Captain America: Civil War (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 146 minutes
Director: Anthony Russo and Joe Russo
Writers: Mark Millar (comic), John Simon and Jack Kirby (characters), Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (screenplay)
Cast: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Sebastian Stan, Scarlett Johansson, Anthony Mackie, Don Cheadle, Jeremy Renner, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Rudd, Emily VanCamp, Tom Holland, Daniel Bruhl, Martin Freeman, William Hurt

Captain America: Civil War is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Walt Disney Studios.

While Captain America: Civil War is a solid and entertaining latest offering from the Marvel universe, it can thank it's release date in large for it's critical and box office success.

Captain America: Civil War is more or less The Avengers 3 with the mysterious absence of The Hulk and Thor, and is not surprisingly wonderfully action-packed, but at the same time extremely busy in the way that these multi-protagonist films can be.

The Civil War in the film's title refers to the inner battle of the Avengers with one side being led by Steve Rogers/ Captain America (Chris Evans) and the other by Tony Stark/ Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.). The trouble begins when after one too many destructive battles, the Avengers are put on notice by the American government and are prohibited to partake in activities without permission. Steve Rogers as Captain America has never had this type of restraint enforced on him and does not believe that the group of superheroes should agree to this, while Tony Stark, who has distanced himself from his alter ego of late for personal reasons, believes otherwise. Things become even more complicated and heated between the two when Steve's lifelong best friend, Bucky Barnes or the Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) is convicted of a terrible act of terrorism, but wants to defend him. With the Avengers now being sliced into two, the biggest battle they face is against those who they has always fought alongside.

The idea behind Captain America: Civil War is one that seems to be an obvious one to bring the cinema crowds in and make large box office figures. The Avengers saw the coming together of the biggest superheroes in the Marvel universe, while in Captain America: Civil War we see them falling apart. However, this is an example of the filmmakers giving the audience what they want to see and that is the Avengers (plus some) fighting among themselves to determine who really is the most powerful superhero. If it wasn't for an enemy who involves Captain America more than the other characters, this would almost certainly be a film for the Avengers series.

So one may say that the title of the film is misleading as this is a film only about Captain America in part, but it is the perfect strategy from Marvel on the back of Warner Bros DC film, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Captain America: Civil War has been marketed as Captain America v. Iron Man and the poster for it looks remarkably like that for Batman v. Superman. So this is Marvel's answer to it's rival's blockbuster and it was the perfect move to release it a month after rather than at the same time. Marvel and Disney would not have known that Batman v. Superman would be such a let down for the large majority of movie goers, but they would have been ecstatic to find out that it was. Here is the film that audiences wanted Batman v. Superman to be, the battle between two superheroes who should be friends but are at odds with one another with a good reason to be.

Captain America's screenplay is more superior than it's DC counterpart with it's twist at the end being less cringe-worthy and more clever. However, it does play victim to that of all multi-protagonist films as it is not able to cover as much from each character as it is attempting to and as a result forfeits emotion and inner turmoil.

 Despite this apparently being his film, Captain America is not fleshed out in the way he should be. After the beginning of the film when he loses the love of his life, Steve Rogers as Captain America exposes himself as a man who refuses to answer to anyone and is a born leader. These are usually admirable features in a man, but in this film he just seems selfish, disloyal and childish. His loyalty extends to only one person and not to his country and their rules, which is ironic considering he is Captain America. He goes against protocol and loses his friends in the process, therefore not showing loyalty to his team. The subplot with he and Sharon Carter (Emily VanCamp) is also extremely weak and has next to no time donated to it. Chris Evan's superhero shows no signs of remorse or inner turmoil despite the conflict and rift he has created and this is by no means Evans' fault as it is the way his character was written.

On the other hand, Tony Stark/ Iron Man is far more interesting as he is a character with greater depth. From his entrance in the film where we see a much younger Robert Downey Jr. in a flashback scene, the audience see's a man who is at war with himself and is greatly wounded by the distant and recent past. The final confrontation between himself and Captain America is emotionally charged from his side and shows how much his character has developed over the course of the Marvel films.

Scarlett Johnasson once again exhibits the strength needed to play a character like Natasha Romanoff/ Black Widow. Black Widow has always been an intriguing character who deserves her own film as she is so strong a character that she could easily carry a film by herself. On the other hand, it almost seems as though the screenwriters were unsure what to do with Elizabeth Olsen's Wanda Maximoff/ Scarlett Witch. Her character in this film would have been the perfect chance for the writers to flesh out the emotional anxiety experienced by those in the same position as the Avengers who deal with the deaths of innocents each time they go to battle. It is definitely touched upon, but not fleshed out which is how it should be if the issue is to be addressed at all.

The introduction of Tom Holland's Spider-Man or Peter Parker into the Marvel universe is one which is finely done and an excitement for what is to come is created. Holland is endearing in the way that a young superhero testing his boundaries should be and makes a solid first appearance as the superhero. Paul Rudd returns as Scott Lang AKA Ant-Man and brings back with him the his likable, every man persona which brings a lightness to the film which is needed.

