Benedict Cumberbatch – People Talking

Movie Review – ‘Avengers: Infinity War’ – The Gang’s All Here

Directed by Anthony Russo & Joe Russo

Written by Christopher Markus & Stephen McFeely (screenplay), based on the comic book story by Jim Starlin, George Pérez, & Ron Lim, based on characters created by Steve Ditko, Jack Kirby, Joe Simon, and Jim Starlin

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Benedict Cumberbatch, Don Cheadle, Tom Holland, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Anthony Mackie, Sebastian Stan, Tom Hiddleston, Idris Elba, Peter Dinklage, Benedict Wong, Pom Klementieff, Karen Gillan, Dave Bautista, Zoe Saldana, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Gwyneth Paltrow, Benicio del Toro, Josh Brolin, Chris Pratt, Danai Gurira, Letitia Wright, Winston Duke, Angela Bassett, Jacob Batalon, Isabella Amara, Florence Kasumba, William Hurt, Terry Notary, Tom Vaughan-Lawlor, Carrie Coon, Michael James Shaw

Soundtrack: Alan Silvestri

It all comes down to this.

(Until Ant-Man and the Wasp comes out in ten weeks, which I’m actually more hyped for, but whatever.)

Eighteen movies in ten years have all been building up to the conflict to end all conflicts (until the next one).

The Infinity War.

So, what do we got?

Well…that kind of depends on the question.

As far as its purpose, which is the joining together of multiple sub-franchises to form, more or less, a single, cohesive story, I think this film does an admirable job of hammering the puzzle pieces together, but it’s not seamless enough to transcend the limitations of adapting one medium to another.

To put it another way, there’s very little about Infinity War that’s bad on its own; pretty much every scene unto itself works just fine, but I don’t think it cuts together well. Frankly, I found the whole thing rather overwhelming (perhaps a second look would be worthwhile, but I’m not sure).

One big problem is that the audience is expected to carry too much into the movie (metaphorically speaking). I’ve seen every MCU film, I assume most people who are going opening weekend have as well, but most of the emotional payoffs in Infinity War rely on you to remember why they’re important, and, as good a memory as I have, I just don’t have that kind of RAM for this, and as such a lot of the emotion of the movie fell flat for me (not to mention there haven’t been many real consequences in the MCU to this point, so…yeah, I’ll just leave it there).

Second, and I know I’ll be in the minority here because it’s the point of all of this for a lot of people, but there’s too much mind-numbing action, which I don’t normally find myself saying about these films. I like action fine, I can even enjoy nonstop action when it’s done right, but let me ask you this:

If two CG characters are fighting each other, why does the camera need to shake so much?

One positive I will mention, because I didn’t hate this movie and want to end on a good note, I actually liked Thanos as a character. Sure, he’s a villain who must be stopped, but at least he has an ethos and isn’t just another bitter revenge dude.

Other than that, hardcore fans will probably eat this one up, but I’m not convinced it has that much staying power for general audiences. Check it out if you want, especially if you’re pot committed to the MCU, but don’t feel bad about seeing it at a discount.

Rating: ★★★☆☆

P.S.
Shoutout to Alamo/Mondo for the swag.

Movie Review – ‘Thor: Ragnarok’ – Kiwi Fried Goodness

Directed by Taika Waititi
Written by Eric Pearson and Craig Kyle & Christopher Yost, based on the comics by Stan Lee & Larry Lieber and Jack Kirby
Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Cate Blanchett, Idris Elba, Jeff Goldblum, Tessa Thompson, Karl Urban, Mark Ruffalo, Anthony Hopkins, Benedict Cumberbatch, Taika Waititi (voice), Rachel House, Clancy Brown (voice), Tadanobu Asano, Ray Stevenson, Zachary Levi, Luke Hemsworth, Sam Neill, Cohen Holloway, Matt Damon
Soundtrack: Mark Mothersbaugh

To be honest, I’m a bit superhero-ed out right now. I don’t think I’ll be able to get up for Justice League, or Black Panther, but I’ve got just enough in the tank to be excited for this, because it’s a known fact that the Marvel Cinematic Universe benefits from getting a little wild from time to time.

