Showing posts with label Chris Evans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chris Evans. Show all posts

Monday, April 11, 2016

Snowpiercer (2013)

Snowpiercer is a movie about a dystopian future, which means it's full of buckets and buckets of important social commentary and symbolism! We should really listen to this movie, because it's Important with a capital I!

Director: Joon Ho Bong
Starring: Chris Evans, Kang-ho Song, Ed Harris

The movie begins with a bunch of poor, dirty looking people in rags living in the back of a giant train circling the wasted frozen carcass of the world forever. Boy, this gritty Thomas the Tank Engine reboot really isn't pulling any punches.

"My life is an endless train of misery..."

Our main character is Curtis, played by Captain America himself, Chris Evans, modeling for the 2013 Hobo Winter Catalog. He lives in the poor part of the train, apparently planning some kind of revolution, or something like that. In his spare time, he likes to try to negotiate with small children for food and he fails even at that. So this is truly a man I can get behind as the leader of a revolution.

"I'll give you five peanut shells and two mosquito wings for it!"

It turns out the police in this brutal train world are stealing the poor peoples' children from them for an unknown reason. One guy SURPRISINGLY has an issue with that, and tries to assault the main lady by throwing a shoe at her. They capture him and force him to stick his arm out the window into the freezing sub-zero weather, and then break his arm off. The crazy lady puts a shoe on the guy's head and delivers a terrible, annoying speech about how the poor exist to be stepped on and should be kept in their places. Wow, what a thinking man's movie this is. It's like the Hunger Games if it were told by a really angry teenager.


This whole time, they basically only haven't made a move because it's convenient for the script. Curtis, in all his wisdom, just keeps saying it's "not time" yet to make a move. Well, I guess their children getting kidnapped was enough incentive for them to finally make a fucking move, because they finally do. Glad you guys are so proactive! They figure out that apparently none of the guards who have been coming in have had bullets for some time now. They deduce that by saying that they've never seen them fire those guns. Well, good enough for me!

Next, they find this pair of badass Asian people who for some reason have been locked away in drawers for some time now. Naturally, given how they've been basically in hibernation for a while, the Asians prove formidable foes for Curtis and the others in the pointless fight scene that comes next. I sure am looking forward to the movie about the characters who have trouble beating up people who have been comatose in boxes for months. They also force Curtis to pay them in hallucinogenic drugs for their services, which, to be fair, is a pretty fucking good deal. That's the only way I'd hang out with this raggedy crowd.


I'm not sure why the bad guys they fight up next are dressed as ninjas. What on earth do you need ninja costumes for just to stand around guarding people on a train? What are you trying to blend in with by wearing those?

ISIS Junior Squad, at your service!

There's one part where they go into a classroom being taught by a woman who acts like a cartoon character. She has them reciting creepy cult-like chants about how the poor are all dogs and praising the holy hell out of the mysterious man who made the train. This whole sequence is about as entertaining as a pro-life protester outside an abortion clinic waving a bloody fetus picture in your face.

The dead soulless eyes, the vacant smile...yup, she does look like a pro-lifer.

Then we get a speech by Curtis detailing how awful it was living in the poor part of the train at first. He spins this whole dramatic story about how they had to start eating the weak, and how babies tasted the best. I think this speech really nails down what I hate about the movie, so bear with me here, I'm going to break character.

This whole scene is just so emotionally manipulative and trite. It's so over the top. They ate babies! They were killing mothers to steal their babies and eat them! Fuck off. My point is, every time a critic bashes an action movie, they get shit on for only wanting serious art house films or really depressing films, or whatever the strawman is. “Can't you just have FUN?” the detractors inquire. But movies like this, actual action movies, too often have these very serious overtones and overly grim, gratuitous parts. Lots of movies have some serious plot threads, that's how they keep you engaged – it isn't just something that French art house movies about postpartum depression made on shoestring budgets do or again, whatever the strawman is.

Snowpiercer's serious elements really want you to take away the pain and sorrow and unfairness of the way the poor people were treated. But it's so bad here. It's done in such a piss poor manner, with no subtlety or shade or nuance. They just shove it in your face. That would be fine if all this wanted to be was a loud, brutal action movie – but this very clearly wants to be a super grim social commentary and it wants you to take it seriously. You kinda need more complex writing if you want to do that. It's not really an optional thing.

