REVIEW: Russell Madness

Right. So, the first thing we're greeted with upon starting up Russell Madness is a big logo that says "AIR BUD ENTERTAINMENT"; apparently the Air Bud brand has become so profitable, it's split off into it's own, sentient being. The fact that the studio bringing us this movie about a dog who wrestles people is named after a movie about a dog that plays basketball is about as reassuring as one would imagine; right away, Russell Madness lets us know with absolutely no pretension that we're in for some high-octane garbage.

The plot involves a Jack Russell Terrier named Russell (get it?); because he urinates on everyone, no one ever wants to take him home from the pet store. Given the amount of affection one of the pet store clerks seems to show towards the little fella, you'd think that they could be bothered to housebreak him (considering they've already gone through the trouble of giving him a terrible name), but I digress. It's during this early scene that our worst fear is confirmed; the dog talks. Not only does it talk, it's voiced by Sean Giambrone; I don't want to be mean, but this kid needs to go through puberty at least once before he ever sets foot near a microphone again. His voice sounds roughly like if June Foray were recorded on vinyl, up-pitched, and said record was scratched with a rusty needle. So yes, the dog is unpleasant to listen to. But back to what this movie calls a plot; after learning that he's basically a reject and will be sent to the pound (where all the reject dogs end up, I guess), Russell escapes through a comedic chase scene that we don't get to see for some reason (an odd editing choice I'm almost thankful for) until he eventually ends up at the historic Ferraro Wrestling Arena and wanders into the ring during a match. For some reason, this dog is really good at ricocheting off ropes, vaulting from turnbuckles, and putting grown men in chokeholds, so the family that owns the arena decides to continue endangering this animal if it means lots of profit and hits on YouTube. The story from here on is pretty much what you'd expect from a kids' movie about an underdog (get it?) athlete coming from meager beginnings.

If you guessed that an evil executive enters the picture and tries to ruin everything with a lot of fixed fights and relentless merchandising, then you're either too old or too smart to enjoy Russell Madness. The antagonist comes in the form of John Ratzenberger, playing Mick Vaughn, a character that is in no way, shape, or form meant to be a legally-safe parody of Vince McMahon. He runs the Wrestlers United Federation, also known as WUF (GET IT?); he's an evil, rich jerk who wants to take all the sport and spirit out of wrestling by making it into pure, predetermined entertainment designed to sell action figures and lunch boxes. If you can't tell already, the makers of this film really hate the WWE. I half expected to see CM Punk with a writer's credit at the end. The main human cast is composed of the family that takes Russell in; we've got the dad who kinda looks like a cross between Jeff Goldblum and Neil Gaiman, the mom who always seems to have her eyes frighteningly wide-open, the son who wears a trilby to school in one scene, and the daughter who tries to deliver snarky, self-referential dialog (but it doesn't really work out because she's, like, six). There's also a talking monkey voiced by Will Sasso. Not only is he the gruff trainer with the heart of gold, he's also the vehicle for a million and one jokes about bananas. Because I'm not sure if you're aware of this, dear reader, but monkeys enjoy bananas. The WWE's John Morrison also shows up as the WUF Title Holder, the Hammer; he's essentially some kind of hybrid of Ric Flair and Bret Hart. Unlike the audience, he seems to be having fun, so I can't really fault him for that.

If I had to say something nice about this stupid, stupid movie, it's that it's hilarious. Not in a good way, mind, but surely that has to count for something. The first time we see Russell actually fight someone is one of the most amazing scenes ever committed to film. Imagine a poorly-made dog puppet putting a huge, confused man in a choke-hold. Now imagine that this scene is played 100% straight; like, we're supposed to be invested in this dog's moment of triumph. That's what we get when we see this tiny dog hop into a wrestling ring with some giant men in stupid outfits. If you ever wanted to see a Jack Russell Terrier fight a mummy before a cheering crowd, this is the movie for you.

