Iron Man 3 Movie Review

It's no secret that The Avengers was a phenomenal success. It wasn't originally intended, but it was quickly decided upon to do another Avengers movie. But before that can happen, we need another couple of movies to showcase our heroes' having individual adventures before teaming up again. Iron Man 3 (2013) is the first movie of the second string of movies leading up to another Avengers movie.

In light of the alien invasion in New York (in The Avengers), Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) is suffering from panic attacks. To set himself at ease, he has built several dozen new Iron Man suits, which has created some friction with his girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow). Several mysterious bombings have occurred around the country over the last several months which mysteriously leave no forensic evidence. These have been orchestrated by a man calling himself The Mandarin (Ben Kingsley), and the attacks are becoming more intense. Meanwhile a Dr. Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce) is trying to team up with Stark Industries to perfect a super-soldier bio-chemical solution called Extremis, which should grant super-healing abilities.  After drawing the attention of The Mandarin, Tony Stark's safe world and everything he has is virtually destroyed. Tony's friend, Colonel James Rhodes (Don Cheadle) the former War Machine, now re-branded as the Iron Patriot, is sent on a wild goose chase to find The Mandarin. With his back against the wall, Tony is left to survive by his own devices, relying on his ingenuity and instincts to protect those closest to him.

I'm so glad that Iron Man 3 acknowledges events from The Avengers. In a short amount of time Tony Stark discovered the existence of powerful gods and alien threats as they both descended to attack Earth. Yes, The Avengers did save the day, but having symptoms of PTSD and panic attacks is not an unreasonable reaction to the ordeal. In a desperate moment, Tony pours his heart out to Pepper, "Nothing's been the same since New York. You experience things, and then they're over. I can't sleep, and when I do I have nightmares. Threat is eminent. I have to protect the one thing that I can't live without. That's you." This is simply the next logical step in the character's development, and it's done well.

Iron Man 3 has a darker tone than the previous two. Tony is at a very low point since nearly everything that makes him Iron Man has been taken away. It deals with some very real and sometimes scary issues; terrorist attacks, the impact on the families of the victims, foreboding insecurity, and mental breakdowns to name a few. But at the same time, Tony's character is a narcissist and rather than deal with traumatic or uncomfortable situations, he deflects it with humor. Iron Man 3 is pretty funny. With the dark nature and the comedy, it makes for some strange tonal contrasts. It didn't always fit perfectly, but I think it did work; it never sounded like sloppy writing that was trying to do too many things at once.

There is a HUGE plot twist halfway through the movie. I really want to talk about it, but to avoid spoilers I won't. I will say that it's probably going to irritate hardcore Marvel fans a whole lot. I was always a fan of Spider-Man and X-Men myself, and I have virtually no concept of Iron Man mythos. While it did take my be surprise, I could easily see long-time fans of Iron Man getting immensely bent out of shape by this plot device. Hopefully it won't cause anyone to boycott any future Iron Man movies or anything like that. I still thought the movie was good.

I can't review Iron Man 3 without talking about the effects. It's a special effects intensive movie with lots of CGI work and is so remarkably well done. Most of the mechanical suits are done with CGI. But it's so detailed, moves so naturally, and the lighting is so perfect you'd hardly guess there wasn't a real large metal suit running around. The final fight at the end is amazing. It's full of crazy Iron Man stunts that I never would have expected. It's hard not to cheer Tony on as he dukes it out. 

Iron Man 3 was great. It had logical progressions in character development, a darker tone, lots of laughs, incredible effects, a pretty good story, and some fun references to the other Avengers. That plot twist will throw you for a loop, though; it will make or break the movie for some Marvel fans. I managed to roll with the punches since I had no preconceived notions. Iron Man 3 is worth catching on the big screen and worth getting a copy on Blu-Ray once it's available. Also, make sure you stick around after the credits for a hilarious post-credits scene, as per Marvel movie tradition.

Boromir tells it like it is.

So, we have three Iron Man movies. Technically four, if you include The Avengers. Which one is your favorite? Comment below and tell me why!

Star Trek Into Darkness Movie Review

Back in 2009, J. J. Abrams took on the tricky task of not only appeasing a notoriously judgmental fan base but of winning over a new generation of movie goers with a relaunch of the 1960's cult classic TV series, Star Trek. Four years later we get a much anticipated sequel, Star Trek Into Darkness (2013), and it's quite a ride!

