Bad Times at the El Royale (2018) film review

Year: 2018
Running Time: 141 minutes
Writer/Director: Drew Goddard
Cast: Jeff Bridges, Cynthia Erivo, Jon Hamm, Dakota Johnson, Chris Hemswoth, Cailee Spaeny, Lewis Pullman, Nick Offerman, Xavier Dolan

Entertaining and delightful at face value and excellent beneath it's surface,  Bad Times at the El Royale is a rare gem of cinema that turns deception into a stunning and enjoyable piece of art. With it's array of superb performances and it's nostalgia-charged production, this film says a great deal more than it does on it's already fascinating surface.

Written and directed by Drew Goddard, the film starts off by deceiving it's audience into believing that they will be watching an Agatha Christie-esque story set in 1968 play out on screen. A group of strangers arrive in a seemingly deserted hotel on the California-Nevada border that was once the scene of many a party of the Hollywood elite, but now only contains the ghosts of it's glory days and a sinister and sleazy atmosphere thanks to the retro lighting, dark corners and a bell boy (Lewis Pullman) who is never quite present.

We are introduced to each of these mysterious travellers and, as is unfortunately human nature, judgement is swiftly passed on each one of them as we note their flaws and attempt to guess what their story is. Bad Times at the El Royale does look like a typical thriller, so that is what our minds have been trained to do when watching such a film. However, once Jon Hamm's egotistical salesman, Laramie Seymour Sullivan reveals himself to be quite the opposite, the story quickly reveals each of the characters and their situations to be quite different than what we assumed and that is when the film reveals itself to as far as possible from a Christie novel.

Bad Times at the El Royale is unpredictable in the most unpredictable of ways. The screenplay is not only well constructed with spectacular character development and an intriguing and suspenseful story, but it also presents us with something of a realisation about ourselves. Bad Times at the El Royale does something very few genre films do and that is it makes us stop and question the relationship between what means we use to solve a mystery and how judgemental we are as humans. We are so quick to predict the motives of the characters based on what we see them doing, their professions, how they talk and how they are dressed, that it is only time that reveals that things really are not as they seem and there are very few characters are what they seem. In addition to that, there are so many complex personalities that also make you question what makes a good person or a bad person, and does it all just depend on circumstance?

It is a brilliant method of deception by Goddard, but it also reminds how we pass judgement on everyone we meet. It is a horrible part of human nature to base judgement on first impressions and it often takes something, such as Bad Times at the El Royale to remind us of this.

However, the associated guilt of this realisation is almost welcomed as Bad Times at the El Royale is so well done. At it's 2 hours and 21 minutes running time, it is a roller coaster of a film with a steep ascent for the first hour to build suspense, followed by fast paced twists and turns. The incredible production design of the El Royale is absolutely mesmerising.  Yet, it is Cynthia Erivo as struggling, down on her luck singer, Darlene Sweet that is completely and utterly spellbinding. Erivo owns every scene she is in and with her own hand, almost brings the film into the musical genre. Like a performance in such a genre, she not only has an amazing singing voice, but she is able to portray her character through song as well as her dialogue.

The film also benefits from star performances by Chris Hemsworth, who once again proves his versatility by becoming a terrifying Charles Manson-like manipulative. Lewis Pullman also gives a head-turning performance as the bellboy, Miles Miller, a character who is one of the true surprise packets of the film.

Bad Times at the El Royale is whole load of fun and a true creative joy. It makes the unforeseeable link between how we watch a thriller and how our minds work as humans and does it in entrancing fluorescent lighting style.

9/10

Ghostbusters (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 114 minutes
Director: Paul Feig
Writers: Kate Dippold and Paul Feig (written by). Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis (based on the 1984 Ghostbusters written by)
Cast: Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon, Leslie Jones, Chris Hemsworth, Neil Casey, Andy Garcia, Cecily Strong, Charles Dance

Ghostbusters is now showing everywhere and is distributed in Australia by Sony Pictures.

