Mark Ruffalo

‘Mickey 17’ Movie and 4K Review

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

The following review was written by Ultimate Rabbit correspondent, Tony Farinella.

Studio movies seem to be falling into two categories these days—they are either inspired by other movies or they are looking to do something unique and different. “Mickey 17” falls into the latter category. Even though it is based on the novel “Mickey7” by Edward Ashton, it is a rather unique and “out there” movie. It is a science fiction comedy with big ideas, over-the-top characters and representations. I can’t compare it to any other movie out there, which is becoming increasingly rare in today’s cinema. So often, when you watch a movie, it reminds you of one or two others that have already been released. Franchises, sequels and reboots are also becoming far too common. Original ideas, even if based off books, are infrequent visitors in the cinematic landscape of today.

“Mickey 17” is directed by the Academy Award-winning director of “Parasite,” Bong Joon Ho, and it follows the story of Mickey Barnes, played by Robert Pattinson of “Twilight” fame. After Mickey and his buddy Timo (Steven Yeun) fall into debt because their macaron business falls apart, they are out of options. This leads them to joining a spaceship crew where they hope to blend in and avoid getting murdered by flying under the radar. While Timo becomes a shuttle pilot, Mickey decides to become an “expendable,” which is a job where he is in charge of dying over and over again in order to find answers for various problems in society.

Mickey Barnes is sheepish, dopey, and painfully shy.  However, he enjoys his new lease on life because of his relationship with an agent named Nasha, played by Naomi Ackie. They are madly in love with each other, and she helps Mickey deal with the fact that dying is not a whole lot of fun. Even though he is brought back to life because of a process called “reprinting,” it doesn’t make dying any easier for Mickey as he is, in many ways, a human guinea pig. With his work, they are able to come up with vaccines that will save lives. 

One day, his life is turned upside down when his life is spared by a group of critters known as Creepers. This leads to him being turned into a double, so while he is Mickey 17, there is also a Mickey 18, a version of him that is confident, self-assured and fearless. Nasha doesn’t mind having two Mickey’s, as it is more fun for her to fool around with two versions of her boyfriend. On this expedition, there is a leader named Kenneth Marshall, played by Mark Ruffalo, and it’s hard not to draw comparisons to Donald Trump with his performance. I had to look this up after watching the movie, and I’m not the only one who felt this way, even though Bong Joon Ho and Ruffalo say that was not their intention. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. Kenneth’s wife is played by Toni Collette.

“Mickey 17” is a film high on ambition and ideas, but it doesn’t have a sense of direction, and its pacing is all over the map. One of the most frustrating aspects of this movie is the fact it has a lot to say and there is a lot going on, but it falls apart because there is no sense of where they want to go with all of this. Is it a love story? Is it a commentary on there being two versions of yourself? Is it a commentary on self-sacrifice? Is it about abuse of power? It’s all of those things and a whole lot more, but without a clear and concise vision, not all of these ideas have the time to be fleshed out, even though the film is two hours and seventeen minutes long. The film is wildly uneven and frustrating.

Another big issue with the film is Pattinson and his bland and uninteresting performance. He’s not a good actor, even when he is given good material. I understand he’s trying to be taken seriously as an actor, but he doesn’t have the chops to carry the comedic scenes, and he also struggles with the more serious material as well. This is another problem with the film—it’s in search of a tone. Since it’s trying to do so much at once, it doesn’t know how to balance its themes or tones. It’s also way too long, and it needed a good trip to the editing room.

* * out of * * * *

4K Info: “Mickey 17” is released on a single-disc 4K from Warner Brothers Home Entertainment. The film has a running time of 137 minutes and is rated R for violent content, language throughout, sexual content and drug material. It also comes with a digital copy that can be redeemed on most digital platforms.

4K Video/Audio: “Mickey 17” gets the Dolby Vision/Atmos treatment, and it’s a remarkable release.  The color palette really pops on this 4K release, and the Dolby Atmos audio track is also perfect for your home theater setup.

Special Features:

Behind the Lens: Bong Joon Ho’s Mickey 17 (11:32)

Mickey 17: A World Reimagined (9:44)

The Faces of Niflheim (8:00)

Should You Buy It?

