Captain America: The First Avenger (3 Stars - 4 Stars)

            Captain America was done exceptionally well for a superhero movie that mainly talks about a hero. To me, this was done with a quality that only shows up in traditional superheroes. To clarify, many superhero movies, nowadays, questions their positions as a superhero; such as Spider-Man, from Spider-Man 2, Batman, from The Dark Knight, and the Watchmen from Watchmen. In this movie, they've decided to go with the old roots of what made superheroes truly remarkable. Kids need role models because they need, not a superhero, but a real hero.

            The most important factor that went into play was Steve Rogers and his role as Captain America. We are given a scrawny looking Steve Rogers, who's surprisingly played by Chris Evans, who gets bullied and picked on for his physical limitations. He wants to enlist into the army, only to get rejected. What really defines Steve Rogers is his bravery amongst anything. When the colonel (played by Tommy Lee Jones) throws a fake grenade at the troops, Steve goes at it and sacrifices his life for his troops.

            When we see the new and enhanced Steve Rogers, his personality and bravery is still retained. The only difference is his only physical body. When he saves the day for the first time, people start using him to sell war bonds. Although he's technically helping a cause, in a cheery and delightful patriotic montage of a campy Captain America, Steve wants to do more than just that. He becomes a celebrity, however, he wants to leave that behind in order to be a hero. Like any Greek myth hero, the hero must go into hell and back, facing death face to face. In this movie, Captain America decides to infiltrate behind enemy lines in order to rescue hundreds of POW. Again, a running theme of the movie is Captain America's self-sacrificing bravery in the face of death. In the end of the movie, there is a kid with a garbage pail painted as Captain America's shield. to me, these are the true reasons on why we look up o certain heroes like Captain America.

            A hero, however, is nothing without his supporting characters. Despite Tommy Lee Jones' role as Colonel Philips, he's actually quite witty and funny at times. Peggy Carter, the love interest, was done exceptionally well as she partly serves as Captain America's motivation. I didn't like Stanley Tucci's role as the scientist, Dr. Erskine, who concocted the serum. He felt overacted and his accent sticks out like a sore thumb. I also didn't like the fact that we aren't given much information about the squad members who helps Captain America. However, the star supporting actor would have to be Johann Schmidt, AKA, Red Skull, played by Hugo Weaving. He is a Nazi officer who went rogue and formed his own legion called HYDRA. His menacing red face is shown in shadows at first, and later shown to Captain America. He affectively plays as a great villain, being that most superhero movies are defined by their villains.

            The only real problem I had with the movie, ironically, were the visual aspects. The set design in this Neo World War II universe was done really well, and yet, it still retained some of that feeling of being in the 40's. The look of the film looked really nice, despite having some obvious green screen moments and jarring 3D scenes that are not meant for 2D screens. There were certain shots that felt too visually dark and unrealistic, and it took away the superhero feel when we are shown green screen shots.

            When I went in the theater, I came in with a pessimistic feel, due to Captain America's ideology. One, he takes a serum that looked like an enhanced version of Steroids. When I saw the movie, I thought that really deserved that power, because he was a great human being in every way, except for his physical body. I didn't like the fact that he used a gun in the trailer. Again, we never see him with a gun that often and instead uses his shield, showing that he plays defensively instead of shooting people in cold blood. The gritty looking army uniform he wore wasn't all that appealing in the trailer; however, he does wear his spandex and chainmail uniform in the movie, and it does look stupid. After a while, I started to really like the gritty looking uniform. It felt needed for telling the origins of Captain America by making him look like the prototype of superheroes.

            The reason why I didn't like Thor so much, was because of the over extensive use of SHIELD. The movie robs Thor and becomes a movie that leads to The Avengers. In Captain America, we never see much of SHIELD, except in the beginning, and in the end. They felt like a cliffhanger, giving a better anticipated feel for The Avengers.

We've gone so far into a new vision of superheroes that we've totally forgotten about their roots. This movie reminded us of the good old days when superheroes were simply the all around hero. It's a great traditional superhero movie. I just wished that it was shot in a traditional way.

