Avengers: Endgame

Spoilers.

The least spoilery thing I can say to sum it up is: It's the same basic fan-servicing Marvel that we've been seeing recently -- but something's different, because I enjoyed watching it this time! But yeah, I'm not even going to try, friends. There are definitely spoilers here!

Endgame: the big secret. The actors knew nothing; no information was released during marketing; and fans go to extreme lengths to avoid spoilers before release day. Even I did it the "right" way and achieved about 97% blindness. And still. Not one thing was legitimately surprising. Maybe if I'd gotten an out of context spoiler, sure; but within the narrative of the movie, there were no shocks, or plot twists, or anything that you'd expect to be kept secret -- save for the mere two deaths. The OG Avengers use time-travel to bring back the dusted, defeat Thanos, and pass their torches to the next wave. Pleasantly straightforward.

I should probably mention that this doesn't help me look at Infinity War in an any better light. I wondered for a year if it might, but no.

Yep. I had fun. The time travel aspect was super comic book-y and cheesy in a nice way. They must steal the Infinity Stones from their past selves in previous movies and the Back to the Future Part II vibe was solid fodder for superheroing. Sometimes not used to potential; other times smart, neat, and fulfilling to the characters' individual stories. And the final showdown battle finally took this series to the scale at which they've always wanted to exist. Like comics brought to life. And when the ultra-high stakes come in (Thanos planning to kill them all) you instantly know the heroes are in for a satisfying win, so it's easy to settle back and soak it all up.

Tony is the most focused-on character. Fitting, since he has an ultimate end -- and started it all. He gets to marry Pepper, have a little girl, live a briefly happy life, have a restoring man-to-man with his dad, and then die a hero's death saving the whole universe. Nice. Cap was my personal favorite. Since time travel now exists, he lives out a normal life with Peggy. Nothing could be more satisfying. And I realize this is fan-service, with no veil or pretense attempted. I was primed to be okay with that fact by the continuous pulling out of the rug from under my hopes of simple enjoyment, and don't care if it worked. These were thoughtful ends that the characters deserved. About time they received them.

Throwback to when these two were the GOAT.

Even Natasha's death felt earned and meaningful. Her and Clint's friendship was one of the first things I fell in love with in these movies, and that scene they had together made it all conclude in a way that felt natural and right. The scene mirrors Gamora's Infinity War death, even with the same music, yet inverts aspects in profound ways. They fight each other out of love, which has never happened in the MCU before. The sad tone was uplifting, and the emotion unforced. Long-established and consistent characters dealt with respectfully. Strange to think that after using movie after movie to point forward to the next with relentless ferocity -- actual, final ends are given here.

But it's not all satisfying lovey-dovey goodbyes. There's Beer-Belly Thor, which is by far the worst iteration of Thor even conceived. The weight (unintended) of the abject failure he feels could have been so powerful were he not turned into a joke. The scene with his mother was nearly good even with that looming over it. On top of that, the "joke" isn't funny. I'd like to say nonsensical too, but I have no proof, so I'll just say it annoyed me -- especially after Thor was the greatest redeeming factor of Infinity War. I've always liked original Thor Thor best, so I wasn't expecting much... but that was just insulting.

Animated humanoids like Hulk and Thanos are impressive, but still fail to draw me in -- even in the way cyborgs and small CGI creatures do. 

I could devote a similar paragraph to Star-Lord, but I'll limit it to this: I hate, loathe, and despise what these films have turned Quill into. It makes me angry in a way that fictional things shouldn't, and this movie was the worst offender. The only mercy is his limited screen time. On the flip side, Nebula has never been more complex and involving. She continues to earn her spot on the team. Scott had the highest ups and the lowest downs: His reunion with Cassie had some of the most genuine MCU acting I've ever seen; and the time travel test was the "joke" that would never end. Yes indeed, the Marvel-brand jokes are still here, and bland as ever. It's impressive how deftly they skirted around Paul Rudd's comic abilities.

It's like the outline of the story had effort, with a nice and plain three act structure that kept the pace going, and thought-out building on past scenes -- but then the details were filled in by an MCU bot. Every tidbit and third line were a callback, and the rest stuffing. The dramatic scenes work by sheer force of will from the actors as they push real emotion through dialogue lacking any written personality. The Marvel-brand green screen and overly-CGI'd pastiness is at large too. The initial swell of the battle did have nice imagery with the portals though, and Vormir appeals, green-screened as it is. I genuinely liked one shot: the last one of Clint sitting in the water with the soul stone.

I thought it was nice how the movie was more or less bookended by farewell speeches from Tony. There is muddling around, but ultimately there's a simple, solid structure.

This movie exists because of past successes, like a greatest hit episode; no legs of its own to stand on, but enjoyable, nevertheless. Exactly what we expect from Marvel -- packaged as a tribute to those who got it started. The effort is nearly derailed by cringe jokes and mountains of CGI: There's lots of filler, lots of worthlessness, and lots that's recycled from the deep, deep, rut that Marvel has dug for itself. Sadly creative ruts aren't a factor for Marvel anymore. Their oodles of cash isn't earned due to quality craft, but to calculated marketing; and with these loyal fans, and the ability to fabricate and promote empty secrets, any kind of slop could've played on that screen and made the same amount of money.

Fortunate, then, that the slop they played for us was a relatively good time, made for pure, widespread enjoyment, and was relatively respectful; serving founding characters with one last dose of genuine progress and a hearty farewell. Almost not slop at all, at heart. Despite shortcomings and extended lapses into stupidity, at least there's a story here, used for the satisfying completion of the journeys of long-beloved characters. Despite everything, I'm glad I got to see the Avengers assemble for one last hurrah.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - August

Well 2017 is officially a very impressive movie year! Last month I said it would be if anything managed to top the brilliant Baby Driver, and, (while I hesitate to compare them so directly since they're such completely different pieces of filmmaking) I think Dunkirk has done just that. I saw it regular, and then again in 70mm, and since I wrote my review before seeing the 70mm version, I'd like to talk a bit about the 70mm experience. Just skip down if this is completely uninteresting to you:

Firstly, yes, digital 70mm is a thing. Being a novice about being picky about movie screens it confused me for a while that my theater claimed to be showing a movie in film format digitally, but yes, everything looked and sounded as it should. I don't know if this is a super common question to have, but I would have liked a nice straightforward answer like this when I was wondering, so I'm putting it out there.