The USS Enterprise and her crew have been sent to a distant planet to observe a primitive civilization. Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) violates the Prime Directive when the life of First Officer Spock (Zachary Quinto) is jeopardized, exposing the Enterprise to the planet's civilization during the rescue. Called back to Earth, Kirk is demoted to First Officer of the Enterprise with his mentor Admiral Christopher Pike (Bruce Greenwood) resuming command. The two attend an emergency meeting at Starfeet Command to discuss the bombing of the secret Section 31 installation in London, perpetrated by former Starfleet agent John Harrison (Benedict Cumberbatch). The meeting is attacked by Harrison who flees to the Klingon home world, Kronos, leaving Pike dead. Kirk is reinstated as the Enterprise Captain, and is given special permission from Admiral Alexander Marcus (Peter Weller) to hunt down and kill Harrison with 72 long-range prototype photon torpedoes. This violates several of Starfleet's usual codes of ethics. With some trepidation, Spock, Uhura (Zoe Saldana), "Bones" (Karl Urban), "Scotty" (Simon Pegg), Sulu (John Cho), and Checkov (Anton Yelchin) follow Kirk as he leads the way to seek out Harrison, the one-man-weapon-of-mass-destruction.

Into Darkness picks up where Star Trek left off. In the previous film, the character driven plot revolves around Kirk and Spock being at odds with one another. Now the two have found a means of working together. They still have polar opposite personalities, but now they have an understanding that Kirk is the captain and Spock is the first officer and should have Kirk's back at all times. Spock does have Kirk's back but "Vulcans don't lie" and sometimes when Kirk breaks the rules, Spock is obligated to address that. It's a logical progression of the two characters' development and we get to see how this interesting dynamic brings the two of them closer together as friends. This relationship is the heart and soul of Star Trek; the ambiguous compound of rivalry, warmth, and interspecies misunderstanding. There are plenty of other characters who are well developed and make significant contributions to the story; it doesn't exclusively revolve around Kirk and Spock. The whole Enterprise crew gets multiple moments to shine.

The visual effects are brilliant. There are massive explosions, outstanding chases, beautiful scenery created through CGI, and the sets for the interior of the Enterprise look amazing. I loved seeing the Enterprise go into warp, buildings collapse, and space ships crash. Everything was shown in glorious detail. There were no shaky cameras to obscure details, and we got plenty of wide shots to show the magnitude of the damage. Into Darkness spares no expense on its stunning visuals nor it's riveting action.

There's an interesting theme that lends itself to a cautionary tale of real world politics. Yes, Harrison is a great villain, but I think the real "enemy" is the prospect of war, or rather how to best handle the onset of war. Kirk and Spock represent the two arguments about war; what is expedient and what is right. They have specific orders that are not in harmony with Starfleet's values, and would probably start a war with the fearsome Klingons. Spock readily puts forth the counter-argument to the crew's mission to destroy the fugitive Harrison; aren't they morally obligated to capture the suspect and bring him to trial instead? Our heroes are often set upon by the dilemma of choosing between moral ideals and making hasty retaliations. We aren't necessarily given a specific answer to the question, but it should make the viewer think about their country's stance in the face of contemporary international conflicts.

I think Into Darkness has a few more Star Trek references from the old TV show and movies than the first movie did. If you're a hardcore Trekkie, you'll notice lots throwback references throughout the movie. There's even some classic Star Trek lines delivered in new and unexpected ways, which was a very creative implementation. But even if you lived under a rock and never watched Star Trek before, you won't become lost watching Into Darkness. I watched Into Darkness with a couple of non-Trekkie friends and the only thing they were confused about is what a tribble was, and that is at best a detail of miniscule importance.

Star Trek Into Darkness was incredibly fun. I didn't think it was quite as good as its predecessor, but it was a good solid movie. J. J. Abrams knows how to construct a good blockbuster with a perfect blend of incredible action and meaningful characters. We are shown an excellent script which brought us some good dialogue. The visual effects are gorgeous and detailed, the action is exciting and well presented, and the classic Star Trek references are delightful. This will keep old school Trekkies and noobz captivated and enthralled.  Star Trek Into Darkness is worth catching on the big screen, and is worthy of a blu-ray purchase once it becomes available.

