witch's mind control powers - only we get to see just a couple scant glimpses of what is going on and none of it makes any sense until some late and fast-worded exposition comes in. For an already long movie you can tell that this was intended to be an even longer film - for better or worse.

Part of the problem I have with this movie is that it opens headlong into an action sequence without reestablishing our characters. The last time we saw Captain America (Chris Evans) he was about to embark on some sort of mission with Falcon (Anthony Mackie) that sounded thrilling and exciting. We don't get to pick up with that. We get a long action sequence that easily could have been ten minutes shorter for how little it actually moves the plot forward.

Now don't get me wrong, I love action sequences and this movie delivers on that in a big way. But part of making an action sequence good or thrilling is making us care about the characters involved. One way Whedon tried to do that is by expanding on Hawkeye's (Jeremy Renner) character by giving him a family. On top of that we get Bruce Banner and Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) building into some kind of romantic pair - which is weird because after Captain America: The Winter Soldier she clearly had eyes for the big boy in red white and blue, but so what, Johansson and Ruffalo play well off each other and their scenes are nice. The issue with these quiet character moments I have is that they grind the film to a screeching dead halt. Then when things need to get going again, the movie has to double clutch and grind its gears back into place before moving again.

With that, everything we watch for an hour and a half builds to a forty five minute climatic super battle that honestly, is straight out of the last movie only with mindless robots instead of mindless alien things. Our heroes protect the innocent while working towards taking down the main bad guy, Ultron. This would all be great if we hadn't seen it all already. After The Avengers and Man of Steel bad things falling from the sky can only be just so exciting for very long.

Now, how much of this is the fault of Writer/Director Joss Whedon? Really hard to say. Given his recent public behavior, the coy off-handed comments, and calling out other summer films like Jurassic World for supposed sexism while injecting a rape joke of his own is telling. I don't think he enjoyed this experience all that much. Maybe it's like he says and he's really burned out and his lips are a bit looser, but at the same time, it's entirely possible a lot of what he wanted to bring to the show was strangled by Disney/Marvel's need to keep the ever expanding franchise growing bigger and bigger. Where the Phase One line of films felt like they built towards The Avengers - this one feels like it's just a part of several stand-alone films that didn't really lead to this particular film in any real way other than a scattering of events from The Winter Soldier. On top of that - this movie feels entirely too "Whedon." We all know that he's a clever guy who knows where and how to throw out a smart quip, but he doesn't need to have EVERY character be quippy at all times. If Ultron had just been the only one, that would have been something - but even the most side characters, including random unneeded cameos from Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. get a snarky quip. If there were good scenes left on the cutting room floor, I can guarantee that if they cut 90% of the unnecessary jokes out there would have been plenty of room for those scenes to come back.

That isn't to say Avengers: Age of Ultron is a bad movie. It is very fun and the action is often very thrilling. The Iron-Man / Hulk battle was fantastic - especially in 3D. Granted, I love 3D and am a bit biased, but this is a HUGE movie and it really makes use of the extra dimensional space. I loved James Spader's voice work for Ultron - he easily steals the entire movie. And, like the last Avengers movie, The Incredible Hulk is the best of the bunch. The big green monster gets all of the best fight scenes while also having a true and genuine emotional arc. That leads me to wonder why the hell they just don't make a new stand-alone Hulk movie again? One can hope.

In the end, I am more excited by the future single hero adventures coming up. This movie was a good bit of fun for a summer movie, it just wasn't nearly as memorable as the first Avengers film. Like I said it isn't a bad movie, I'll say I had a good time but not a great time - it's just average, and for a Marvel movie that's kind of tough medicine to take. I'm reserving final judgement for the Extended Cut thats rumored to arrive in the fall. It certainly isn't as bad as Iron Man 2 so that's something!

3/5

While problematic and overstuffed, Avengers: Age of Ultron was still a good bit of fun, it's just not as special as some of the more recent Marvel movies. 

Interstellar Movie Review!

It's really cold out today!

It has been a very long time since I've been on this blog of mine. No – I have not completed my segway to wordpress, I've been busy and personal projects like that took a backseat, except for the occasional Epic Trailer and the watching of films like today's review of Christopher Nolan's Interstellar. And with that, lets get to it.

In A Nutshell:
Well, by now you're all wondering if it's an amazing movie and if it's even worth seeing in the theaters. From the rather slim box office take for a movie of this size and scope - you're not the only one asking those questions. They are two very different questions that need to be answered, so I'm going cheat and answer the second one first. Yes. It is a movie that must be seen in the theater. Plain. And. Simple. Even if you don't think you'll like it. GO TO A THEATER and see it. Even then, you need to find a large format screen like IMAX or XD. I saw it on a standard, local theater screen and I have to admit that I was feeling a bit short-changed on the splendor of the visuals. With that, let me say before I get into the nuts and bolts of this review that I have every intention of seeing this film again if I can on an IMAX screen or it's relative equivalent.

The Story:
Now the story - what is it all about? The A to Z plot is Earth is on the brink of extinction as food crops fall to a blight that has left corn as the only viable staple to feed what's left of the planet's population. In order to guarantee a future for mankind, NASA and the government have secretly conspired to send manned missions to the furthest reaches of space via a wormhole in space-time to another galaxy with potentially habitable worlds. One such mission is lead by Matthew "Well ah-right ah-right ah-right" McConaughey, Anne "Catwoman" Hathaway, Wes "Remember I was in American Beauty" Bently and a black guy. I don't mean to be racially insensitive for flippant about that last part, but sadly for actor David Gyasi who was friggen AMAZING in Cloud Atlas, that is basically what he is reduced to in this movie.

