Skip to main content

This isn’t freedom. This is fear.


Trailers
Captain America: The Winter Soldier

The perceived “Avengers effect” whereby individual Marvel superhero properties are expected to get a box office boost from the goodwill and increased exposure of that mega hit, got an easy vindication when Iron Man Three sailed past the previous two installments.  Indeed, it doubled Iron Man 2’s worldwide gross.

But Downey Jr’s Tony Stark was already twice as successful as Marvel’s other fledgling superheroes, and the combination of his witty delivery and Joss Whedon’s post-modern dialogue was central to the appeal of Avengers. It should be no surprise that Iron Man Three did well, because it would have coasted to success on its star’s charm anyway. What differentiated it (controversially, perhaps with some fans) was that it ploughed its own distinct furrow. It wasn’t content to offer the lazy option of the big, better, more forgettable sequel that was Iron Man 2. Instead it chose not to follow the standard superhero formula and embraced a plot that included, well, you know, a plot. There were major twists, and Stark was kept out of his suit for the majority of the running time (a studio-friendly decision, since for some reason they think the public are paying to see the actor not the masked superhero, but one that worked). They threw in an annoying kid who, shockingly, wasn’t annoying. Shane Black was allowed to come in and shake things up a bit, and he did so in a wholly good way.

One might expect Edgar Wright’s Ant Man to work on similar lines, as it is informed by (relatively) auteurist instincts. Who knows what Guardians of the Galaxy will turn out like (I’m hesitant as James Gunn has yet to really “wow” me). But Thor and Captain America have an uphill struggle to make themselves distinctive and attractive as solo properties, particularly as both were approached in a (then) rather half-arsed budget-sensitive manner. I was extremely sceptical of Kenneth Branagh tackling a big Hollywood movie. I well remember the unintentional hilarity of Kenneth Branagh’s Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. He couldn’t even keep that steadicam from overacting in his big screen version of Hamlet. But he delivered an entertaining, undemanding movie. It may have owed a little too much to Masters of the Universe, and it played everything very safe, but it was okay. The sequel comes with the promise of more of the Asgard Marvel head honcho Kevin Feige and co were reluctant to indulge too much first time out (lest it alienate). It also ropes in Game of Thrones director Alan Taylor, as if to say, “This will be a grittier fantasy epic”. But I’ve seen the trailer a couple of times and I can’t remember anything distinctive about it. Not the plot (Loki must team up with Thor; well no one could have seen that coming), not the action (there are some big battles, surprisingly), not the performances (Chris Eccleston is in there, under a pile of prosthetics and pointy ears). It might well be very good (but my expectations are middling), I’m sure it will at least be entertaining. But it sells nothing but formula. There’s nothing to make you think they’ve come up with something different. More than bigger, better, (possibly) more boring.

Which brings me to Captain America: The Winter Soldier. If I had some good will towards Thor, Captain America: The First Avenger left me mostly indifferent. It was all rather underwhelming. I had little familiarity with the character, other than that his name was not the most advisable one for a superhero in the current global environment. Fish out of water, or time, stories are a reliable standard, from Adam Adamant Lives! To… Thor. The problem was at least partly Joe Johnston, one of those safe-pair-of-hands journeymen who can be trusted not to mess up a Jurassic Park movie but who will also be in no danger of pulling off something more impressive than Spielberg. He’s bland and, true to course, he made a bland Captain America movie. It never built up a head of steam, failed to make the action involving. It just kind of sat there.

And Chris Evans is a charismatic guy; pretty much everything he did previously showed this (including the best part of the poxy Fantastic Four duology, Johnny Storm). But as Cap he becomes a block of wood. He even looks pallid and anaemic. Aside from Downey, Evans represents Marvel’s most obviously crowd-pleasing pick for a franchise king. But they put him in a vehicle that works against all his best qualities. Evans should be quick, sparky and irreverent. Cap is slow, bulky and staid. You can see Evans having to work against giving the character’s (few) witty lines a bounce. His personality fizzles out in the role.