I almost forgot to mention, Fred Willard is in this movie, playing a wrestling commentator. Yes, he's basically doing the same thing he did in Best In Show and yes, he's still one of the best things in the movie despite his entire role being a watered-down rehash. So that's something else in the film's favor. I'm on a roll with praising this thing right now, so I'll also say I really enjoyed the subtle little running gag involving the action figure that Hunk the Monkey carries around. The joke is that this monkey has been living in this abandoned wrestling theater since the 1980's and his only company has been an action figure of a wrestler known as Il Maniac; so he carries it around and talks to it as if it's his friend. The real joke comes in when we see the action figure change poses and expressions in between shots. It's actually a pretty charming gag and it shows a level of subtlety I wouldn't have expected to see in this movie about a dog who becomes a pro wrestler. So there, a few things I actually liked about Russell Madness. On the other hand, the writing, acting, direction, cinematography, story, pacing, special effects, choreography, set design, costume design, voice acting, editing, music, and basically every other aspect of the film is complete and utter gutter trash of the highest caliber, and that I simply cannot abide.

Russell Madness is not the worst movie I've ever seen, and that is the highest compliment I can give it. That said, it is most definitely one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen. It has no reason to exist; as popular as pro wrestling is, was, and will continue to be, there was absolutely no demand for a movie about a dog that wrestles people. Hell, the climax is just two burly dudes trying to beat up a kid and his puppy. It's just so mind-numbingly idiotic, I still can't believe this is a thing that exists, let alone a thing that made it to theaters. The most shocking part is that I can almost see this working; had they dropped the sappy, hackneyed moral about family and friendship and instead made this a Josie and the Pussycats-esque parody of the WWE, this totally could have worked. I can't believe I'm sitting here saying "I wish Russell Madness from Air Bud Entertainment had taken more risks", but this is the point that this movie has brought me to. It's stupid and boring and it has absolutely nothing that justifies its existence. It is the cinematic equivalent of a squeaky fart at the dinner table; a few might find it funny because it stinks so bad, but no one's gonna care about it twenty four hours later.

REVIEW: Robocop

With a title like Robocop, you'd probably expect this 1987 action flick to be nothing but schlock. You'd be partially right; a film about a police officer in dystopian Detroit who is murdered and subsequently resurrected as a law-bringing cyborg is definitely going to exude its fair amount of cheese. However, like the titular officer himself, the film (while looking a bit silly and clunky on the outside) has a very human spirit within.

The plot, as one would expect, involves a cop. A Robocop, as it were. Officer Alex Murphy (Peter Weller) is an all-around good guy family man, transferred to a beleaguered precinct in the heart of a vaguely futuristic Detroit. Crime runs rampant and the police force has been privatized by the mega-corporation known as Omni Consumer Products. After Murphy is brutally murdered by a gang of criminals led by the sadistic Clarence Boddicker (Kurtwood Smith), he is brought back to life by OCP scientists in the form of Robocop, the future of law enforcement. The film then follows Robocop as he gradually begins to remember his life as Alex Murphy, setting out on a quest to bring the men who killed him to justice. It's a classic B-movie revenge story told in a suprisingly sophisticated fashion. For example, I particularly enjoyed the sequence in which Murphy actually becomes Robocop. We end up seeing things from his point of view, giving us a feeling for just how terrifying and uncomfortable it would be to be turned from a man into a product. Throughout the entire film, Robo is referred to by OCP executives as their property, a device manufactured in their labs to be sold for a profit. We watch Murphy die, be stripped of his humanity by the paramilitary business machine, then slowly regain it on his own terms. As I said before, while Robocop is a pretty silly concept, it's definitely got a brain.

Peter Weller is really fantastic in the starring role. We only see him as Murphy for a short time, but he pulls off the role of a likeable nice-guy cop well. The film establishes him as a family man without resorting to clunky expository dialog, humanizing our protagonist before we see Red Forman blast him into oblivion. Once he becomes Robocop, Weller's performance does a complete 180 (not in quality, but in tone); Robo is stoic and monotone, a far-cry from the man he once was. The fact that we get to see what Murphy once was compared to what he's become makes his transformation all the more tragic. As the film progresses, more and more of Murphy's original personality begins to shine through, making for a really enjoyable, sympathetic protagonist. By his side is Officer Anne Lewis, played by Nancy Allen. The best thing about this character is that she feels like Robocop's partner, not his sidekick. Female characters in Lewis' position tend to either end up as flawless badasses who don't need no man or hapless damsels who serve no purpose throughout the entire film; I would hazard to say that Lewis is one of the best female action protagonists of this era. It's true that she doesn't get as much time or development as Murphy (unfortunately, that comes with the territory of being the secondary protagonist), but she's wholly relatable and never once feels useless or overpowered. There's no shoehorned love story, she isn't kidnapped by the main villain, everything in this movie feels essential to the plot. At just over an hour and a half, this is a movie with very little fat to trim.

