It's almost here! Avengers is just a day away!
To celebrate, we've decided to give you just one more review, of the two Marvel One Shot short films, The Consultant, and A Funny Thing Happened on the way to Thor's Hammer.
Hero/Universe: Agent Coulson, The Marvel Cinematic Universe
Is it Based on the Comic? Nope. But a new Nick Fury (resembling Samuel L Jackson) and Agent Coulson have both recently made their debut in comics.
Haven't they already made this? These appeared online and as extras on the Thor and Cap Blu-rays, and one does use some footage from The Incredible Hulk.
What does it have to do with Avengers? Well, The Consultant clears up a couple questions caused by the Stark cameo in Hulk, and A Funny Thing is just Agent Coulson being awesome. But, these fill in some small holes in the marvel cinematic universe.
Mike says these are so Fun! They're both about three minutes, and both showcase a fun side of Coulson's personality. The Consultant seems to focus on his wit, humor, and willingness to work the system for what he thinks is best. A Funny Thing really highlights just how much of a bad-ass Coulson can be (despite his fondness for donuts).
I like The Consultant, because it fixes something Marvel could have easily ignored: the now irrelevant Stark cameo at the end of Hulk, which was made before anyone had any idea of what the heck Avengers could be or would be about. While most of the film is clips from Hulk, it's surprising how much Coulson's character come through.
A Funny Thing is just plain fun, and that's really all it is. Filling in the small gap between Iron Man 2 and Thor, the film features Coulson breaking up a gas station robbery. And it's AWESOME. And funny!
While these two short films don't add much tot the franchise as a whole, it's fun to see this unexpected fan favorite character break out on his own, if only for a few minutes.
Kate says these are great clips, mostly for how casually hilarious they are and how much information they deliver in three minutes. Of course Coulson would love big band! That is so right. and his casual, almost apologetic behavior with the cashier is also very right.
I agree with Mike that The Consultant puts Stark in context. It also brings up a nice extra layer to the superhero universe--the ongoing, internal rivalry between agencies. I found the entire discussion of Abomination ("He doesn't like that name") so fascinating, I started thinking, "Wow, they could have made Hulk about this!"
But mostly the shorts are a chance to see Coulson in action. I'm betting Gregg never saw the character's fandom coming. It is hard to decipher the je ne sais pas that makes the character so appealing, but I think the shorts help to decipher it: extra, extra dryness plus extreme efficiency, intelligence, and a cool head, not forgetting relentless courtesy, all of it masking competent kick-your-buttness.
He's Giles!
Showing posts with label Extra Review. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Extra Review. Show all posts
Saturday, April 28, 2012
Thursday, June 9, 2011
BREAK MOVIE REVIEW: Invictus
I recently saw Invictus and really enjoyed it. I finished the movie and thought, "Wow, this is an awesome film! I will totally get this out again."
I also thought, "I know why this film wasn't hugely popular."
I don't know if it appeared in theaters, but if so, it didn't make the waves of even The King's Speech.
The reason: a lack of a single character arc.
It is an exceptionally well-acted piece. Morgan Freeman is a cultural icon in his own right (even more so, I think, than Matt Damon who has that Gary Oldman-morphing quality), yet I never felt like I was watching Morgan Freeman. Rather, I felt like I was watching a consistent portrayal of Nelson Mandela. (I don't know how accurate the portrayal is since I know very little about Nelson Mandela, but Freeman never broke character.)
In typical amazing fashion, Matt Damon morphed, Gary Oldman-like, into Francois Pienaar. Damon is not only much shorter than Francois Pienaar but ten years older than Pienaar was in 1995. However, Damon really bulked up for the role. He is much more rugby-looking than in the Bourne films. This actually, surprisingly, makes him look younger.
And he does a superb job.
Perhaps too good.
I don't know what Francois Pienaar is actually like, but Damon plays him as a reserved minimalist who remains a reserved minimalist throughout the film. He also plays him as politically flexible but likely due more to his age/generation than anything else.
That is, he plays Pienaar as a person rather than as a character with an arc.