Thor (2 1/2 Stars - 4 Stars)

            There were some good moments and there were some bad moments. However, the most perplexing thing about this movie was that they didn't answer "why." Why should I watch this movie? There is usually a reason why we watch superhero movies. We want to be in their shoes and have mystical powers, or fancy gadgets. So what does Thor offer, other than the hammer?

            The movie starts out with a narrative about Odin fighting against the Frost Giants of Jotunheim, setting up the story. We then see that Thor is going to ascend the throne, but before he does, he goes to Jotunheim, the realm of the Frost Giants, and rage war against them with his buddies. This leads him to being banished and having his brother, Loki, take the throne momentarily. This is also where we meet the Earth characters. We first have Jane Foster, her annoying friend, Darcy, and Erik. Together, they help nurse Thor back to life and although there are some comedic value between these characters, the idea of this was flat out uninspiring. Not only that, it plays as a clueless sitcom of Thor walking around and making a fool out of himself. This is a superhero movie, not a sitcom.

            The thing I liked about this movie was the personality behind the characters, despite having them saying godlike boring dialogue. Thor was impulsive, Loki wanted power, and Jane was helpful and kind. Loki's performance had me at best because in the end, we start caring for him, despite being the bad guy. Thor does get too arrogant in the beginning and it gets ridiculous for some time. The Earth characters do not interest me so much because the movie is not really about them. The relationship with Jane and Thor, though awkward at first, sort of worked out in the end. I also felt a changed in character when Thor fights the Automaton. There was some tension in that moment, but the real important part of that was not the fighting, but the character and his realization of his flaw. I thought that worked pretty well.

            To some degree, the special effects were not jarring and it worked pretty well. There were some slanted angle shots that felt unnecessary, but the 3D was not in your face 3D. The scenery in Asgard were done pretty well, even though it was full on CGI. I even liked the rainbow bridge and the gate. The beginning battle scene, although pointless, was done pretty well and I'll give them credit for that.

            The reason why I do not like this movie is because of the marketing scam behind it. It's all a set up for "The Avengers." for the same reason why they killed "Iron-Man 2," the SHIELD people will not leave the superheroes alone. The whole confrontation scene where Thor tries to pull Mjolnir out from the ground was pointless. The whole reason why that scene was there was for him to realize he was not worthy when he couldn't pull the hammer out. We didn't have to go through a pointless fight scene and a pointless introduction to Jeremy Renner's character. To me, the SHIELD people were just fillers and nothing more.

            Why was this movie worth watching? There was no part that was memorable. It wasn't a bad movie, but it wasn't inspirational. Everyone wants to be Superman, Spider-Man, Batman, or Iron-Man. Everyone wants to fight crime, or save people from a burning building. We want what superheroes have, and that is the ability to do what's right. They are the heroes that we all wish to be when reflecting in a mirror. In the end, I had to ask this question. Who would want to be Thor? 

Attack the Block (3 1/2 Stars - 4 Stars)

            This particular alien movie, along with District 9, is shot entirely on the setting that plays a key role in the movie. Often people will talk about how this movie is this year's District 9, where the movie depicts aliens in a poor and forgotten part of the world that's not a part of a huge worldly pandemic alien invasion. They both also show a very fresh cast of people who are surprisingly well done and are judged purely on their ability on whether they can act, and not their celebrity status. The movie does have Nick Frost; however, he's not a main character.

            The movie centers around five hoodlums around a South London block, led by the dominant figure, Moses. The movie also revolves around a nurse name Sam, who just got mugged by the hoodlums. After a mysterious thing crash lands onto a car, the hoodlums chase after the alien thing, kills it, and bring it to their flat. However, more of these things seems start to appear everywhere around the block, and they are bigger, aggressive looking, and would kill if it wants to.

            This movie is a type of survival movie that I really like. It takes place in one night, and we see almost everything that's happening. It's like a type of zombie movie where the survivors are well prepared and advance, later retreating after being outnumbered. It's a type of movie where the group high fives each other as they're about to go into a huge fight. After finding out that the alien invasion has started, the hoodlums go into their flats and gear up with fireworks, a bat, a sword, and a knife. After being prepared to go on an all out assault with the "don't mess with our turf" spirit, they retreat into the block after being outnumbered with the bigger looking aliens, or, the big Gorilla Wolf motherf**kers.

