Iron Man 3

Steve Rogers: "You're not the guy to make the sacrifice play, to lay down on a wire and let the other guy crawl over you."
Tony Stark: "I think I'd just cut the wire."

That quote, from 2012's The Avengers, feeds directly into the decision by Tony Stark (played by Robert Downey Jr.) to selflessly deliver a nuclear missile through a portal to the other side of the universe at the end of that film. Stark manages to survive this act, something that should likely have been a one way ticket. Iron Man 3 looks at the personal ramifications of that decision.

Directed by Shane Black, he makes a gamble that manages to pay off in dividends: by pulling things in closer (the larger "universe" that Marvel has created is only briefly alluded to) to the "man behind the mask" we get to know the things that now make a post-Avengers Stark tick. We open to Stark's humorously rambling yet strangely coherent narration very reminiscent of 2005's Kiss Kiss Bang Bang that Downey also starred in (which was also both written and directed by Black). After a brief prologue/flashback to a pre-Iron Man Tony Stark, which for astute viewers features some nice callbacks to the first film of the trilogy, we get to see Tony hard at work in the lab of his Malibu mansion. We immediately recognize how occupied he's kept himself since the events of The Avengers. Where that film saw him first using the Mark VII armor, he's now up to the Mark XLII, which gives a subtle insight into his mindset: he's become one paranoid guy.

Tirelessly planning and tinkering with the armor for every contingency actually becomes one of the main conflicts of the film. Will Tony continue a descent into a Howard Hughes-esque reclusiveness and obsession or actually grow as a person by film's end? The journey to find out is a long and difficult road. Plagued by several PTSD-like symptoms, Stark clearly hasn't come to terms with the rapid changes in his universe. Organically, the writing makes sense: Iron Man was more or less the most "grounded" of the previous stand-alone Marvel films, so someone like Stark would naturally be very practical. Seeing mythical monsters attack New York through a portal from another world would at the very least probably result in some nightmares. Having to deal with the new villain, and self-proclaimed "teacher" the Madarin (played by Ben Kingsley), only adds more conflict to a very shaken Tony Stark.

Beyond the character driven story, the film also features some great effects and cinematography.  Particularly memorable: the incredible effects shots of Tony's Malibu mansion falling into the sea after a missile attack, a very intense scene filmed with real-life skydivers, and Stark himself laying alone, stripped of his armor (both literally and figuratively), in a quiet meadow immersed in silently falling snow. The orignal score features some nice call backs and motifs used in both the previous Iron Man films and in the Avengers. This is surprisingly well done considering that the composer, Brian Tyler, has not been previously used in any Marvel Phase One films (and has a rather eclectic filmography ranging from movies to videogames).

This is not to say that the film doesn't feature a few drawbacks. The intense focus on Tony Stark's character gives some of the supporting cast the short end of the stick. One of the villains, played by the always compelling Guy Pearce, is telegraphed so obviously as a bad guy that he may as well have had a twirling mustache and evil laugh. In addition, Gwyneth Paltrow is almost reduced to the lovesick female again (a la Iron Man 2) but at least gets to actually save Stark for once. Don Cheadle also reprises his Iron Man 2 role as James Rhodes, whose character comes across as kind of forced in an admittedly lame way to showcase the new Iron Patriot armor. Also featured is child actor Ty Simpkins, who plays a new ally of Stark's that I was relieved to see leave the main part of the plot relatively quickly (the problem being that his character comes dangerously close to being the annoying Spielberg kid and could have easily been written out).

Despite some supporting character issues, Iron Man 3 manages to avoid what can often be the "trilogy curse", by delivering a film far superior to the previous sequel and on the same level as the original.

I Am Iron Man

• A gamble done right : opting to focus on the character of Tony Stark and the repercussions of the events in The Avengers on a personal level is a lot more effective than any other bloated effects film could have been.
• Strong writing for Robert Downey Jr. to work with, he continues to own the role with his witty delivery and amusing soliloquies.
• Good balance of practical effects and digital work: both clearly spared no expense.
• Several great call backs to the previous films without it becoming repetitive. 
• Interesting motives for the villains: the use of perception vs. reality has a particularly strong resonance throughout.
• Strong original score with a nice balance of motifs from the old (the original Iron man) to the new (The Avengers).

I'm Hot, I'll hurt you!

• The focus on Tony Stark comes at the expense of some of the other characters, notably Don Cheadle's James Rhodes and to some extent Gwyneth Paltrow's Pepper Potts.
• The use of the infamous "annoying Spielberg kid".
• Some character's are overly telegraphed (almost to juvenile levels) as being "good" or evil".
• Some of the use of the Extremis Soliders is too silly, one scene in particular sees a character literally breathe fire on someone else.