This movie's only manner of getting you invested is to throw stories about dead babies at you. So, yeah, if I'm in the mood for horrifically depressing stories about bad things happening, I think I will take the pretentious indie arthouse flick next time. At least if my only other choice is Snowpiercer.

But I digress. They then immediately find the place where the Big Bad is, like right after that, because the script was getting long and they couldn't think of any more dead baby stories to tell. We find out that the man behind the curtain in this is actually Ed Harris with some 5 o'clock shadow going on, so they probably just dragged him out of his house while he was still groggy drinking his morning coffee, and just threw him on the set.


He just goes on and on for like fifteen fucking minutes about how it's necessary to keep everyone in their place on the train and everyone has to stay in their place. He says they have staged revolutions before and Curtis's was just one more to keep people in their place, because chaos needs to exist for people to be normal! Well, after even a moment of thought, that makes no sense. Ask the people in Brussels how well that chaos is helping them live normally. I guess I get what they were trying to say, but it comes off a bit weird to say the least...

He then gives Curtis the choice to choose whether or not to keep the train running. I don't know why he does this, maybe just because he's bored for shits and giggles. He says it's Curtis's destiny now, and he can either stop the train or keep it going by feeding it children from the poor section – yes, THAT'S why they were taking the kids in the beginning of the movie. I guess the movie wasn't quite out of dead baby stories yet. You know, those are the only way to have a deep story! Dead kids!

Then the movie ends in a true fitting fashion for such a thought provoking picture: Curtis beats the shit out of Ed Harris with his bare hands like a caveman. Yes. That really drives the point home: Ed Harris is bad. I think we've learned a lesson here.

Would've been better with the Captain America shield in the shot. You really missed that opportunity, you dumb movie, you.

The visuals are pretty good as the train comes off its tracks. So there is that. They crash land in some snowy mountainside, and I'm guessing most of the people who survived are just mad Curtis couldn't wait until they passed by the sunny tropics to crash the train.

I know the feeling.

Honestly, this movie sucks. It's just not a good story. While I liked the action and some of the visuals were nice, the writing was just terrible. Everything was suffocatingly grim and over the top, and the message conveyed was delivered in a clunky, cloying and overly obvious manner that left very little to the imagination. I can see this film was trying to do something a little different and I can appreciate that, but it just doesn't have the depth of writing or script needed to be really smart. Instead, it just comes off as grandiloquent, self-serving, huffing and puffing crap stuck up its own ass with how smart it thinks it is.

I just think this is telling about what the action movie genre's big problems are. You get movies like this and John Wick touted as these really great, serious new action movies, and it's a blurry line, because neither one is really that bad – they both have their moments. But the writing for both is just so shallow. There are very few relatable characters, very little of anything compelling or intriguing about the way these themes pushed forward. Both movies are as deep as kids' wading pools in a shitty hotel, littered with used condoms and beer cans. But people accepted them just because they were better than Michael Bay Transformers crap and something alternative to Marvel. Even though they aren't really that great.

I'm NOT saying these movies have to divert from the action to show us long artsy sequences of the characters' relationships or something. By all means, give us some great, high energy action scenes! More really good ones would be a plus! But if you're making these fucking dark, brooding, serious films, that frankly do carry themselves with the pretense of a social message or trying to be a “thinking man's movie,” then I think I'm in the right to expect some kind of quality writing or storytelling. Or are writing and storytelling arbitrary tools of the upper echelon bourgeoise, only for pretentious dickwads who hate fun? I dunno. Maybe they are, then.

Images copyright of their original owners, we own none of them.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

The Avengers (2012)

Starring: A bunch of people
Director: Joss Whedon

Many of you have never heard of this small independent film that explores the deep realms of the human psyche by analysing the most intellectually intriguing phrase of our time: "HULK SMASH!!!!!"

Or it just might be about something completely different...

The movie starts off with Loki (Tom Hiddleston) coming to Earth with the intent of becoming its supreme ruler. It is up to a familiar group of superheroes, including Iron Man, Captain America, The Incredible Hulk, Thor, Black Widow, and Hawkeye (respectively played by Robert Downey, Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, and Jeremy Renner) under the guidance of Nick Furry (Samuel L. Jackson) to stop him. However, they first have to learn to work together as their conflicting personalities soon become apparent.

Umm...it's awesome! Nope, I don't have anything to add to that; I think I've made myself pretty clear. Okay, fine, if you insist...