            The running time for this movie was only 88 minutes; however, the movie has a great energetic feel from the beginning, to the end. It's extremely straightforward and it gets straight to the point. Everybody wants to go on an adventure to kill these aliens. Afterwards, everyone's life is at stake and end up fighting in order to stay alive. Even their pot driven conversations are worth listening to as each and every one of these characters are interesting and not cardboard clichés. There is a great spirit in this movie that's not found in staged mainstream movies. It's the kind of spirit that kids want to emulate after watching too much zombie action movies. For example, there are two little kids named Mayhem and Probs who are only about half the size of the hoodlums, but they carry around, what seems to be a toy gun, and a water gun, showing the aliens they mean business. In the trailer, I thought, "why does the kid have a water gun?" The answer, it's all in the spirit of the movie, like the spirit of preparing for a zombie apocalypse that'll never ever happen.

            Despite being hoodlums who've just mugged an innocent woman, we actually start to slowly relate to these kids who aren't just looking for trouble to brew. We get to especially get to relate to the de facto leader, Moses, who tries his best to lead the group into safety. At first, we see him as a punk who steals from people. When the first alien crash lands into Earth, Moses was the one who kills it. As everything starts to go downhill, the hoodlums have to team up with Sam, the nurse, who need her nurse expertise to treat a leg wound.

            For a low budget movie, made by a first time movie director, the movie has a great sense of using suspense, the "less is more" concept, and the use suspension of disbelief. Obviously, Joe Cornish is going to have a bright future ahead of him. He did his homework, and he knows what life is like in the South London block. This alien movie is a type of alien movie that works as a personal movie, where the visuals go hand in hand with the characters as they see this mayhem strictly through their point-of-view. There are moments where the scenes have darkness and smoke that seems conventional but surprisingly works to its advantage.

            It's very interesting how the hoodlums have a very strong South London accent, and because of their accent, the audience in America might get lost in their jargon. Sometimes, when I look up British comedians who joke around about current events in Britain or imitate a semi well known British person, I would get completely lost. I thought the same thing would happen in this movie; but instead, I totally understood almost everything that they're saying, despite having not recognized some of their slang. They do talk a bit fast at times, but it's really the character's action and the character's themselves that's emphasized. It's not a Jersey shore thing, it's a universal thing that anyone can recognize. If they were speaking in a foreign made up language, then I would still understand them in the movie.

13 Assassins (3 1/2 Stars - 4 Stars)

            This is a monumental samurai film that's thought to be a dead genre that used to realm supreme during Kurosawa's reign behind the camera. It has everything that a good samurai film has, all the way down to their costumes, katana blades, and mannerism.

            One of my favorite movies of all time is Seven Samurai, and there are many aspects of 13 Assassins that are borrowed from Seven Samurai. The two movie plays with the rules of the main characters being terribly outnumbered and yet they must find an ambush like tactic to obtain the upper hand. The movie even has the idea of having an incompetent loser as a part of the team. Seven Samurai only had six samurais. 13 Assassins only had twelve assassins. I did like Toshio Mifune's character and purpose in "Seven Samurai" because he actually did the most work and had a passionate like drive. In this movie, the bumbling idiot is more of a mysterious character who doesn't even uses a katana blade.

            The look of the movie is something I've never seen in any mainstream samurai movie for a very long time. When we imagine samurais, we would have them wear those giant armor and scary mask like helmet. In this movie, the costumes are simplistic. The 13 samurais wear black, while Lord Naritsugu and his guards wear white.

            Like most of Takashi Miike movies, the villains are overemphasized. In Ichi the Killer, we have Kakihara, a sadistic yakuza enforcer. In Audition, we have Asami, a sadistic torturer who appears innocent. In this movie, we have Lord Naritsugu. His performance is not so emphasized to the point where the movie is solely about him, but we get to know so much of him and his sinister nature as a ruler and as a human being.

            The first half of the movie contains a huge buildup and that's what I like. Action scenes are only good if it means something. If the samurais are fighting just for the sake of fighting, then the ending would've not been so interesting. The first half of the movie plays a great big lead up to the big climactic ending. We are introduced to Lord Naritsugu and find out that he's a wretched and vile human being and should be fit for attaining political power. We are then introduced to Shinzaemon and his plot to assassinate the evil lord. Through this, he gathers eleven samurais for the job. We spend about an hour and fifteen to know these characters and because of that, the big ending is epic.

