Kingsman: The Secret Service Review

I have a confession to make; I'm not much of a fan of spy movies, and I've never seen a James Bond movie I can honestly say I liked. I saw the trailer for Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014) and I was torn. It looked funny, but it also looked too much like a James Bond rip off for me to enjoy it.  I watched it anyway, and it was nothing like I expected. It's a very tongue-in-cheek spy movie that both satirizes Bond movies and acts as an innovative action spy movie.

Harry Hart (Colin Firth), code named Galahad, works for a top secret spy organization called The Kingsman. When one of Hart's compatriots dies in a failed attempt to rescue scientist James Arnold (Mark Hamill), The Kingsman have an opening in their ranks. Hart recruits Gary "Eggsy" Unwin (Taron Egerton) an unrefined but promising street kid, and son of a former Kingsman, into the agency's ultra-competitive training program. During Eggsy's training, internet billionaire and philanthropist Richmond Valentine (Samuel L. Jackson) is reaching out to politicians, celebrities, and other persons of status to support him in his idea to put an end to global warming which correlates with his promotion of SIM cards that will provide the world with free internet and phone service. Concerned about the connection between Valentine and the death of his compatriot, Hart discovers a global threat behind Valentine's seeming generosity. Can Hart whip Eggsy into proper gentleman and spy to help save the world?

Kingsman was a ton of fun. It's almost like Men in Black meets James Bond but without aliens. If James Bond were completely rebuilt from the ground up for this generation, we'd have Kingsman. The movie both makes fun of spy movies while paying homage to them. It's self aware and makes literal references to spy movies. In some scintillatingly well done dialogue between Hart and Valentine, they say something to the effects of "If this were a movie, wouldn't [insert spy movie trope here] happen?"  This is followed by "This isn't that kind of a movie." And then they'd do something outside the usual structure of a spy movie. They really push on the fourth wall without actually breaking fourth wall in the interest of commentating on the spy movie genre. It gets a bit meta and self-referential without such commentary seeming out of sorts with the story itself.

Further homage include Valentine being made of the same stuff as a James Bond style villain but with a modern flair. He's got weirdly endearing quirks; he has an odd lisp, pays for all his ridiculous gadgets with his inheritance and earnings through online business, and he can't stand the sight of violence and becomes ill at the sight of blood. He's even got a ridiculous henchman; an amputee woman named Gazelle (Sofia Boutella) who wears bladed prosthetic legs. It's just like an over the top James Bond Villain, but modernized, silly, and interesting.

Hart is positively delightful. He's a superbly proper British gentleman with a crisp Queen's English accent. He's dapper, well dressed, eloquent, and can fight amazingly well. He's the kind of gentleman who would hold the door open for a lady and kick the trash out of her scumbag boyfriend. This was perfectly played out by Colin Firth, he seemed practically tailor made for the role. The role of Eggsy was also good, I've never heard of Taron Egerton before, but he was excellent, and I expect to see him in a lot more movies in the furutre. He played a streetwise petty thug with a chip on his shoulder and a thick cockney accent, and he allowed the character to develop and grow gradually and become a likable character. He's not terribly deep, you can't help but root for him.

The action is very intense in Kingsman. While there are moments of rising and falling action, the action rarely lets up. It's the action and some language that give the movie its R rating. Some of it is fairly cringe-worthy, but the camera doesn't dwell on the shots of gore hardly at all. It gives you just enough time to register what happened before moving on to another shot. This made it more watchable, I think, but no less shocking. But even some of the violent imagery tends to be hilarious at times. The action scenes were well choreographed and captured on camera. There's some shaky camera work in a few action scenes, but it was reasonably well done; the camera followed the action well enough to know what was going on without making me motion sick.

I thought Kingsman: The Secret Service was very enjoyable. Non-stop action, fun characters, a witty script full of commentary on spy movies, self-referential comedy, and lots of laughs. I'd say this wasn't a deep movie if not for the meta-spy movie quality it has, that makes Kingsman work on the level of a simple action movie and on the level of an interesting critique of the genre. I was both laughing and sitting on the edge of my seat throughout. This works well as a self contained story; there's no open end for a sequel to follow. I liked it enough to want to see more, but I don't think a sequel is necessary. Leaving this as a one off movie would be just perfect. If you do not like violent films or are put off by profanity, you won't like this one at all. But it that doesn't bother you too much, I recommend seeing this movie. I enjoyed it enough to want a copy on blu-ray once it's available.