Next, what to expect with 70mm: If you're a film connoisseur or already know you love Dunkirk I'd absolutely recommend seeing it in 70mm. If you're a casual moviegoer, you might find it odd, because while the 70mm is being presented to us as the movie enhanced, it's enhanced in style rather than in quality. It is sharper, yes, and there more contrast to the picture, but those are minute details, and some of the more major differences in a lot of ways actually detract from the movie's quality. (Such as we've come to think of movie quality of course.) The 70mm's whites are much brighter and appear to vibrate on the screen -- the sort of thing you'd call a flaw if you saw it in a Transformer movie. The blacks are also much darker (at one point in the movie the lights go out, and it's as if the film itself goes out) and colors seemed more true. Some scenes had different tints from others. And you can see tiny imperfections in the film.

The biggest change though, and one I didn't expect, was the sound. There was much more bass overall (so as Spitfires fly overhead in the film, you feel their noise move through you as you would in real life) and the dialogue had some difficult to describe qualities to it -- to me it sounded vaguely like dialogue from on old 30's or 40's movie, which is appropriate, but it had a lowness to it, like higher frequencies in the voices were cut out. It also sounded grainy (if things can sound grainy) and almost muted, yet I found it easier to understand the lines. That seems counter-intuitive, but my dad said the same thing, and he's the one in the family who usually doesn't understand dialogue, so I swear, it's not just me being weird. Honestly the sound was my favorite difference, and absolutely enhanced the movie, which had already blown me away, to an even higher level.

Some of those things could easily be called flaws in a normal movie situation, except, here, that is how Christopher Nolan meant the film to be. What was made obsolete by improving technology has now become an artistic style choice, and Nolan used it to great advantage. Regular movie projection now shows us the film as less than it's meant to be -- and I find that very neat. (Then of course there's IMAX to consider but I won't go there.) It goes along with how the characters were done; Nolan stripped away the common and the unnecessary from the film, making his vision all the more focused. In short, after seeing Dunkirk in 70mm, I feel that my experience experiencing this experience of a film is only now truly complete. And the ticket price was not a cent more expensive!

(Click here to read my review of the film itself!)

I also saw Spider-Man: Homecoming in July, but after Dunkirk, poor Spidey is a bit overshadowed right now! I liked the movie, and loved Tom Holland as the kid hero, and even saw it twice! (Review here!) I still want to see Valerian someday, but probably won't waste ticket money on it, and since War for the Planet of the Apes got such a good response from fans, I'll watch that eventually too; to either solidify my low opinion, or change my mind (unlikely, but possible I suppose.)

August has no must-sees (unless new information develops) but a good spread of pretty interesting movies! A nice number of indies! I like indies. Anyway, on to my list. How was your movie-July? And how is you movie-August shaping up? Let me know in the comments!


The Dark Tower
Aug 4th; PG-13
Based on the novel series by Steven King, and the trailer looks cool, but I don't really have a dog in this race. I never got around to reading the book, though I usually do whenever an interesting movie based on a book is coming up. Maybe I could still squeeze it in, but I'm not sure I want to. I heard rumors that there were changes made, and the book fans aren't terribly happy? Of course based solely on the trailer, it being based on a King story is a definite plus. Idris Elba is always effortlessly cool and hardcore, and Matthew McConaughey playing the baddie is nice for once. I'm not holding out much hope that it'll be much more than a fun mid-summer action flick with some neat sci-fi elements, but if it does that, and does it well, that'll be all it needs to be anyway -- for me that is. For the fans I hope it's a satisfying adaptation. If there are good reviews it's likely that I'll go see this one.




Wind River
Aug 4th; R
I still haven't seen Sicario or Hell or High Water, but every time this Taylor Sheridan writes a movie it looks very interesting. This one is a murder mystery starring Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olsen. I've always liked the niche dynamic they have in the Avengers movies, so I'd like to see this one someday on that point alone. I think the trailer gives too much away though, so maybe think twice before watching it.




Some Freaks
Aug 4th(limited); NR
Thomas Mann is great. I'll watch him in any kind of romance/dramedy. He seems to like the quirky ones, and this one's about as quirky as they come! It's an indie so who knows when it'll pop up somewhere, but I'll be on the lookout.




The Only Living Boy in New York
Aug 11th(limited); R
Whether I want to see this depends largely on how it ends, and what the take-away is, but in order to know that, you have to see it. So I'll keep an eye open. It's got a great cast. Listening to Jeff Bridges explain existential things is one of the finer things in life.




Pilgrimage
Aug 11th(limited); NR
Me watching this trailer: "Ooo, Peter Parker and Punisher medieval team up, that's sounds cool." "Woah, it's a quest movie -- very Lord of the Rings." "Oh my gosh, Ritchard Armitage! It is Middle Earth!" And then finally: "Yikes." This actually looks quite a bit more interesting than a mere Spidey/Punisher team-up. Will be on the lookout.




The Hitman's Bodyguard
Aug 18th; R
So, like, the comedy version of Safe House? Sounds neat. Honestly I expected I wouldn't even have to bother with this one since it's so blatantly R-rated, but apparently there will be only language and violence so not as bad as I was expecting. R-rated comedies can work for me, but it has to be genuinely a good movie for me to brave the waters. This is a case of "wait-and-see." The trailer I saw in theaters a while back made it look pretty dumb, but this one has more promise. Samuel L. Jackson is for sure, but Ryan Reynolds is hit or miss. Hopefully it's a hit, but I won't be missing anything if it isn't.




Logan Lucky
Aug 18th; PG-13
Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Daniel Craig getting as far away from Bond as he possibly can poor guy, Sebastian Stan, Katie Holmes, Katherine Watterson, Hilary Swank -- it's definitely got the cast of a good movie! It's got oddball comedy, a memorable quirky plot, weirdo characters, and a heist. Sounds like a pretty great movie actually. It's also got an early perfect score on RT. It hasn't reached must-see status for me yet, but I will be paying close attention as it comes around the bend.




The Defenders
Aug 18th on Netflix
Daredevil season 1 was fantastic. Season 2 was barely passable only because of Punisher. I never watched Jessica Jones or Luke Cage, and probably never will. And Iron Fist was laughably bad and a sad letdown. Yet, here I am, garnering up excitement for the team-up. My optimistic mind is considering that Iron Fist was only terrible because it was rushed, and since Defenders is Netflix-Marvel's big event effort will be put into it. My rational mind watches this trailer, and sees nothing worth getting hopes up for. I won't be surprised if the 18th rolls around and I find myself sitting down to watch this -- the surprise will come if it's actually as great as it should be.

Arrival

Spoiler-free.

Based on the novella The Story of Your Life, Arrival asks the question, "if aliens made contact with Earth, how would we respond, really, and how might it change us?" Amy Adams is Louise, an exceptionally talented linguist who lives a sad and lonely life. When mysterious alien ships appear around the globe, she is hired by the US military to figure out how to communicate with them, in order to learn their intentions.

