Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) – Review

Review: Captain America: The Winter Soldier is very entertaining with really great action and a nice tonal change of pace from most superhero adventure films. The film is about Steve Rogers (Captain America) still coming to terms with his place in the modern world, working for S.H.I.E.D. There is a conflict between his idealism and the manner by which S.H.I.E.D. wants to police the world (preemptively eliminating targets with huge flying gunships). Working with Natasha Romanoff (Black Widow) on a recent op, Rogers uncovers a secret conspiracy within S.H.I.E.D., one that changes everything and makes Rogers and Romanoff fugitives from S.H.I.E.D.

There are two things that stand out about The Winter Soldier right away. It is very violent and plays much more like a serious political thriller (with a lot of action) than a superhero adventure film, especially for the first two acts before it bows to the obligatory massive action set piece in the third act. There are great twists and a plot that is actually interesting. This film does not have to merely make due on the strength of its good characters and visual splendors (though, it also has both of those too).

Directors Anthony Russo and Joe Russo have completely changed the tone of the Captain America solo franchise, taking full advantage of Ed Brubaker’s great story (he also makes a cameo in the film). Captain America: The First Avenger is sort of hokey and is steeped in nostalgic charm, but that worked for that film (as it takes place during a different time with different values and realities). It succeeds not on its action beats (which are mostly boring) but on its character moments. The Winter Soldier has great action (maybe the best of any film so far in the MCU) and character moments. It is a superior, but different film. Paralleling the NSA, S.H.I.E.L.D. seemingly wants to monitor and control the people it is charged with protecting. The world is no longer about stopping evil in terms of a known entity like the Nazis or Hydra; good and evil being black and white. The world has digressed into a scary place in which evil is now potentially everywhere, hidden in plain sight, waiting to strike. Our modern world is one of fear and terror, and thus the Russo Brothers have adapted Captain America to be a beacon of hope and moral good in this world of grey.

Phase II of Marvel’s films has been so much better so far than Phase I. Each of the solo superhero films is better than any of the solo films in Phase I (personally, I rank them: Iron Man 3, The Winter Soldier, The Dark World, Iron Man, Thor, The First Avenger, Iron Man 2, and The Incredible Hulk). I also really like that each of the solo franchises has a different tone and style: Iron Man 3 feels like a classic 1980s/90s action film, The Dark World like a sci-fi/adventure fantasy, and now The Winter Soldier like a political thriller (similar to the Jack Ryan or Jason Bourne films, but with much bigger action sequences).

The Russo Brothers have a difficult narrative to manage with The Winter Soldier. There are many characters and the story has a lot going on. Like the best blockbuster directors, who need to balance the spectacle with the characters and story, the Russo Brothers create great character moments that fluidly exist within the bigger action sequences, which allows the film’s pacing to be rather tight and the narrative keeps moving forward; however, I am not sure younger viewers will quite find this to be the case. There are portions of the film that revolve around Rogers and Romanoff trying to uncover the truth behind the conspiracy, and these might play slower for young viewers (although, I am not sure this film is appropriate for those young viewers anyway, as again it is very violent, as Captain America certainly is not messing around). All the good action aside, the film really succeeds on the story work the Russo Brothers do with their characters. Maybe more so than any other MCU film to date (along with Iron Man 3, which is in some ways also a Tony Stark character piece), the narrative really digs deeply into its characters. The audience really gets to see behind the veil, especially with Rogers (and also to some extent Romanoff and Nick Fury).

MCU films still do not have great villains, however, outside of Loki (particularly when compared to The Dark Knight Trilogy). In The Winter Soldier, there is a hidden villain behind the conspiracy and then his henchmen, the most notable of which is the Winter Soldier (whose identity should not be a spoiler as it is obvious from any trailer, promo or merely looking at the cast list, but I will still treat it as one). The Winter Soldier as a character is fairly bland as he is basically a cold-hearted killing machine (he is essentially a Terminator), but that level of conviction is also kind of exciting, because the audience knows that this man will not hold up or stop coming, which in turn creates actual suspense when he engages Roger, Romanoff, et al. That said, I am hoping Joss Whedon can finally deliver another great villain into the MCU with Ultron.

The Winter Soldier is another example of Marvel’s dominance of superhero films in the present moment (as it has been ten years since Sam Raimi’s brilliant Spider-Man 2 and The Dark Knight Trilogy is at an end). Like each of the other Phase II films, The Winter Soldier is extremely entertaining, providing its solo character (or two characters, as it does feature two Avengers heavily) with his own great adventure, allowing the audience to become all the more invested in the MCU as a whole. And yet, it also works completely as a standalone political thriller that draws parallels to our own political climate.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: I was very surprised that Marvel hired the Russo Brothers to direct a big budget action film, as their CV was mostly made up of TV comedy like Arrested Development, Community, and Happy Endings (all good, but not big action things); and, their only feature film was You, Me and Dupree (which certainly does not inspire faith). Let me say: they did a fantastic job with The Winter Soldier. Their camera is always active in the scene, often creating interesting and exciting shots. I am very much looking forward to their work on Captain America 3 in 2016.