There are plenty of Star Trek movies out. Star Trek Into Darkness is the 12th. Do you have a favorite? Comment below and let me know!

Atlantis: The Lost Empire Movie Review

 Maybe it's just me, but I don't think anyone really remembers Disney's Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001). I can think of a few good reasons not to see it, but I can also think of reasons you shouldn't miss it.

It's 1914, and Milo Thatch (Michael J. Fox), the grandson of Thaddeus Thatch works in the boiler room of a museum. He knows that Atlantis is real, and he believes he can get there if he has the Shepherd's Journal, which would act as a guide to Atlantis. Milo needs someone to fund a voyage, but his employers don't take him seriously and refuse to fund his expedition. After meeting a mysterious woman, Helga Sinclair (Claudia Christian), she takes Milo to her employer Preston B. Whitmore (John Mahoney), an eccentric millionaire who was a friend of Milo's grandfather. He gives Milo the Shepherd's Journal, a submarine, and a 5-star crew. The crew includes Commander Tiberius Rourke (James Garner), French Geologist "Mole" (Corey Burton), Medical Doctor, Joshua Sweet (Phil Morris), Italian Demolitionist "Vinny" (Don Novello), Puerto Rican mechanic Audry Ramirez (Jacqueline Obradors), elderly and sarcastic radio operator Wilhelina Packard (Florence Stanley), and a Western-style chuck wagon chef called "Cookie" (Jim Varney). After a bizarre voyage through the ocean's depths and through cavernous caves, they find Atlantis, governed by its king (Leonard Nimoy) and his daughter Kida (Cree Summers). Milo is beside himself with awe and wonder at the Atlantean City and doesn't suspect his crew of ulterior motives.

Disney was taking some bold new steps with Atlantis. It was their second animated feature without a musical number (Dinosaur being the first), their first animated sci-fi adventure (followed by Treasure Planet a few years later), one of the few to be shot in the Cinemascope aspect ratio (widescreen) format, and at the time of its release Atlantis used more CGI than any other Disney-animated feature. Disney was pushing the envelope with this movie.

Hellboy by Mike Mignola
The visual style inspired
designs for Atlantis.

The first thing that stands out about Atlantis is the animation. There are lots of details in the backgrounds and props, but the characters all have simple high contrast shading which makes them look flat. I thought that was a bit distracting, but take into consideration the style they were going for. The visual style was strongly based upon that of Mike Mignola, the comic book artist behind Dark Horse comic's Hellboy. The characters look angular and have large, squareish hands. It's very interesting to look at; it gives this animated action movie a satisfying comic book feel. Mignola's distinctive style helped earn Atlantis a cult following among comic book aficionados.

Another fascinating aspect of Atlantis was the Atlantean language. One of my linguistic heroes, Marc Okrand, was hired to develop the language used in the movie. Okrand is famous for developing the Klingon Language for the Star Trek movies and TV series. The Atlantean language employed an Indo-European word stock with its own unique grammatical structure. Okrand would change the words if they began to sound too much like an actual, spoken language. The written form was meant to be read left-to-right on the first line and right-to-left on the second, continuing a zigzagging pattern to simulate the flow of water. The artificial language was fascinating to hear and see, but wasn't utilized to the extent that I had hoped. It seems like a lot of effort was put into this underused aspect of the film.

The action in Atlantis was particularly exciting. Everything was well choreographed and it was easy to follow. While it is suitable for younger audience members, the action was  used to draw the audience in. Unfortunately with such an emphasis on the action, I felt that the story and characters suffered. I wanted to know more about the Atlantean culture and more about the character's histories and motives. There's very little down time in Atlantis, making the movie feel rushed. Yes, it's a Disney family movie, but they've done other animated features that flesh out the story and characters better than they did here. Excusing the lack of story and character development on the fact that it's a kids' movie is a pretty lousy argument. You can do better than this, Disney!

On a side note, I want to commend Jim Varney on his role as Cookie. Varney is known for his titular role in the Ernest movies, playing Jed Clampett in The Beverly Hillbillies movie, and for providing the voice for Slinky Dog in the first two Toy Story movies. Varney began doing the voice work for Cookie while struggling with lung cancer. He passed away in February of 2000, and never got to see the film. He was shown clips of his character's performance and reportedly, "He loved it." For a man virtually on his deathbed, Varney did a great job portraying an upbeat comical character.

