Skip to main content

Why would I turn into a filing cabinet?

Captain Marvel
(2019)

(SPOILERS) All superhero movies are formulaic to a greater or lesser degree. Mostly greater. The key to an actually great one – or just a pretty good one – is making that a virtue, rather than something you’re conscious of limiting the whole exercise. The irony of the last two stand-alone MCU pictures is that, while attempting to bring somewhat down-the-line progressive cachet to the series, they’ve delivered rather pedestrian results. Of course, that didn’t dim Black Panther’s cultural cachet (and what do I know, swathes of people also profess to loving it), and Captain Marvel has hit half a billion in its first few days – it seems that, unless you’re poor unloved Ant-Man, an easy $1bn is the new $700m for the MCU – but neither’s protagonist really made that all-important iconic impact.

In Black Panther’s case, T’Challa was roundly eclipsed by villain Eric Killmonger. Here, Brie Larson’s Carol Danvers is outshone by… well, pretty much everyone, except maybe her anodyne best bud Maria (Lashana Lynch). There have been various theories on why this is, perhaps the most common being that the fractured nature of her tale – an amnesiac gradually piecing her memory and supreme potential back together – rather impaired her chances of hitting the ground running as a fully conceived character. I’m not sure I really buy this, in that the movie’s structure had the potential for a relatively fresh take on an origins story, if only there had been more attention to making the mystery compelling and pushing the plot along (Memento comes to mind, where that lack of self-knowledge drives the story).

Carol rather listlessly comes across who she is/was, with convenient flashes of information here and there: nothing that really makes you sit up and take notice. Indeed, for Marvel’s mostsuper-powered superhero – I mean, she pretty much is, isn’t she? – there’s something curiously indifferent about the project. Brie is fine, but like Chadwick Boseman’s T’Challa, there’s little for her to chew on, and what there is is of the corniest “control your emotions/unleash them to realise your potential” variety (that “get back up again” montage is processed cheese incarnate). Which is why her arc doesn’t land. It’s both over-familiar and artificially foisted upon her; with any other superhero who has really taken off on the big screen, you can be sure that their sense of conflict/arc has actively translated, but Carol Danvers has been rather too schematically planned out, and as a result, she isn’t terribly interesting.

In terms of plot, the strongest element only peripherally relates to Captain Marvel, by virtue of her being duped: the Kree, who have trained her as a warrior, aren’t guardians of peace and justice at all, but aggressors bent on exterminating the reptilian, shapeshifting Skrulls (good lizards? What the…?) Accordingly, both Jude Law as initially hard-but-fair mentor Yon-Rogg, later revealed as bastardly, and particularly Ben Mendelsohn as initially dodgy interrogator Talos, later revealed as a sympathetic family lizard man, are more engaging presences than the lead (which is not to say the Skrulls-Kree conflict stuff is any better fleshed out, as a whole, than say the world of Green Lantern). I was a little disappointed that the paranoia potential of the Skrulls wasn’t developed more, but that makes sense in retrospect as (a) the Skrulls are good guys here and (b) it sets up a flip for the inevitable Secret Invasion movie. It’s a nice touch to have both Law and Mendelsohn use their natural, non-RP accents, but most of all it was nice to see Mendelsohn, typecast as a go-to Hollywood villain (well, it’s his fault really for accepting the parts), getting to play a good guy and be really funny.

Indeed, if there’s one thing that saves this movie from descending into the forgettable, it’s mining that patented Marvel seam of humour. Which is to say, it’s very formulaic humour, like the movie itself, but it provides a lift that the competently staged (by the second unit no doubt) but disappointingly sluggish action can’t (there’s one strong pursuit scene in an underground facility, but that aside, you’d be hard pressed to single out anything great, certainly not Captain Marvel’s “becoming”).

This is easily the best time Samuel L Jackson’s had in a Marvel movie – playing a version of himself a good decade younger than he actually was in the ‘90s, by the look of the actually pretty good de-aging; Agent Coulson doesn’t fare so well, but mercifully the character’s barely in it – and he’s very much the sidekick to Danvers. Indeed, while Fury works well (“If toast is cut diagonally, I can’t eat it”), there’s a vague annoyance when an emerging character is so engulfed by continuity that they don’t get the chance to take those all-important baby steps on their own. The presence of SHIELD here most hearkens back to their intrusive presence in Phase One, and if it wasn’t for Fury being an enjoyable element – as opposed to an extraneous one back then – it would grate just as much.