Filling the role of villains, we have Kurtwood Smith as Clarence Boddicker and Ronny Cox as OCP executive, Dick Jones. First off, both of these characters have superb names. Honestly, I could say "Clarence Boddicker" all day and never get tired of hearing it. So bonus points for a strong display of euphany. The performances are what really matter here, though, so it's a good thing that these two are an absolute joy to watch (particularly Kurtwood Smith). Clarence Boddicker is such a good 80's villain; he's a violent psychopath who isn't written as anything more than he is. He's not some "agent of chaos" or anything like that. His line of work often brings him into conflict with the law, so, as he so elegantly puts it, "I don't like cops". Like Collin Farrell's Bullseye in Daredevil, this is a villain who treats his wrongdoing like a job; he's good at it and he enjoys doing it. Ronny Cox's appropriately named Dick Jones is pretty great too, playing the smug, scheming slimeball to Smith's unbalanced killer. He's the definitive power-hungry businessman, eager to climb the corporate ladder regardless of how many bodies he has to step over to get there. He brings his own form of mechanized law-enforcement to the table in the form of ED-209, a big, clunky chickenwalker that intimidates would-be criminals by playing recordings of lions before mutilating them with twin-mounted miniguns. The special effects here are pretty simplistic (which is to be expected, considering the film's relatively meager budget), but they have a certain charm to them. ED-209 in particular is really fun to watch; it's obviously done with the use of stop-motion, but it ends up looking really distinct from everything else on screen. Whenever it moves, it's both fascinating and endearing, considering that actual people had to make everything on screen with their bare hands. This film was made in just the right era; CGI hadn't been widespread yet, so there's strong use of squibs, prosthetics, dummies, miniatures, and other practical effects. While the visuals have obviously aged, I'd say that they've aged well; instead of sticking out and looking downright unpleasant, everything has a real charm to it, which definitely helps things in the long run.

Robocop is a film that could have easily been yet another schlocky 80's action flick. All of the elements are there; a dystopian future city, a revenge story, drugs, gratuitous violence, some mild body horror, and a big message about consumerist society. There's even a scene in a seedy strobe-filled night club. The thing about Robocop, however, is that it actually works well. It doesn't feel like a load of schlock meant to sell toys, all while denouncing consumerism behind a backdrop of blood and gore. Not to say that the film didn't sell toys; hell, I've got a Night-Fighter Robocop on my nightstand right now. It's bloody and violent and there's a good amount of swearing and explosions and the protagonist makes for some really awesome action figures. But it's also got a great character story running through all of that, conveying messages about everything from privatization and militarism to fascism and gentrification. If you're looking for a fun 80's flick with a little more meat than your average boomfest, I highly recommend you give Robocop a watch.

REVIEW: Mad Max- Fury Road

Having never seen any of the original Mad Max films, I had little interest in seeing Fury Road for the longest time. The trailers dropped, received limitless praise, and I figured this would be one of those summer movies that I get around to seeing eventually. What I didn't expect was for my introduction to the world of Mad Max to be one of the most technically and visually impressive films I'd ever seen. The fact that this film also contains absolutely stellar performances, writing, and direction is just the icing on an already delectable cake.

The story concerns the lone road warrior, Max (Tom Hardy). Haunted by visions of his deceased daughter, he wanders the post-apocalyptic wastelands of Australia, managing to do little more than survive. After being captured by the automobile-themed cult known as the War Boys, Max finds himself wrapped up in the plans of Imperator Furiosa (Charlize Theron); the one-armed official has gone rogue, commandeering a war rig in an attempt to usher the Five Wives of King Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne) to freedom. What follows is a two-hour long chase through an arid wasteland as our protagonists flee the massive army of weaponized vehicles that pursues them in search of revenge. The plot is simplistic, but this is the kind of film that is moved forward by compelling characters rather than a compelling story. The entire thing can be summed up as a chase through the desert, but such an oversimplification of what occurs throughout the film's runtime is an injustice to the final product. The performances, characters, and action all take center stage here; while the effects are some of the most astounding I've seen in any movie before, they never take precedence over the characters. A visual or action sequence can be as cool as it wants to be (and by god are the visuals and action sequences in this movie cool), but there isn't any tension behind the events on screen if we don't care about the people involved. Luckily, the main cast of this film manages to be truly interesting despite how wild and out-there the situation they're in happens to be.