Overall, I think the art style and production of Atlantis: The Lost Empire was far more interesting than the end result was. Most of the characters are shallow and conventional, and the story is predictable and unrefined. The art and color palette will blow you away, and the action will likely keep you interested. Due to its poor box office performance, Disney quickly canceled a spin-off TV series and an underwater Disneyland theme park attraction. I think that if more effort had been put into the developing the story, this would have been a much better movie. But if you're a linguistics dweeb like myself or a comic book enthusiast, I recommend seeing Atlantis: The Lost Empire. It will be released on Blu-Ray on June 11, 2013 and I may get a copy just because the animation is so intriguing. If art and linguistics aren't your thing, you're probably better off watching something else.

Here's the trailer to showcase the interesting animation and art style:

Can you think of another movie or book that uses a fictional language? I've already mentioned Star Trek's Klingon language and the Atlantis language. Comment below and tell me about it!

Dark Shadows Movie Review

Many year ago there was a television soap opera called Dark Shadows, that ran from 1966 to 1971. While originally not intending to have supernatural elements in it, the show eventually featured ghosts, vampires, werewolves, witches, zombies, time travel, and parallel universes. Directors Tim Burton and Quentin Tarantino have publicly stated they were fans of the TV show. Johnny Depp was obsessed with the show as a child and wanted to be the prominent vampire character, Barnabas Collins. Well, if Tim Burton and Johnny Depp liked Dark Shadows so much, a movie (2012) was inevitable.

In 1772, Barnabas (Johnny Depp) has the world at his feet until he makes the grave mistake of breaking the heart of Angelique Bouchard (Eva Green). A witch in every sense of the word, Angelique dooms him to a fate worse than death: turning him into a vampire and burying him alive. Two centuries later, Barnabas is inadvertently freed from his tomb and emerges into the very changed world of 1972. He returns to Collinwood Manor to find that his once-grand estate has fallen into ruin. The Dysfunctional remnants of the Collins family have fared little better, each harboring their own dark secrets; the inhabitants include Elizabeth Collins (Michelle Pfeiffer) who runs the family fortune, her teenage daughter Carolyn (Chloe Grace Mortez), Elizabeth's useless brother Roger (Jonny Lee Miller), Roger's Disturbed son David (Gully McGrath), and a live-in psychiatrist named Dr. Julia Hoffman (Helena Bonham Carter). Even after centuries have passed, Angelique shows up to wreak havoc on the Collins family and tear them apart.

I think Tim Burton films are fun and I love watching Johnny Depp perform. The director and actor duo tend to produce movies that are fun to watch, even if a little strange. Dark Shadows was chockful of Tim Burton's signature Gothic style; weird angles, vividly contrasting colors, elaborate sets and costumes, a variety of wacky characters, and often dark humor. If you're a fan of Tim Burton, you will not be disappointed by the rich and strange visuals Burton is known for.

Since the role of Barnabas Collins was a childhood dream of Depp's you can rest assured that his performance is pitch perfect and intense. You'd think that with the dark and often strange roles Depp portrays, he would have been a vampire at least once before, but this is a first for him. Barnabas is a 18th-century  Englishman who has awakened in the 1970's; he treats people with elaborate courtesy. Depp's performance is haughty and mannered, as it probably should be for the character. But on the other hand, so is the performance of every other actor. This creates a sort of strange style in the movie's overall presentation that seems to teeter between satire and being snooty to the audience. That may have been intentional to captivate the  melodramatic quality of the original TV show, but it felt a bit weird to me.

A problem with trying to capture all the fun stuff from the TV show in a movie is that the movie seemed rushed. The back story in the introduction, while very well done, probably could have been a movie all by itself. The Dark Shadows movie had a huge cast and never seemed to give enough screen time to any of the characters other than Barnabas and Angelique. So when some of the Collin's family secrets come into play, it seem to be an all too convenient plot device rather than a logical twist in character development. I don't even know why Barnabas's love interest developed; the two characters have maybe two short scenes together.