Just when I was becoming truly tired of watching and writing about unworthy remakes and sequels, along comes the 2016 revamp of Ghostbusters. Filmmakers take note...THIS is how you do a remake and THIS is how you make an empowering female driven film. While Ghostbusters on a whole may not be flawless, what it does right it does flawlessly and makes this a fun and worthy sister piece to the 1984 original.

In a matter of days, New York City has became a very spooky place to live. Dr Erin Gilbert (Kristen Wiig) abandoned her fascination in paranormal investigation to be taken seriously scientifically at Columbia University, but with this rise in ghostly activities across the city she is thrust back into exploring this strange world with her old friend, Abby Yates (Melissa McCarthy) and the eccentric Jillian Holtzmann (Kate McKinnon). Their team is complete with the addition of the street smart Patty Tolan (Leslie Jones), and even though they are successful in their ventures, still struggle to be taken seriously and acknowledged for their hard work. However, the girls have their work cut out for them when they uncover evidence that a terrible event is about to tear the city apart and nobody believes their warnings.

Admit it, when you heard that there was going to be a Ghostbusters remake you weren't impressed, were you? You'd be forgiven too given the state of remade films today as they are normally made as a result of thinking "we can do better now" and/or lack of an original, but bankable idea for a screenplay. Many of these remakes are just modern versions of the original with no real point of differentiation that have movie lovers everywhere screaming 'What was the point of remaking that?!?!"

The 2016 Ghostbusters gives us a great gift...faith in the remake. Paul Feig's film does something different to the original and is by no means a carbon copy of it's predecessor, yet still has some wonderful cameos and thrilling Easter Eggs to delight long time fans. Despite what could have easily been assumed, the film is not a carbon copy of the original with women thrown in to make it seem different. The screenplay written by Kate Dippold and Feig is a different story to what was previously told by Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis with the only similarities feeling as though they are respectfully paying homage to the original. While Ghostbusters is completely and unsurprisingly far-fetched as well as quite silly, it has a self-awareness that makes this acceptable, highly enjoyable and wildly funny.

However, what is perhaps the greatest thing about Ghostbusters is that Feig knows the difference between a film with women in it and a female empowerment film. So many filmmakers believe that just having a female with an action woman's body and commanding manner of speaking empowers women and even as a society we are usually happy to settle for this. Yet, Ghostbusters is truly the ultimate female empowerment film.

Each of the characters portrayed by Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy, Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones have extremely admirable qualities...they are all very intelligent women who are comfortable with who they are and in a profession where they are being ridiculed and oppressed, but passionately believe in what they are doing so much that they are doing it either way. None of them are the traditional vision of an action woman, but they are all strong in mind and matter with their own distinguishable personality that makes them unique. Wiig, McCarthy, McKinnon and Jones all give great performances of their well-rounded characters, but McKinnon and Jones shine the greatest. McKinnon's crazy but lovable Holtzmann provides many of the biggest laughs and Jones gives a standout performance as the down-to-earth Patty. Not surprisingly, any 'Saturday Night Live' fans will love the brand of comedy the girls bring to the screen.

The screenplay allows for a reversal of the usual gender stereotypes found in film, especially considering it is the girls saving the boys. The role of the secretary, Kevin played by Chris Hemsworth is the perfect example of this reversal. A secretary is traditionally a female occupation, but here we have an attractive, but incredibly dumb and goofy male who is splendidly portrayed by Hemsworth who must've had a ball during filming. Another worthy point to make is that all the girls are single and while it is great that this shows that a woman doesn't need a man, the best thing about each of the girls being single is that it isn't even a matter that is talked about in the film because it isn't an issue whether they are attached or not....as should be the case in real life too.

Ghostbusters is exactly what film goers have been needing and craving in 2016. With the tidal wave of remakes and sequels flowing through cinemas in recent times, Ghostbusters proves that you can really do something great with a remake and make it memorable and loved in it's own right.