The real protagonist of the film is, oddly enough, not Mad Max himself. Tom Hardy feels much more like a supporting character, which is honestly one of the only gripes I've got with the film; while what we get is really genuinely good, I would have loved to have seen more of Max. As it turns out, Charlize Theron's Furiosa is the real star of the show. Both protagonists are interesting and enjoyable to watch on screen, but Theron simply does more in regards to the plot; Max is just sort of along for the ride. It says a lot about the quality of the film when the biggest complaint is "the already great protagonist isn't quite as great as the really great secondary protagonist". For me personally, however, the highlight of the cast was Nicholas Hoult as Nux, one of Immortan Joe's War Boys. Like all War Boys, the character is a fanatical follower of Joe, convinced that if he serves his great purpose, he will one day join the heroes of legend in the afterlife of Valhalla. All his life, he's been indoctrinated with Joe's ideology; this kind of insane outlook is literally all he knows. I don't want to say anything more for sake of spoilers, but the character ends up being easily the most interesting facet of an already truly interesting movie. The villains are really quite enjoyable as well; they don't have much more depth beyond "evil bourgeoisie dictators of the wasteland", but they don't really need to be anything more than that for the film to work like it does. Their motivation is clear and understandable; they're kings of the end of the world and want to keep things that way. This is a movie in which really compelling protagonists rise up against really awesome-looking antagonists and it all works flawlessly because, at the end of the day, it's not about the villains. They are simply yet another source of death and misery in an already desolate, unforgiving environment. It's about our protagonists and how the journey they've embarked upon affects and changes them as things progress.

Of course, a monumental amount of praise needs to be given to everyone responsible for the visuals in this movie. From the artists who designed each manic vehicle, to the effects coordinators who made everything explode properly, to the stuntmen who risked life and limb, this movie is the absolute epitome of the phrase "a feast for the eyes". The film uses mostly practical effects, giving everything a very organic feeling of grit and danger; when CGI is employed, it meshes with the actors seamlessly. Filmmakers everywhere take note; this is how you make an action movie. Every bit of machinery, architecture, and gear employed in this universe is just so absurd and strange, yet it all makes perfect sense within the film's own logic. One might look at some of the trailers and promotional images and wonder "what purpose could a mobile amp carrying a guitar-playing lunatic possibly serve? What is the point of those goons on the sway-poles brandishing chainsaws?"; believe me when I say, it all makes perfect sense within the movie's own logic. It's all completely ridiculous, but it's not unreasonable to imagine a scenario where this could actually happen; the culture surrounding this post-apocalyptic wasteland is strange, yet familiar at the same time. It all feels like a world that, long ago, was once like the one we're living in now.

Mad Max: Fury Road feels like a breath of fresh air in the realm of modern action flicks. Where it seems nowadays that everything attempts to crank the spectacle up to eleven with nothing more than absurd amounts of lifeless CGI, this is a film that manages to be truly imaginative, confidently securing the wow-factor with breathtaking effects, interesting characters, and strong direction. Word is that there's more Mad Max in the pipeline if this film proves successful; if Fury Road is a sign of things to come, then I sincerely hope these films never stop coming.

REVIEW: The World's End

At long last, I've finally witnessed the last film in Edgar Wright's Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy, the grand finale known as The World's End. Released in 2013, the film follows the story of Gary "The King" King (Simon Pegg), an aging slacker who reunites with his school-age chums (Nick Frost, Martin Freeman, Paddy Considine, and Eddie Marsan, all of whom now have actual jobs and families of their own) in an attempt to finish a legendary pub crawl from their youth. Upon returning to their quaint little hometown village, the friends slowly realize that all is not what it seems, as most of the population has apparently been replaced by blue-blooded android replicants. As with the other films in the Trilogy, it's a basic premise (zombie outbreak, comically mismatched police duo, invasion of a small town) made extraordinary by the brilliant minds behind it all. 