I was expecting this movie to be pretty good even though I have mixed feelings about the previous Marvel movies that preceded it. "Captain America" was great and "The Incredible Hulk" was enjoyable. The "Iron Man" movies were pretty good though I feel like they could have been better. "Thor"...was okay, but I say that generously since it had major flaws. Still, I figured this movie would take enough of the best elements from each of them and be able to create a competent story. And...it did! It really just goes all out: it makes the most of the characters and how they interact with each other, it has a number of funny moments that are actually funny, it has some good serious moments, and (perhaps most importantly) it has lots and lots and LOTS of action!!! What more can you want?!!!

That's pretty much it. I really can't elaborate on it any further, at least not without spoiling it. Too be honest, I can't really criticize it either. The only part I really questioned was how the characters seemed be clued in on a bunch of the major details about each other and the situation at hand. But they explain how the film takes place about a year after the other ones ended and given how persistent Nick Furry has been about keeping tabs on people (and how high profile some of their individual circumstances were in the media) its seems logical that they would all have a basic idea of what was going on. Which is good because it minimizes the number of scenes needed to do all that explaining and cuts straight to the good parts!

So...yeah! It is a really solid, excellent movie. Most of you who are reading this are probably going to see it anyway or have already done so, but if you are on the fence for some reason, I definitely recommend it. I can't think of any other superhero movie that will be able to beat this one this summer...


Hmm...forgot about that one...

P.S.: As you would expect, there is a scene after the main closing credits that...okay, I will not spoil it. And if you wait until the end of rest of the credits, there is something else. Just in case you wanted to know.

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Review: Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) TH


An Uncle Sam who gets his hands dirty

While other superheroes are just out to stop thugs and fight crime for what the police and average citizens can't handle, instead Captain America is a political savior with a chunk of the world in his sights: someone who has a knack for heroics, team leadership and is capable of changing the tides of war with not only his brawn but his determination and unselfish attitude.

"Captain America: The First Avenger" is set during World War II and like "X-Men: First Class" it creates an alternate universe with shared commonalities to the past, as what's unfolding isn't just working in the shadows like, say, "National Treasure," rather it's stepping out to the light to make its own substitute history with different names and faces. In doing so it manages to pose a series of what if questions: What if Germany perfected scientific weapons before the US? What if one man could actually make a significant difference in war? What if they had more advanced artillery and technology in the '40s and how would it have panned out otherwise? Hitler is only mentioned with mock and referenced talk, but instead the main Axis bad guy named Johann Schmidt (Weaving) is at the forefront with possibly more ambition than the tiny mustached dictator could hope. Nazis and swastikas aren't delved into but instead an organization/political party/cult named "HYDRA" with a different but still threatening emblem to wave.

A scrawny guy named Steve Rogers (Evans) from Brooklyn, who has the underdeveloped frame of an average 13 year old but the courage of a warrior, is doing all but holding his breath to enlist in the military so he can serve his country despite health issues and a Hobbit stature. After continually getting denied, he gains his chance when meeting an honest man named Dr. Abraham Erskine (Tucci) who's an idealist scientist who sees potential in Rogers for a new experiment. The serum can't be used on just anyone as it will transform the person into an unstoppable super soldier as well as amplify their temperament from bad to really bad, and good to extremely good. Thus when the ultra-patriot-to-be comes out a taller, bulkier one-man-army, not to mention a lady magnet, he has the perfect antithesis of a rival with Red Skull on the side of HYDRA who uses his powers for gain and domination.

Like "Green Lantern" this thoroughly concentrated on character development, including what it means to have these awesome strengths and how to direct and use them to their maximum potential. Though when it came time to get his hands dirty, the antagonist vs protagonist element seemed somewhat straightforward, glossed over and easy to the unchallenged Captain. The only moment the brain kicks in is when a scene is too vague rather than being too complex. From doing campaign pledges for war bonds and gimmicky shows that include American flag dressed woman dancing to hooting soldiers, Cap gets heckled off stage by real combatants and decides to put his abilities to the test to save his friend Bucky (Sebastian Stan) and fellow soldiers held prisoner. Soon enough with the help of Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) with his uniform, he has a motley crew of fighters that go out on missions that somehow have a detrimental effect on the war effort, yet it's never fully explained how that's possible. It makes things extremely simple and that part of the story only seems there to do nothing but perpetuate fast flying, combustive action.