8/10

In The Heart of The Sea (2015) film review

Year: 2015
Running Time: 122 minutes
Director: Ron Howard
Writers: Nathaniel Philbrick (book "In The Heart of The Sea: The Tragedy of The Whaleship Essex"), Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver (story), Charles Leavitt (story and screenplay)
Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Cillian Murphy, Brendan Gleeson, Ben Whishaw, Benjamin Walker, Tom Holland, Michelle Fairley, Paul Anderson, Frank Dillane

In The Heart of The Sea is now showing in Australian cinemas and is distributed by Roadshow Films. Opening in the United States December 11 and the United Kingdom December 26.

Ron Howard's ambitious tale of survival, In The Heart of The Sea is a visually stunning film that gives only momentary suspense, intrigue and emotion and when it does, it is more at the hands of the majestic sea creatures featured rather than their human counterparts.

Based on the incredible true story which inspired Herman Melville's classic novel "Moby Dick", In The Heart of the Sea is the recount of the disaster of the whaling ship, the Essex in 1820 as told by survivor, Tom Nickerson (Brendan Gleeson) to Melville (Ben Whishaw) many years after the event took place. Nickerson was just a young cabin boy when he was aboard the doomed ship that was captained by George Pollard (Benjamin Walker) who clashed with the First Mate being the more experienced shipman, Owen Chase (Chris Hemsworth). The Essex, which set out to retrieve whale oil, hears of a recently discovered whale hunting ground where they were sure to obtain more oil, but ignore the warnings of a monstrous, dangerous whale who is not intimidated at all by humans. The crew's voyage takes a disastrous turn upon meeting this mammal and then turns into a struggle for survival.

In The Heart of The Sea is a glorious film visually with wonderful special effects and breathtaking marine panoramas. The concept of bringing the story of the ill-fated Essex to the screen is an extremely ambitious project which could not have been achieved in a believable fashion until the right cinematic techniques were made available. The creation of the world beneath the surface is spectacular and brought to life with clean cut cinematography. It is the giants of the sea that are the true stars and highlight of the film. Despite being a product of CGI, one is entranced by the majestic nature of the beasts and feels greatly for them, including the "devil". This can make watching the characters participate in the act of whaling during the film rather distressing. The film itself does not glorify whaling, but rather presents it as an activity that was accepted as normal in order to obtain oil. Yet, this act does draw more emotion for the whales than for the crew of the Essex as they battle for survival.

The emotion felt for the humans of the story is rather weak in comparison to the whales. Their survival techniques are indeed tragic, but they are not felt on an emotional level and are merely just acknowledged by the viewer. The suspense in the film is rather sporadic and are reserved, once again, just for the scenes involving the whales. It is true that the ending of the film is known right from the start as Melville is interviewing a survivor, but this is not an adequate reason to lose it's sense of tension as many films with a known conclusion are able to hold tension for the majority of it's run time. The lapses in tension are also lapses in intrigue and this leads to the film feeling rather slow, especially during the opening scenes which make the film appear slow to get going.

It would seem that with In The Heart of The Sea, Howard directs the natural world better than he does his actors for the large part. Brendan Gleeson is the stand out as his character of the older Tom Nickerson evolves from being hostile and extremely guarded to opening up to Melville and believably releasin years of inner torment. While Chris Hemsworth is top billed, his performance can be described as just fine. He is solid, but it is not anything we haven't already seen from Hemsworth in previous films and does not break any ground for him as an actor. However, Hemsworth remains likable and a fine leading man. Cillian Murphy is very good, but does not have as much screen time as he should to make a proper impact in the film.

In The Heart of The Sea is a film that could have been made years ago had it not been for it's need for the specialised CGI and special effects that are present today. However, these features are truly the best things about the film and it's spectacular scenes with the whales will be what it s remembered for.

6/10

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

 

Year: 2013

Running Time: 120 minutes

Director: Alan Taylor

Writers: Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Kat Dennings, Stellan Skarsgard, Chris O'Dowd, Idris Elba, Christopher Eccleston

 

Thor: The Dark World is now showing in Australia and the United Kingdom. Opening in the USA on the 8th November 2013.

There was never any doubt that Thor: The Dark World was going to reminiscent of it's predecessor, which was just a little bit corny, but still a lot of fun.