It's honestly difficult to decide which is better, the writing, the direction, or the cast. Truthfully, it's a symbiote circle; each aspect of the film is equally as strong as the others, and it's the quality of each section that helps bolster the quality of all the others. It's a perfect storm of a film, getting a bunch of funny people together, having them read lots of great dialog, and filming it in the brilliant kind of way that Edgar Wright excels in. For now, let's focus on the direction. Like Wright's other films, it's shot in a remarkably clever fashion; I'm certain that the next time I watch this movie, I'll notice some subtle visual gag or clever framing device that corresponds to the action on screen. To give a good example of what I'm talking about, say the climax of the film is approaching; if you look in the background, you can very faintly make out a sign that reads "THE END IS NIGH". It's this attention to detail that makes Edgar Wright films a complete joy to watch, in that there's always something new to discover with each viewing. 

The cast is a pure delight to watch as well; all while watching this movie, I would occasionally think of writing this review. I'd say "this character is definitely the highlight", only to eventually realize that I'd said this at least once for just about every one of the primary group of fellows journeying to The World's End (the final pub on the legendary "Golden Mile"). Each character has a moment (or moments) to shine, building a great deal of character despite having such a decent-sized cast. It's a fantastic ensemble piece, yet it never loses focus of Simon Pegg as the core of everything that's happening; he's the protagonist, but that doesn't mean he's the only character to get any sort of development, backstory, definition, or jokes. The supporting cast is great too, bringing in talent like Rosamund Pike, David Bradley, and Pierce Brosnan; despite their roles as secondary characters, they're all just as strong as the main cast (just less present). The characters are what make this movie, as it paints a really intriguing picture of youthful glory days and what it can feel like to return to that kind of environment (or in Pegg's case, what it can feel like to never leave that kind of environment). It's a story about growing up and joining the real world and whether or not that's entirely a good thing. Out of all the Cornetto films, I feel as though this one is both the most action-packed and the most subjective. It feels almost like a tribute to movies like They Live and The Stuff, in which a big dumb message is gotten across through big dumb sci-fi action. The only difference being that the message behind The World's End is anything but dumb.

As I said, this is easily the most action-oriented of all of Wright's Cornetto films, which certainly isn't a bad thing. It's all shot in a really wonderful, kinetic way that makes the fight scenes against these easily-breakable mannequin men a really entertaining treat to watch; there's always something new in each action beat, so we never really get bored of watching our protagonists beat up these things. They're completely disposable enemies who still manage to feel like a threat, so it's certainly an effective entry into the action, horror, and sci-fi genres. However, if I had to compare it to the other Cornetto movies, I would probably consider World's End to be the least funny. That certainly doesn't mean it's unfunny (the worst Edgar Wright film is still miles above the best Rob Schneider film), it's just not as good as Hot Fuzz (which I personally consider to be one of the greatest comedies of all time). So take that as you will; this good movie isn't quite as good as some of the best things ever. Despite that, I was surprised at some of the places this movie went, particularly during the third act; with a subject matter like a bunch of old friends getting together to relive the glory days, you expect there will be a fair amount of heart to it. There is, but not necessarily where you'd expect. I won't spoil anything, but know that this movie is much more than " haha that man drank a beer and punched a robot and cursed".

While it's personally not my favorite of the Cornetto Trilogy, I have to say that The World's End is a truly spectacular way to end the series. Even though it's the runt of the litter, it's still one of the better comedies I've seen in years. It manages to take a simple premise, introduce a wild element, and make the entire thing work properly as a hilarious and heartfelt action/sci-fi/horror/comedy flick with more brains in one scene than most modern comedies have in their entire runtime. It's a product born of care, dedication, and raw talent; that much is incredibly obvious to see. If you've enjoyed anything else from Wright's directorial backlog, I highly recommend you check this one out. If you haven't seen anything by Edgar Wright, then you should go watch his entire filmography (The World's End included) immediately.