Guardians of the Galaxy, Ant-Man, Doctor Strange, Spider-Man: Homecoming: all a bit nutty, a bit weird, and all wonderful (and all helmed by non-“name” directors, who Marvel came to terms with before shooting); and as I well know, if you really want to get your freak on, you pass things off to Taika Waititi.

Director of such films as What We Do in the Shadows, and the criminally underrated Hunt for the Wilderpeople, Taika Waititi knows how to provide his audience with a good, fun time, without making a complete farce of things (not unlike Edgar Wright, though they are definitely not the same; growing up on opposite sides of the globe will have that effect), and Thor: Ragnarok is no exception.

This is not to say that we have a perfect film on our hands (for one thing, I’m not sure it stands up entirely on its own, which I’m something of a stickler about), but it’s definitely worth the price of admission.

The strength of Thor: Ragnarok lies largely in its tone and its humor (shocker, I know), to the point that the action bits are probably the least interesting thing about the movie.

Of course, none of this would work without quality performances (including a bit of a scene-stealer from Waititi himself). Chris Hemsworth, if he wasn’t already, seems perfectly comfortable in his Thor suit; same for Tom Hiddleston as Loki; Cate Blanchett is clearly having a blast (and is darkly fetching); Idris Elba does fine with what little he has; Tessa Thompson makes for an interesting addition; Karl Urban brings a surprising amount of gravitas to what could easily be a throwaway role; Mark Ruffalo is Mark Ruffalo (in the same way that RDJ is RDJ); but the man himself, Jeff Goldblum, is truly the straw that stirs the drink (so much so that one of my disappointments is that he’s not in the movie more).

Thor: Ragnarok won’t work for everybody, I recognize that (I already said it wasn’t perfect); not everyone will jibe with its particular sense of humor, but, by-and-large, I think most people will experience this as the fun romp it is

After all, you don’t want to be taking all this comic book stuff too seriously now, do you?

Rating: ★★★★☆

P.S.
Of course there are stingers; why are you asking?

Movie Review – ‘Doctor Strange’ – Escher’s World

You didn’t think People Talking was dead because there hasn’t been a post in three weeks, did you? I certainly hope not. Vacation is a wonderful thing, but, it’s time to get back to the movies.

Directed by Scott Derrickson
Written by Jon Spaihts & Scott Derrickson & C. Robert Cargill, based on the character created by Steve Ditko
Cast: Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Rachel McAdams, Benedict Wong, Mads Mikkelsen, Tilda Swinton, Michael Stuhlbarg, Benjamin Bratt, Scott Adkins, Kobna Holdbrook-Smith
Soundtrack: Michael Giacchino

So, what happens when a Marvel movie about a Buddha is helmed by a Christian guy who makes horror films?

Well, apparently you get one of the better movies of the year.

I had no idea what to expect from ‘Doctor Strange’ going into it. I knew absolutely nothing about the character or the comics, and all I could glean from the trailers is that it looked like the lovechild of ‘Inception’, ‘The Matrix‘, and maybe some ‘Harry Potter’ (which, from a cinematic perspective, is true, and I’m more than okay with that).

I get nervous sometimes when I see that a movie is receiving overwhelmingly positive reaction, but, in retrospect, I should have believed the hype, because recent history has shown that the Marvel Cinematic Universe does well when it’s not afraid to get a little weird (e.g. ‘Guardians of the Galaxy’ and ‘Ant-Man’), and, well, this one has “Strange” right in the title.

I’m not going to talk about the plot (it’s an origin story), because you either know what it is already, or it’ll be there for you to discover, but, the movie, as they say, is a trip, and not the bad kind. It may not boast the same level of visceral realism as, say, ‘Interstellar’, but I’d be lying if I said the visuals weren’t impressive and clever in their own right, which is important in a film as ambitious as this one (at least relative to other superhero movies).