And it has proved itself to be just that. However, it has avoided the pitfall that many sequels tend to fall into, which is the "The sequel is never as good as the first" category. That isn't to say that Thor: The Dark World is better than the first film, but it is also not noticeably worse than it. Sequel business aside, it is also surprisingly comical and, not so surprisingly, action packed.

Years ago, the Dark Elves entered into battle to return the universe to the dark it was once in, but using an element called Aether. Since then the Dark Elves have been banished and are only awakened when Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) finds the Aether and has it enter her body. Jane hasn't seen Thor (Chris Hemsworth) since he left her in the first film, but he returns to her as soon as he believes she is in danger. He takes her to Asgard to keep her safe and in his sights while the Dark Elves are after her. However, there is one ally Thor needs more than anybody else in these times, and that is his brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston), who, of course, is locked in the dungeon after trying to destroy the world.

Thor: The Dark World is by all means what you would expect from it. It is more about the action, spectacle and entertainment than about the dramatic, realistic and sentimental. The action sequences sure are impressive, especially the final showdown set in Greenwich. The CGI used to create Asgard and it's surroundings is very well done, although Asgard seems to have suddenly become a cross between a cross between Rivendell from The Lord of The Rings and Naboo from Star Wars. There is also a scene between Natalie Portman and Chris Hemsworth which is almost visually identical to one in Attack of the Clones between her and Hayden Christensen.

As was the case with the original Thor, the script is as corny as can be. Thor himself seems to be a corny character in general, which can often come with the territory of being a buff and handsome god. He is not particularly a character who has cinematically been represented in a serious light, so the amount of humour in the script seems appropriate. While the first half of Thor: The Dark World tends to be somewhat mediocre as not much really happens, the second hour is much better as there is more humour, action and more of Tom Hiddleston's Loki. There is so much humour that the film somewhat borders on a comedy. However, the comedy in the film does work and proves rather enjoyable and entertaining.

Even though Hemsworth's Thor is the star of the film, the film has it's best moments when Tom Hiddleston is on screen. Loki is an extremely complex character. He obviously has an evil past, but this doesn't change the fact that you never quite know what his motives are. Hiddleston makes Loki into a character which the audience feels a real connection with and he is truly the highlight of the film.

Hemsworth does well enough, but his character, as opposed to Loki's is very one-dimensional and nto quite as interesting. Natalie Portman does well as Jane Foster, but often falls into the corniness that Thor does, as one would guess considering she is his love interest. Kat Dennings is also very funny as Darcy and like Hiddleston, doesn't have a bad scene in the whole film. Chris O'Dowd is also on screen for a very short amount of time, but is memorable for his well delivered comedic dialogue.

Thor: The Dark World achieves exactly what it sets out to do as it is entertaining and enjoyable for the most part. Perhaps not the best and most original action production in recent times, but still has some moments worth seeing the film for.

6.5/10



You may have also seen Chris Hemsworth in.....
Thor and The Avengers as Thor
Rush as James Hunt

You may have also seen Tom Hiddleston in....
Thor and The Avengers as Loki
Midnight In Paris as F. Scott Fitzgerald

You may have also seen Natalie Portman in.....
Thor as Jane Foster
Black Swan as Nina Sayers

Rush (2013)

Year: 2013

Running Time: 122 minutes

Director: Ron Howard

Writer: Peter Morgan

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Daniel Bruhl, Olivia Wilde, Alexandra Maria Lara

Rush opens in Australian cinemas on 3rd October and is distributed by Hopscotch Films. Now showing in the UK and opening in the USA on 27th September 2013.

Rush is absolutely the ultimate film for Formula One fans. It is completely impossible to be a fan of F1 and not have an incredible two hours with this film.

This isn't to say that if you are not a fan of this mode of car racing that you will not also enjoy Rush. Ron Howard's latest film is incredibly suspenseful and immaculately made It is also a very good character study of two of the most intriguing figures in motor sport history and an extremely comprehensive retelling of the story of their rivalry.