Directed by the subtly stylish Denis Villeneuve.

Jeremy Renner is Ian, a scientist hired to work with her, and their handler is Forest Whitaker, but the story belongs to Louise. The story is two-fold: a realistic and politically influenced speculation into how an extraterrestrial crisis would be handled, and a character drama, exploring Louise's personal makeup, her relationship with the aliens, and how they affect her journey as she struggles to understand them. Both sides have their points of appeal, and elements that stand on shaky ground.

On the technical side, the appeal lies in the obstacles to overcome in order to understand a species with which humans have almost nothing in common. Where would you even begin that kind of endeavor? Arrival presents a lot of realistic and impressive solutions that fans of real-science science fiction would appreciate. The promise of this was what interested me in the film in the first place. The downside comes from the politics embedded within. It would have been impossible to go completely without politics with the direction the story took; only, in a handful of moments, the film itself offered opinions, instead of simply relaying those of the characters who inhabit it. I was taken out of the immersion of the film a handful of times as a result.

There's a subtle difference between a movie having an opinion and a movie portraying an opinion. I always prefer the latter.

On the side of personal drama came a lot of unexpected enjoyment since the trailers never gave anything away on the subject. But the film itself starts with it -- full force. Amy Adams does a good job in the dramatic role, keeping her downtrodden and anxious character engaging in spite of depressing attributes. My sympathy towards Louise, however, was much stronger in the scenes that lean toward science, as she solves problems using smarts in the style of Mark Watney. Each new discovery and well-earned step forward sparked significantly more satisfaction in me than watching her in the emotional moments in between.

Her emotional journey is, however, equally as important to the film as the more apparent obstacle. The two eventually tie together significantly, as we know it will from the beginning, and the film is completed. The mysteries are twisty but not too complex, revealed in gradual stages; the three in my group all "figured it out" at different points in the film. The slow reveal of the truth worked well with the film's tone which constantly loomed depressed and sluggish. The mystery, the muted suspense, and the steady supply of mind-bending half-twists kept the film from becoming boring, although I did wish it would hurry up once or twice.

Watching this film is like having your mind blown in slow motion.

Jeremy Renner's natural energy also did a lot to help boost the film, and was constantly glad he was there. Ian also gets his due moments of impressive intellect, and the most involving pure-character aspect of the film was the slowly developing dynamic between him and Louise. The extraterrestrials themselves, their culture, and the human's learning of it were by far the most creative and compelling aspects the film had to offer. When they connect, this is the side of the story that informs the emotional, human journey, and in the places where they intersect the film hits a sweet spot of cerebral sci-fi that is thoroughly mesmerizing.

Then things get complicated, but at the same time, very simple; the story informed itself, essentially building a prison around itself with its own story. There were aspects I thought changes would have improved, but those were things that were impossible to change because their existence allowed for the story's existence, which in turn dictated their existence. It created a loop impossible to escape from. I don't see it as flaw, since the self-constrained story does work and make sense within the space it allows itself to occupy; only it didn't satisfy me as much as it was meant to. Its theme, its message, as finished and complete as they could possibly be, was still limited.

I think this movie is an actual paradox...

Arrival asks big questions, and thinks up creative answers for them. It's a thinking man's science fiction, but still understandable for novices to the genre. Its premise is wholly new, and the direction taken with it is certainly down a path less worn. The story is complete and well-rounded, filmed with dull, gritty beauty, acted with feeling, written with intelligence; simply, it is proficiently and artistically built. What exists within those well-built walls is more open for interpretation.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - November

In October I went to the movies! I saw The Magnificent Seven, which was a nice wrap-up for the summer, and now it's November already and the season of Oscar hopefuls is starting! Lots of movies this month, and lots that look really good! Which ones have your attention?


Doctor Strange
Nov 3rd; PG-13
Benedict Cumberbatch takes his turn as Marvel hero as the Marvel universe officially expands into the realm of magic. I'm expecting good things. This movie doesn't have the kind of hype that surrounds some Marvel films like sequels and team-ups, but I always look forward to the introduction films and what they'll bring to the table that's new. And Doctor Strange more than most seems to be coming from its own place and is (as of yet) unconnected with the rest of Marvel. The trailers look good and promise plenty of weirdness, and Cumberbatch appears to be in fine form as the new hero. He's joined by Tilda Swinton, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Mads Mikkelsen and Rachel McAdams, and positive reviews are already flooding in. I have no doubt this movie will be good; it's just a matter of how good at this point. I hope it'll be spectacular, but even if it isn't, it should certainly be a worthy addition all the same -- and a definite must-see!




Loving
Nov 3rd; PG-13
My favorite director returns again with a second film for 2016! Well, I just said it, so it must be true; Jeff Nichols is my favorite director. So far he's been batting a thousand, with four beautifully brilliant and strikingly different films under his belt, and everything seems to indicate that Loving will be right at home along with them. It stars Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga as the historic interracial couple Richard and Mildred Loving who fought the system over their marriage in the 60's. Nichols' staple, Michael Shannon is there also, and Nick Kroll and Marton Csokas. Normally, I have diminished interest in based-on-true-story films, especially if they're straight dramas, so I can see this being my least favorite from Nichols, but even if that's the case, it's still just as likely to be as beautifully and excellently made.




Arrival
Nov 10th; PG-13
Did I just watch a trailer for a political alien movie? At the very least Arrival seems to be exploring the realistic technical aspects of a hypothetical alien contact. Maybe like in the way The Martian did for surviving on a different planet. How would the government react? Who would be brought in to handle things? What kind of obstacles would need to be overcome and how would it be done? And then of course you throw in the question of whether the alien's intentions are good or bad, and you have a pretty neat idea for a movie! And based on the early reviews, they've pulled it off. Amy Adams stars -- who I'm currently feeling "meh" towards, but I know she capable of good things -- along with Jeremy Renner (always a plus) and Forest Whitaker. I'm always down for sci-fi, but I really want this one to be as great as it wants and appears to be.




Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Nov 17th; PG-13
Okay, I'm not much of a Harry Potter fan. Never read them; watched the films through and enjoyed them. Just so you know where I'm coming from here. This new spin-off does look like fun; set in the same universe, but apparently very separate from Harry's adventures. Eddie Redmayne is being all quirky and odd and is using magic a lot in the trailer which is great, and I like the tone of the trailer too. Mature, like the later Potter films, but also very focused on being fun. I heard it's the beginning of a new Potter-World series, and I just hope it doesn't turn into eight more movies. The idea of investing in a whole new string of films isn't appealing to me at my level of interest, but if this movie delivers and can stand on it's own, I'd be happy to watch it!