“Mickey 17” is a film that might end up gaining a cult following in years to come, but it also might be a film that falls flat with a lot of audiences. I do think it is worth checking out because it is entertaining at times and has individual moments which stand out in a positive way. It’s just too inconsistent for its own good, and it needed better performances from its cast.  I absolutely hated the Mark Ruffalo character, but it probably wasn’t in the way they intended for me to hate the character. After spending a little bit of time with him, I wanted him off my TV, and I would audibly groan when he would reappear. The film does have some good special features and from an audio and visual aspect, it looks and sounds great. The movie is just a jumbled mess, but it’s rarely, if ever, boring. I’d recommend you watch this one first before you decide to add it to your collection.

**Disclaimer** I received a copy of this film from Warner Brothers to review for free.  The opinions and statements in the review are mine and mine alone.

Spike Jonze’s ‘Where the Wild Things Are’ Deserves Another Look

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Back when I saw it in 2009, Spike Jonze’s take on Maurice Sendak’s “Where the Wild Things Are” proved to be one of the few movies which I felt really dealt with real kids instead of the cliched ones which inhabit far too many motion pictures. Here, we get a young boy who has quite a vivid imagination which he retreats to when the real world becomes too scary to deal with, and who comes from a broken family where the father is not present. It was nice to see kids, one in particular, treated as intelligent and capable of learning more than they knew, and it combines them with things which are real, imaginary and, of course, wild.

The kid here is Max, and he is played by Max Records in one of the best performances I have seen from a child actor. Seeing him build an igloo out of a snow pile or making a spaceship in his bedroom with his stuffed animals as willing passengers brought back great memories from when I was a kid. But reality rears its ugly head when other kids thoughtlessly destroy his igloo, not thinking of what it meant to him. Then we see him in elementary school as his teacher explains how the sun will die one day. This is one of the funnier moments as the teacher just can’t stop talking about all the different ways our planet will die. Granted, this won’t happen for another billion years, but when you’re a kid, this can feel like it is just around the corner.

Everything comes to a head as Max becomes very resentful of his mother (the always terrific Catherine Keener) when she brings home a new boyfriend (played by Mark Ruffalo). The bond Max shares with his mother is very strong, but when he is no longer the center of her attention, he rebels and ends up biting her on the shoulder. Horrified at what he did, Max runs away from home and sails to a distant island where he does indeed come across the Wild Things of the title, and this is where the rumpus truly begins…

The Wild Things are a combination of puppetry and CGI effects, and it makes them all the more real as a result. The visual effects are used to give them facial expressions which vividly captures their happiness and sadness. As a result, it never ever felt like I was just watching a whole bunch of special effects. It really felt like I was watching creatures I could actually interact with.

Of all the monsters, the one with the most recognizable voice is the late great James Gandolfini who plays the most prominent Wild Thing, Carol. We first see Carol destroying some dwellings he had just built. For Max, breaking things has a wonderment to it, and Carol links on to this with the upmost enthusiasm. Gandolfini is wonderful, and at times truly heartbreaking as he takes Carol from utterly enthusiastic highs to downright angry lows. This is not him doing Tony Soprano as if he was all covered with fur. Also, Carol’s last scene is one which really choked me up, and Gandolfini sells it for all it is worth.

Among the other voices are Catherine O’Hara’s, and she plays Judith, the one monster who is very mistrusting of Max. Paul Dano plays the ever so sensitive Alexander, and he captures the painfully shy nature of this monster in a very truthful way. Forest Whitaker portrays Ira, and I barely recognized his voice here which is pretty impressive. Lauren Ambrose voices KW, and the moments she shares with Max form some of the movie’s best moments.

You know the saying of how we have met the monster, and the monster is us? Well, that is very much the case here. The Wild Things clearly represent the different parts of Max’s personality, and he soon comes to see himself in all of them. As a result, Max manages to see things a little more clearly in relation to his own family, and especially his mother. By becoming the monsters’ king, he realizes he has become much like his mother.

I really mean it when I say Records gives one of the best child actor performances I have ever seen. The whole movie really rests on his shoulders, and that is a lot to put an 11-year-old through. Jonze really lucked out getting him to play this part as the young actor makes his character’s transition from being just a kid to someone who is more mature and understanding very believable, and this really shows in the movie’s last half.