Can you think of another good meta-movie? Surely there are others. Comment below and let me know!

Captain America: The Winter Soldier Movie Review

Considering the current state of America and its government's reluctance, inability , or refusal to help average, non-wealthy, non-corporation citizens, it seems the only kind of patriotism these days is the knee-jerk "we're number one" nationalism variety. I praised Captain America: The First Avenger for its comments on patriotism and where the true strength of America lies. Now that Captain America is finished with The Avengers movie and is returning for his own second movie I had high hopes for more patriotism, political commentary, and superhero action. Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) did not disappoint.

For Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), awakening after decades of suspended animation involves more than catching up on pop culture; it also means that this old school idealist must face a new world of subtler threats and difficult moral complexities. That becomes clear when Director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) is killed by the mysterious assassin,  The Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan), but not before warning Rogers that S.H.I.E.L.D. has been subverted by its enemies. When Rogers acts on Fury's warning to trust no one there, he is branded a traitor to the organization by Alexander Pierce (Robert Redford), a senior leader within S.H.I.E.L.D, a member of the World Security Council, and an old comrade of Nick Fury. Now a Fugitive, Captain America must get to the bottom of this deadly mystery with the help of Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and his new friend, Sam Wilson/Falcon (Anthony Mackie). The battle will be costly for Captain America, with Rogers finding enemies where he least expects them while learning that The Winter Soldier looks disturbingly familiar.

The characters in Captain America: The Winter Soldier were positively amazing. Steve Rogers in particular was great. He's been working for S.H.I.E.L.D. for the two years that followed the events in The Avengers, and he's still trying to adjust to the modern world. It's not so much a question about his shock with modern technology as it is about societal differences. He has gone from the 1940's to today; he comes from a world where people were more trusting and the threats were not as deep. Now it's harder to tell who's right and who's wrong. In our world, actions you take to protect people from threats could compromise liberties and privacy. That is really tough for Steve to swallow. He is teamed up with Natasha and they form a fascinating dichotomous contrast. She is incredibly modern, not very reverent, and exceedingly blunt whereas Steve is a man from the 40's. Steve isn't necessarily a boy scout, but he is reserved and has a strong moral center, whereas her moral center moves around as the situation requires. As a spy, Natasha lies for a living. Steve is a character who tells the truth. Give them a problem and they'll have very different ways of approaching it. She pushes him to modernize while he pushes her to add a certain level of integrity to her life. The characters and their respective actors bounce off each other beautifully.

The First Avenger told us about real patriotic American values. Winter Soldier makes some fascinating commentary about modern politics in a very relevant way without being heavy handed in trying to be relevant. It raises questions about the United States Government and how it behaves. It does this in a smart, almost subversive way. It's very pertinent to how we define freedom currently, versus how we defined freedom in the 1940's. There is a scene early in the film that sets up this interesting question. Fury tells Rogers a story about his grandfather and a gun; basically a variation on "walk softly and carry a big stick." But then Fury shows Rogers "the stick;" weaponry that can take out 100 hostiles in a minute, than can read a terrorist's DNA from a million miles away, and basically eliminate threats before they can become threats. "We're going to neutralize a lot of threats before they even happen," Fury tells Rogers. "I thought punishment usually came after the crime," Rogers objects. "S.H.I.E.L.D. takes the world as it is, not as we'd like it to be," says Fury. Rogers boldly retorts by telling him “You hold a gun on everyone on Earth and call it protection. This isn’t freedom. This is fear.” How could one not think of the way America has invaded other countries based on rumors of stockpiled weaponry or the monitoring internet use for any signs of correspondence with enemies? In the other Marvel movies we've had invading aliens, killer robots, and super powered villains to fight. Here we've got very human enemies that are using very real methods to attack and undermine the good guys. The only things we're asked to believe is the "super soldier" Steve Rogers being at above normal human ability, and S.H.I.E.L.D.'s airships and their Bond-style spy gear. Everything else is pretty down to earth, and that makes it all the more relatable. The villains aren't just trying to take over the world, they're probably targeting YOU specifically!

Disney has taken over Marvel and their second wave of movies leading up to The Avengers 2 has been good so far. These Avengers movies have proven to be a corporate cash cow, and I'm surprised that they took the chance to tackle these big issues rather than playing it safe. And similar to what was done in Iron Man 3, it messes around with the franchise canon a bit. I won't spoil anything, but any fan will know that is horribly taboo. S.H.I.E.L.D. has never been without it's issues, and I'm interested to see where the movie series goes with it.