In the early 1970's, two aspiring drivers meet for the first time in Formula Three racing and quickly become rivals, never letting the other out of their sight. Austrian, Niki Lauda (Daniel Bruhl) is extremely serious about his racing and life in general and always plays by the rules. Englishman, James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth) is the complete opposite, as he enjoys the wild lifestyle of drinking and women and the only thing he takes seriously is winning. The 1976 Formula One season was legendary for these two for the fierce battle for the world championship and also for how close one of them came to death during the war.

Rush is not purely about the sport of Formula One racing and more about the lives and personalities of Niki Lauda and James Hunt, so it is not to say that if you are not a racing fan you won't enjoy it. Although it does help to have a love of the sport in order to get the most out of this film. The racing jargon and personalities are what F1 fans will be used to hearing and watching and are presented with great care. Rush is absolutely the best car racing movie which has been released in years.

The story of these two is an extraordinary one and it is astonishing the lengths they both went to in order to be victorious over the other. The screenplay by Peter Morgan, who has previously teamed up with Ron Howard when he wrote the screenplay for Frost/ Nixon , delves into the characters of Lauda and Hunt so we get to know the two of them in great detail before the film is finished. The only thing one might feel is perhaps even though so much is covered, some important aspects of the character's lives are just skimmed across and not given as much as we would like to see. As the film is for entertainment, there are certain aspects of the rivalry and the character's personalities that are enhanced, but for the large part Rush does remain true to life.

Howard's direction is wonderful. The film is very atmospheric as a result of the sounds, visuals and cinematography. The time period of the 1970's is very well recreated and you actually feel like you are right beside the track smelling the burnt rubber of the tyres and in the crowd of people enjoying life in that particular decade. The sound editing is particularly outstanding and the recreation of the racing scenes are superb. There is some really beautiful cinematography involved in these scenes. The slow motion shots of the cars in the rain and the photography around the track is wonderful. The soundtrack for the film is also perfect for the ambitious and competitive atmosphere of the film.

Both Chris Hemsworth and Daniel Bruhl do very well in their roles. Bruhl's Lauda is perhaps more interesting to watch as Hunt comes across as rather one dimensional in comparison, and thus Bruhl comes up with a slight edge and gives a better performance than Hemsworth. However, in saying this, Rush is quite possibly Hemsworth's best performance to date. Neither character is particularly likable for the large part of the film, but this is where the F1 personalities play a great part. In order to be as successful as these two men were at their chosen sport, there was a degree of selfishness and arrogance they both needed to have to succeed. In this way, Howard has got out of these two actors what is expected of them playing F1 drivers.

Rush is a wonderful character study of both Niki Lauda and James Hunt. F1 fans will be absolutely thrilled with what they see here and it is a must see for any sport movie fan.

8/10


You may have also seen Chris Hemsworth in.....
The Avengers and Thor as Thor
Snow White and The Huntsman as The Huntsman

Snow White and the Huntsman (2012)

Snow White and the Huntsman

Year: 2012

Director: Rupert Sanders

Cast: Kristen Stewart, Charlize Theron, Chris Hemsworth

Before I begin my review…

                Well, I guess right now in this world Snow White and the Huntsman is known to a lot of people as the movie where Kristen Stewart cheated on her boyfriend, Twilight co-star Robert Pattinson with her married director, Rupert Sanders. This is all pretty new news and a major subject of discussion in all the celebrity gossip magazines and websites at this present point in time.

                Let’s face it, Movie Critical is not a celebrity gossip site and I am not going to take this opportunity to make it into one. Personally, I don’t really care to write a huge article on who said what and who did who in this instance. I’ve pretty much summed up in the above paragraph the gist of what has happened so I am not really going to go into the whole debacle much more than that.

                The only thing that I am really pondering in this whole circus is, what will this do to Kristen Stewart’s career?

                Will it make her more popular (if that is at all possible as she is the highest paid female actress around at the moment) and turn her image into that of a sex symbol? Or will her image be tarnished by her bad girl ways?