Jonze shot a good portion of the action with handheld cameras to give the proceedings more of an immediacy, and he thankfully does not overdo it. Some filmmakers fail to reign this camerawork in a lot of times to where it is hard not to feel sea sick. This was only his third movie as a director, following the creative triumphs of “Being John Malkovich” and “Adaptation,” and his directorial vision remains a very original one.

“Where The Wild Things Are” was originally supposed to be released in 2008, but Warner Brothers had considered reshooting the whole thing. It turned out Jonze’s vision was a lot darker than they expected it to be for something they thought would be an average family movie. The fact that Jonze’s take on this classic children’s book did make it to the silver screen and was not buried in a deep dark dungeon like “Batgirl” feels like a miracle. While it was not the box office hit the studio hoped it would be, it continues to have a long shelf life.

It also has a wonderful soundtrack done by Karen O and the Kids. It’s one of those soundtracks which has really great songs which are never easily forgotten, and it adds vividly to the strong emotions generated throughout.

Is this movie appropriate for kids? Well, it depends. If they are 6 years or younger, you may want to see it before they do. I was sitting near a boy and his mother, and the boy did get a little freaked out at times. Still, it is nowhere as traumatic as “Watership Down” or “The Neverending Story” was. If your kid can handle “Bambi,” they can handle this one as well.

One of my favorite scenes comes when Max and the monsters are jumping all over the forest, and Carol was creating big dust clouds when he landed. This all leads to a wonderfully heartwarming moment where the wild things pile on top of each other and fall asleep. Seeing Max befriend the somewhat alienated KW is especially great because their individual differences just evaporate at that point. These are two who can relate and sympathize with one another as they both come from worlds where they feel like outcasts.

If there is one weakness to be found here, it is that the plot does not always hold together. There are some moments which drag, and it takes a bit for the pace to recover. Then again, this movie is based upon a book that is only ten sentences long. The fact Jonze and co-writer Dave Eggers were able to craft a story for a feature length movie out of it is pretty amazing. But when you read or re-read the book, I think you will find that there is more to it than its simplicity of story might imply.

There was a bookstore next to the theater I saw the film at, and I dashed in there to read the book. I can’t even remember the last time I read this Caldecott award winner, and there is a lot of different ways you can look at it. You can see it as a story of how kids do not easily separate from their parents, and of how the further away from home they get, the more they realize the importance of a home. Or maybe you will see it as a story of the one person who becomes king and gets what he wants, but then finds it deeply unfulfilling and bereft of love and family which we largely thrive upon.

I think Jonze saw “Where the Wild Things Are” as a story which clearly take in a child’s point of view. Just about everything in this movie made me feel like I a child again, and of how we become shaped by the things which make us happy and sad. It is not meant to break down the imaginary worlds we create for ourselves, but of how they can make us understand the world around us and the people who figure most prominently in our lives better. Max comes to see why his mother treated him the way he did, and he grows up a lot quicker than most others his age do in the process.

For me, this film was something of a godsend when I first watched it. We see kids treated like real kids, and there is a wealth of genuine imagination and emotions throughout. While it doesn’t always hold together, it is a much more accomplished film than many others which get passed off as “family entertainment.” Too many movies then and now are dumbed down for audiences, and they often don’t treat children like the intelligent creatures they can be,

Indeed, no one could have brought this classic book to the silver screen the way Jonze did. And after all these years, it is definitely worth another look.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

Underseen Movie: ‘Thanks for Sharing’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written back in 2012, and I was reminded of this film when I recently interviewed the writer/director and stars of the 2024 film “Sweet Dreams.”

There are many who see support groups (or 12-step groups if you want to call them that). The truth, however, is that those who attend them are not any different from the rest of us, and they can at times be very funny. At the very least, these people deserve credit and applause for taking the time to get the help they need because asking for help is usually one of the hardest things to do.

“Thanks for Sharing” is one of the few movies I have seen which deals with these groups and the people who attend them. While it does take the subject of addiction seriously, it also finds a good balance between drama and comedy to where we find ourselves laughing with these characters and never at them.