Manchester by the Sea
Nov 17th (limited); R
I don't have much to say about this one. It's rating will keep me out of the theaters for it even if I were that interested anyway. But I just really love all that all the critically acclaimed film are coming out now, and the critics are gushing over this one. So I thought the trailer was worth sharing.




Nocturnal Animals
Nov 17th (limited); R
Now this is the kind of character I'd really love to see Amy Adams play. Dark, and possibly sinister. And man, this film has a cast! There's also Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Isla Fisher (Amy's look-alike!), Armie Hammer, and Laura Linney! The movie will probably have to be cut before I'll watch it, but it looks like my kind of film. Moody, mysterious and noir-ish. It's based on a book, so I'll have to look into that too.




Bleed For This
Nov 17th; R
Miles Teller bulks up to star in this based-on-a-true-story sports drama as a boxer who works through a devastating injury from a car crash to be able to fight again. Aaron Eckhart costars as his trainer. Sports movies aren't typically my things, but fighting sports do have an edge over other kinds. I would probably be very interested in this if it weren't for the rating, and how it comes through in the trailer -- that is, unnecessarily. These are the earmarks of a movie that is only decent, because not enough effort and devotion was put into making it great.




The Take (Bastille Day)
Nov 17th (limited); R
Idris Elba. Richard Madden. British action movie. Enough said, I think! This doesn't look like a huge caliber action film or anything, but it's the sort of movie that I'd want to watch no matter how bad it is and then live with the regret if I must. Another iffy rating, but I'll be keeping an eye out.




Rules Don't Apply
Nov 22nd; PG-13
I liked Alden Ehrenreich in Hail, Caesar! so much that I might be interested in this movie even if he wasn't the new Han Solo, but honestly this movie's plot looks like garbage. As another pilot of the Millennium Falcon would say. Here he co-stars with Lily Collins while she plays a aspiring actress in 1950's Hollywood. Romance and drama ensues.




Lion
Nov 24th (limited); NR
Probably won't be able to make it to the level of Slumdog Millionaire, which it will probably be compared to considering the drama and Dev Patel in the lead, but it sure is an interesting original idea for a story! An Indian boy lost as a kid is adopted by an Australian couple, and 25 years later, he sets out on the nearly impossible task of finding his home and family again.

Captain America: Civil War

Spoilers!

Divided, they fall.

After an undeserved guilt trip, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) worries that the Avengers need to be put in check. He is surprised to find that if, say, an alien army attacks New York, or a robot AI army tries to lift an entire city into the sky and drop it again, people die in the wake. So, he signs a document called the Sokovia Accords, putting himself under the command of General Ross (William Hurt) and forces the other Avengers to either sign as well, or retire from their crime-fighting ways; or become outlaws. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), however, is Captain America, and as such sees no wisdom in allowing himself to be controlled by someone who may someday order him to do something wrong, or deny him permission to do something right. He and about half the Avengers refuse to sign.

Rising tension between the two sides explodes when Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) appears on the grid and everyone wants a piece of him; Steve, the ever-loyal friend to help him, new addition T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman) for revenge, Ross (and thus Tony) because he's dangerous, and also the villain Zemo (Daniel Brühl) who framed him for the UN bombing in the first place. Zemo plans to destroy the Avengers by leading them to destroy each other.

Anthony and Joe Russo return for another Captain America movie featuring the cast of an Avenger movie.

It's the year of the "hero vs. hero" story line, and Civil War set out to make it realistic. It is -- a little bit too much. Superheroes, practically by definition, are people who can act outside the law and remain good, but this movie challenges that, putting our heroes under the harsh judgment of our reality. The result is that the plot is not fundamentally conducive to the genre. It's like if Pirates of the Caribbean 5 were a courtroom drama where Jack stands trail for all his misdeeds. The film struggles to find footing at the beginning, forced to scrounge around for some contrived situations to justify the plot; some that sacrifice character and sense in the effort.

At first Iron Man is only antagonistic and it works alright. He was pressured and emotionally coerced into believing he needed someone to put him in check, and imposed his beliefs on everyone else. But no matter what that self-righteous, cruel, finger-pointing woman by the elevator wrongly says, Tony is not a murderer, and I hate that they made him buy into that lie. He created Ultron, yes, but ultimately, Ultron was an intelligent being that made decisions for himself. What he chose to do isn't on Tony. And that's something Tony would know if the movie didn't require otherwise. Most of the characters have the drama work for them -- as it should -- but someone had to be made the villain, and Tony got the short straw in a lot that shouldn't have existed.

After five films, Tony is no stranger to putting himself in check, but suddenly now he needs someone else to do it for him?

Eventually it reaches a point where if they'd have just stopped and talked about things for a few seconds everything would have been cleared up. Cap has evidence that Bucky was framed and they attempt to go off after Zemo. But Tony and co. (Rhodey (Don Cheadle), Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), and Vision (Paul Bettany) with the help of T'Challa, aka Black Panther, and some kid named Peter (Tom Holland)) are under orders to arrest Cap and co. (Bucky, Sam (Anthony Mackie), Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen), Barton (Jeremy Renner), and newly recruited Scott Lang (Paul Rudd)), and they battle it out instead. This was one of the most fun sequences in the movie though, so of course they couldn't just bypass it with a simple exchange of information. Still I reserve the right to be annoyed that that's all it would have taken.

After that Tony discovers the truth for himself and goes off to help Cap and Bucky. Great, right? They team up and prevail against the villain, right? It's a glorious reuniting of friends almost torn apart joining together and putting aside their differences to fight evil, right? Nope -- instead, the villain reveals his plan to them, and shows video footage of Bucky as the Winter Soldier, under the influence of mind control, killing Tony's parents. Tony flips back over in his rage and actually becomes a villain. Not just a misguided and uninformed antagonist -- as irking as that was -- but a villain, uncharacteristically intent on causing harm to the innocent. There are so many things wrong with this; I hardly know where to begin.

It did endear Bucky to me a lot more, so it's arguably worth it. I wasn't ever a huge Iron Man fan anyway. And I'm sure he'll be back to hero status in no time...

Tony knows that Bucky killed his parents because of mind control. And this is not a new issue; Barton killed several people under mind control in The Avengers, but once he came back, no one batted an eyelash. They said it wasn't him, and they were right. Here Cap says the same, and Tony doesn't care, trying to kill Bucky in revenge. (Yet he didn't even blame anyone for Rhodey's injury?) They pick and choose what pushes Tony's buttons based on where the plot wanted to go, instead of the other way around as it should be. He knows he's innocent and he doesn't care -- but not killing innocents was exactly his whole agenda in the first place!

