Skip to main content

So, you want to go overseas. Kill some Nazis.

Captain America: The First Avenger
(2011)

(SPOILERS) I suppose you have to give Kevin Feige credit for turning the least-likely-to-succeed-in-view-of-America’s-standing-with-the-rest-of-the-world superhero into one of Marvel’s biggest success stories, but I tend to regard Steve Rogers and his alter ego as something of a damp squib who got lucky. Lucky in that his first sequel threw him into a conspiracy plotline that effectively played off his unwavering and unpalatable nobility and lucky in that his second had him butting heads with Tony Stark and a supporting selection of superheroes. But coming off the starting block, Captain America: The First Avenger is as below par as pre-transformation Steve himself, and I’m always baffled when it turns up in best of Marvel Cinematic Universe lists. The best I can say for it is that Joe Johnston’s movie offers a mildly engaging opening section and the occasional facility for sharp humour. For the most part, though, it’s as bland and impersonal as every other picture he’s directed.


Dr ErskineDo you want to kill Nazis?
Steve RogersIs this a test?
Dr ErskineYes.
Steve RogersI don’t want to kill anyone. I don’t like bullies. I don’t care where they’re from.

Actually, that’s a little bit unfair, although you can only see Feige’s priorities in a cold, calculating light when he picked the journeyman director for the job. A little bit unfair because Johnston’s debut, Honey, I Shrunk the Kids is a witty, pacy picture exhibiting a sense of fun and energy everything else he’s done – which includes filling in for buddy Spielberg on Jurassic Park III and replacing Mark Romanek on The Wolfman– lacks. It was reportedly his period work on The Rocketeer and October Sky that got him the gig, and there’s definitely a strong link between the former and Cap. Unfortunately, it isn’t a good one. 


I well remember The Rocketeer being touted as one of the big hopes of summer 1991 (Premiere magazine certainly thought so, but then, they had Dying Youngpegged as the season’s champ), and if poster art reflected the quality of a movie, it would have been an all-timer. Unfortunately, it flunked the key test of bringing in audiences in droves. And that’s because it has many of the same issues Capdoes; it’s flaccid, lacks engaging lead characters and completely fails to kindle that period buzz, charm and energy Spielberg made look so easy in the (first three) Indiana Jones movies. As a director, Johnston makes a very good art director.


Steve RogersI’m just a kid from Brooklyn.

Because Cap does look pretty good. The Arctic opening, leading to a flashback to 1942 Norway, is effectively atmospheric in a manner the rest of the movie lacks. Nevertheless, for all it has going for it in respect of bringing to life comic book iconography, Cap is singularly lacking a sense of adventurous fun, of revelling in its pulpy trappings. It’s as po-faced and unyielding as its lead character for the most part; Alan Silvestri’s score follows suit, with strains of the likes of Innerspace and Excalibur but without the wit and playfulness of the first or the grandeur of the second. 


Additionally, I’m very ready to admit I don’t get Cap. I don’t get his appeal. I don’t get why he’s supposed to be interesting, and I don’t care for Chris Evans’ performance (and I like Evans in pretty much everything else I’ve seen him in, so I’m assuming it must be the character). Even when the movie is considerably better – as the sequels are – I’m left unmoved by the main protagonist. 


Guy beating on Steve:You just don’t know when to give up, do ya?

I’m clearly supposed to find Steve Rogers’ unfaltering positivity and dedication to serving his country inspirational, but I don’t. I find it faintly risible. On a purely practical level, the makerz also go a touch too far in making him super scrawny (six stone veers a little too strongly into fantasy territory to be convincingly rendered; his face should be emaciated as well as his body). The effect is a little akin to Marlon Wayans head superimposed on a dwarf actor in Littleman. And his transformation via the super soldier programme, given the casualties we’ve seen (Bronsky, Schmidt) seems to be implicit – and ever-so-slightly worrisome – acknowledgement that it only yields the best results if one’s mind is as pure as one’s body will become (Steve really does embody the master race).


Senator BrandtJeez, will somebody get that kid a sandwich!