This movie focuses on three men who attend the same Sex Addicts Anonymous meeting: Adam (Mark Ruffalo), Mike (Tim Robbins) and Neil (Josh Gad). Adam is an over-achieving environmental consultant who is celebrating his fifth year of sobriety. Mike is a happily married man who is kind of the elder statesman of the support group these men attend. And then there’s Neil, an emergency room doctor who is in serious denial over his addictions to where he gets in serious trouble with the law. I like how we are given characters who are at different stages of dealing with this addiction to where it gives you a good idea of why people come to these groups in the first place.

Adam is at a good place as he has really cleaned up his act and is coping with life really well. He takes great pains to keep himself on the right track by taking such measures as removing television sets from his hotel rooms so he won’t find himself watching anything pornographic. But then he meets the irresistibly beautiful Phoebe (Gwyneth Paltrow) while at a party where people are eating bugs (don’t ask), and the two are instantly attracted to one another. While Adam is eager to be in a relationship with her, he is not altogether sure he is ready to fall in love again after all he has accomplished. He is trying to keep his demons at bay, but it becomes much harder for him to do so.

Mike has been in recovery the longest, and he appears to have a great relationship with his wife, Katie (Joely Richardson). Things between them, however, change very quickly when his son Danny (Patrick Fugit) turns out to have some serious addiction problems of his own. Katie is thrilled to see Danny, but Mike is not sure he can trust him after all they have been through. In the process, we come to see that Mike, despite his well-earned sobriety, still has some major control issues he has yet to make peace with.

As for Neil, he has gotten himself into a painful situation when he stands uncomfortably close to a very attractive woman while riding on the subway. From there, things come to a head for him when he loses his job under embarrassing circumstances, and this finally makes him realize he needs help. Neil eventually finds solace through another recovering addict, Dede (Alecia Moore, better known as Pink), who is just starting to deal with her personal demons as well.

I am always yearning for movies which have down to earth characters, and “Thanks for Sharing” is definitely one of them. All of what everyone goes through feels very real, and nothing ever felt contrived to me. Granted, the storyline involving Robbins’ character is one we have seen many times before, but the acting between him, Fugit and Richardson are so good to where we can forgive the filmmakers for venturing into familiar territory. It really is a shame how most Hollywood movies do not dare give us more characters we can relate to on a human level. If they did, it would make most movies far more enjoyable and invigorating as a result.

“Thanks for Sharing” was directed and co-written by Stuart Blumberg, one of the writers of “The Kids Are All Right.” Finding a balance between comedy and drama can be very hard to pull off, but Blumberg is successful in doing so for the most part. He also shows a lot of love for each character here, and not just the ones who in recovery.

Mark Ruffalo remains one of the best and most naturalistic actors working today. As Adam, I never caught him acting once, and his chemistry with Paltrow is very strong. Ruffalo makes Adam a very likable guy as he struggles to not fall back into his old habits, and he makes you see how much of a challenge this is for him.

As for Paltrow, this is the most relaxed she has been onscreen in some time. While she was a blast to watch in “Iron Man 3,” she seems more in her element here as she portrays a character who is not an addict, but one who needs to face up to the issues slowly eating away at her. Watching her in “Thanks for Sharing” reminded me of just how wonderful she can be when she is given the right role.

Robbins remains as terrific an actor as ever, and I am always enthralled when I watch him in anything he does. His character of Mike seems like the typical father who has lost trust with those he should be the closest to, but he imbues this character with a lot of humanity to where he never seems like a simple caricature. His scenes with Fugit, who we have not seen enough of since “Almost Famous,” feel emotionally true, and their relationship feels authentic when it could have come across as ridiculously manipulative.

At this point, I am not familiar with Gad’s work other than him appearing in the acclaimed musical “The Book of Mormon.” Gad has the trickiest role here as he is this movie’s comic relief, but he never plays Neil for simple laughs. We are watching Neil as he is at the start of his recovery, and it isa rough start to say the least. Gad makes you root for Neil even as he does some of the dumbest and most reckless things anyone would ever have the nerve to do.

But there is no forgetting Alecia Moore, a.k.a. Pink, who gives an impressive performance as an addict who was pushed into this particular support group by a friend. Her character of Dede ends up forming a strong rapport with Neil, and they find in each other the strength they need to move past what is destroying their lives to where they can see the light at the end of the tunnel. From start to finish, she really understands this character very well, and I could see it in her eyes. Like Ruffalo, you never catch her acting here as she grounds her character in a reality which is not all removed from our own.