            The huge battle scene was probably one of the best movie fight scene of this year so far. It consists of thirteen samurais versus 200 hundred guards. The thirteen samurais must allocate their resources in order to survive enough to kill Lord Naritsugu. Through this, they used arrows, explosives, giant gates to separate the guards, and rocks if they're really desperate. Although there was some CGI placed in some scenes, the fight felt real due to the use of a real location and the use of real sword fighting. There are certain stylized parts in the battle, but the sword fight looked as if it wasn't planned out and felt natural. The samurais don't do impressive feats that looks impressive. They're basically trying to survive by cutting down as many guards as possible.

            This movie is a Takashi Miike movie and although I never did like his other movies, Miike shows us how good of a filmmaker he is. He's notable for making gory unwatchable movies; however, the gore and violence must play a role in the story. In this movie, the Samurai holds up a parchment that reads "total massacre." It's supposed to be bloody and gory and Miike does have his moments of bloody pleasures. But the bottom line is, Miike finally serves the tone correctly while satisfying his own directorial trademarks. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I can safely say that there is one Takashi Miike movie that I actually critically like.

            13 Assassins was a pretty damn good movie. It encompasses many principles of that which made Seven Samurai a great movie, as well as going with the idea of facing enemies that outnumber them a billion to twelve. It's the first respectable Takashi Miike film and it's an overall good samurai epic.

50/50 (4 Stars - 4 Stars)

            The title implies that the main character, Adam (Gordon-Levitt) has a 50% chance of dying from the cancer he's diagnosed with. That means the movie will go either way where he's either going to live or die. However, the movie never focuses on the fact on whether he lives or not. I could care less on which ending they would use. 50/50 is a comedy that uplifts itself from its comedic backdrop and turns it into a heartbreaking drama about friendship and family.

            So far, this movie is possibly the best movie that uses cancer as its main topic, and because cancer is a serious topic, someone decided to use it as an opportunity to put it into a comedy. However, the jokes used in this movie are not so much foul or in bad taste as it would if a horrible raunchy comedy writer/director worked on it. Like the witty humor in Juno, this movie aims to reach for that same goal by using cancer and turning it into a witty comedy with witty dialogue. The fact of the matter is, if I can laugh at something that’s serious and frowned upon if laughed at, then the movie has done its dutiful job.

            The movie starts with a relatively young and healthy individual who complained of simple back pains. After the reports from the doctor, Adam is diagnosed with spinal cancer and looks it up to find that the Chemotherapy has 50% chance of success. However, when he tells his friend, his girlfriend, and his family, their lives start to change.

            Cancer is more of a calling of life before it ends. It's an ailment that cries out "seize the day" where patients will get to finally do what they want to do. This movie tells a bigger truth about cancer, and it shows from the writer, Will Reiser, who survived his encounter and passes his experience on to this movie. In this movie, we see depression, anguish, a huge sense of denial, a great deal of internal pain that's impossible to release until the day of the operation. Because of this, I respect this movie and shun away most other movies that uses cancer as a clichéd plot device or to all of a sudden, create sympathy towards a character.

            During his Chemotherapy, he sits next to two old cancer patients, Alan and Mitch, who are surprised at Adam's young age. They call it waste that he's got a whole life ahead of him and that it could be cut short at any moment. The conversations that they have are not usually not cancer or death related. Instead, they mostly talk about pot. Because this is somewhat labeled as a slacker comedy, the movie has to add pot into the equation.

            More importantly, Adam learns about what it truly feels to live life like it's about to end any moment. He learns to be more in touch with his mother, he takes care of his dog named Skeletor, even though he hated him at first, and he finally does what he truly wanted with his girlfriend and her painting. He learns about true friendship even if Kyle can be annoying at times.

            The last moments of the movie were a true pleasure to watch for I nearly cried when we see everything leading up to whether Adam lives or not. We all want him to live, but it's 50/50. We can't choose on whether it's a boy or a girl. All we can do is waiting, like all of the characters.