I’m not sure that has really changed in the sequel. But, on the evidence of the new trailer, other aspects appear to have been given the kick in the pants that Thor: The Dark World lacks. Screenplay writers Stephen McFeely and Christopher Markus contributed both the previous Cap and The Dark World screenplays. They also adapted all three Narnia movies. Perhaps not the most illustrious of CVs, although my understanding is that the Winter Soldier plot they’re basing their script on is a good one. What is most arresting (and of course a trailer can be cut to suggest qualities that are not in the finished movie; The Counselor appears to be the latest example of just such a let-down) is the flourish directors Anthony and Joe Russo have brought to the table. Known for their work on comedies, including Arrested Development and Community on TV, they had an early “up and coming” vibe with well-cast heist flick Welcome to Collinwood about a decade ago, but nothing suggesting a facility for massive mayhem. So this looks like one of those cost-effective chances that has paid off for Marvel (just as plumping for Jon Favreau paid of with the first Iron Man). The images suggest a keen grasp of framing and staging, from the lift fight to the car flip, to the crash and burn hellicarrier to the final shot of the Winter Soldier catching Cap’s shield.

I’m less than sold on Scarlet Johansson’s Black Widow. This may just be sour grapes at Emily Blunt losing out on the part, or it may just be that nothing has been done to make the character distinctive or interesting (other than put Johnansson in tight-fitting catsuits).

But the rest of the trailer content struck a chord, as it echoes the Russos’ previous comments that they wanted to combine the Captain with the trappings of a ‘70s conspiracy thriller. The vibe of the trailer suggests Cap’s traditional American values are pitted against a world where threats are neutralised before they even happen, and where  “to build a better world sometimes means tearing the old one down”. The Captain’s response is a head butt to a USA where pre-emptive strikes and drone attacks are an integral to the modern military machine. “I though the punishment usually came after the crime” he chastises. Appropriately, and picking up from the uneasy authoritarian vibe of their previous depiction(s), SHIELD is a force not to be trusted, an encapsulation of governmental propensity to act unmonitored and unanswerable to higher authorities. Might this be the first Marvel movie with a serious and graspable commentary? Well, Robert Redford shows up, Condor himself, so you’d have though some kind of carrot attracted him (I doubt that it was the thought he would once have been an ideal Captain). I expect the whole thing will devolve into unfettered explosiveness during the final act, but this looks like it might also have some bite. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019)
(SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You're not only wrong. You're wrong at the top of your voice.

Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
I’ve seen comments suggesting that John Sturges’ thriller hasn’t aged well, which I find rather mystifying. Sure, some of the characterisations border on the cardboard, but the director imbues the story with a taut, economical backbone. 

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
(1982)
(SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek, but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

How do you like that – Cuddles knew all the time!

The Pleasure Garden (1925)
(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s first credit as director, and his account of the production difficulties, as related to Francois Truffaut, is by and large more pleasurable than The Pleasure Garden itself. The Italian location shoot in involved the confiscation of undeclared film stock, having to recast a key role and borrowing money from the star when Hitch ran out of the stuff.

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

To defeat the darkness out there, you must defeat the darkness inside yourself.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)
Easily the best of the Narnia films, which is maybe damning it with faint praise. 

Michael Apted does a competent job directing (certainly compared to his Bond film - maybe he talked to his second unit this time), Dante Spinotti's cinematography is stunning and the CGI mostly well-integrated with the action. 

Performance-wise, Will Poulter is a stand-out as a tremendously obnoxious little toff, so charismatic you're almost rooting for him. Simon Pegg replaces Eddie Izzard as the voice of Reepicheep and delivers a touching performance.
***

The President is dead. You got that? Somebody’s had him for dinner.

Escape from New York (1981)
(SPOILERS) There’s a refreshingly simplicity to John Carpenter’s nightmare vision of 1997. Society and government don’t represent a global pyramid; they’re messy and erratic, and can go deeply, deeply wrong without connivance, subterfuge, engineered rebellions or recourse to reset. There’s also a sense of playfulness here, of self-conscious cynicism regarding the survival prospects for the US, as voiced by Kurt Russell’s riff on Clint Eastwood anti-heroics in the decidedly not dead form of Snake Plissken. But in contrast to Carpenter’s later Big Trouble in Little China (where Russell is merciless to the legend of John Wayne), Escape from New York is underpinned by a relentlessly grim, grounded aesthetic, one that lends texture and substance; it remains one of the most convincing and memorable of dystopian visions.

The present will look after itself. But it’s our duty to realise the future with our imagination.

Until the End of the World (1991)
(SPOILERS) With the current order devolving into what looks inevitably like a passively endorsed dystopia, a brave new chipped and tracked vision variously in line with cinema’s warnings (or its predictive programming, depending on where your cynicism lands), I’ve been revisiting a few of these futuristic visions. That I picked the very Euro-pudding Until the End of the World is perhaps entirely antagonistic to such reasoning, seeing as how it is, at heart, a warm and fuzzy, upbeat, humanist musing on where we are all going.