The Winter Soldier was a formidable opponent for Captain America to face, but The Soldier didn't have much of a presence until toward the end of the movie. He's a good villain and introduces further moral dilemmas for Captain America to deal with. Moral dilemmas for Captain America are always black and white, but The Winter Soldier presents the only real grey area that he has had to face. It makes the character dynamic all the more fascinating. Sebastian Stan did an outstanding job acting this part; he gets few spoken lines, and most of his face is obscured for much of his screen time. Having said that, he manages to portray a great deal of emotion through facial expression and actions. Stan did a great job in this role given his limited screen time. The Winter Soldier's theme music starts off eerie and gradually swells into a sort of panic screech which makes the formidable enemy all the more frightening. I didn't think he played a big enough role to get his name in the title of the movie. If you're familiar at all with the comic books, you'll know that The Winter Soldier has a huge story arc and that this is probably just the first chapter of his tale.

Captain America: The Winter Solider was excellent. It delves deeper into theme and character than the other Marvel superhero movies have. It's a very character driven movie that has some very pertinent themes that are magnificently woven into the story so as to avoid being preachy. We get several new characters and we get some glimpses into their past without focusing on unnecessary details; each character has their own distinct arc. The action is great, the pacing is even, and the effects are amazing. Even if you don't enjoy super hero movies that much, you'll probably enjoy this one. I recommend brushing up on your Captain America lore by watching the first movie again before seeing this one. Make sure you watch for Iron Man, Thor, and Hulk references, and stick around for mid-credit and post credit scenes. I'm going to be getting a copy of this when it hits Blu-ray. Don't miss this movie!

Have you seen Captain America: The Winter Soldier yet? What did you think? Avoid spoilers, but tell me what your impressions were and what the future might hold for the Marvel Universe movies.

Jumper Movie Review

Haden Christensen delivered to us an insulting, lackluster, and unnecessary character of Anakin Skywalker in two of the prequel Star Wars movies. George Lucas is obviously to blame for that. Surely Haden Christensen could recover from such a terrible role, right? Well… maybe not.

High school student David Rice (Haden Christensen) lives in Anne Arbor. At the age of five, he was abandoned by his mother, so he lives with his alcoholic father. He’s got a crush on Millie (Rachel Bilson), and is picked on by at least one other kid at school. One winters' day, David becomes trapped under the ice on the river. Just before drowning, he discovers he can transport himself instantaneously to any place on earth. He leaves town, goes to New York City, robs a bank vault, and comes to the attention of a shadowy group called “The Paladins.” Eight years later The Paladins, lead by the murderous Roland Cox (Samuel L. Jackson), get a fix on David. Attempting to flee, David returns home to invite Millie to travel with him as far away as he can get. But he soon realizes that Roland and The Paladins are even more obsessive and deadly than he thought, and are bent on eliminating “Jumpers” like David. David finds another Jumper named Griffin (Jamie Bell) who is at war with The Paladins. Simply wanting to be free of The Paladins, David attempts to join Griffin, but ends up being more of a hindrance than anything.

Haden Christensen doesn’t seem to be able to act very well. He’s got this very forced style that seems on par with a high school drama student. He acts a lot like he did in Star Wars but without such “profound” dialogue. David's character is a thief, a coward, selfish, uninteresting, non-developing, and seems devoid of social graces, relying on his good looks to get him laid. No one in the movie seems to like David; Griffin doesn’t like him because David screws up Griffin’s plans and makes bumbling mistakes. Millie wants to like David, but he acts so weird and secretive that she doesn’t feel safe around him nor does she trust him. David’s father is an abusive alcoholic who beat David as a kid, and his mother flat out abandoned him. It’s a wonder that more of the cast aren’t siding with the villain; At least Roland takes the initiative to try to kill David.

It’s hard to take the story or characters very seriously because there never seem to be consequences for anything. David transports himself all over the globe, occasionally causing damage. When David “jumps” sometimes he busts up the floors and walls generating lots of dust or water damage, and sometimes he doesn’t. David appears in a crowd of people in the middle of a large city and no one bats an eye. A new car is teleported out of a dealership. A house is demolished when half of it is transported into a river. Still, not one person ever seems affected by any of this. If all this random damage and confusion doesn’t matter to anyone in the movie, why should it matter to us?