Yet, one does not go to see a Marvel superhero film for it's depth and powerful emotion. The whole point of a superhero film in the eyes of most movie goers is the action, which is were the superheroes do what they do best. There is indeed a great deal of action and impressive special effects right from the beginning of the film. Yet much of the camera work which is supposed to reflect the high pace and intensity of certain scenes (in particular the opening scene), is too quick and jerky for one to be able to have a clear grasp of what is happening. The editing in these scenes is rather erratic and too fast moving, but it is acknowledged that if they weren't so high-paced the film would have been even longer than it's 146 minute run time.

Captain America: Civil War does do what so many franchise films neglect to do these days and that is to create a strong ending which signifies the beginning of something new and leaves the audience begging for more. Although far from the best Marvel film, Captain America: Civil War is an entertaining and enjoyable film with many characters to both like and dislike.

7/10

Iron Man 2

Iron Man 2
Year: 2010
Director: Jon Favreau
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Scarlett Johansson, Mickey Rourke, Sam Rockwell

In My Own Words
Ah the action sequel. The second film in a superhero series. There are two givens with a film such as this, high expectations and box office success...and “Iron Man 2” definitely comes with both of these! There was never any doubt that this film was going to make a significant amount of money and draw in huge crowds. The first “Iron Man” was a massive success and delighted movie goers that were not normally superhero fans, which in turn meant a success for the second film as the “Iron Man” phenomenon had such a large appeal. And the high expectations, were they met? Do the majority of expectations for an action sequel ever get met? The answer to both these questions is no.

I pose the question. Are action sequels just made for the money or for the love of the director for the film? I would say both, but an action blockbuster sequel (or any sequel to a film which had any success at the box office for that matter) does equal money, no matter how bad the film is. Don’t get me wrong, “Iron Man 2” was not one of the worst sequels I have ever seen, but it was not one of the best. However, the overall quality of the film in this case will not affect the box office figures. “Iron Man 2” has not received favourable reviews from other sources, yet in its second week it is still topping the US box office. The film does do its job, which is to entertain. If you do go to see “Iron Man 2’, I can guarantee you that when you look around the cinema as soon as the lights go up, you will see the same thing on everyone’s lips, “It wasn’t as good as the first one”.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
Jon Favreau’s “Iron Man 2” is not quite the action packed sequel the world was expecting. While most sequels tend to heighten the action sequences, comedy and sex, it seems like “Iron Man 2” went backwards with all this. Sure the gadgets are all there, but the film just lacks. Even as a stand alone film and completely disregarding the first film, it is still a disappointment. If it were a stand alone film, it would probably be even more of a disappointment considering the stellar cast, most of which are Oscar-nominated performers. The film takes place six months after the last film and the world is at peace as a result of Iron Man/ Tony Stark’s existence. Everyone loves Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr. ), and Tony Stark loves Tony Stark! Stark has now become completely absorbed by his fame and is consistently making rash decisions, according to his partner, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), which land him in hot water. At this point in time, Stark refuses to hand over the Iron Man technology, which earns him new enemies with the government and rivalling companies. To make matters worse, he also has Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) after his blood as a result of past tension between his family and Stark’s. And while Stark has all this going on, he also needs to run his company and find some way of saving the world and himself before it is too late.

As is evident from this synopsis, “Iron Man 2” has way too much going on. Sure these stories do tie in with one another and do make logical sense when watching the film, but it is way too much to feel any suspense. Funnily enough, for an action film, there does not seem to be much action at all and the action sequences that are featured aren’t particularly outstanding. Funnily enough though, the film is very well shot. There are moments of fantastic cinematography which Favreau must be complimented for. Visually, it is a pleasure to watch and it does serve the purpose of entertainment, however dull and overly busy it can be at times. There is no tension or emotion in the film and is not anywhere near as clever as the first film.

It is such a shame for a cast like this to have so little characterization for some, and too much for others. Sam Rockwell in his role as Justin Hammer, is completely and utterly annoying. Rockwell himself is a fine actor as has been proven in other films, but he is so ill-suited to this role. He takes the cake as the most annoying villain thus far this year. He talks way too much and his anger in the film is just laughable. Scarlett Johansson’s character, Natalie Rushman, is completely bland and monotone. She fulfils no other purpose in the film besides looking gorgeous. Mickey Rourke is not bad as the devilish Ivan Vanko, but it is a huge step down from his performance in “The Wrestler”. Again, it is not Gwyneth Paltrow’s best performance, but she is in no way bad during the film. She definitely shows that she has a talent. However, it is impossible not to like Robert Downey Jr. Yes he is obnoxious and narcissistic, but he does it so well. He is extremely charismatic and is, as he was in the last film, the perfect man for the role.

Like many action sequels, “Iron Man 2” does not live up to its expectations, nor does it even reach to low expectations. It is entertaining enough, but there is no “wow” factor to it. It can be silly and annoying, and also dull and lifeless. But who can resist the charm and cool of Robert Downey Jr., who is about the only thing (besides Scarlett Johansson in a tight suit for the guys) makes this movie watchable?
5/10