Also important are the performances, and I can honestly say I didn’t spot a poor one in the bunch. Rachel McAdams is a stand-out despite minimal screen time, Mads Mikkelsen is a proper villain without being a scenery-chewer, and, controversial casting choice aside, I think Tilda Swinton knocks it out of the park as The Ancient One.

However, if you’re wondering where my praise for Benedict Cumberbatch is, I think he’s more than serviceable, it’s just that in my opinion he doesn’t establish himself as indispensable in the titular role. Part of this is not his fault, because he’s following in the footsteps of Hugh Laurie, but, because he’s a British actor playing an American doctor, it’s difficult not to imagine him merely doing a “House, M.D.” impression, and thus I can’t help but wonder how someone else (perhaps, I don’t know, an American actor?) might have played the role.

Similarly, Michael Giacchino delivers a fine score, but the melody of the main theme sounds suspiciously similar to his recent work on the Star Trek films. Whether this is a case of temp track fever, self-plagiarism, or something else, I don’t know, but it definitely gnawed on me throughout the movie.

Realistically though, these are minor criticisms compared to the movie as a whole.

In the end, ‘Doctor Strange’ is an enjoyable adventure that’s balanced out with the right amount of fun and serious stakes. Certainly one of the better movies of 2016, and one of the better Marvel movies ever made. Kudos to writer/director Scott Derrickson and everyone else involved.

Rating: ★★★★½

P.S.
As usual, thanks to Alamo Drafthouse [Yonkers] and Mondo for the swag and for getting into the spirit of the thing.

Movie Review: ‘The Hobbit’ – An Unnecessary Trilogy

The Hobbit
Directed by Peter Jackson
Written by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, and Guillermo del Toro, based on the novel by J.R.R. Tolkien
Cast: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Stephen Hunter, Mark Hadlow, Graham McTavish, Dean O’Gorman, Peter Hambleton, Aidan Turner, Jed Brophy, John Callen, Adam Brown, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Christopher Lee, Bret McKenzie, Sylvester McCoy, Lee Pace, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lilly, Luke Evans, Stephen Fry, John Bell, Craig Hall, Benedict Cumberbatch, Billy Connolly, Thomas Robins, Antony Sher, Manu Bennett, Andy Serkis, Barry Humphries, Kiran Shah, Elijah Wood, Ian Holm, Dan Hennah
Soundtrack: Howard Shore

Oh, my head.

Yesterday, I made the decision, perhaps foolish, to see all three Hobbit films in one sitting (at my old favorite, the Alamo Drafthouse Theater in Yonkers, NY).

I had not seen the previous two Hobbit films at all, frankly, because I wasn’t really interested in seeing another three movies about Hobbits and Dwarves and whatnot in Middle Earth, but, ultimately, the opportunity to see a complete trilogy, with fresh eyes, in a theater with plenty of food and drink at hand, was too enticing to pass up, even if I did have to take time off from work to do so.

Was it worth it? In the end, I suppose so, if for nothing else than it gives me something to talk about. It’s not often that I get to write about a movie (or series of movies) before most people get to see it, so here goes.

Now, when I first heard that J.R.R. Tolkien’s [roughly] 300-page novel, The Hobbit, was going to be adapted into not just one film, but a whole trilogy of films, I said to myself, “It’s going to be the Star Wars Prequels all over again,” in that a later-produced trilogy that takes place before the events of the original trilogy could not possibly live up to the original, and might even leave a black mark on the whole franchise.

Now, is Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit anywhere near as bad as Star Wars: Episodes I-III?

No, of course not.

Unlike the Prequels, which are almost completely irredeemable as films, there are many enjoyable aspects of The Hobbit movies, but there are a few themes, somewhat reminiscent of Episodes I-III, that run throughout these films and make it difficult for me to recommend them as presently constituted.

What am I talking about?