                It’s hard to tell, scandals work in mysterious ways for stars. They can make your star rise or fall. I guess only time will tell. When Breaking Dawn : Part 2 is released in November, will we look at Edward and Bella differently knowing what happened in real life? Chances are probably not, but I believe there are some not very happy Twilight fans out there as a result.

Review

                Snow White is a story that has been told many times over, but never the same as Snow White and the Huntsman.

                Snow White and the Huntsman is the second Snow White film to be released in 2012 as Mirror Mirror starring Julia Roberts and Lily Collins was released earlier this year, but is completely different from its processor.  It is much darker and more of an action/adventure fantasy film than a fairy tale. The film itself is interesting to watch with some spectacular images, but lacks in the area of script and story.

                Like all Snow White stories, young princess Snow White (Kristen Stewart) has been banished to the tower by her evil stepmother, Ravenna (Charlize Theron) who has taken the post of Queen upon the death of her father. When Ravenna finds out that Snow White is now the fairest of them all, she sets out to kill her. Instead, Snow White escapes to the forest and the Queen sends in The Huntsman (Chris Hemsworth) to bring her back to her. However, the Huntsman and Snow White join forces to destroy the evil Queen and win Snow White back her rightful throne.

                Snow White and the Huntsman is visually a very good film. The cinematography combined with visual effects make what you see on the screen extremely impressive. The battle scenes are well choreographed and intense. The visual effects are quite extraordinary, especially that of Ravenna’s mirror. The castle, town and forest also serve as spectacular backdrops to the story.

                However, the script lacks and the story suffers. This is a different version of Snow White than we are used to so the story needs to be entrancing and well defined. However, the script does not support the story and isn’t intense enough to keep the film interesting for its entirety.  Although the action sequences are great, they sometimes do slow the movie down and there are scenes where it feels like nothing happens which are just downright boring.

                Kristen Stewart is not the most convincing Snow White you will see. She plays awkward and unsure well, but is not as endearing and “the fairest one of all” as Snow White is supposed to be. However, she does have two scenes, one in a white dress and her first battle scene, in which she shows that she may well have it in her to be more versatile than she has been in her films recently.

                Charlize Theron is indeed the star of the film. She plays interesting evil so well and is actually very scary. She makes the film not really suitable for the typical children audience of a Snow White film. Chris Hemsworth is not at all bad. He is now part of the league of action stars at the moment so he is a good fit for the role of the Huntsman. However, he does have some great emotional scenes as well which add to his successful performance. On the other hand though, he and Stewart really have no on screen chemistry, romantic or platonic.

                It’s hard not to judge Snow White and the Huntsman as a “Snow White” film and not compare it to other films of its kind that have been and gone. Yet even if you don’t, its pro’s and con’s measure evenly with each other.

6/10

References
Fox News
The Internet Movie Datebase
Celeb Dirty Laundry

The Avengers (2012)

The Avengers

Year: 2012

Director: Joss Whedon

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Samuel L. Jackson, Jeremy Renner, Tom Hiddleston

Before I begin my review….

                How cool is the idea behind The Avengers?

                It’s absolutely no wonder that the movie created so much interest and had so many fans even before it premiered. How often is it these days that you throw all these movie characters into one film? OK…yes I know. There is the horror film trend of such films as Freddy vs Jason and Alien vs Predator which has its fans and haters.  I remember when I was about 8 there was a cartoon special where all these cartoon characters were put into one show to help the fight against kids taking drugs, but these are the only instances I can think of with the throwing of characters usually not related into one show.

                But The Avengers? It is an action film fans dream! Even if you are not huge on the superhero genre, you can’t help but be interested by this prospect of placing Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and The Hulk in one film.

                And you know what one of the coolest things is? The Avengers is actually better than some of the films which are solely about its characters.  So if you didn’t like the film originally about one of these characters, it’s definitely not a sure thing that you are going to feel the same way about The Avengers. Of course having a different director is a good start for that.

