Review: Avengers - Age of Ultron (2D)

Conquering heroes The Avengers return in their second outing as an ensamble cast. This time they must defend Humanity against a peacekeeping AI developed by Tony Stark after it goes rogue.

Is it wrong to say anything negative about a Marvel property these days?
*Cinema Cocoa brings up the blast shields*
Okay so it is fair to say that the sequel has less limitations than its predecessor Avengers Assemble, since all the characters are established now and the story can give us both barrels, but is it possible that during the revelation that Avenger films work Marvel has become... overconfident?
Age of Ultron could be evidence to support this.

Now I am not saying it is bad: action set pieces are incredible; peaking at the Hulk Vs Hulkbuster fight, the humour is still top notch; everyone gets a go, even Jeremy Renner's Hawkeye and Ultron himself!
Speaking of Hawkeye, he is probably the best character for development. The poor guy starts out the movie getting injured and out of commission again, but miraculously Renner is given character material to work with that some of the lead cast haven't had! Well done, Marvel.
Ultron himself is cool, voiced by a gravely James Spader, here's a villain Marvel has been looking for. Malicious, calculating and born from all of Tony Stark's worst traits.

Another boon for the film is its heavy representation of our heroes saving civilians. It is worth remembering that Avengers Assemble had been directly compared to DC's Man of Steel as being the better representation of superhero justice. One can't deny that this feels like a direct attack on DC's property. 

But telling you this film has great dialogue and great action is a no brainer. I think people would have left half way through had those things not been present; this is an Avengers film, if you even remotely like the first one you will find enjoyment here.
But...

This film feels sloppy. It feels rushed, and more importantly it feels utterly careless with what the non-Marvel fandom audience can consume. In an effort to outdo the first film, Ultron cuts narrative corners, makes unreasonable logic jumps without explaining it and possibly the worst offender for me: random exposition dumps.
I can accept, barely, characters literally jumping from place to place between cuts, but having the Avengers (our lead team of superheroes in the Marvel Cinematic Universe) learning about the crucial Infinity Stones through some ridiculously contrived illusion/dream/prophetic vision of Thor's, that's unlocked by newcomer Scarlet Witch's powers, and distilled by standing in some underground pool.... No.
We know what Infinity Stones are: Star Lord and friends had them explained really really well in Guardians of the Galaxy, don't make it look like you are laboured in finding a place to tell your main protagonists this incredibly important information. Especially when your screenplay is so heavily invested in explosions and battles.

Another very unnecessary addition were "The Twins", introduced in Captain America 2's end credit stinger, Quicksliver and Scarlet Witch. While they aren't in any way bad, and I can see how the franchise wants to move forward, for this film they are completely unnecessary.
A final note that almost slipped by me, Ultron's final act does little for the female characters; the usually strong and capable Black Widow is randomly imprisoned. I have no idea why, and it is so brief that I almost forgot about it.

Oh dear, that's a lot of negatives isn't it?
Avengers: Age of Ultron is an excellent showcase action movie, it has a quick fire pace and really does have some great moments between the characters. It feels like a reunion party with Don Cheadle's Warmachine helping out among others, and an early drunken scene of "Who can lift Thor's hammer?" is memorable. Many quips too, Captain America absently saying to himself: "If the hammer is in an elevator, the elevator isn't worthy," all give a great chuckle from me.

Marvel need to be careful. Bonanza is all well and good, spectacle will bring the crowds for a short while, but you are trying to tell a story, a narrative, over hours and hours of film. So tell it. 
Don't get stuck in a formula (which you already have, in my opinion) otherwise I will become less intrigued by Avengers milestones and more intrigued by new properties ala Guardians. 

Just, write good.

Review: Iron Man 3

Stark's getting too big for his iron clad boots, so big that there's no room for anyone else!

With an advanced, advanced preview I can give you my thoughts on Iron Man 3, and I can tell you right now, you aren't going to expect half of what happens! (the trailer threw me completely off the scent)

The film is set after the events in Avengers Assemble and we see a burnt out Tony Stark who is overwhelmed with the hero worshiping and the memories of his near-death experience. The events in Avengers are game changing, and he isn't ready for competitors pioneering in bio-warfare technology or the terrorist known only as The Mandarin.