In the end Cap defeats Iron Man physically, but it's really Zemo who wins the day. He didn't succeed in making them kill each other, but he divided them, and the results of Steve's attempts to heal the breach are left ambiguous. Also, it's sad that Zemo's family dies, but it doesn't justify his villainy; it makes it a double standard. He murders in order to orchestrate murder, and his revenge is directed at the people who stopped the one really responsible. These plot lines are the foundation of the movie, and are almost nothing but nonsensical hogwash, and I couldn't buy it. This whole movie was contrived into existence, and characters were bent and broken to its whims all for a nice, swift kick of maddeningly lazy drama that moved nowhere before being resolved by nothing.

I guess one thing this movie portrays well is the folly of revenge.

Remember that heartbreaking moment in the trailer, where Cap seems to have abandoned his friendship with Tony? "He's my friend" he says of Bucky. And Tony replies sadly, "So was I." I don't know if the same take was used in the trailer and the finished film, but the difference the context made was incredible. Once we see that Cap is at that moment keeping Tony from committing emotionally driven unjustified murderous revenge on his friend, that "So was I" comes across in the exact opposite way. Suddenly Cap is the one we feel for, ever the man who will stand up for what he knows is right, and has his friends turn on him for it. That's noble.

And Bucky -- the movie's main focus in on Bucky, and he was the main redeeming factor that kept the film afloat. Bucky regrets the things he was forced to do, and even though he doesn't blame himself, he takes himself out of the equation, giving up on living a life he deserves until he knows he can live it without inadvertently putting others in danger. Like Iron Man, he recognizes that his existence is dangerous, but he takes it upon himself to prevent that danger. That is noble. That is what superheroes do. Iron Man's only spark of nobility here is only perhaps in his motivations of wanting to keep people safe. His actions do a poor job of reflecting that desire if it's true though, and I wonder if really he was only interested in dulling his misguided guilt. In past movies he's been the noble character, but not here, and that doesn't sit right.

So -- that concludes the main point of what is wrong with this movie. On to what is good. Here's to my ability to express it in a more condensed fashion!

Next, I need to devote a whole section to Spider-Man, (Forget condensed!) because his part in this film felt like a whole different film. He didn't really fit, but I was glad he was there. The scenes he has with Iron Man were the only times in the movie that I actually liked Iron Man, and the fight sequence at the airport was fun (uncharacteristically so) because of him -- and Ant-Man. I knew Tom Holland was going to be my favorite Spider-Man, but he didn't let me down even one bit in his short amount of screen time. He tell his origins with a mere "It's a long story," and explains his version of "with great power comes great responsibility" earnestly and simply, like a teenager would. His place in the movie was obviously contrived, but that didn't dampen the exciting appeal of his presence at all.

But even when Spidey is absent the fights are still the most effective distractions from the occasionally insulting drama the movie gives. The choreography is just as great as The Winter Soldier, and though there isn't exactly an equivalent of the elevator scene, Civil War makes up for it by having lots more fights, and lots of fights featuring Bucky. Bucky was great wherever he went. The stairwell fight and the sequence when Zemo activates Bucky stand out as the best and most memorable. I did miss Cap though. It was his movie in name, but he was slightly overshadowed by the long list of a-list co-stars whose characters had bigger issues than Cap did. Cap's problems didn't carry as much weight as they should because all he had to do was the right thing, and that's the one thing he always does. It's why we love him.

Cap trying to hold the movie together...

Acting all around was as good as ever, and not hindered by the plot's often confused and illogical nature. Even Robert Downey Jr. pushed a very impressive performance through his character's sludge. Everyone I've previously mentioned had a solid moment to display their chops, and so did Martin Freeman, Emily VanCamp, and even Frank Grillo in a disappointingly short-lived stint as post-Winter Soldier Crossbones. Vision and Wanda's dynamic was quite strange and oddly cute. Not much was new with Hawkeye when he wasn't given much to do but left a mark anyway. Chadwick Boseman makes a great first impression as Black Panther. And Bucky is steadily and ever-increasing in my affections. This movie's moments of organic drama were almost exclusively his. (Any chance he'll make an appearance in Black Panther, you think?

Marvel films at this point have become well-oiled machines, and it's beginning to show in less-than-appealing ways. They know how to cater to an audience, and know what kind of moments will serve fans the most and stoke their fandom fires. In the moment, it's a blast, but it's not a good thing at heart. The stories are becoming less and less personal as a result; and more and more familiar. Civil War goes through the motions of what made The Winter Soldier and Age of Ultron successful, doling out high-caliber, production-line thrills, but slacking off when it came to the stamp of originality, confident that the heroes turning on each other would be enough. I prefer a handcrafted story that respects character foremost, even if it has flaws in the execution.

This movie didn't seem personal to anyone besides its characters.

Civil War is a hand-book movie; a collection of high-energy action scenes, fan-favorite characters, amusing stock jokes, and heavy-handed drama that occasionally bends characters to suit it, but only really works when it happens to suit the characters. It has a lot of good -- even great -- elements to it, but when they're compiled together, the puzzle is not only missing a few pieces, but it is also several different pictures altogether. Half what I was afraid it was going to be, and half what I hoped it would be; but, slowly, the things that were done wrong or lazily are offending my sensibilities less and less, as I remember the good fondly.

I doubt I will ever not notice the plot holes and contrivances that allowed for this film's existence, but I know that I will sit through them again for the parts that catered to my action-loving side and appealed to my love of character. This film is not the ground-breaking, tide-turning event it wanted to be and thinks it is, but, as a Marvel film, and as a Captain America film, and as a preview of what a Russo Brothers Avenger film might be like -- not to mention an introduction film for Black Panther and Spider-Man, and a continuation of the Winter Soldier's story -- it's got something of everything. Civil War is so packed with so much that it could hardly have done anything that would've neutralized its addictive fun, or seriously dampened the effect of the chaotically, colorfully intense and exciting blockbuster that it is.

Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation

This review is Spoiler-free.

When all seems impossible... enter Ethan Hunt.

Or rather, enter Tom Cruise, who makes him possible; both by producing the movies Agent Hunt appears in, and by playing this epic character with determined fearlessness that pushes the boundaries of what is possible in film making. In the 5th installment of the iconic franchise that was adopted by Cruise in 1996, Ethan goes up against the Syndicate -- a villainous organization of rogues bent on destroying the IMF (Impossible Missions Force). This installment is written and directed by Christopher McQuarrie, and he handles this behemoth blockbuster expertly to great effect.

Epic action movie is impossibly epic.