Verdict: Iron Man 3 sees a great use of Robert Downey Jr.'s abilities as the always strongly written Tony Stark. By deciding to focus on the man and not just the suit, Iron Man 3 manages to rise well above the typical summer popcorn flick.

Take a look at the Iron Man 3 Stark Expo at Disneyland.

Pain and Gain

Pain and Gain unfortunately takes a very interesting (and true!) story and attaches it to director Michael Bay's ADHD style of empty action, loose narrative and nauseating cinematography. Opening with a voiceover by bodybuilder/fitness trainer Daniel Lugo (played by Mark Wahlberg): the film has a promising start. The gym that Wahlberg's character works at is getting surrounded by a SWAT team and he's the target. Mid-escape and after being hit by a police car, we flash back to the previous year where this twisted tale of extortion and kidnapping began. I found myself at first enjoying the voiceover, which seemed to be going the route of unreliable narrator which has been done to great effect in the past. Most recently in 2009's The Informant!, which interestingly enough is also based on true events that occurred in the mid-nineties, but alas this isn't the method utilized. Soon it becomes clear how sloppy it was executed: Maddeningly switching from the traditional 3rd person to the much harder to pull off 1st person perspective without any consistency. Eventually, it devolves into snippets of POV from each character resulting in a wonky and oftentimes confusing focus (Goodfellas this isn't).

We are then breezily introduced to the main characters of the film: close friend and fellow gym patron of Wahlberg's character Adrian Doorbal (played here by Anthony Mackie), recently released from prison Paul Doyle (Dwayne Johnson), and the mark Victor Kershaw (played by Tony Shalhoub whose character's name was changed to protect his real-life counterpart). Each actor does well with decently written material, but due to the shoddy direction it feels disconnected and unfocused. This however, leads to one of the oddest bits of casting: Rebel Wilson. She plays the girlfriend/wife of Mackie's character based on real-life Cindy Eldridge. Wilson, native to Australia, opts to use one of the most confusing accents ever recorded on film. In one scene (I kid you not!) it shifts from a southern twang, to flat-midwest, and then back to her natural Australian. One wonders if the casting director owed her a favor, as the person she portrays is literally NOTHING like her. Eldridge was, in fact, an American born bodybuilder.

In the structure of the film itself, Michael Bay's directorial eye feels stale. Almost like someone that is trying to emulate a Michael Bay film and is not actually done by the man himself. He, of course, manages to shoehorn in his oft-used trope of the spinning camera on a stationary character, a weird focus on certain scenes that adds nothing to the narrative (e.g. a drawn out look at a battered Tony Shalhoub reaching for a dinner roll and a protracted focus on a trip to the hardware store to return a saw both immediately come to mind), and a weird fascination with phallic shaped objects. Sadly, it seems Bay won't be switching up his style anytime soon since the success of the Transformers films has more or less given him a license to do whatever the hell he wants. It's just frustrating that he brings in his increasingly juvenile vision to what could have otherwise gone down as a classic dark comedy crime film (see 2011's far superior Bernie starring Jack Black). Rounding out the film crew is composer Steve Jablonsky, a long-time Bay collaborator who produces a surprisingly forgettable soundtrack (which is surprising in the sense that he was one of the lone bright spots as composer of the entire Transformers trilogy).

Pain and Gain has all the ingredients of a good movie: a strong cast, good story, great setting and larger than life scenario. The problems start to stack up with the direction, handled so poorly that it literally breaks the film.

I'm a Doer!

• Generally strong casting, most of the actors use the best of their talents with the characters and the decently written script.
• Shockingly faithful adaptation of the real events in the sense that most of these things actually happened.

... or a don'ter?

• Features the always frustrating Michael Bay directorial tropes and style: fast cutting and eyesore inducing camera twirls that distract from what could have been a pretty good film.
• A large blight on the casting concerns the confusingly used Rebel Wilson, which comes across as pure gimmick when you consider the fact that the character she is based on is the polar opposite of the real person.
• Extended focus on things that add nothing to the story and entirely fictional scenes that seem to only exist to inflate the already bloated running time.
• Also features a bland soundtrack that could have easily been pulled from any cookie cutter action film of the mid-nineties.
• Ends up sensationalizing some rather horrific events to the point where you catch yourself forgetting how horrific it actually is. While the dark comedy route could have worked it ends up crossing a line.

Verdict: Pain and Gain, something with actual promise, manages to crash in on itself no thanks to the increasingly smug directorial stylings of Michael Bay. Save yourself an ordeal and read this much more compelling comparison of the film to the actual events here and the real life story written by journalist Pete Collins here.

Watch this pretty hilarious amalgamation of the truly awful Michael Bay "spinning camera". S*it just got real, Martin Lawrence.