I liked how “Thanks for Sharing” showed how these support groups can become another addiction as its members begin to spend more time with others instead of their own families. While these characters have made great strides in conquering their demons, they still struggle with their urges every single day. Truth be told, it takes a lot of courage to face up to the things which are tearing your life apart, and long before this movie is over, you realize these addicts are not weak but strong.

The one thing I would have liked to see more of is how the family members deal with their loved ones’ addictions. My understanding is that they can only be so involved in what an addict goes through as they can never fully comprehend how dangerous their addictions can be unless they have experienced the same thing themselves. There is a scene between Paltrow and Richardson which addresses this divide, but I would have liked to see this movie go a little bit deeper in this area.

But when all is said and done, “Thanks for Sharing” fulfilled my need to see a motion picture with characters which we can recognize in our own lives. With all these superhero movies coming at us endlessly, it is important to remember we will never be perfect and cannot be everybody’s everything. It would be nice to be a superhero though, wouldn’t it? Lord knows we could use a couple of them right now. Anyway, I think this movie is definitely worth checking out.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

‘The Kids Are All Right’ is About Marriage, Period

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

The Kids Are All RIght movie poster

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written back in 2010.

Lisa Cholodenko’s “The Kids Are All Right” takes its title from one of many great songs by The Who. However, I kept wondering about the movie’s title in regards to the way it is spelled. The Who’s song is entitled “The Kids Are Alright” while the movie splits “Alright” into “All Right.” What exactly does this mean? Are the kids infinitely more intelligent than the parents in this movie? Do they make better decisions in their lives than the adults? We all know kids have a stronger detector system when it comes to exposing the hypocrisy of parents and adults in general, so perhaps the movie’s title means to spell this out literally. Or maybe it’s because The Who made a rockumentary a number of years back called “The Kids Are Alright,” and perhaps Focus Features didn’t want to confuse the two. Anyway, that’s just a thought.

I was lucky enough to catch a screening of this movie on the day Proposition 8 was overturned by the California Supreme Court (YES!!!). This was the same proposition which barred gay couples from getting married and found funding from people who didn’t even live in California. However, to call this a gay or lesbian movie would make audiences completely miss the point as that is like calling “Brokeback Mountain a “gay cowboy” movie for crying out loud. What the couple of Nic (Annette Bening) and Jules (Julianne Moore) go through is not any different from what many “straight couples” go through, and it really gets to the truth of what hard work marriage can be.

Nic and Jules are a very loving couple indeed, and there is no doubt about how deep their affection for one another is. Furthermore, they have two wonderful children: a 15-year-old boy named Laser (Josh Hutcherson), and an 18-year old girl named Joni (Mia Wasikowska) who is about to head off to college. The major difference between Nic and Jules is while Nic has had a successful career as a physician, Jules has failed at just about every business she has tried to start up on her own. It gets to where Jules starts to wonder if Nic is really just belittling everything she does, and a resentment between the two grows quickly.

But what really throws a wrench into the family’s dynamic is when Joni, after being pushed by Laser to do so, contacts their biological father. Both were conceived by artificial insemination, and the sperm donor turns out to be a very nice guy named Paul (Mark Ruffalo) who has a phobia of commitment and leads a decidedly bohemian life. Upon meeting these two kids, he warms up to them immediately and finds himself changing in ways he didn’t expect. But then he meets the parents, and things get really crazy.

What I really liked about “The Kids Are All Right” was that after a summer of superheroes and high concept movies, here’s one which deals with real people and situations we all recognize from our own lives and the lives of others. The characters conceived here are all well meaning people who never come across as contrived or clichéd in the usual sense. Director Lisa Cholodenko, along with co-writer Stuart Blumberg, succeed in creating some wonderful characters, and they give them with hilarious dialogue which is also insightful and refreshingly down to earth. These are people with visible flaws which make them all the more human, as if we need to be told this.

I never found myself taking sides or hating any of the characters. Like I said, each one is well meaning and comes into this situation with the best of intentions. Of course, we all know where the best of intentions can lead us. When these people stray from one another, we may disagree with what they do, but Cholodenko uses this to make us understand why some end up doing the things they do. Everyone is complicated in their own way, but labeling people as bad for doing certain things only serves to blind us from understanding them as individuals.