                Here’s an idea. Why doesn’t someone make a film with super bitches from films all in one? I’d love to see Meryl Streep’s Miranda Priestly from The Devil Wears Prada take on Faye Dunaway’s Joan Crawford from Mommie Dearest and we would just chuck in there Bette Davis’s Baby Jane Hudson from What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?

                That will never happen…..because Davis is no longer with us, but I am sure we can think of some other movie bitches we can throw in there to watch a massive war of words cat fight on the big screen!

Review

                It’s the film superhero fans have been hanging out for and it does not disappoint.

                The Avengers is a whole lot of fun for anyone whether you are a superhero fan or not. It is a concept that could have been just a big cheese ball, but it surprisingly is not.

                For those of you who saw the 2011 Thor, you will be familiar with Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Thor’s (Chris Hemsworth) brother who has an evil streak. Loki has made his way to Earth with plans to take over the world. The ever present Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) assembles a group of superheros consisting of Tony Stark/ Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Steve Rogers/ Captain America (Chris Evans), Natasha Romanoff/ The Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Bruce Banner/ The Hulk ( Mark Ruffalo). It isn’t long before Thor also joins the quest on Earth to ensure his brother doesn’t destroy mankind on this planet.

                Superhero movies have a reputation of being extremely cheesy, so you could expect a film with four well known superheroes in it to be so. However, although predictable, there really isn’t much to roll your eyes at in The Avengers. This is a result of a cleverly written script by director, Joss Whedon. The script just makes the whole concept come together and achieves the optimum result. It is still a superhero action film which isn’t realistic at all, but doesn’t seem completely over the top and the way it is presented to you actually does make you believe that what you are seeing could maybe happen (even though common sense tells you it won’t).

                Another good thing about this film is that you would also expect that with so many big characters thrown into one movie it could become messy and have too much going on. Again, this is not the case. Each character holds their own and you know a bit about every character, but Whedon hasn’t written the script so that one superhero gets more screen time than another or that there are too many stories going on at once. The film sticks to its path and each character adds to outcome in their own way. It is easy to understand and not messy at all.

                The only problem one may have is that if you haven’t seen the other films which these characters are in, you may feel a bit lost. It does help to have prior knowledge of who Loki and Thor are (as not everyone studied Norse mythology at school), why Captain America is the way he is and who is Tony Stark. Otherwise the characters may be slightly lost on you.

                The script also has some very funny moments. Of course, being a superhero action film, its main focus is the special effects and action sequences. These are very impressive as one may expect and spending the extra to see The Avengers in 3D wouldn’t be a waste of money.

                The acting isn’t the main focus of the film, but there isn’t really a bad performance in the film. Robert Downey Jr. is at his witty and comedic best as Tony Stark/ Iron Man and is always great fun to watch. Mark Ruffalo is also very good as Bruce Banner/ The Hulk, giving a performance as the man who battles his inner demons, or inner big green monster.

                However, it is Tom Hiddleston who is the stand out in this film. Hiddleston is one of those actors who has been in the business for a long time, but seems like he has just come out of nowhere with how many films he has been in as of late. He does evil well and is a pleasure to watch.

                The Avengers, although having much hype, is not a let down. It is one of the best action blockbusters you will see this season and just a whole load of fun.

7.5/10

Thor

Thor
Year: 2011
Director: Kenneth Branagh
Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgard, Anthony Hopkins, Kat Dennings, Tom Hiddleston