REVIEW: Knights of Badassdom

Knights of Badassdom is a flick that I've been curious about for some time now. On one hand, the title is utter garbage, making this sound like a low-budget package of "nerd humor" for the Big Bang Theory crowd. On the other hand, Peter Dinklage. I spent this past winter watching the entirety of Game of Thrones, so I figured that anything with Peter Dinklage in it must surely be worth my time. I was wrong, but good lord does he try.

The plot involves a group of pals (Ryan Kwanten, Steve Zahn, and Peter Dinklage) who embark on a LARP (Live-Action Role Play) after our protagonist, Joe (Kwanten) is dumped by his girlfriend (Margarita Levieva). Once they're in the woods amongst their fellow adventurers, Eric the mage (Zahn) accidentally summons a succubus who promptly takes the form of Joe's ex (and begins killing off the assembled geeks). It sounds like a fun premise that can be easily accomplished with a small budget; for the most part, it is. The greatest problem with the film lies in the fact that it's simply too short for its own good; at 85 minutes (counting the credits), this is not a long picture by any means. As such, plot points are glossed over left and right and the film deteriorates in quality as it goes along. The first half is honestly quite enjoyable; once it turns into a slasher flick is where things really begin to go wrong. For example, we're told offhand that Joe lives with one of his friends who is "an accidental millionaire". We assume it's either Dinklage or Zahn, but we never really find out who it is or how they accidentally stumbled onto such a fortune. The succubus is summoned through the use of an ancient magical tome (as explained through the great opening, in a loving homage to Army of Darkness), but we never find out how Zahn's character even came into possession of the book in the first place. Once the protagonists encounter the succubus (who still looks like Joe's former girlfriend), they immediately know something supernatural is afoot and have no qualms with running her through with a longsword. Afterwards, another character explains to them everything that we already know about the book (from the aformentioned opening sequence). The movie feels like it's way too excited to move on to a payoff that isn't nearly as great as it thinks it is; as a result, our characters aren't nearly as fleshed out as they need to be and the pacing suffers tremendously. I'm thinking back to what I just watched and it honestly all feels like a blur after the first fifteen minutes.

Rounding out the cast is Danny Pudi as Lando (the cleric), Jimmi Simpson as Ronnie (the game master), and Brett Gibson as Gunther (the hulking brute who never breaks character). They're all wholly underdeveloped (like the rest of the cast), but Simpson at least provides a good deal of laughs in the later half of the film. Filling the role of the love interest is Summer Glau's character, Gwen. She's the token "girl who does something a sheltered person would assume only nerdy guys would do" character, and as such she is super cool and tough and hot and awesome and amazing. It's the most basic "GRRL POWER" cliche in the book and she's completely devoid of any amount of depth or character growth (even moreso than the rest of the cast). Glau can hardly be blamed for this though, since I'm sure this character would have been terrible no matter who donned the leather studded miniskirt.

For the most part, I enjoyed Ryan Kwanten in the lead role, though I find the best way to describe his performance is "not quite Chris Pratt". He's not quite as handsome or funny or likeable as Chris Pratt, but he's pretty good. As one would expect, Peter Dinklage is the highlight here. You really get the feeling that he had a good time making this, which is never a bad thing (especially in a movie with this kind of tone). The only problem is that he's clearly the biggest actor in the cast; therefore, it's reasonable to say that he's the most expensive actor in the cast. As such, he doesn't have nearly as much screentime as I would have liked; the same goes for Danny Pudi. I feel as though the budget really limited this picture, but for all the wrong reasons; like the filmmakers spent too much money on things that didn't matter in lieu of things that did. For instance, the special effects. Minimalist practical effects would work perfectly for a film like this; when the film employs such effects, they look great (there's a gag involving a decapitated head that I found to be one of the highlights). However, the other half of the time, it uses incredibly dodgy CGI worthy of the SyFy channel. One would think that, had the filmmakers spent less money on nonessential details (like the main characters' lavish castle home), there would have been more room in the budget for additional scenes featuring more plot, character development, and Peter Dinklage.