            There are some fun moments where Kyle does try to persuade Adam to use his cancer to pick up chicks, to which Adam replies, “I look like Voldemort.” They even threw in a Patrick Swayze joke in there even though it felt too soon.

            This movie seems to have the star cast. Joseph Gordon-Levitt makes a strong performance with the dilemma he's given Anna Kendrick as the amateur doctor gives the movie a warm feel as she tries to connect with Adam with just a single physical connection through touching Adam. Adam's mother, played by Anjelica Huston, does a great job as a loving overly concerned mother. However, I give my kudos to Seth Rogen as Adam's best friend. Although at times he'll act like the normal Seth Rogen we've seen in all of his other comedies, Seth's performance shows that there is more to him than just comedy. There is something in this movie that shows that he's not just a type cast.

            This movie is possibly the best movie about cancer, trumping that of Terms of Endearment. It’s a movie that handled its material with delicate care, making this possibly one of the funniest and saddest movie of the year. I’ve read in an article that happiness has a combating chance of prolonging one’s death from cancer, as if it was psychosomatic. After all, smile is the best medicine.

Source Code (3 1/2 Stars - 4 Stars)

            What would you do with your life if you knew that you would only have eight minutes left to live? What would happen if you could go back in time and fix your problems? What if the life you knew was fake and that you've found the "creator" of the world? These are some of the questions offered in the philosophical, action thriller movie by Duncan Jones. At first, Duncan Jones seemed to make a pretty good indie movie on the moon. He studied Philosophy in college and decided to apply his learning into the two movies he's made.

            The movie starts out with a normal everyday situation with Colter Stevens as a passenger of a train that's about to go off by a hidden bomb. However, the conflict is, where is the bomb, the detonator, and who is the bomb maker or the one setting off the bomb? It turns out that Stevens was in a program called "Source Code." The program works with the last eight minute memory of a passenger, Sean Fentress, on the train and is replaced with Stevens. He could do anything in the span of those eight minutes, but must oblige to Quantum Physics, such as, he has to die in some way. Through this, he interrogates people, he finds a phone on the bomb and needs to finds the caller. He looks for suspicious people and looking for a weapon. Each of these scenarios offer us something new and it advances the story. All the while, Stevens finds out that he was in a crash and he wants to find the truth of his own existence.

            It's sad that it's only a program. If life was a program, then what's the point of living? This was what Stevens was going through. He could only tamper with the past in order to save the future. The past, however, is all gone. The events could not be changed. it could be repeated over and over again, but it cannot change. In the movie, Stevens falls for a woman passenger, Christina, and he vows to actually save her, even though she's already dead. It's also sad to believe that when you realize that the environment you live in doesn't exist and is only concocted by higher beings, then you would have to rethink at the point and purpose of living. This movie is interesting because Stevens can reason with the people from Source Code. He tries to reason with them, and even bargains for an ultimatum.

            This movie is a fantasy movie. Basically, what I'm saying is that it's a movie that we wish we could be a part of. In the movie, Groundhog Day, the main character has to relive the same day over and over again. Because of this, he takes advantage of it, he suffers, and he changes. This is what also happens in Source Code. Stevens would make mistakes and have the opportunity to learn from them and fix them. He has the opportunity to be a hero of a story that doesn't really matter. He had the ability to listen to his parents as they heard the news of his death. The ending, especially was what truly made it a good fantasy piece. (Spoiler) In the end, he requested to die after he does one final mission. In this last simulation, he stops the bomb, stops the bomb maker, and he gets the girl. As the plug was pulled, his life ends and pauses on a kiss. A single moment stuck in time was what made it touching.

            The Cloud Gate, the sculpture shown at the end of the film, represents the infinite possibilities of you seeing your reflection. The movie emphasizes on the infinite possibilities of an alternative universes that Stevens has to go through. It also represents the unpredictability of the film. In this movie, there are many Red Herrings, and dead ends.

            Alfred Hitchcock said that suspense is not about a bomb blowing up from underneath a table. Suspense is the fact that you know that there's a bomb under the table and you don't know when it's going to go off. In this movie, I could care less about the style of the explosion and focus on the meaning. Nowadays, visual directors focus on the fireworks rather than why they're shooting them in the sky. In this movie, the way suspense is generated is by the eight minute countdown to the bomb, disarming the bomb, or waiting for the inevitable. The movie is not much of an action movie, nor is it a movie about a bomb that's about to blow up. It's more of a character's journey towards finding out the truth externally, as well as internally.