Oblivion

Oblivion is the best new sci-fi film in quite some time and is a welcome return of Tom Cruise to the genre (the last being 2002's Minority Report). The scope of the film is impressive considering the relatively small area it takes place in, and the world the film's characters inhabit is eerily beautiful. Featuring very impressive special effects, the shots of a destroyed and abandoned New York City are haunting. One particularly memorable chase scene through a canyon featured the ruins of the Statue of Liberty poking out of the rock like grasping fingers and looked like nothing more than a lost relic. This is just one example of a film filled with scenes of beautiful ruins of lost grandeur, very reminiscent of ancient Rome.

Directed and co-written by Joseph Kosinski (who interestingly enough also co-wrote and based this film on an unpublished graphic novel of the same name), Oblivion is his second film, the previous being the pretty decent Tron: Legacy (which was admittedly was a tad overwritten). Prior to this Kosinski, is also known for two very well done video game tv spots (both the 'Mad World' Gears of War and 'Starry Night' Halo 3 trailers) which personally, are two of my favorites. In those ads, you can clearly see a visual connection between them and this film. Ultimately, Kosinski does manages to avoid a lot of the overwrought and slight pretentiousness of his previous Tron sequel here, despite Oblivion having a much more complicated story.

Unfortunately, the complicated story does lead me to the few complaints I have about the film. Opening with the dreaded exposition voiceover (dubbed in by Tom Cruise), the opening monologue is concise enough but frustrating in that almost the exact same information is relayed back to us by a later character named Malcolm Beech (played by Morgan Freeman) much later in the film. I almost wonder if the voiceover was added later after initial test screenings and/or studio pressure to help the movie "make more sense"a la Blade Runner. The problem is that it just takes out some of the wonder of the film, we don't need a hand holding voiceover to tell us something that can just as easily be shown or even briefly outlined in opening text (and again the same information is recycled to us in dialogue). The director apparently attempts to reconcile this by having voiceover again at the end (perhaps to add symmetry?), but manages to make it even worse than it was at the beginning. In addition, an over reliance on showing the same flashback scene gets a little repetitive especially when we are shown the entire thing again after it was just told to us. As a filmmaker, it would be nice if Kosinski would have a little more faith in his audience to figure things out.

Apart from these issues, there is a great polish on all aspects of the film. The beautiful scenery can't be stressed enough: the sleek white Apple esthetic inspired sky tower that serves as Tom Cruise's base would make Steve Jobs himself jealous. This sky fortress features gorgeous shots of the both the day and night sky that contrasts very well with the abandoned and creeping grandeur of the devastated New York below. The supporting cast is rounded out well, featuring strong performances by both the lesser known Andrea Risenbrough (playing the part of Cruise's tight laced communication officer and love interest) and a subtle turn by Olga Kurylenko who seems to only improve her acting skills with each subsequent film (as a mysterious woman who may know more than she appears to). It also features Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, known for his role as Jaime Lannister (Kingslayer!) on HBO's Game of Thrones, an actor who is clearly going to see his career take off despite not really being used for much in the film itself. The soundtrack is immersive and I was pleased that, like the director, it was co-composed by two relative unknowns when they could have easily just recycled bits and pieces from Inception and called it a day.

Oblivion gets to un-officially serve as the kickoff to the summer movie season, and it fills this role with aplomb. This well written and thought provoking film may not get a sequel, but will certainly remain in the pantheon of smart and extremely competent sci-fi films for years to come.

Another Day in Paradise...

• As visually appealing as it is thought provoking, Oblivion is an extremely respectable sci-fi film, if not a classic.
• Incredible visuals, at no point do they get too flashy or distracting and very successfully add to the feeling of eerie awe of an abandoned New York.
• Strong performances by the 3 main characters, they feel like real people and Tom Cruise's everyman character works to a surprisingly good effect that pays off (story-wise) by the end of the film.
• Offers up some nice homages to past films particularly 2001: A Space Odyssey, even though it almost borrows a bit too much from others (namely: Independence Day).
• Great original soundtrack (composed by two newcomers), that fits both the world and style of the film and doesn't have what could have been a borrowed feel from other films.

Are You an Effective Team?

• Some rather annoying voiceover at the beginning and end of the film that approches the border of awful (especially the ending bit).
• An underused Morgan Freeman, whose character is so superficially written that it honestly could have been played by any actor over 60. I almost wonder if they just needed another big name to attach to the credits?
• One early scene in regards to how certain character's move calls into question a rather major revelation later in the film and a weird sense that the director didn't think the audience would understand a very straightforward flashback sequence.

Verdict: Oblivion is a worthy investment of your time that manages to pull off both the popcorn and cerebral appeal that so many science fiction films fail to balance properly (ahem... see any sci-fi movie/action movie helmed by Roland Emmerich). With some very minor quibbles aside, Oblivion is a must see for any fan of sci-fi.

Take a look at the rather unique way the filmmakers dealt with not being able to build a "real" sky-tower...