Red Skull, apart from his intensely commanding appearance and dress, wasn't as outlined and the performance came across at times like a run-of-the-mill, snide villain who ends up being somewhat predictable. Not to mention some of the delivery was scripted to a fault as some lines felt preplanned and a lost cause to the quick pacing. Chris Evans went for sincerity due to toning down his usual showmanship and humor from past films like "Fantastic Four" and instead lets others take on one-liners like the hilarious Tommy Lee Jones who plays the no nonsense, southern Colonel Chester Phillips. Evans performs the role as somewhat naive to the world at large from knowing exactly what he wants and everything else along the way being second, such as dames and his own well-being. Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) shows up as the physically attractive agent on the surface but underneath is confident and not to be underestimated. There's a budding love angle but fortunately the picture never slows down to entirely make it a distracting cliche that every blockbuster summer flick "must" have.

"Captain America: The First Avenger" never lets up from being relentlessly theatrical as a number of scenes are set up with the intention of going for a grand show and timed out unveiling rather than attempting to create a piece of naturalism or history lesson. Despite its exaggeration and garish ways, it indeed works as a mostly simple and entertaining experience with a little food for thought about Cap's little guy background and eventually plenty of action fodder to give it energy. The 3-D wasn't completely maximized to its full potential but it did have its moments of shining, such as a few particular scenes that for the first time actually made me flinch with his iconic shield coming right out of the screen! The film moves steadily along and doesn't feel its two hour time length partly due to frequent location changes. The effort put into the art direction and set pieces while melding CGI positively showed as they were generally constructed down to the finest detail. In terms of fire power in a war movie, this shuffles between guns that shoot bullets and fictitious ones with beams of energy, as well as flame throwers and tanks, and, of course, more fiery explosions than can be counted on fingers and toes in a packed theater.

Director: Joe Johnston (The Rocketeer, Jurassic Park III, The Wolfman)
Starring: Chris Evans, Hugo Weaving, Tommy Lee Jones, Hayley Atwell, Stanley Tucci, Sebastian Stan, Dominic Cooper, Neal McDonough
Website: IMDB

Friday, July 22, 2011

Review: The Losers (2010) TH


Losers become winners

This is a movie that would be followed by "The A-Team" and "The Expendibles" with a team of varied guys out on high-octane missions at the tax payers' expense. "The Losers" is simple entertainment down to the frequent location changes, thousands of ammunition fired, casual property destruction, inventive covert missions and party-like jokes in between like everyone is having a ball of a time even if their lives are in danger and their country is in peril.

A colonel with a conscience named Clay (Jeffery Dean Morgan) gets an order to paint a target for an air strike in Bolivia, when he spots a truck full of innocent children that are going to be collateral damage. Control tells him to stand down, yet he goes against orders anyway for a quick rescue with his four other team members that have varied specialities ranging from driver, tech, sniper to demolitions. After telling them to take the kids first on the helicopter safely away, headquarters orders a missile to obliterate the chopper thinking they're on it as they stand by idle and watch in horror. They're now thought of as deceased and with the help of a newly met woman named Aisha (Zoe Saldana) who's tough, seductive and sneaky, they plan how to take out the eccentric man named Max (Jason Patric) who set them up and is so deplorable and devoid of emotion that he makes the typical Bond villain look neighborly. At first the rough around the edges "heroes" want to give up and look the other way, though they all have something to look forward to back home. Soon enough they pit their skills together and act like a tight-knit brotherhood who's got each others' backs through thick and thin to clear their names and possibly figure out the truth in the mean time. Except where money's involved who knows what could happen.

This is an action/comedy with flashy camera setups and hip music to move things along without a moment's pause. The serious and comical scenes don't always transition smoothly back and forth, with some one-liners feeling out of context and like crickets and drum rolls should proceed instead. This is cinematic amusement at its most basic, such as trained professionals never hitting their target, so they have to expend countless rounds of ammo to make it look more intense and dramatic. This tries to be gritty with a certain chromatic look at points and some shady locations, but the action is typically exaggerated and feels preplanned to the point of not always lending out any serious weight. "The Losers" has its moments and passes by with some excitement but feels like a one-off movie that can be soon enough forgotten because there's not much to it that already hasn't been done apart from a few gimmicks up its sleeve.

Director: Sylvain White (I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer, Stomp the Yard)
Starring: Jeffery Dean Morgan, Chris Evans, Zoe Saldana, Idris Elba, Jason Patric
Website: IMDB