And lo, before you know it, Steve’s sporting a ripe pair of glistening man boobs. The bag of bones who uses his brain to win a flag and fearlessly jumps on a grenade – pass the sick bucket – is transformed into an icon of might being right and muscle being might. The problem of Rogers is he’s utterly unrelatable; he’s too assured of what he isn’t or what he is, without foibles and insecurities; he’s all surface. No wonder Tony will take the piss out of him constantly.


Dum Dum DuganYou know what you’re doing?
Steve RogersYeah. I’ve knocked out Adolf Hitler over 200 times.

There’s the occasional bright spot post-transformation, such as Cap being used for propaganda purposes, selling war bonds and so sparking the genesis of his costume (“I’m a great fan of your films” greets Red Skull, about his only good line; despite Red Skull being an entirely rote villain, I find myself rooting for him because Cap is so insufferably moral). At other points, it feels like an opportunity’s been unforgivably missed (his war exploits with the marauders glossed over in a montage sequence). 


Steve RogersI thought you were dead.
Bucky BarnesI thought you were smaller.

Cap’s nearest and dearest are no more compelling than he is. Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan) goes from being the vanilla pal looking out for Steve to the vanilla POW who needs saving by him (before falling off a train – and we never even got a chance to give a shit about him!); he’s never in danger of developing a character or becoming interesting, at least until he turns bad/brainwashed (and even then, he isn’t especially interesting). 


Agent Carter (Hayley Atwell) is likewise a complete non-presence. How did she get a Marvel series out of this? Because she can kick guys’ arses and she’s a rare female playing with the boys? That’s usually a substitute for an effectively written role in the Marvel-verse (see also Black Widow). Also damagingly, there’s zero chemistry between Atwell and Evans, so his virginal standing up (“I had a date”) doesn’t feel like any kind of loss (and means that, when she eventually carks it, it’s based on a false premise of emotional investment in the character). 


Dr ErksineSo, you want to go overseas. Kill some Nazis.

Stanley Tucci apparently took the part of Erskine the benign German eugenicist (what’s the difference between a bad eugenicist and a good one? The latter works for the US Government) because he wanted to try out the accent. Which is as good a reason as any. Certainly, he’s had better roles in Michael Bay movies. Somehow, Hugo Weaving as Red Skull (at this stage, he was in the go-to-villainous place Ben Mendelsohn is now) entirely misses out on becoming a memorable monster; it seems like a no-brainer, but even scenes with Toby Jones (as Dr Zola) fail to come alive.


Arnim ZolaI don’t eat meat.
Colonel Phillips:Why not.
Arnim ZolaIt disagrees with me.

That brings me to the one scene I like unreservedly, although it’s more about the actors than the content. Zola is captured and interviewed by Colonel Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones), and there’s suddenly a sense of the picture clicking into gear as a couple of pros do what they do best, sitting at a table and exchanging small talk. Notably, Cap is nowhere in sight.


Johann SchmidtThe Tesseract was the jewel of Odin’s treasure room.

While Cap is structurally forced to contrive to bring its superhero to the present day to become an Avenger (and thus quickly dispense with his litany of wartime exploits in order to set him up as a fish out of water), the movie at least doesn’t feel overly stuffed with paraphernalia setting up future Marvel-verse characters and instalments. Yes, Howard Stark appears, and apparently has some serious work done at some point if he’s to transform facially from Dominic Cooper to John Slattery. And yes, we get the Tesseract, and implicitly Thor. And yes, there’s the obligatory Nick Fury cameo, but the issues with Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely’s screenplay (their first of six Marvel credits to date) are nothing a strong director couldn’t iron out. Really, this was Johnston’s to fluff, and he did.


Steve RogersI can’t get drunk.

Captain America: The First Avenger making just 60% of the first Iron Man’s gross isn’t only because of the charisma vacuum of Cap himself or the issue of his national identity. It’s also because the romance has no fire, the conflict isn’t sufficiently personal, and the third act comes across as disengaged. But mostly, it’s because Johnston does nothing to galvanise the proceedings. Someone with a sharper eye for the period detail, a bit more frivolous (so as to puncture Cap’s shield of nobility when necessary), a bit livelier, with a bit more personality (even if the latter is anathema to Marvel unless you’re James Gunn). The First Avenger is rather flat, static and inert. It most resembles one of those lifeless ‘80s fantasy cash-ins-that-failed-to-cash-in knockoffs (Krull), where big bucks were thrown at moribund material to negligible effect. Still, at least no one could say the next Marvel movie lacked personality…



Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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.