I have to admit the premise of having people who are able to teleport at random and what kind of a person that might create is interesting. Why The Paladins think it’s such an abomination and an affront to God isn’t really addressed. They are bad guys for the sake of being bad guys. But then, the Jumpers we see in the movie are rather unscrupulous scoundrels. Is Jumper really about a band of government-sponsored heroes tracking down some international petty thieves and law breakers? It isn’t framed that way, but it certainly looks to be the case.

Jumper had some potential to be a decent story. It could have made some social commentary similar to that of X-Men or Spider-Man: the injustice of attacking those different from you or “with great power comes great responsibility.” But it didn’t. Jumper just shows us a vaguely interesting premise, some half-decent special effects, some uninteresting characters, and a story with a very weak plot. Is it worth seeing? Maybe, but I wouldn’t take the effort to seek out the movie yourself. The only reason I saw it was someone gave me their copy of the movie because they didn’t want it. That alone should tell you something about the film.

If you could have any one superpower (like teleporting anywhere in the world) what power would you want? What would you do with it? Comment below and tell me the whole story!

The Avengers Movie Review

Ever since the post credits scene at the end of Iron Man (2008) where Nick Fury discusses “The Avengers Initiative”, Marvel fans have been anticipating an Avengers movie. There was a five-movie build up to this event, including two Iron Man movies (2008, 2010), The Incredible Hulk (2008), Thor (2010) and Captain America: The First Avenger (2011). Having already built a fandom around these characters, we have high expectations for Joss Whedon’s Superhero mash-up, The Avengers (2012). Even with our expectations set so high, they are still exceeded by this movie.

S.H.I.E.L.D. is a global peacekeeping espionage organization, with  Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) as its director. Exiled Norse god Loki (Tom Hiddleston) infiltrates S.H.I.E.L.D. and steals The Tesseract, and item of immense power that S.H.I.E.L.D. has been protecting. Loki has formed an alien army and will use the limitless power of the Tesseract to open a portal across the galaxy to bring them here and destroy Earth. Fury instigates The Avengers Initiative to gather the superheroes he has contacted over the past several years to help S.H.I.E.L.D.  protect Earth should the world stand in dire need. These heroes include Dr. Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) who can transform into The Hulk; genius billionaire playboy Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and his mechanical battle suit he which dons to become Iron Man; Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), who is the iconic World War II symbol Captain America; the Norse god Thor (Chris Hemsworth) returns to Earth to aid in stopping his adoptive brother Loki; and two S.H.I.E.L.D. operatives Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) codenamed Black Widow and Clint Barton (Jeremy Renner) codenamed Hawkeye.  But The Avengers are divided over how to approach Loki and the revelation that S.H.I.E.L.D. plans to harness the Tesseract to develop weapons. The team of superpowers must overcome their differences and combine forces to stop the immanent global threat.

Traditionally, the term “Epic Film” meant that a movie had a large scale, huge cast, sweeping scope, high budget, and often a run time that exceeds two hours. Some examples include Schindler's List (1993), Ben-Hur (1959), and Saving Private Ryan (1998). Recently, movie studios decided that dividing up an Epic into multiple shorter films makes the franchise last longer and earns the studios more money. That’s part of the reason for The Lord of the Rings to have been divided up into three movies, and the whole reason Quentin Tarantino’s epic Kill Bill (2003, 2004) was divided into two films. The five movies leading up to The Avengers were overlapping stories culminating in this one movie. With the dramatic combination of superpowers and a huge scale, I think it’s arguable that The Avengers and its related films could be considered an Epic by the traditional meaning of the term.

There were a few things I was worried would happen with The Avengers. I was concerned that the movie would rely on the assumption that the viewer has seen the five movies leading up to it and throw our heroes at us without bothering to develop them as characters. I was worried each of these characters were simply going to accept each other and rush off to fight the villain without question. I was also worried that only one or two of our heroes were going to get a bulk of the screen time. That would have been some seriously sloppy writing. I am deliriously happy to say that none of that happened! Joss Whedon co-wrote and directed The Avengers, and he is well known for his multi-character driven stories.