Also in his favour is his making best friends with cat-shaped alien/Flerken Goose (“It’s a cat, not Hannibal Lecter”), possibly the highlight of Captain Marvel (though the tentacled maw thing is a bit over-used design wise at this point). Still, it’s odd that Boden, Fleck and Geneva Robertson-Dworet (credited with inert Tomb Raider reboot, but also prospectively penning Gotham City Sirens, Sherlock Holmes 3 and a new Dungeons and Dragons, so maybe she was very unlucky first time out) should choose to undercut Fury by having Goose be responsible for his loss of sight in one eye. I mean, it’s funny, but it’s still a surprising choice.

Also in the cast are Annette Bening (barely makes an impression), Lee Pace (I actually thought they’d got someone else in as Ronan, à la Red Skull, as again, he barely makes an impression) and Stan Lee, cutely – or not, given the detritus that film is – swotting up on his lines for Mallrats.

How do Boden and Fleck fare? Well, okay… I mean, there’s absolutely no evidence of style or personality anywherein the movie (honestly, I’m surprised they even have a screenplay credit, since there’s nothing remotely as distinctive as their work on Half Nelson). Captain Marvel seems entirely made to order, nothing more so than the half-hearted attempts at ‘90s nostalgia, which principally consists of a Blockbuster drop-in and some sadly unimaginative and intrusive needle drops on the soundtrack (Come As You Are and Just A Girl being the most egregious). There seems to be a wide range of takes on the MCU directors, few seeming to be in unison on who’s handled their house-style requirements most heroically – I’d pick Shane Black, Jon Watts, James Gunn and Scott Derrickson, while I’m contrastingly not overly impressed by star journeymen the Russo brothers – but few can disagree at this point that, whatever the DCU’s deficiencies, and let’s face it they’re writ large in basic storytelling, they aren’t afraid to let talented filmmakers lead the way, rather than the producer.

Captain Marvel doesn’t turn up the feminism dial to eleven particularly, which might be to its credit – Maria’s flying the gender-warfare flag more pronouncedly than Carol – or perhaps to Marvel’s sheepishness, since it’s taken them so long to get there. There’ll be those who read topical commentary into the thing in dribs and drabs, but that kind of tack only invites a spotlight on its essential shallowness. Indeed, anyone looking for a progressive message here needs only observe how refugees and minorities congregate in awe around another white saviour figure. Don’t tell Brie that, though, or she’ll get right mardy with you. Captain Marvel will do, and has the box office to prove it, but that shouldn’t really cut it.



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

Comments

  1. Y'know, I'd have guessed that you'd hate it, but I'm glad to be wrong; ironically, you sound like you like it more than me (I evidently mostly want to complain about it) but that's probably down to your take that it does nothing really special, when I'd argue that it does. Occasionally. (Like, I love the first memory scene, the train chase, the Escape From the Planet of the Apes reference--wha?--and at least the plot beats of the finale, if not the padded, middlingly-choregraphed group fight or the most awful song cue in a movie made of bad song cues.)

    I do think you're right about a lot of it, though--the one almost-fatal problem is that they don't give her a reason to be loyal to the Kree, so their betrayal of her, and her turning her back on them, don't land as the Space Jesus sacrifice they are in the usual version of this story. I mean, Superman, the Silver Surfer, the original Mar-Vell... they lost their homes and/or their freedom to do the right thing, whereas Carol regains both. It's not as powerful, or as exemplary. It makes her allegiance to the Skrulls more-or-less incidental. (And they easily could have. The USAF treated women like shit up until... well, anyway, the Kree Empire easily could have been a choice for a woman who apparently is good at and likes to inflict violence for the sake of a cause, is what I'm saying. I kept expecting her memory block to be self-inflicted!) I still think she's better off than T'Challa, who is such a nonentity in his movie (a shame after coming off as the most interesting part of Civil War!) that it's probably the reason I like Captain Marvel better.

    As for Marvel directors who broke free themselves the most, I'd pick Gunn, but only in GotG the first--even then, he really only remade the template, which is why even though I'd like to say Waititi, Ragnarok absolutely falls in line with a post-GotG, modified-Whedon Marvel Formula. Heck, I might say Reed: the Ant-Man franchise's frivolity feels genuinely organic in a way that the "cosmic pomp with piss-taking jokes" doesn't quite. Meanwhile, the Russos are consummate workmen, and not even, like, good workmen.