All the actors are clearly in love with playing the intricacies of their roles, and each one creates a character we quickly become emotionally invested in. Annette Bening is perfect as Nic, the bread winner of the family. While at times very high strung and a bit overprotective of her family, she imbues Nic with a strong sense of commitment while losing sight of what brought her into this relationship in the first place.

Julianne Moore shines as she always does as Jules who feels increasingly neglected in her role as housewife, and her fear that Nic is not taking her career endeavors seriously feels very much justified. In many ways, Jules gets looked down more than anyone else in the script, but Moore never makes Jules a pitiful creature and gives her a strong center which she finds her way back to. Also, her speech on marriage is one of the movie’s best moments, and it comes from an honest place.

Mark Ruffalo continues his reign of great naturalistic performances and makes film acting look effortless. His character of Paul could have been the bad guy of the piece or some sitcom-like character, but you never doubt his sincerity in how he grows to love these kids which he had a hand in bringing into the world. Even when he missteps (and he really does), I found it impossible to dislike the guy. Of all the characters in “The Kids Are All Right,” he is the one who grows the most, but his revelations come in a way which is not exactly appropriate.

Both Mia Wasikowska and Josh Hutcherson are great as the kids, and Cholodenko keeps them from becoming conventional in the teenager mainstream movie kind of way. Wasikowska gets to be much livelier here than she was in Tim Burton’s bland remake of “Alice In Wonderland,” and she radiates intelligence which makes her character wise beyond her years to where she comes across as the most mature one in the film. Hutcherson also makes Laser into an interesting kid caught up in friendships which aren’t really sound and finding a father figure in the last place he expected to. Seeing him discovering his parents’ videotape of gay male pornography leads to one of the funniest scenes this movie has to offer.

If there is any complaint I have with “The Kids Are All Right,” it’s the ending. The plight of Ruffalo’s character is frustratingly left unresolved, and we never do learn if he will keep in touch with Joni and Laser. Nic and Jules do get a satisfying conclusion, but seeing Paul getting cut loose was an unfortunate disappointment. I was eagerly waiting to see where he would end up after all which had ensued.

Still, “The Kids Are All Right” is one of the nicest surprises of the 2010 summer movie season, and it deservedly got a large audience for an independent film. It has what I would like to see more of in movies: regular, down to earth people with problems and flaws much like anyone else’s. I also think it involves a relationship which any couple (and I strongly stress the word ANY) can relate to in different ways.

By the way, for those of you who think that gays getting married is still a threat to the “sanctity of marriage,” I got two words for you: Donald Trump. End of story.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

‘Avengers: Endgame’ Had Me Going Out of the Movie Theater Saying Wow

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Avengers Endgame poster

WRITER’S NOTE: Will or will not this review have spoilers? Does it matter pointing it out at this point? Like any other movie, it would be best to keep from reading this review until you have seen this one.

Now you all know how much I hate the term “based on a true story” as it has long since lost its meaning for me, but there is also another I get seriously annoyed with, and it is this one: “it has all led up to this.” When a movie trilogy reaches its end or a television show finally arrives at its season or series finale, this phrase is often utilized as a way to get butts in the seats or eyes glued to the television in a why which will have advertisers salivating to no end. More often than not, it feels like a shameless trick to get us to watch something we otherwise wouldn’t, and we come out of it feeling angry as we have been easily duped.

But when it comes to “Avengers: Endgame,” the term “it has all led up to this” makes perfect sense. This is the 22nd film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe which started back in 2008 with “Iron Man,” but this one has a strong sense of finality as the superheroes we have followed all these years will rise and fall all at the same time. Yes, the MCU will continue on, and we have “Spider-Man” and “Black Panther” sequels to look forward to, but after this penultimate installment, things will never be the same. What results is an exhilarating motion picture which thrills even the most jaded of moviegoers, and its conclusion will leave you emotionally drained for very good reason. Yes, it really has all led up to this.

Three weeks have passed since Thanos (Josh Brolin) captured all the Infinity Stones, snapped his finger and eliminated half of all life across the universe. Those Avengers who survived the snap are, as you can expect, infinitely eager to avenge those lives who disintegrated, but their quest for justice does not go in the way you might expect. In fact, for some it comes too quickly and leaves a lot of damage in its wake.