In a way, this is awesome since it is probably more accurate than a film like Remember the Titans where all the close-minded youngsters learn to be open-minded youngsters. However, this lack of arc gives Invictus a documentary, rather than a story feel. In fact, although Invictus more directly explores the political scene, it is much less message-heavy than Remember. This makes it rather relaxing to watch.
The film's political focus is Mandela, and I agree with Freeman et al. that using a specific story, the 1995 World Cup, was a better vehicle for exploring Mandela's character than trying to tell a straight historical biography. However, even with Mandela's character, nothing much changes. We learn a lot about the man; we don't really see any before and after alterations.
The film's change/arc is not to any person; rather, it is to THE COUNTRY. A change that big and abstract is extremely hard to pull off. In fiction-writing, I think it is impossible. Remember the Titans, although based on a true story, focused on one student's change of perspective, the student's girlfriend's change of perspective, and the one coach's change of perspective. Through those specific changes, the viewer saw the bigger historical picture.
In Invictus, the images of national jubilation, although awesome, don't resonate because the viewer isn't invested in any one person.
However, the movie IS worth watching. It keeps the interest. It is a fascinating view of two personalities I, personally, knew little about. (Not to mention a sport that is sort-of starting to make more sense to me.) And it does have an awesome pay-off!
Check back next Friday, June 17th, for our review of "Blink" from Doctor Who, Season 3!
I also thought, "I know why this film wasn't hugely popular."
I don't know if it appeared in theaters, but if so, it didn't make the waves of even The King's Speech.
The reason: a lack of a single character arc.
It is an exceptionally well-acted piece. Morgan Freeman is a cultural icon in his own right (even more so, I think, than Matt Damon who has that Gary Oldman-morphing quality), yet I never felt like I was watching Morgan Freeman. Rather, I felt like I was watching a consistent portrayal of Nelson Mandela. (I don't know how accurate the portrayal is since I know very little about Nelson Mandela, but Freeman never broke character.)
In typical amazing fashion, Matt Damon morphed, Gary Oldman-like, into Francois Pienaar. Damon is not only much shorter than Francois Pienaar but ten years older than Pienaar was in 1995. However, Damon really bulked up for the role. He is much more rugby-looking than in the Bourne films. This actually, surprisingly, makes him look younger.
And he does a superb job.
Perhaps too good.
I don't know what Francois Pienaar is actually like, but Damon plays him as a reserved minimalist who remains a reserved minimalist throughout the film. He also plays him as politically flexible but likely due more to his age/generation than anything else.
That is, he plays Pienaar as a person rather than as a character with an arc.
In a way, this is awesome since it is probably more accurate than a film like Remember the Titans where all the close-minded youngsters learn to be open-minded youngsters. However, this lack of arc gives Invictus a documentary, rather than a story feel. In fact, although Invictus more directly explores the political scene, it is much less message-heavy than Remember. This makes it rather relaxing to watch.
The film's political focus is Mandela, and I agree with Freeman et al. that using a specific story, the 1995 World Cup, was a better vehicle for exploring Mandela's character than trying to tell a straight historical biography. However, even with Mandela's character, nothing much changes. We learn a lot about the man; we don't really see any before and after alterations.
The film's change/arc is not to any person; rather, it is to THE COUNTRY. A change that big and abstract is extremely hard to pull off. In fiction-writing, I think it is impossible. Remember the Titans, although based on a true story, focused on one student's change of perspective, the student's girlfriend's change of perspective, and the one coach's change of perspective. Through those specific changes, the viewer saw the bigger historical picture.
In Invictus, the images of national jubilation, although awesome, don't resonate because the viewer isn't invested in any one person.
However, the movie IS worth watching. It keeps the interest. It is a fascinating view of two personalities I, personally, knew little about. (Not to mention a sport that is sort-of starting to make more sense to me.) And it does have an awesome pay-off!
Check back next Friday, June 17th, for our review of "Blink" from Doctor Who, Season 3!
Labels:
Extra Review,
Movies
Monday, July 5, 2010
Mike Takes On The Last Airbender
You can read Mike's in-depth and very funny review of The Last Airbender at Votaries of Horror.
Don't forget the pilot of Supernatural for this Friday!
Don't forget the pilot of Supernatural for this Friday!
Labels:
Extra Review,
Mike
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)