The one positive quality I can attribute to this film is that it portrays role-playing nerds in a semi-realistic way; while there are still a few throwaway jokes about noobs and level 27 sorcerers, these characters are far more accurate portrayals of the modern melvin than one would find on The Big Bang Theory. There's gratuitous swearing and drug use and a healthy love of the various subgenres of metal; this isn't a movie that looks down on nerd culture for the sake of a punchline, which is appreciated. It's just a shame that the rest of the movie didn't have as much care put into it. It's not offensively bad or anything (as I said, the beginning is quite fun for anyone who's ever rolled a D20), but I feel as though this is a film I'll never end up watching again. Take that as you will.

REVIEW: Avengers- Age of Ultron

After months upon months of anticipation and an oversaturation of over-showing advertisements, the second of Marvel's Avengers team-up movies has hit US theaters in the form of Avengers: Age of Ultron. I must admit, my hype for the film had slowly diminished over time; I was shaking with anticipation upon walking out of James Gunn's phenominal Guardians of the Galaxy last summer. However, between the various trailers (which show far more than they should) and the knowledge that the next time the Avengers assemble (albeit years from now in the two-part Infinity War), the result will be bigger and better in literally every aspect, my excitement for Age of Ultron steadily decreased from "frothing at the mouth" to "just another movie I want to see". Unfortunately for the film, my expectations didn't follow such a downward slope, otherwise I probably would have appreciated what I watched more than I did. Don't misunderstand me, I didn't dislike this film; hell, I just got back from my second (and likely not last) screening. I was, however, somewhat underwhelmed. I didn't leave the theater in the same state of pupil-dilating delight that Joss Whedon's first Avengers left me in. This isn't a bad movie, but I feel as though it certainly could have (and indeed should have) been better.

For anyone who's been under a rock for the past year or so, the plot follows the Avengers (Robert Downey Jr, Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, and Jeremy Renner) dealing with the genocidal AI known as Ultron (voiced and mo-capped by James Spader). Like many robots designed to protect humanity, Ultron sees the human race as a threat to itself and deduces that the only logical way to keep people from constantly killing each other is to wipe them all out. By his side are Wanda and Pietro Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen and Aaron Taylor Johnson), twins from the European nation of Sokovia who volunteered to be imbued with the powers of reality manipulation and super speed for a chance to gain revenge against one Tony Stark. As one would expect from a Marvel movie at this point, the cast also includes Samuel L. Jackson reprising his role as Nick Fury and Paul Bettany pulling double duty both as Tony Stark's AI assistant, JARVIS, and as the enigmatic Vision. New to the MCU is Andy Serkis, appearing as Ulysses Klaue, a black market arms dealer whom fans of the comics will recognize as arch-enemy of the Black Panther. With an ensemble this large and diverse, it can be difficult to ensure that everyone gets enough screentime and development; it can be a little imbalanced here and there (as one would expect, we spend much more time with Iron Man than we do with Thor or Hulk), but for the most part it's pretty even.

The alumni have all long since settled into their respective roles and play them well. Honestly, all of the performances here are great, the only issues arise from the writing. It's sharp and clever at  best, utterly cringe-inducing at the worst. Captain America went through a significant deal of development and growth in the stellar Winter Soldier; here, he is relegated to occasionally give a teamwork speech and be the butt of jokes about how he's an old-fashioned boyscout who doesn't like naughty words. Tony Stark was left in a very interesting place at the end of Iron Man 3, rethinking his philosophy and mission statement when it came to being a superhero, deciding not to rely so heavily on technology. In Age of Ultron, literally every decision he makes is a bad one (even the choices that end up working out in the end are all horribly irresponsible in context). Honestly, it's kind of shocking just how incompetent Iron Man is for the entirety of this film, in particular during the already iconic Hulkbuster fight. Instead of coming off as a well-intentioned hero who makes a mistake, he's written like a wannabe messiah with absolutely zero foresight. Granted, there IS a plot point that explains this behavior (or at least the aspects of which result in Ultron being born), but that doesn't magically turn this detail into a point in the film's favor. If the intent was to streamline the process of making him into an almost-antagonist in time for Captain America: Civil War, then mission accomplished. Thor has barely any screentime when he's not hitting things with his hammer and Hulk is now involved in an awkward and overly-forward romance with Black Widow (because if there's one thing audiences love in superhero movies, it's unnecessary romantic subplots). Bruce Banner sees himself as a monster because of the beast lurking within him, but the reason that Agent Romanoff thinks of herself as something of a "monster" is so baffling I'm honestly surprised it made it into the final cut. I honestly don't understand the logic in taking the only female Avenger to get so much screentime (a hardened secret agent with a bloody, shadowy past as an assassin) and relegate her to the role of team denmother, able to soothe the savage beast with her gentle femininity (when she's not throwing out witty quips about how she's the girl on the team of "boys"). In short, literally every main character here is better written in their own movies. Widow and Cap were better in Winter Soldier, Tony and Rhodey were better in Iron Man 3, and so on. All that said, the two characters who completely steal the show here are unquestioningly Renner's Hawkeye and Bettany as The Vision.