In My Own Words
It's amazing what "Home & Away" does for Australian actors. For those who don't know, "Home & Away" is an Australian drama series that airs every weeknight at 7pm in Australia and has been doing so since 1988.  I once had an actress friend who said that she never wanted to go on "Home & Away" because it was "trash"....funnily enough she never made it very far in her chosen profession as I haven't heard of her since . As much as people such as this past "actress" like to bag out "Home & Away", it does provide up and coming actors with a fantastic stepping stone to future international success.  I'm not saying that if you take part in "Home & Away", you are definately going to become a Hollywood star, but for the ones who really want to take the big leap and try their luck in Hollywood it must look great on their resume. Let's look at some past "Home & Away" actors, shall we? Isla Fisher played Shannon from 1994-1997 and is has been in films such as "Wedding Crashers" and "Confessions Of A Shopaholic", not to mention being Sacha Baron Cohen's wife and the mother of his child. Isabel Lucas of "Transformers" fame's first role was as Tasha for four years in "Home & Away". Melissa George, who has had several successful Hollywood roles in the remake of "The Amityville Horror" and "Derailed" as well as television roles in "Grey's Anatomy" and "In Treatment". Ryan Kwanten started off his career on "Home & Away" as well as bad boy Vinnie. The list goes on and on. The star of "Thor", Chris Hemsworth, is also a "Home & Away" alumni. I remember I once saw Hemsworth walking along a street in Sydney while I was out at my work Christmas party one year. He's come a long way since then! And, like many other Australian actors, he has "Home & Away" to thank for kick starting his career!

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
"Thor" is reminiscent of what the old action/fantasy movies used to be like, yet still has the characteristics of a Marvel Comic production. Largely carried by extremely impressive special effects, but is still a big cheeseball. "Thor" is definately amazing as far as the visuals go and there are some great moments in the narrative, but there are still some momentsin the script and direction which instigate a roll of the eyes. It is an interesting project for Kenneth Branagh as looking over his past directorial career, "Thor" is his first attempt at a comic book adaptation or an action spectacular. He is no stranger to Shakespearean cinema and there are indeed some Shakespearean references in "Thor". In Short, "Thor" highlights Branagh's strong points as a director and his low points. Thor (Chris Hemsworth) has always dreamt of the day when he will be crowned king of Asgard. His father, the current king Odin (Anthony Hopkins) is about to crown him king when their long time enemies, the Frost Giant's bring havoc to Asgard so Thor goes after them without his fathers permission. Odin is so furious with his son that he banishes him to Earth, where Thor meets scientist, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). Thor tries to get back to Asgard, but finds out that his brother, Loki (Tom Hiddleston) is working against him and will do anything to no let his brother back into Asgard so he can be king.

"Thor" is very much a touch and go situation. There are some really wonderful things about it and some other things that, as said before, just make you want to roll your eyes. It could almost be divided into two movies. One is a great action film set in the a fantasy world where a great battle is taking place, while the other film is a lack lustre and corny romance story set in New Mexico. The first movie is really quite spectacular to see on the big screen. The graphics are absolutely outstanding and completely bewildering, especially if you see this film in 3D. Asgard is almost like a cross between the Emerald City (except gold)in "The Wizard Of Oz" and Naboo in "Star Wars" and has the elegance and grace of ancient civilizations. The cinematography is wonderful throughout all the scenes in "Thor", as is the editing in the action sequences. Yet, there is the problems of the script. Of course it is corny in the way that comic book films are so it is forgiven for that reason. It would be a worry if there was a comic book adaptation trying to be completely serious and dramatic. Branagh has got this part right. Although it is a lot cornier on Earth than Asgard. The romance between Thor and Jane is very comic book romance. Absolutely over done, predictable and cheesy. But hey, thats comic book romances for you!

After seeing "Black Swan", it was almost like a feeling of finally being able to exhale seeing Natalie Portman in this film. Her performance is nowhere near the intensity of that of Nina in "Black Swan" and it is so lovely to see her in a role like this. It is an exceptionally easy one for her and she seems very natural and at ease herself. Chris Hemsworth isn't too bad, but again is very comic book hero corny on Earth. When he is in Asgard, his acting is actually a fair percentage better than on Earth, especially when he is fighting with his father. Anthony Hopkins is flawless as usual and adds emotion and intensity to the film. Not a bad word can be said about Tom Hiddleston. He's perhaps not as evil as what he could be, but that isn't something that remains in your mind when you leave the cinema. Kat Dennings is a great addition to the film and adds humour as Jane's sidekick, Darcy.

"Thor" is a typical comic book movie crossed with the grand spectacle, historical action film. It is just good entertainment. Not a dramatic masterpiece like Branagh is used to directing, but still good viewing. Cheeseball fun.
6.5/10