Composer Henry Jackman is no stranger to the superhero genre, having also scored Kick-Ass and X-Men: First Class. With The Winter Soldier, he again delivers a score that works well with the tone of the film while also giving it an epic superheroy feel. It is good work, as usual. Trent Opalock (who shot District 9) brings a great grittiness to the cinematography, almost completely contradicting with the gleam of The First Avenger, which nicely juxtaposes the differences in the world Rogers knew and the one he now finds himself in. I think the look of the film is tonally right on. Production designer Peter Wenham (who designed The Bourne Ultimatum) also grounds the film very much in the real world (as much as it can be) with a very real feeling and looking world for Rogers and company to inhabit.

There are a lot of characters in the film, and yet they are all served well by the narrative and give good performances. I really enjoyed the cameos/small roles from Gary Sinise’s voice, Steven Culp, Branka Katic, Danny Pudi (yes, Abed got in there), Aaron Himelstein, Jenny Agutter, Garry Shandling, Callan Mulvey, Toby Jones, Maximiliano Hernandez, Frank Grillo, Emily VanCamp, Cobie Smulders (hoping these two women might show up in future episodes of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.), and especially Hayley Atwell (who might be getting her own Marvel TV miniseries Agent Carter). Anthony Mackie, playing Sam Wilson/Falcon, brings a good foil for Steve Rogers to bounce off. Sam too is a good man returning from war a bit shaken, not really knowing what to make of life back in the world. Mackie plays Sam with a great sincerity that works very well in the developing of Sam’s friendship with Rogers. Sebastian Stan, playing the Winter Soldier, does a good job of looking heartless and cold, essential to the character. Robert Redford plays Alexander Pierce, a man who is at the top of S.H.I.E.L.D.’s hierarchy with Nick Fury. Redford brings the right balance of politician and war veteran to the character, making him very believable. Samuel L. Jackson reprises his role as Nick Fury, but he has never been better as the character nor had more to do (in terms of dramatic moments). Jackson is quite good in the film. Scarlett Johansson is also great as Natasha Romanoff. Her flirty work relationship with Rogers is so much fun and gives the film needed lighter moments amidst all the action and suspense. She is possibly the star of the film – that is except for the fact that Chris Evans is also wonderful as Steve Rogers. Evans has been good in other films and as other characters, but he is perfect as Rogers, a man who seems as wholesome as they come, but who is also not hesitant to carry out his mission (if he believes in it – which is what creates the tension in the film; he is a soldier, but more so a good man).

Summary & score: Captain America: The Winter Soldier is yet another great and entertaining film from Phase II of Marvel’s Cinematic Universe. The action is strong and big and the characters moments are very satisfying, but mostly the film is just a good political action/thriller. 8/10 

21 Jump Street (2012) – Review

Review: 21 Jump Street is a funny action comedy that hits the right comedic, action and dramatic notes, while making fun of itself at the same time. The film is about two cops who are screw-ups, and as such are transferred to a recently revived undercover unit forcing them to go back to high school to bust a drug ring. Directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller create sort of a duality to the film, in that it exists within its own real world while also breaking the fourth wall pointing out the almost post-nostalgia inherent in reviving a TV series in film form that most of the targeted audience never watched and the genre stereotypes of action comedies (and/or buddy comedies). For example, the two lead characters Schmidt and Jenko have a movie-based expectation of what being a cop should be like – explosions, car chases, shootouts, and so on – only to realize that their jobs are more mundane than action movies would have them believe, and then all these things happen within the course of their case. Another example has their police captain explaining that they are being transferred to a revived department from the 1980s, and goes off on a tangent about there being no more original ideas, eluding to what is going on in Hollywood currently (and for the last decade or so). These jokes work really well, because they invite the viewers in on the joke, in a sense speaking directly to them. But this would be all for naught if the characters were not relatable, Lord and Miller however do present Schmidt and Jenko in such a manner to get the audience behind them. Something that works really well is that Schmidt and Jenko are shown in the prologue (when they were in high school) as being the loser nerd and cool jock, respectively, but when they return undercover Lord and Miller reverse their roles, which creates both dramatic tension and comedic moments for the characters (which are again relatable to us the viewers). However, aside from Schmidt and Jenko, the supporting characters are not really given much to do other than to fill generic place holders like love interest or villain, holding back the narrative slightly. The audience cares about Schmidt and Jenko, which is the most important thing, but the stakes are not that high because none of the other characters really matter. The villains are never really developed so Schmidt and Jenko are never really in any real peril from the audience’s perspective. Molly is underwritten (though saved by a good performance) so the audience does not really care if it works out between her and Schmidt (we would like it to work out obviously, as we are told they go together narratively, but since Molly is underdeveloped it is not an essential dramatic moment for us). All that said, the point of 21 Jump Street is to be a very entertaining and funny action comedy, and that is what it is. Plus, it is a good overall film too.