Each of our heroes has dynamic personalities and values; they don’t always see eye to eye, and they don’t trust each other. There’s a three-way fight early on between Iron Man and Thor. Each one exhibits some amazing feats, and even when Captain America tries intervene, you can’t decide who to root for most. Seeing these superheroes fight and their personalities clash makes them all the more interesting. Each character is developed enough for us to be emotionally invested in them; we know what they are capable of, we know what their strengths and weaknesses are, and we want to see them pushed to their limits! We are not left disappointed.

Every good hero needs a good villain; the nastier and more devious the villain, the more interesting the conflict. Loki returns after his defeat in Thor. He wants revenge and he wants to strike Thor where it would hurt the most: by enslaving Earth which Thor has come to love. Once the manipulative Loki sets his plan in motion, you can’t imagine how he could possibly be stopped. He is an outstanding villain who uses power and leverage to get what he wants. When he kills, he makes it meaningful and personal. He lies, manipulates, and is positively cruel to others. You just love to hate this villain, and you want to see him get it in the end.

The Avengers doesn’t shy away from showing us the kind of high end superhero action we want to see. We’re given gorgeously clear action that is over the top and amazing. We are held at the edge of our seat for a lot of the movie. Every character gets some great dialogue and humorous lines. The visual effects are brilliant. There is one scene later on that has a long, sweeping shot where the camera snakes around and over buildings showing us our heroes smack down enemies in their own distinct style in one dynamic swoop. There is so much energy and excitement packed into the camera work, the script, and the characters you can’t help but get caught up in the movie.

To summarize this movie in one word, it is “satisfying.” It shows us what we were expecting to see, and then goes several steps beyond that. You will applaud and cheer for your favorite heroes. You will be captivated by the action. You will be highly satisfied with this movie. There are a couple of minor parts of the story that seemed a bit too easily resolved; but you can forgive it because it pales in comparison to the good qualities in the film. The Avengers is fun, funny, exciting, and so satisfying. You really must see this in the theaters if you’ve ever liked Marvel superheroes or superhero movies at all. It’s an epic movie that you really should be a part of. You don’t necessarily need to see the five movies that built up to The Avengers, but you’d be doing yourself a disservice by missing them. Go see it in theaters as soon as you can, and then buy a copy of it on Blu-ray when it’s available. You can bet I will.

If The Avengers were to assemble again for another movie, what Marvel villain would you love to see them pitted against? Comment below and tell me why!

Movie Review: Captain America: The First Avenger

Marvel Studios has been busy as a bee since 2008, introducing a variety of Super Hero characters. Each character has their own movie, and some even have multiple movies. We have two Iron Man movies, a Hulk movie, a Thor movie, and Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has appeared in all of these movies to varying degrees. There’s even a third Iron Man and a second Thor movie in the works. Any comic book geek with knowledge of the Marvel universe could see what was coming after the post-credits scene in Iron Man (2008).  Nick Fury showed up telling Tony Stark (Iron Man) that he’s not the world’s only super hero and wanted to discuss the "Avenger Initiative". The last of The Avengers team that hadn’t shown up yet was Captain America. I didn’t think Captain America’s story would be hard to do, but it might be tricky to do well. But after seeing how well a Norse god became relatable, I felt confident and ready to see Captain America: The First Avenger (2011).

The year is 1942; World War II is in full swing and the United States has entered the fray. Thousands of young men are volunteering to join the army to serve their country. One among them is Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), a short, ninety-five pound asthmatic with a heart of gold who has just been rejected yet again for military service. Rogers’ life changes dramatically after encountering Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci) at a recruitment center. Dr. Erskine is impressed with Rogers and recruits him for the top secret “Project Rebirth.” After proving his extraordinary courage, intellect, and morals, Rogers undergoes a Super Soldier experiment conducted by Dr. Erskine and Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) that transforms his weak frame into a body at the peak of human strength and potential. Dr. Erskine is immediately assassinated by an agent of Nazi Germany’s secret research department, HYDRA, which is operated by Johann Schmidt, also known as The Red Skull (Hugo Weaving). Schmidt has been using an object of remarkable power called the “tesseract,” believed to have come from the Norse God Odin’s throne room, to create space age weapons and supply Nazi Germany with an unlimited energy-source for world domination. Rogers is deemed too valuable to be put on the front lines and is misused initially as a propaganda mascot. However, when his comrades who had previously enlisted need his help, Rogers springs into action to aid them and truly becomes Captain America, the hero, not just the symbol. This is where Captain America’s war against the Red Skull truly begins.