Plot-wise not much explanation is needed. This Mission: Impossible, just like the last four, plays by the guidebook for M:I movies -- a handbook that had yet to get old in the past twenty years, so it's safe to say that it never will. "Plot" is just what happens between the guide's plays to link them all together. The guidebook requires there to be a small team working against impossible odds, antagonizing for this team from both good and bad sides, something that requires stealing, at least two chase scenes, three fight scenes, one sequence where characters wear evening attire, one or two moments where there's no escape in sight, one surprise on the audience, cool gadgetry, sharp comic relief and an epic finish -- but most importantly, stunts. Stunts that make you go "wow." And if there's one guy for that job, it's Tom Cruise.

No doubt you've seen that one big stunt in the trailer where Ethan is holding on to the outside of an airplane. And perhaps you know that stunt was real. Well, while it was the most obviously scary stunt in the movie, the whole film is full of moments just as real and just as -- or even more -- impressive. Notice, if you will, how long the underwater takes are; or that it's really Cruise riding that motorcycle; and driving that car -- and fighting and jumping and climbing as the requirement comes. But beyond being one of the craziest actors who does his own stunts in the business, with Ethan Hunt, Tom has created a fantastic, personable character, and every time we come back to see him, we love him just as much -- or even better -- than we did before. Ethan is a great, determined, caring a brave guy. The exact kind of guy you would imagine out of a man who's saved the world as many times as he has.

If the world's in trouble, Ethan Hunt is the man you want on the job!

As for his supporting team, it's never exactly the same twice, but this one is the most familiar out of all the films.

The right-hand man is Benji Dunn, played by the brilliantly funny Simon Pegg. Benji has been in the M:I films since he had a small supporting role in M:I3. He was the quirky tech support. Then in Ghost Protocol he had just passed his field exam (crazy, right?); here, he's not a newbie anymore and is featured heavily, and I honestly think it made the movie. He is now perfectly capable of throwing punches, thinking on his feet, and using initiative to help the cause and his teammates -- but always his major is in computers. I just love that this film finally gave him (this is true for both Benji and Pegg) a chance to really come into his own and show what he's made of. He may still have all the most hilarious lines and reactions, but that's not what he is anymore. I've never considered this about anyone besides Ethan, but I now firmly believe that Benji Dunn is a necessary character for the Mission: Impossible franchise. 

The progression of his character over the last three films has been a real treat to witness.

Jeremy Renner is listed second is the credits, but his character of William Brandt, who first appeared in Ghost Protocol, spends a considerable amount of time is the background, wearing ties and talking politics while Hunt and Dunn are in the field. I expected this, and expected it would disappoint me too, but it actually didn't. The character of Brandt is just geared more that way, and this film knew very well how to properly utilize its characters. Brandt is the guy who wants to play everything by the rules, and this gives him and Ethan plenty of chances to clash their opinions together. The only thing I missed from the character was that his chances to show off his action-star tail-kicking skills were limited here, while he got plenty in the last film.

Luther Strickell, played by Ving Rhames, is the only other character besides Hunt to have been in the first Mission. In fact, he was technically in all of the M:I movies, only his appearance in Ghost Protocol was just a short cameo at the end -- after the world had already been saved -- so that really doesn't count. And even here his role is limited, though at least helpful this time. Luther is a very charming and sharp gentleman, and his presence is always a useful and welcome addition. He plays a big part in making this cast feel like an old friend.

Cool cool cool.

The good guy antagonist is Alec Baldwin -- no complains whatsoever. The main villain is played by Sean Harris. Now, one of the few things M:I movies don't have a step-by-step guaranteed-successful checklist to follow for is the villain. They have ranged from the incredible terrifying coldness of Phillip Seymour Hoffman in M:I3, to... totally forgettable. Sean Harris' Solomon Lane lands solidly on the upper side of that scale. He's effectively malicious, has an unnerving confident and disconnected air to him, and plays a memorable and active part in the plot.

Rebecca Ferguson's Ilsa Faust was an addition I wasn't sure of going in, never having seen her act before, but I couldn't help growing to care for her character very fast. She had a great screen presence. Being so gorgeous didn't hurt, but it really was something about her essence that was both elegant and commanding that catches your attention -- and the camera's. She wound up being a very memorable and involving addition.

Photos do her surprisingly little justice compared to film. That dress though. So epic.

M:I movies require both heist/con events and purebred action events, but this one leans heavily towards the pure action side. There are two heists, one secret mission, and a con, but for the most part the film concentrates its focus to the action side of these. The secret mission had the classic small-time heist feel. The main heist was great -- well-planned and well-executed with that classic "just in time" tension, and minimal improv. The con was action-heavy, and epically satisfying. And in between each of those, there was a chase scene.

The format of these movies is tightly-packed awesomeness, and Rogue Nation has the most awesomeness per square minute out of them all so far. It really blows the mind how many various action-flick must-haves are included. I don't think one action cliche was overlooked to be added to the plot, and then turned on its head to feel fresh and original. You should have seen me grinning like an idiot during the big car chase. The opening was tight and stylish perfection, setting the perfect tone, and the climax was downright magnificent and it knew it.

The only impossible thing about this movie  is the likelihood of you not getting totally involved in the over-the-top awesome fun, everywhere it takes us.

The comic relief was so common throughout, with hit cracks one after the other that they gave this movie the feel of actually being a comedy. Of course Simon Pegg effortlessly steals the spotlight in this section, with the four or five topmost hilarious lines, but everyone does the comedy, and does it well. Tom Hollander shows up at one point and seems to have been cast solely for his epic comedic abilities. The comedy does fade down considerably though as the third act begins and the building drama breaks through the surface. It doesn't feel like an unnatural tone change though, because this is the way of M:I movies. When the seriousness comes, it is welcome, giving the film one last boost of energy that it rides to the end, and giving the film that deeper quality that rounds it out, and makes it the ideal, impossibly grand action adventure.

This epic, epic, smart, hilarious and totally involving fifth installment is, without a doubt -- for Tom and co. and for Ethan and co. -- another mission: accomplished.

Upcoming Movie Roundup - July

In June I got out to see Jurassic World (review), and it was every bit as awesome as I wanted and expected it to be. I also saw a May movie, when Far From the Madding Crowd (review) finally showed up at a theater near me. And as to how much I liked it -- I'm in the middle of reading the novel now.

July is chock-full of movies -- as it should be -- and contains at least two must-sees for me! What movies are your must-sees this month?