            The trailer does no justice to this movie at all. It shows "Source Code" as a cheap thriller that looked recycled. The movie didn't have much interest to the public audience because it was, quote on quote, original. I highly recommend this movie. Get some fresh air, and watch something that's original. 

Rango (3 1/2 Stars - 4 Stars)

            Perhaps a great way to start the movie year of 2011. Rango is an extremely original, yet daring piece of a story. It's adventurous, and yet surreal, despite being a Nickelodeon movie. The movie plays as a Western with desert animals and has a Chameleon who goes by Rango as the main character, despite stealing it from a Durango bottle. It's self-reflective, meaning, it makes itself aware that the movie is a movie. In fact, the owls even mention in the trailer that he's going to die.

            The movies starts with a pet Chameleon getting stranded in a desert. Here, he meets an Armadillo who constantly speaks in metaphor. He moves onto the town, Dirt, where he feels unwelcomed at first, but is gained respect when he accidently takes down a hawk. Because of this, the mayor offers Rango the title, Sheriff. He also talks about the shortage of water, which is the equivalent to money in the desert, and that the water bank reserve is low on water. Rango goes on a mission to find out why there is a shortage, but he ends up finding a bigger mystery himself.

            The movie makes numerous references to many other movies. As an avid movie watcher, I had fun spotting out the many movie reference. The whole plot was revolved around Chinatown, which basically about water and someone taking it. There are many Spaghetti Western film references, especially the "Man With No Name" trilogy. There was a trench scene (Star Wars), and there were a swarm of incoming bats flying (Apocalypse Now). In fact, you might catch a small glimpse of one of Johnny Depp's past human character in this movie. The movie also breaks the fourth wall by having the four owls talk about the future of the main character, such as stating on how he will die. There are also the many conventional Western imagery to gives us a nostalgic feel when we are remembered by them. There is the riding with the sun in the background shot, the main character entering the saloon filled with a mysterious unfriendly atmosphere, and of course, the dueling scenes that involve cutting back and forth, along with a medium wide shot of both characters. It was referencing and parodying off of Westerns so much, that you can even argue that it drew inspirations from Blazing Saddles. Even though it's a parody of certain films, it's got to be one of the most original work of this year so far.

            The special effects in this movie is worth the price of the ticket stub. It would work as a 3D movie, and yet it chose not to do so which gained my respect as an aesthetic choice. The great detail in Rango's feature, to the way water is featured and animated, and the color temperature made it feel really dry and bony of an atmosphere. Warning, do not watch this movie while being thirsty. It's torture. Not only that, each and every character was different and unique. One was green, one was a menacing rattlesnake, one has only one ear, another has an arrow in its eye. Rango has a great deal of body language. He's jumpy, he bounces off the wall, and he's constantly in motion. We can see him when he's scared, confident, and even more so when he's witty.

            The script is really witty for a Western movie. It was directed by Gore Verbinski, the Pirates of the Caribbean guy, and it was written by an Oscar nominated writer. The way the story is setup is really weird and even surreal. For one, Rango notes that he wants to be a hero, but a hero must be thrust into a situation. Right after he says this, he is thrusted in a situation. The unnecessary owls talk about his dilemma and his future actions and even interact with Rango himself. The characters will do the silliest things that will only happen in an animated comedy. It has a wise old sage who's mystical and noble, a damsel in distress, a big and scary villain, and a villain who betrays the people. It has everything that a normal movie has, and yet it seems really new for a movie.

            Ultimately, Johnny Depp is what's called a "Chameleon Actor," meaning, he can act in any performance, whether it's a pirate, a horrible movie director, a chocolate factory owner, and even a rebellious druggie on the quest for the American dream. In this movie he literally plays a chameleon. It's an action adventure, it's a western parody, it's funny, surreal, and it's animated. It's well made, in terms of special effects, and yet it has a really good story. So much is shoved in this kid's movie, and yet, it was great fun watching something fresh off of the movie tree.