My biggest concern with this movie was that the character Captain America would be portrayed as a gung-ho, pro-America, nationalist, which seems to be the extent of modern day patriotism. Thankfully, this was not so. Captain America: The First Avenger (directed by Joe Johnston) has something to say about patriotism and where the true strength of America lies. This aspect of the character and plot was not played up quite as much as I was expecting, but it was not belittled or avoided as I had feared. Steve Rogers did not join the military out of a sense of vengeance or bravado as many of his comrades had. He joined out of a sense of justice and a desire to protect the oppressed. This was depicted in an exchange between pre-Super Soldier Rogers and Dr. Erskine. Erskine asks, “Do you want to kill Nazis?” to which Rogers replies without hesitation, “I don't want to kill anybody. I don't like bullies; I don't care where they're from.”

We’re shown the other side of war where patriotism can be used as propaganda. Initially Steve Rogers is given a rather eccentric costume after the Super Soldier experiment so that he can help promote the war and sell it to the American public. He is given an embarrassingly simple script to recite about buying war bonds while a line of dancing women are singing pro-America jingles. This ends badly with Captain America throwing a fake punch at a stage actor portraying Adolf Hitler. Rogers is clearly uncomfortable with this and desires to take a more active and useful role in stopping the Nazi bullies. This really is the type of simplified gung-ho nationalist-like patriotism that the character Captain America is not about and I appreciated that they made this distinction in the movie.

In most movies, especially superhero movies, they spare no time in having the newly empowered hero confront the villain and dive headlong into the action scenes. Not so in this movie.Captain America: The First Avenger really spends time developing the Captain America character. This really is an origin story that develops the character at his heart; the movie is more character driven than action driven. There is an action “montage” rather than lots of fighting scenes. This was used to depict Captain America’s multiple successes and shield-smacking victories before getting into the bigger, more plot-specific battles. But don’t worry; when the action arrives it’s really good; I was on the edge of my seat for many of the scenes. There were even a couple of moments during the action scenes that were unexpected and a bit shocking, such as a henchmen meeting a grotesque demise by a propeller.

All the characters were fun and well developed. Steve Rogers’ flame, Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell), was interesting, pretty, confident, and independent. Colonel Chester Phillips (Tommy Lee Jones) was gruff, practical, logical, and helped push Rogers’ to his best potential. Howard Stark (who is the father of the not yet born Tony Stark; Iron Man) is a lady killer, arrogant, creative, and resourceful. All these characters play off of each other really well. No one character is given a bulk of the humorous lines which was a somewhat mediocre device done in Thor (2011).

My only real complaint was the Red Skull. Every good hero needs a good villain; the nastier and more devious the villain, the more interesting the conflict. The Red Skull seemed to be lacking in purpose. He seemed to simply want to take over and destroy the world for the sake of taking over and destroying the world. It was almost as though all the lackluster qualities of a generic throw-away villain were stuffed into what is ordinarily an iconic super villain from the Marvel Comics universe. I have heard Red Skull is supposed to possess a superior intellect and inventive genius, as well as being a highly gifted subversive strategist and political operative. We did see some creative genius as he made ray guns and all manner of sci-fi gadgets with 1940’s technology. But you don’t get a feel for his intellect, political machinations, or strategic plotting. The Red Skull as a character is just about the only major character that seemed flat, generic, and undeveloped. He fills the role of “nasty, ugly villain” quite well, but his depiction in this film just seemed cliché. I can overlook this shortcoming a bit since Captain America is the main focus and there needed to be a struggle over which he could prevail. Such a struggle allows us to see what Captain America is made of and ultimately understand his part in the upcoming Avengers movie.

As opposed to the excruciating Captain America movie that came out in 1990 (trailer here) which, with good reason, no one seems to remember, Captain America: The First Avenger really was a fun movie with a good, fairly solid story. The movie demonstrates the message that patriotism is not about strength. It is about compassion and justice. Patriotism is not about how loud you cheer for your country or how many bad guys you kill. It is about how much you are willing to sacrifice to protect the helpless. Those are real patriotic American values. I enjoyed this movie enough that I intend to get a copy of it on Blu-Ray for my personal collection when it becomes available. This movie will be pretty intense for younger audiences, but it might be worth the effort to show them once they can handle some intense action scenes. Captain America is a hero of good morals and character that would be good to help them model in their own lives.