    Anyway, I might've just liked Captain Marvel more than Marvel 2018 just for having an actually good score, quite plausibly only the second time that's happened.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree regarding the USAF; it was irritatingly revisionist and a missed opportunity to give her some unforced substance.

      With the score, I probably didn't mention it as I'm not quite sure what I think. At times I thought it was pretty good, but overall it didn't stick in my mind, failing to make an impact or lift the movie. Which, with a middling one such as this, was really needed.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

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…

And my father was a real ugly man.

Marty (1955)
(SPOILERS) It might be the very unexceptional good-naturedness of Marty that explains its Best Picture Oscar success. Ernest Borgnine’s Best Actor win is perhaps more immediately understandable, a badge of recognition for versatility, having previously attracted attention for playing iron-wrought bastards. But Marty also took the Palme d’Or, and it’s curious that its artistically-inclined jury fell so heavily for its charms (it was the first American picture to win the award; Lost Weekend won the Grand Prix when that was still the top award).

The world is one big hospice with fresh air.

Doctor Sleep (2019)
(SPOILERS) Doctor Sleep is a much better movie than it probably ought to be. Which is to say, it’s an adaption of a 2013 novel that, by most accounts, was a bit of a dud. That novel was a sequel to The Shining, one of Stephen King’s most beloved works, made into a film that diverged heavily, and in King’s view detrimentally, from the source material. Accordingly, Mike Flanagan’s Doctor Sleep also operates as a follow up to the legendary Kubrick film. In which regard, it doesn’t even come close. And yet, judged as its own thing, which can at times be difficult due to the overt referencing, it’s an affecting and often effective tale of personal redemption and facing the – in this case literal – ghosts of one’s past.

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…

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2 (2017)
(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.

Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.

Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they migh…

I'm reliable, I'm a very good listener, and I'm extremely funny.

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)
(SPOILERS) When I wrote my 23 to see in 2019, I speculated that James Cameron might be purposefully giving his hand-me-downs to lesser talents because he hubristically didn’t want anyone making a movie that was within a spit of the proficiency we’ve come to expect from him. Certainly, Robert Rodriguez and Tim Miller are leagues beneath Kathryn Bigelow, Jimbo’s former spouse and director of his Strange Days screenplay. Miller’s no slouch when it comes to action – which is what these movies are all about, let’s face it – but neither is he a craftsman, so all those reviews attesting that Terminator: Dark Fate is the best in the franchise since Terminator 2: Judgment Day may be right, but there’s a considerable gulf between the first sequel (which I’m not that big a fan of) and this retcon sequel to that sequel.

You nicknamed my daughter after the Loch Ness Monster?

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2 (2012)
The final finale of the Twilight saga, in which pig-boy Jacob tells Bella that, “No, it's not like that at all!” after she accuses him of being a paedo. But then she comes around to his viewpoint, doubtless displaying the kind of denial many parents did who let their kids spend time with Jimmy Savile or Gary Glitter during the ‘70s. It's lucky little Renesmee will be an adult by the age of seven, right? Right... Jacob even jokes that he should start calling Edward, “Dad”. And all the while they smile and smile.

Rejoice! The broken are the more evolved. Rejoice.

Split (2016)
(SPOILERS) M Night Shyamalan went from the toast of twist-based filmmaking to a one-trick pony to the object of abject ridicule in the space of only a couple of pictures: quite a feat. Along the way, I’ve managed to miss several of his pictures, including his last, The Visit, regarded as something of a re-locating of his footing in the low budget horror arena. Split continues that genre readjustment, another Blumhouse production, one that also manages to bridge the gap with the fare that made him famous. But it’s a thematically uneasy film, marrying shlock and serious subject matter in ways that don’t always quite gel.

Shyamalan has seized on a horror staple – nubile teenage girls in peril, prey to a psychotic antagonist – and, no doubt with the best intentions, attempted to warp it. But, in so doing, he has dragged in themes and threads from other, more meritable fare, with the consequence that, in the end, the conflicting positions rather subvert his attempts at subversion…

It’s like being smothered in beige.

The Good Liar (2019)
(SPOILERS) I probably ought to have twigged, based on the specific setting of The Good Liar that World War II would be involved – ten years ago, rather than the present day, so making the involvement of Ian McKellen and Helen Mirren just about believable – but I really wish it hadn’t been. Jeffrey Hatcher’s screenplay, adapting Nicholas Searle’s 2016 novel, offers a nifty little conning-the-conman tale that would work much, much better without the ungainly backstory and motivation that impose themselves about halfway through and then get paid off with equal lack of finesse.