Terminator Genisys
July1st; PG-13
This one, the newest attempt at reviving the Terminator franchise, released today, so based on critic reviews, I have a pretty good idea of what to think. I'm thinking I'm going to wait for the rental. Spending any more money on it would be a waste according to the pretty terribly sad 26% on RT. The fact that Arnold Schwarzenegger is back for this one is a plus, but I don't like that Anton Yelchin's Kyle Reese was traded in for that dull hunk Jai Courtney. Jason Clark could be cool as John Connor, and I hear Matt Smith is in it, but have yet to see any evidence. And if the twist that appears to be revealed in this trailer really is the twist it appears to be, then I'm thinking I'm going to be feeling more annoyed and confused than excited while watching it.




Aurora
July7th (limited); NR
In a lot of ways this movie looks pretty cliched. Humans, "destroying" the earth get booted out of control by an AI that "knows better" but is really evil and the bad guy. But, who knows, maybe this movie will be the one that finally perfects that plot by being more than it appears to be by the trailer, and then those cliches can be put to rest. Or, maybe it'll be exactly what it seems -- all the cliches, sci-fi action coolness and romance and everything. I still might very well be interested.




Self/Less
July 10th; PG-13
This is the big, mainstream, non sequel or franchise sci-fi movie of the month, so I kinda have doubts of how profound it will actually be, but this trailer certainly does promise lots of things. Ryan Reynolds stars as a dying billionaire (Ben Kingsley) who gets a new body so that his mind can live longer. Complications and mystery ensue. At least, I really really hope mystery ensues. And I hope it's really really complicated too -- in a smart way of course. In all likelihood though, I'm dreaming. Ryan Reynolds certainly doesn't inspire too much faith on that score. I'll be keeping an eye on reviews for this one.




What We Did on Our Holiday
July 10th(limited); PG-13
David Tennant and Rosamund Pike in a British comedy. Done. It looks totally silly and cutesy and light and airy, but I'm fairly sure that there's nothing it could do that would keep me from wanting to see it, or from enjoying at least some of it once I do. The only real question here is "when?"




Ant-Man
July 17th; PG-13
The "when?" for this one is easy: as soon as possible. Ant-Man is my first must-see for this month, which isn't really a surprise considering it's a Marvel movie. Paul Rudd is Ant-Man, Corey Stoll is the villain, Evangeline Lily is there; Michael Douglas, Judy Greer, Michael Pena, and the list goes on and on. I've witnessed others doubting this one (my brother included) but I have a feeling about, like the feeling I had before Guardians of the Galaxy released, and I'm dying to see if I'm right about it. I don't expect it to be as good as GotG of course, but I plan on liking it. A lot. Even if it turns out to be a letdown in terms of Marvel movies, I'm sure I'll still will enjoy it, but, I'm planning on it not being a letdown, but another unexpected surprise, hilarious, epic, fun, and a unique success. Very, very, very highly anticipating this wildcard!




Mr. Holmes
July 17th(limited); PG
Unfortunately this one's not sparking interest with me. I'm sure Ian McKellen does a great job as an aged Sherlock Holmes, and the trailer absolutely looks like a well-made film in every way. But it also looks like the kind of movie I would never really bother to watch. Too sentimental and grit-less perhaps. And why would I want to see all of Holmes' mind-blowing traits and defining skills be debunked? Maybe I'll be wrong and suddenly grow some interest, but it's not happening yet.




Paper Towns
July 24th; PG-13
I certainly want to see this one eventually, but right now I can't imagine it being even close to the greatness of the book it's based on. Many of the thing I adored about the novel seems to be softened and smoothed down for the movie, and that will easily disappoint me. I'm also not sure I like the casting of Cara Delevingne for Margo. Though I do think Nat Wolff will be the perfect Q. And the story is ideal for a movie as long as they're not wimpy about it. Hopefully this one turns out even half a bold as the book, and maybe if I don't get my expectations up too high I'll enjoy it.




Mission: Impossible Rogue Nation
July 31st; PG-13
No chance this one won't be thrilling! Tom Cruise, Jeremy Renner, Simon Pegg, and Ving Rhames are back, and Alec Baldwin appears to be the bad guy. And the stunts have been dully taken up to the next notch, with Tom Cruise hanging on to the outside of an airplane as it takes off -- and you know it all real too because Cruise wouldn't do anything less! As far as I can tell the plot looks smart and fun, but honestly all my requirements for having a blast while watching this movie have already been met. Second must-see of the month of July!

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Major Spoilers throughout.

Earth's Mightiest Heroes are all back: Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, Hawkeye, Black Widow, and the Hulk; the Avengers -- and Joss Whedon; and the biggest Evil Genius currently in film-making. They've returned to save the world again, because that's what they do.

And they're doing it more efficiently and with more pizzazz than ever now that they've already found their footing as a team.

This is one of those rare cases where the plot is not only just a good excuse to make the movie, but is actually making the movie better by taking the backseat. A Joss Whedon plot is always solid, but priority here is given to character. It's the biggest movie of the summer, brimming with action and distractingly cool special effects, but the thing that left the biggest impression was still the Avengers themselves, and their surprisingly not-super, but superbly-human struggles and dilemmas.

Every Avenger has their moment to shine, and their due dose of character development. And I love the way they were prioritized. Avengers who have solo movies -- that would be Stark, Steve and Thor -- stepped graciously into the background a little and gave the other less fortunate but equally lovable heroes a longer turn in the spotlight -- that would be Barton, Romanoff, and Banner.

"We'll be right here if you need us..."

Clint Barton, or Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) after spending most of the first movie playing MVP for the wrong side, gets the extra development to make up for it, and then some. Mr. I-see-better-from-a-distance is hiding a wife and two-and-a-half kids in a farm house situated on some rolling green hills! This instantaneously gives him both a layer of explanation, and two more layers of mystery. And oh, I was so mad at Whedon, because I knew, I knew it was a great set up to sucker-punch so hard, and I never would have forgiven him (again) if he'd done it, but that Whedon is just too unconventional and unpredictable for that, and my favorite Avenger happily lives on. But not only that, he got to live up to his hero potential in the fight scenes, and got some of the best, most Whedon-esque lines to say, which he owned with burning sarcasm. His equally inspirational and hilarious rant at Wanda was just the best.

Hawkeye sitting on his perch like a cool Hawkeye, 'cause Hawkeye is cool.

And then Natasha Romanoff, aka Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Bruce Banner and the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), and I mention them together, because yes, they are an item now. And first of all, I like that -- Nat's friendships with Cap and Barton are too good to ruin with romance, and Nat and Bruce make an unexpectedly good pair, on and off the field. Natasha is a beautiful enigma, (the kind that is Whedon's specialty) being so cold and deadly at work, but with her elegant hairstyle, and wearing flouncy skirts off duty. And I loved the way she picked Banner and then just went for it. We all know what she's like when she flirts (as Cap says and Tony knows too) and it's great to see the minute but important differences when she's serious. The dynamic between her and Banner is wonderfully unique, and wouldn't be so without the romantic element.