Hawkeye was infamously underdeveloped in the first Avengers and, in a stroke of good decision making, Whedon has remedied this by giving him entire scenes of nothing but pure character development. It's greatly appreciated and helps cement Hawkeye as something more than "that guy with the bow and arrows who's on the same team as the Mighty Thor for some reason". Renner plays the role as incredibly down-to-earth and it works perfectly; this is a normal, human guy who happens to be really good at archery and that is why he works alongside Hulk and Iron Man. As I mentioned, the other highlight was Paul Bettany as The Vision. The Vision is an intriguing character, in that he is both above and outside of humanity, yet was born of humanity. He feels no ill will towards anything, even Ultron, giving him a distinctly Christlike tone; he is the bridge between the synthetic and the organic, offering insight from both perspectives as a living being and as a machine, born in a lab. Aside from the fantastic performance by Bettany, his powerset is absolutely a blast to watch in motion, so a gold star for The Vision, the peaceful, optimistic Yang to the villainous Ultron's Yin. And speaking of Ultron, we come to my biggest gripe with the movie...

In the comics, Ultron is an advanced AI developed by Dr. Hank Pym (better known as the first Ant Man). Designed to protect the human race, Ultron deduced that the only way to save mankind from itself was to destroy all life on Earth entirely. In the source material, Ultron is a hateful, spite-filled presence and is one of the absolute greatest threats to the planet. In the movie, he is a snarky android who spouts one-liners and fails to ever come off as a genuine threat. I know it's not necessarily fair to compare the comic books to the film; these are two different interpretations through two different mediums. However, that doesn't change that the MCU portrayal of Ultron is one of the most pointless villains to exist in a modern Marvel movie. He's not quite as bad as Thor: The Dark World's Malekith the Accursed, but Loki, Kingpin, Alexander Pierce, and even Thanos (for the cumulative ten minutes of screentime he's had so far) completely blow Ultron's dumb robot eyebrows off of his oddly expressive face. All that said, no disrespect is meant to Mr. Spader; he does a bang-up job in the role and his voice sounds fantastic coming out of a robot that intends to end all life on the planet. As I mentioned, none of the problems with this movie have to do with the cast so much as they have to do with the writing. Instead of loathing humanity with a deep, painful hatred, Ultron makes sarcastic remarks. There's a half a handful of moments when he actually sounds either genuinely threatening or intriguingly vulnerable, but these interesting character moments are too few and far between to salvage this wreck of a villain. His plan is idiotic and he carries himself in a way that makes it seem like he's one musical cue away from breaking into a Disney villain song. James Spader is awesome, but Ultron is decidedly not.

For all my complaining, it probably sounds like I hated this movie; I don't. I actually quite like it. I don't love it the way I love Winter Soldier, or Guardians of the Galaxy, or even The Avengers, but that doesn't mean it's horrible. Truthfully, I was just disappointed; it feels like this movie could have been so much more. It's already long (just over two hours long, to be more specific), but an extended edition would really help patch some of those holes and add some lean meat onto this shallow summer blockbuster. I feel the same way about Avengers: Age of Ultron that I felt about Iron Man 2 when I first saw that years ago; it was an enjoyable time, I definitely recommend seeing it in a theater with a good sound system and a fun, responsive crowd. That said, it simply felt like a preamble; Iron Man 2 was nothing but build up to The Avengers, Age of Ultron was a bunch of build up to Marvel's Phase Three. It's the Avengers, so you're going to have a good time. But don't expect anything revolutionary.