1. The Characters (aka “Who’s the protagonist?)

This is, in fact, a very minor complaint, and I don’t actually mind movies straying away from traditional storytelling and featuring multiple leads, but for what is essentially a nearly eight-hour long motion picture called The Hobbit, there are an awful lot of long stretches where the title character isn’t around, or, if he is, the story is not from his perspective. I get that Peter Jackson essentially raided the Tolkien library for any other unadapted source material related to Middle Earth to pad out the running time (which is the proper way to do so; add more STORY…we’ll come back to padding later), but, at times, it’s just a little tough to reconcile how much of The Hobbit is told without him, and how often it feels like the Dwarf or Wizard show.

2. Tone (aka “You’re making a movie for children, right?”)

One issue with the Star Wars Prequels, and it’s echoed almost perfectly by The Hobbit, is that the movies get darker and darker as the trilogy progresses, as if the filmmakers think they need to compensate for something. Now with the Prequels I think this was entirely intentional, as a response to the negative audience reaction to Jar Jar Binks and other such attempts at “comedy.” With The Hobbit one could argue that it’s part of the natural progression of the story, and at the end of the day I don’t specifically have a problem with Peter Jackson wanting to make an adaption for mature audiences, but at the same time he’s making an adaptation of a children’s novel, complete with lots of kid-friendly moments (like dwarves doing annoying dwarf things). Do we really need to also see decapitations and people burning and dead children? Again, who are these movies really for?

Which leads me to my next point.

3. Excess (aka “I may have gone too far in a few places.”)

Peter Jackson is a huge Tolkien fan.

He’s also arguably the most excessive director working today, and has been going all the way back to his schlock horror days with movies such as Dead Alive (aka Braindead) and Meet the Feebles. Now, excess can be good when properly channeled (think Quentin Tarantino), but a three-hour long King Kong movie that nobody wanted or needed, and fails to justify its own existence (unlike certain other ape-themed movies which are fantastic), is not what I had in mind.

The core problem with these movies isn’t just how long they are, it’s WHY they’re as long as they are; and while there are other Tolkien works folded into the story, the excessive running times are ultimately due to excessive action scenes, some of which look fine, and others of which look like cutscenes from videogames (and I don’t mean no PS4; I’m talking XBOX 360 at best). In fact, a great deal of tension is lost from our heroes actually physically behaving like videogame characters; with such speed, strength, and agility that they basically become unbelievable within their own fantasy universe.

You see, Peter Jackson and George Lucas both failed to realize that even in this amazing age of digital technology, just because you can dream something, and just because you can create it in a computer, does not outright mean you should commit it to film. And it also seems like both of them are in favor of pushing technology in the wrong direction: Lucas, to further his own laziness, and Jackson, well, I guess to make 48fps telenovelas about Middle Earth.

Anyway, I could more easily accept a Hobbit trilogy if it was three 100-120 minute films, or like a 6-8 part TV miniseries; but three two-and-a-half to three-hour long films is just insane, and I’m not just saying that because I saw all three in a row. Remember, this whole thing is essentially based on one 300-page children’s novel. The Rankin/Bass animated version from the late-1970s clocks in at a crisp 77 minutes, and while it does leave some story elements out, does Peter Jackson’s version really need to be over six times as long? I argue no.

Now I’ve spent nearly a thousand words hammering what I don’t like, and why I don’t recommend this trilogy as it stands, but I don’t want to end on a totally down note, because I don’t actually hate these movies. In fact, you could say I really want to like them, but overwhelming factors prevent me from doing so.

If you’ve already seen Journey and Smaug, going #OneLastTime to see Five Armies can’t hurt, but if you haven’t seen any of them before, I say don’t bother with them.

I hope there will come a day, after Five Armies is released on home format, that someone in the fan-edit community will take all the footage available and compile together a reasonable-length version of Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit, because as I said before, there are plenty of gems to find: good performances; emotional moments; all the wonders of a fantasy world.

Right now, it’s just not worth 8 hours (474 minutes, to be precise) of your time.

But we can always dream.

Overall Rating: ★★½ (out of five)