The good stuff first. Robert Downey Jr is still on fire as Tony Stark (and no matter what I might say to lessen this experience, fans of his will still love it for him) his dialogue is still snappy and loaded with sarcastic wit. The action sequences are very creative and ludicrously dynamic what with Tony's newest suit's ability to fragment and locate him, or for it to fly and work remotely. Almost all of the action sequences revolve around this trick (if you thought the suitcase suit was bizarre, you ain't seen nothing yet!)
There are several occasions were Stark has to make do without the suit, and these are definitely the best moments in the film! Hilarious. 

But if I can now dive into the problems... I didn't like the film's antagonist. Now I may start wobbling into spoiler territory here, but early on in the film we are introduced to an indestructible soldier. Think of a fiery rendition of the Terminator's T-1000 (reforming lost limbs and all) and these soldiers become the film's main threat.
The special effects are great, but the villain's motivations and personality are paper thin. We know and love Tony Stark, now the story needs to give us some convincing villain for him to face and what we get here is not the answer. Yes, I will go out and say it: Iron Man 2's Whiplash was more interesting.
My issue is with the film's overriding focus on Stark himself (what, I hear you cry) because the story's justification for this feels shallow and unrefined:

"The love triangle in this movie is between Tony, Pepper and his obsession with those suits." - Producer Kevin Feige.

That is the film's meat at the end of the day and honestly I felt it was an insufficient theme for a third (technically fourth) outing for these characters.  

Urgh, I can't say the film wow'ed me. It isn't your typical "trilogy third act". In fact it is remarkably underplayed at times and its ponderous nature did make me a little restless: "Where are we going with this? Why are we here, talking to this character?" (especially that little kid...) which I pin almost entirely on the poorly established and executed villains.

Creative action sequences, laugh-out-loud funny moments, but unconvincing villains and a ponderous theme, makes Iron Man 3 good, but not great.

Additional Marshmallows: I really cannot say more to explain why elements don't work without spoiling the film. Let's just say there's a twist involved (I don't even know how comicbook geeks will handle it!) Go and see it for yourselves!

       
        

Review: Avengers Assemble

There are four films this year I am banking on being at the top of my list and Avengers Assemble was the lesser. My god this is going to be a good year for movies!


Marvel Studios colossal gamble in combining four of their major comic brands into one film was subject to feeling clustered and failing, yet having gotten each hero's back story and characteristics out of the way in previous films, Avengers can go all out. No brakes.
"Genius, billionaire, playboy, philanthropist" Tony Stark (aka Iron Man) is teamed up with Doctor Bruce Banner (The Incredible Hulk) Steve Rogers (the super soldier Captain America) and Thor, the god of thunder, to protect the world from a hostile invasion led by Thor's brother Loki. They have to learn to put their personal demons aside and work together if they are to succeed!

Avengers Assemble is another landmark in cinema after Harry Potter; keeping firm continuity on a franchise makes it stronger. The actors already know their characters, the film's first act dips wonderfully into "character moments", one minute it is a new Iron Man film, then it is Thor's movie, Avengers simply revels in their clashing personalities, a geeky "what if Thor, Tony Stark and Captain America were in a room together?". I cannot stress the credit due to Joss Whedon, co-writer and director, he brought is A-game here; the wit and stinging dialogue is here in abundance. The cinema I was in was roaring with laughter at all the right points.
There are several short signature fights, giving each hero and villain a chance to fight another, though this does not feel forced. Instead each battle feels unique, memorable and is certainly eye catching.


The film's heart and soul is with the superheroes, and while their personal demons are less defined here (for obvious reasons, there are six of them!) the battles they wage show them struggling, Marvel's ethos of "human superheroes" is not completely lost here. By the end, the heroes are quite worse for wear.
Loki is the signature villain, and one should watch Thor (and Captain America) to fully appreciate what's at stake. The villains are pushed aside overall, but only for the excellent team-building theme the film is about anyway.

Definitely worth seeing, for the great dialogue alone, never mind the frantic and characterful battle sequences on top of it!

"But he is my brother, he is family"
"He just killed over eighty people!"
"He was adopted..."