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…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

You're waterboarding me.

The Upside (2017)
(SPOILERS) The list of US remakes of foreign-language films really ought to be considered a hiding to nothing, given the ratio of flops to unqualified successes. There’s always that chance, though, of a proven property (elsewhere) hitting the jackpot, and every exec hopes, in the case of French originals, for another The Birdcage, Three Men and a Baby, True Lies or Down and Out in Beverly Hills. Even a Nine Months, Sommersby or Unfaithful will do. Rather than EdTV. Or Sorcerer. Or Eye of the Beholder. Or Brick Mansions. Or Chloe. Or Intersection (Richard Gere is clearly a Francophile). Or Just Visiting. Or The Man with One Red Shoe. Or Mixed Nuts. Or Original Sin. Or Oscar. Or Point of No Return. Or Quick Change. Or Return to Paradise. Or Under Suspicion. Or Wicker Park. Or Father’s Day.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Would you like Smiley Sauce with that?

American Beauty (1999)
(SPOILERS) As is often the case with the Best Picture Oscar, a backlash against a deemed undeserved reward has grown steadily in the years since American Beauty’s win. The film is now often identified as symptomatic of a strain of cinematic indulgence focussing on the affluent middle classes’ first world problems. Worse, it showcases a problematic protagonist with a Lolita-fixation towards his daughter’s best friend (imagine its chances of getting made, let alone getting near the podium in the #MeToo era). Some have even suggested it “mercifully” represents a world that no longer exists (as a pre-9/11 movie), as if such hyperbole has any bearing other than as gormless clickbait; you’d have to believe its world of carefully manicured caricatures existed in the first place to swallow such a notion. American Beauty must own up to some of these charges, but they don’t prevent it from retaining a flawed allure. It’s a satirical take on Americana that, if it pulls its p…

You know what I think? I think he just wants to see one cook up close.

The Green Mile (1999)
(SPOILERS) There’s something very satisfying about the unhurried confidence of the storytelling in Frank Darabont’s two prison-set Stephen King adaptations (I’m less beholden to supermarket sweep The Mist); it’s sure, measured and precise, certain that the journey you’re being take on justifies the (indulgent) time spent, without the need for flashy visuals or ornate twists (the twists there are feel entirely germane – with a notable exception – as if they could only be that way). But. The Green Mile has rightly come under scrutiny for its reliance on – or to be more precise, building its foundation on – the “Magical Negro” trope, served with a mild sprinkling of idiot savant (so in respect of the latter, a Best Supporting Actor nomination was virtually guaranteed). One might argue that Stephen King’s magical realist narrative flourishes well-worn narrative ploys and characterisations at every stage – such that John Coffey’s initials are announcement enough of his …

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Kindly behove me no ill behoves!

The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990)
(SPOILERS) It’s often the case that industry-shaking flops aren’t nearly the travesties they appeared to be before the dust had settled, and so it is with The Bonfire of the Vanities. The adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s ultra-cynical bestseller is still the largely toothless, apologetically broad-brush comedy – I’d hesitate to call it a satire in its reconfigured form – it was when first savaged by critics nearly thirty years ago, but taken for what it is, that is, removed from the long shadow of Wolfe’s novel, it’s actually fairly serviceable star-stuffed affair that doesn’t seem so woefully different to any number of rather blunt-edged comedies of the era.

Is CBS Corporate telling CBS News "Do not air this story"?

The Insider (1999)
(SPOILERS) The Insider was the 1999 Best Picture Oscar nominee that didn’t. Do any business, that is. Which is, more often than not, a major mark against it getting the big prize. It can happen (2009, and there was a string of them from 2014-2016), but aside from brief, self-congratulatory “we care about art first” vibes, it generally does nothing for the ceremony’s profile, or the confidence of the industry that is its bread and butter. The Insider lacked the easy accessibility of the other nominees – supernatural affairs, wafer-thin melodramas or middle-class suburbanite satires. It didn’t even brandish a truly headlines-shattering nail-biter in its conspiracy-related true story, as earlier contenders All the President’s Men and JFK could boast. But none of those black marks prevented The Insider from being the cream of the year’s crop.