Technical, aesthetic & acting achievements: Phil Lord and Chris Miller now have two well-received comedies to their names (this and Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs). They twist genre expectations and stereotypes for comedic effect making seemingly played out genres feel renewed (which is nothing new, but they do it well). With a sequel in the works (and assuming they return to helm it), I am interested to see if they can continue to keep the material fresh. Mark Mothersbaugh’s score fits the tone of the film, but mostly plays second fiddle to the great soundtrack (featuring among others Eminem, The Clash and N.W.A). Barry Peterson’s cinematography is fairly standard for the genre, as well, but the car chases and other action set pieces are very good and well-shot (but nothing special). Peter Wenham’s production design stands out among the aesthetics in the film. His sets for the 21 Jump Street station and Schmidt’s house are fantastic. The cast throughout does a good job delivering funny material. Johnny Simmons, Ice Cube, Nick Offerman, Jake M. Johnson, Ellie Kemper, and Johnny Depp all provide great bit stuff (especially Ice Cube and Kemper). Rob Riggle and Dave Franco are good in support, but they are not given too much to do really (Riggle just acts like he is slightly on the edge and Franco like he is super cool). Brie Larson is great as Molly, bringing spunk and humanity to an underdeveloped character. Both leads are fantastic, and are in large part responsible for the film being as good as it is. Jonah Hill plays Schmidt to be unconfident and desperate to be liked, which is a perfect match against Channing Tatum’s overly confident and entitled Jenko (never would have guesses that I would actually really enjoy performances by Tatum, but that is five in a row now, even sometimes in otherwise bad films).

Summary & score: 21 Jump Street delivers on what it promised to be: funny, action packed and highly entertaining. 7/10

Fast Five (2011) – Review

Review: Fast Five is exciting and well done – full of great action sequences, fast cars and good looking women. It is the pinnacle of what the franchise is about and the film that all future installments in the series should aspire to, as it is easily the best of the series (and will probably be among the best action films of the summer). Going in the audience expects three things: to be entertained, to not have to overly think and for the film to be flashy (both with hot cars and girls). Director Justin Lin (who also directed Tokyo Drift and Fast & Furious, which was fairly terrible) does his best work of the series (and his career, unless you count the Community episode Modern Warfare). The story is pretty boilerplate and the returning characters have all had previous films for the audience to get to know them – both these things actually help the film. Usually, recycling a tried and true narrative just makes for a tired film, but here Lin is able to take the narrative that everyone knows and tweak it just enough to make it fresh. He also knows what his audience wants and delivers very good action scenes that push the boundaries of reality a little but are wholly satisfying and entertaining. Lin also keeps the narrative moving forward and does not dwell too long on anything (which is essential with somewhat shallowly drawn characters and story). And while the characters are not given a ton of dramatic work (save maybe Dom, Brian and Mia), especially the new characters (specifically Elena who is fairly cliché, but it still works fine), it does not really matter because the audience already knows the returning characters and Lin has given them each just enough to remind the audiences as well. He has also catered the roles to fit the actors making the characters more transparent and thus not needing too much dramatic work as they are essentially who is playing them (of course with some differences). What also works well in the film is Lin and cinematographer Stephen Windon’s shooting style – it is gritty and kinetic enough to derive the intended impact, but is still clean and crisp enough to adhere to the series’ sleek and sexy tone and style. The action scenes in this film work better, far better, than in any of the previous films. Lin could have gone too far over-the-top with them, and almost does in some cases, but he is able to get right to the edge of what is believable in the series and deliver great stuff. All that being said, the film is still not great (unless compared against its series predecessors). It is an action film that does not try to be anything more (which is fine). Fast Five is fun and thrilling, not because of great character work but because of great pacing and action set pieces.

Technical and acting achievements: Director Justin Lin seems to have taken a page out of J.J. Abrams book with this film – as long as the film moves forward constantly and the action is well done, the film will be good and entertaining (though, I would save that Abram’s MI III has better developed characters due to Abram’s being a better filmmaker and storyteller). As stated above, (I think) this is his best work, turning a completely overdone series suddenly into one that is compelling and has enthusiastically anticipated future stories (all the more impressive considering he directed the two previous not installments, neither very good). The work of production designer Peter Wenham and D.P. Windon give the film a great look, upholding the series’ style while creating a deeper sense of urgency to the action drawing the audience in. Composer Brian Tyler’s score is loud and accompanies the action well. The cast is good, each playing to their strengths. Tyrese Gibson, Ludacris, Sung Kang, and Gal Gadot (who probably made herself into an it-girl if not a star with her look in the film) highlight the supporting players, while Dwayne Johnson is wonderfully himself in his embodiment of his character. Paul Walker, Jordana Brewster and Vin Diesel are all good in the leads (with Diesel doing the best work among the group).