Dark Shadows was really fun. It was highly stylized in a classic Tim Burton fashion and we had a great performance from Johnny Depp. While the story started out promising, it seemed rushed and didn't seem to know where it was going most of the time. The humor mostly centered around Barnabas's reaction to 1970's pop culture, which is usually good for a few laughs. It averages out to be a fun movie, but not necessarily a good one. If you're a fan of Tim Burton or Johnny Depp, Dark Shadows is worth owning. But even if you're not a fan, I still recommend renting it at least because it's so fun.

Is there a TV show you'd love to see made into a movie? I think a Gilligan's Island movie might be cool, or possibly Blake's 7. Comment below and tell me what you think!

One for the Money Movie Review

I've worked at a couple of public libraries over the years. When shelving fiction books I would frequently come across Janet Evanovich books. Evanovich has written a series of crime comedies starring her character Stephanie Plum; there are currently nineteen books in the series. Just recently a movie was made based on the first book. The trailer for One for the Money (2012) looked decent, so I gave it a try.

After losing her job, Jersey girl Stephanie Plum (Katherine Heigl) is broke. Needing a job she is told that her cousin, a bail bondsman, needs someone to help out in the office. But the only open jobs he has are skip tracers. She learns that Joe Morelli (Jason O'Mara), a guy she knew intimately years ago, is one of the "skips." She eventually finds him but wasn't really prepared so he gets away. Another bounty hunter, Ranger (Daniel Sunjata) takes Stephanie under his wing to show her the ropes. Eventually she finds Morelli again, but he claims he is innocent of the crime he's accused of and he is trying to prove his innocence. Stephanie thinks he's telling the truth so she stakes out the person who can help him. The two try to find someone who can prove Morelli's innocence but the problem is that people are attacked or killed shortly after Stephanie speaks with them. Something bigger than a missed court date is going on, and Stephanie is determined to find out what that bigger something is, and to find out if Morelli is as trustworthy as he claims to be.

I've never read a Janet Evanovich book, so I can't really say how the movie compares to its source material. I can say the movie is full of quirky, silly characters with New Joisey vibes. While they are quirky and silly, they aren't very deep or all that interesting. Stephanie's plight is easy to relate to; becoming desperate enough for money as to pick up any odd job that comes around and appeasing a family full of wacky characters is something many of us do anyway. I got the feeling that many of the characters in One for the Money were making movie cameos that  would delight only fans of the books.

Most of the dialogue was amusing, but only earned some laughs now and then. It's as if the movie was trying to set itself up for some funny situational humor but only managed to achieve humor through some of the dialogue. It resulted in a comedy that wasn't all that funny. There are plenty of antics that revolve around Morelli who is a possibly corrupt and murderous cop, and his still-enamored and inexperienced pursuer. This seems like an interesting twist on the traditional cat-and-mouse games that a lot of crime movies have.

One for the Money seemed more like a really long episode of a TV show rather than a major motion picture. The acting was sub-par and even awkward at times. Katherine Heigl is pretty and all, but her delivery was lackluster. The script seemed to be rigid and by-the-book; it was predictable for the most part and had the same scenes that nearly every crime movie has. The action is sparse; we have a car explosion and a few gun shots. This studio probably could have saved some money by making this a TV release movie without changing a thing.

My biggest complaint about this particular crime movie is that we're not given enough hints to figure out whodunit. It's a crime/mystery story and when we find out who the culprit is, it pretty much comes out of the blue. The story isn't all that deep or hard to follow, but a good story should make you understand how the crime could only have occurred the way that it did. We're given a lot of red herrings, but the one that actually develops into something is unforeseen and illogical. I don't think the gumshoe aspect was supposed to be the driving point of the movie necessarily, but the comedy wasn't all that successful either.

One for the Money wasn't a very good movie. It was amusing enough to avoid actually being called "bad." The acting was forced and awkward, the script was mildly charming, the low production value caused the overall quality to suffer, and the story was contrived. If you don't see One for the Money you won't be missing anything of value. I caught it on NetFlix Instant Play and because of that it might be worth catching if your queue has been depleted of other good movies. Apparently Evanovich was thrilled with the movie, but I really don't foresee the other novels in the series being made into films. The books may still be worth a shot; don't judge a book by it's movie.

What's your favorite crime movie? Were you able to solve the case along with the investigator? comment below and tell me about it!