She is always an interesting, complex and fun character, but Whedon's version of her is my favorite.

Banner, though, I don't quite understand. I certainly understand the center of his character -- his fear of himself -- but I don't understand how that motivates him to act. Plus I assume there's more going on in there besides that. Did he run away at the end because of fear, or because he wanted to be alone, or was he just mad at Natasha for kissing him and pushing him off a cliff? Hard to tell, but whatever kind of mixed-up he is, it's complicated, understandable and convincing.

I like these two together. They're both some strange characters with some serious dark sides; not as different as you might think.

Iron Man, or Tony Stark, (Robert Downey Jr.) is the veteran of the team, and has done so much growing in his three solo outings that he hardly has anywhere to grow now, but does seem to have started on an arc that will lead to some interesting places in the future. He gets his share of snide comments and makes everything look cooler, and that's plenty. Same basically goes for Thor (Chris Hemsworth); he has his humorous moments, and his hinting dramatic moments, and all those bits about people being worthy to lift Mjolnir or not, so he continues to be awesome and quite helpful.

Captain America; Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) is still trying to find a place where he fits in the world, but he keeps his problems in perspective and concentrates on the problem at hand. It seems like it would be easy to make Cap boring or into a shallow goody-goody, but his well-adjusted persona and predictability instead make him an effortlessly engaging, lovable and sincere character. And I'm glad he got his dance with Peggy, even if it was just a vision.

And now, saying "language!" is a movie reference that even Cap will understand!

Now the newbies; the Maximoff twins, Wanda (Elizabeth Olsen) and Pietro (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) or, as they are never referred to in the actual movie, Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver. They temporarily work for Ultron before switching over to the good side, and for two new characters in an already bursting cast, they make impressively good and compelling additions. Firstly they are important to the plot, but eventually are welcome to the party on their own merit as characters.

I'm looking forward to seeing more of-- well of her anyway. Sadly I can't say the both of them, because Pietro is the one who doesn't make it though the movie. He dies heroically saving Hawkeye and a little boy from a shower of bullets, and it was sad. Sad in a good way -- the kind that actually sincerely induces the word "aww." It made me like the character even more, and gave him that last boost of character he needed. It was neat actually, with Hawkeye being set up for the sucker-punch, and him and Pietro having a testy rivalry going throughout the movie, ending with that reused line, "you didn't see that coming" -- Quicksilver's first and last. So both their development was used up, but now with her being an Avenger and her brother being dead, there's a new beginning waiting for Wanda.

The way their powers are portrayed is cool -- glowing red magic for her and a jagged blue trail for him.

And now -- dun da-dun-dun duuuuun -- Ultron himself. I never really wondered or cared how good a villain he'd be, I suppose because I knew he wouldn't be able to compare with Loki, no matter how creepy he can make children's songs sound. Another point for Joss and Marvel; Ultron doesn't even try to fill Loki's shoes. He even forgoes doing evil plan-revealing monologues! James Spader does his thing that only James Spader can do, and turns Ultron into the most amusing and sinister artificial intelligence that is hip on pop culture you've ever seen. He is a lively robot, and seems to have every human emotion that your typical delusional murderous maniac would have -- right down to temper tantrums. He also looks great; his robotic face is very expressive and just creepy enough, and the way he is every one of his minions adds importance to every kill an Avenger makes. Overall he's just very well planned, designed and acted super-villain.

He will crush you -- and look so patronizingly bored while he does it.

Mentionable, but less featured characters include Andy Serkis as Ulysses Klaue (you know it's a huge movie if Andy Serkis only gets a side mention, but he does get the biggest side mention, because his short screen time doesn't decrease his awesomeness), Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury, Cobie Smulders as Agent Hill, Don Cheadle as the War Machine; Anthony Mackie's Falcon, Stellan Skarsgard's Dr. Selvig, and of course Peggy Carter -- Hayley Atwell.

Paul Bettany's Vision is almost a side character, except he's almost not even a character at all -- he's every bit an unwaveringly good AI program, and very little like a human pretending to be a robot. The snarky AI computer JARVIS has always been a favorite of mine, and having the computerized butler become Vision was a great inclusion that fit in ideally with the plot. He may not technically be JARVIS anymore -- floating elegantly through the air on willpower and creating capes out of nothing like some strange celestial being -- but if he sounds like him, is sharp-tongued like him, and yes, looks like him, then there's certainly no loss.

Ultron: "You're unbelievable naive." Vision: "Well... I was born yesterday." Yep -- JARVIS's personality definitely stuck around.

There's only one real problem in this entire picture, and that is that there were a few times during the action scenes where it was hard for me to tell who I was watching and what was going on; most prevalently in the Avenger Tower scene. That's it. Another viewing or two and it will disappear. Otherwise the action is styled perfectly to suit our heroes -- occasionally ever-so-slightly on the cheesy side, but fun, original, fun, magnificent, fun, entertaining, and definitely fun.

There is one thing that can be taken as good or bad: Age of Ultron is basically a replica of the first Avengers. It's the exact same formula -- the exact same ingredients, baked into the exact same cake. Its icing is different of course, with different details, more colors and extravagant decoration -- that is, it's bigger, three years more advanced and filled with more fantastic Whedonisms -- but underneath it's still the same. Here's the thing though; it's a really delicious cake. It is perfection, and everyone knows you don't mess with perfection. Unwritten movie rules try to say that you can't just add details to the original formula for a sequel and make a good sequel at the same time, and often that's true, but I'm glad Whedon ignored the rule and did what he wanted, because this movie was almost exactly the same as the original, and exactly what I wanted it to be.

So congratulations on the resounding win!

With the signature style of Whedon, the Avengers gives us a plethora of brilliant jokes to laugh at, countless moments to surprise and wow us, tricky mind games to worry us about the fate of our favorite heroes (or was that just me he was torturing?), and a couple deeper thoughts to tempt us to chew on that complements our popcorn. It gave us a long but fast-paced and epically scaled clash of a plot line, ending with a grand climactic battle in the sky against a totally evil and dislikable, but never annoying villain -- to a perfectly satisfying conclusion. Every technical aspect was sharpened to a fine point; superhero-ed cinematography style, clean and bright special effects, a meticulously honed script for maximum cheekiness in banter, and a cast that obviously had so much fun, yet delivers on the involving performances from the smallest side character, to the mightiest of the many mighty heroes.

To put it very, very simply: this movie is awesome.