Summary & score: Fantastic action, beautiful woman and awesome cars make Fast Five a triumphant film (in a series that has yielded maybe one ok film in four tries, previously). 7/10

Battle: Los Angeles (2011) – Review

Battle: Los Angeles is above all else a really entertaining sci-fi action war film. Director Jonathan Liebesman is not overly concerned with making a character drama, or really any of his characters have much of a backstory or real personality (aside from the main character), instead relying on tried and true genre clichés and character stereotypes. And most times this would be a mistake and take away from the film as a whole, but this movie is not about any of the characters, rather it is about the situation they are faced with. The drama of the moment and of the action takes hold of the audience. Liebesman structures the film to have a brief prologue showing quick character bits about the men the audience is to be following, just so they have a sense of who these men are – and sure this prologue plays heavily off typical scenarios of past war films, but it works and does not drag. After the prologue, the film is none-stop action (a bit like J.J. Abrams’s Mission: Impossible III). Liebesman is making a film purely about spectacle and entertainment – and at this he succeeds. The dialogue, however, is pretty tired and a little too cheesy, but the visuals and level of excitement and tension throughout do not really allow for the audience to dwell on it. Plus, this film is PG-13. If you are expecting realistic dialogue (something comparable to Generation Kill), the film would be R for sure, but still the dialogue certainly could (and should) of been better. Sure, the lame dialogue keeps this from being a great film, but it does not really hurt it too much either. Liebesman knows enough about narrative filmmaking to have one central character with a more fleshed out backstory, someone relatable to a higher degree, and the main character, SSgt. Michael Nantz (helped by the good performance by Aaron Eckhart) provides this for the audience. Liebesman also is able to shoot and stage his action set pieces very well. They are all intense and enthralling, completely commanding the attention of the audience, which is quite important, as action is the point of the film and to have it done so well, and everything look so good is a huge benefit to the film. A criticism of the film, though, is that all the members of the Marine Corps in the film are honorable men, there are no deviant or problematic characters at all, which is possible given the small size of the group, but not too realistic. But again, this is not that film. What makes it ok is that this is not a film about the U.S. Marine Corps fighting against another human enemy in a foreign country that most of them know nothing about and do not understand. This takes place in LA (home soil) against a universal enemy, and thus all the possible compassion and support is completely bestowed on the Marines (whereas, in something like Saving Private Ryan, it is humans fighting humans – each side with their strengths and flaws both moral and social). The continual action and suspense also eliminates, somewhat, the analysis of plot-holes, or elements of the film that do not seem to make a ton of sense – however I chose to take the film at face value and not over analyze every detail (I mean, if Aliens have huge space ships that can travel across our and their solar system(s), then they probably have the technology to wipe us out fairly easily, but again I take the events in the film at face value). The location of the film, Los Angeles, also gives the audience an immediate stake in the outcome, which again plays into the lack of character development, because it is not really needed. So while the film has bad dialogue, little character development or real people and questionable plot points, it is none the less a very entertaining and good film, as it is able to grab the viewer emotionally through its chilling visuals initially and then, through the very good use of tension and anticipation by Liebesman, hold on to the viewer until the last frame. The viewer completely buys into the spirit of the Marines – first in, last out. To some degree, this could be taken as a propaganda recruiting video for the Marine Corps, as they are shown in a very good and impressive light (which I have no issue with). All that being said, Battle: LA is a good film upon its first viewing – very exciting and action packed (though, I suspect some of the allure will wear off on multiple viewings due to some of its constructions pieces being in poor order).

Technical and acting achievements: director Jonathan Liebesman has made his best film to date, getting away from the horror genre (which typically seems to be a tough genre to make good films in). He definitely shows here that he can shoot action very well with Battle: LA and I look forward to seeing if he can rescue the Clash of Titans series from the rubbish bin with his work on the sequel (Wrath of the Titians). Composer Brian Tyler’s score works well with the drama of the film. The same can be said for Lukas Ettlin’s cinematography. Visually, the film seems to owe a lot of films like Black Hawk Down and the style of Paul Greengrass. Peter Wenham’s production design is very impressive. The sets and look of the film are fantastic and really draw the audience in. While the characters did not have much character work to do, there were still some good performances. Will Rothhaar and Michelle Rodriguez stood out in their supporting roles, and Aaron Eckhart was good in his leading role, which helped anchor the drama.

Battle: Los Angeles is not going to work for everyone, it has a few glaring issues. But taken as intended, it is a very gripping and engaging film about the triumph of human will. 8/10