Together our intrepid explorers zip into the worm hole and come out on the other side with three possible planets to explore and and figure out if they can transport Earth's dwindling population there. All the while McConaughey's kids grow older and must deal with their father's absence, raise their own families, and figure out their own path to survival if perhaps with the help of an unexplained, mysterious force.

The Good, The Bad, & The Everything Else:
That is a pretty easy and simple to follow story for what amounts to be a very cumbersome film. I think the easiest and most appropriate way to describe this movie is with a cinematic mathematical equation: Take the explanation of Quantum Physics from John Carpenter's Prince of Darkness + the ability to travel through a wormhole/black hole from Paul W.S. Anderson's Event Horizon + time travel ability from Leonard Nimoy's Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home + the third act plot contrivance from Danny Boyle's Sunshine and ÷ (Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey + Robert Zemeckis' Contact) = Christopher Nolan's Interstellar.  

Did you get all that?
To clarify, this movie is basically Prince of Darkness + Event Horizon + Star Trek IV + Sunshine ÷ (2001 + Contact) = Interstellar.

If you've seen those movies and are familiar with their plots and story mechanics, then you're pretty damn close to Interstellar. I know I am way over simplifying this film, but I also have to be honest when I tell you those movies, in particular Prince of Darkness and Event Horizon did a far more succinct job at explaining quantum physics and the theoretical aspects of long distance space travel. I was so unintentionally hyper-aware of those other movies and how much more efficiently they explained the minutia that it definitely hurt my experience with this movie. But I also don't think that's exactly my fault for being a film fanatic either. That falls on the filmmakers for feeling they needed to explain everything that was happening at all times. This hurts the movie even more when something happens that is pure theory or made up for convenience that it's given the short end of the exposition stick. This happens to a point where the film's climax can feel more than a bit silly or even melodramatic.

"Whoa now!" I can hear you folks out there saying, probably wondering after that little bit why I would still recommend this movie to anyone. Valid question. In my opinion, it is quite simply one of the most ambitious films made in a great long while. The visuals, the story, the themes and message; it is an undertaking that should be commended and congratulated. But with all of the accolades needs to come some grounded criticisms.

First, this incredible cast lead by McConaughey is severally short-changed. So much time is spent explaining the this and that of what's clearly happening on screen that we never get to actually know them personally except for some very short bursts that don't last enough to resonate. In fact the only character other than McConaughey's that truly resonates lands on someone I won't mention because it's a twist in the plot. But when you see the movie you'll know whom I'm talking about and forgive my vagaries. Then you have Jessica Chastain and Cassey Affleck's characters, who really don't need to be there at all. In fact the movie's story may be smoother and work better without them.

Second is exposition. This is a long movie that only feels longer because there is so much time spent(or wasted depending on your POV) on what feels like a physics lesson for the audience. Perhaps this is the greatest problem. All at the same time, this film underestimates and overestimates the intelligence of its audience. On one hand - we're a whole lot smarter and know more about theoretical physics or at least have a rudimentary understanding than ever before. For better or worse we have shows like The Big Bang Theory to thank for promoting the theories and helping them resonate at least somewhere in the consciousness of the general population. But on the other hand, there is so much that we don't know that when something is clearly being made up or even if it is grounded in legit science it isn't thoroughly explained enough to be believable; it is glaringly obvious and weighs the entire film down. At a nearly 3 hour runtime, it feels longer than it should for a movie I would normally want to spend as much time with enjoying.

Apart from those areas, there is a great deal to admire and even love about this film. It is visual beauty at its finest. Particularly wonderful was the usage of practical effects to execute these complex visuals. When you hear that this movie cost $160million, you can see where that money was spent in the best ways. It also has so much to see in every frame that it warrants repeat viewings. If anything, I hope these repeat viewings will help improve my experience and overall opinion of the film.

Another thing I love, and this is largely because I am a score-hound, Hans Zimmer's pipe organ score is incredible and simply beautiful. It is thrilling, dramatic, and tonally it fits perfectly with every single scene of the movie. It is an auditory orgasm and I can't wait to own the CD, rip it to my iPhone and endlessly listen to it over and over again. So if you're a lover of incredible movie music - this is a feast!

It is also a movie that makes you think. Not abstractly about "what does it all mean," but about much more tangible things like our roles in this world. In each of us is a capability to leave a lasting mark on the future. Whether we make a scientific achievement, raise crops, or have a family - all of these are ideas worth thinking about and taking into consideration while viewing this film. Time and our role in the limited segment of time we are given is a reoccurring theme in Christopher Nolan's films and Interstellar is his magnum opus.

In summation, the best way I can describe this movie is as an experience and one that you must have for yourself. Neither my opinion or those of others should make up your mind as to whether or not you should see it. You absolutely should see it and IN THE THEATER. I can not stress that point enough. While I have my qualms about the film - it is one I will revisit again and again. It's a challenge. Is it on the same level as something like Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey? No, not quite. It stretches towards the stars but doesn't reach the same cinematic heights. But that's okay too. Like 2001, it is a movie that makes you think about a lot of things; in this case the meaning of time, love, responsibility, our future and legacy while making you dream for a world beyond our own. So on that level it is a terrific cinematic achievement, and one that should be experienced by all. Go to a theater and see it for yourself. That is the best review I can give.

In the end: 3.5 of 5 stars - while it doesn't quite reach the heights it strives for, it at least tries to be something more than most movies even attempt to be, and that is something that deserves to be seen.