Following this, the movie then jumps ahead five years as what is left of humanity is grappling with the things they can do in the aftermath. Some are still eager to undo what Thanos did while others have done what they can to move on. Either way, they are dealing with a clear case of survivor’s guilt, and their enthusiasm for saving the universe is not what it used to be.

Yes, these characters are blessed with super powers we would love to have o, but the filmmakers are quick to show us how they are as human as we are. They suffer from doubts, anxiety, frustration and, as this movie begins, they are overcome with despair. While they may be special or gifted, they aren’t much different from the average joe as the weight of the world lies heavily on them, and they don’t have time to balance their checkbook. (Who does anyway?)

Time travel plays a significant role in this MCU movie as a couple of the Avengers, namely Scott Lang/Ant-Man (Paul Rudd) and Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), come up with a theory which will make it possible for them to accomplish, albeit with some limitations. Like everyone else, the Avengers have seen every time travel movie ever made and are quick to mention such classics as the “Back to the Future” trilogy, “Time After Time,” “Timecop” (was this particular Jean Claude Van Damme film ever that popular?), “Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure,” and even “Hot Tub Time Machine.” Somehow, “Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home” was left off this list, and I am deeply perturbed as a result. The Enterprise crew saved humpback whales in that one for crying out loud!

I enjoyed how “Avengers: Endgame” plays on our knowledge of time travel as a plot device. Even though science renders these various time travel methods to be utterly bogus, the pluses and minuses of actually changing historical events are always prominent in our minds. Remember all that talk about the space time continuum? Whether or not the conclusion of this movie is in doubt, I spent much of it wondering how things would end up once the mission was complete. What gave me comfort was what Doc Brown said in “Back to the Future Part III” about how the future isn’t written and how it is whatever you make it.

Granted, the time travel aspect does get a bit confusing at times, especially when certain characters end up facing off against their past and present selves. It reminded me of when Austin Powers faced a similar predicament in “The Spy Who Shagged Me,” and that one was a comedy. But the movie proves to be so much fun, who cares?

Helming “Avengers: Endgame” are Anthony and Joe Russo, brothers who have been a major asset to the MCU ever since they directed “Captain America: The Winter Soldier.” Along with screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, they have an infinitely impossible job of balancing out a story filled with far too many superheroes, most of which will not get the same amount of screen time as the biggest ones of all. The ending is bombastic, but never in an overwhelming way. And yes, it is three hours long, but it never drags nor is it in need of a top-notch editor the way “I Spit on Your Grave: Déjà vu” was. For what it’s worth, you can head straight to the bathroom once the end credits start as there are no special scenes during or after them.

I imagine a lot of people look at these “Avenger” movies as being the kind which don’t require the cast to give their best performances ever. This assertion, however, is deeply unfair as many of the actors here have inhabited these characters for close to a decade. From one movie to the next, we see these characters evolve in meaningful ways to where we have to recognize what the passing years have done to them. It does not matter how incredible they are because they age like us even if they don’t always show it.

Chief among the cast is Robert Downey Jr. whose role as Tony Stark/Iron Man helped to rejuvenate a film career which looked to be permanently undone by drug abuse. Downey has taken Tony from being a lovably arrogant playboy millionaire to a less self-centered man who becomes eager to reign in his fellow superheroes before they do damage they won’t be able to walk away from. Tony himself has some interesting developments along with Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) to where his hesitation to disrupt the course of events is challenged endlessly, and watching him here makes you realize how far he has come in this role.

Another actor is Chris Hemsworth who has had quite the journey as Thor. For his first two movies, he portrayed the powerful Asgardian as an unshakably pure force who could not ever be corrupted. Then came “Thor: Ragnarok,” the best “Thor” film yet, which allowed Hemsworth to take some risks with the character in ways which made him even more interesting. With “Endgame,” we get to see Thor in his Big Lebowski phase, and we can tell Hemsworth is just having a blast taking this superhero in this direction. We should applaud him for taking chances here as other actors would have been a bit too fearful to do so.

Then there is Chris Evans who took Steve Rogers and his alter-ego of Captain America from what we thought would be the average white guy and turned him into a charismatic good guy in a way we did not see coming. Evans really hits his peak here in the MCU as he finishes his run in a very moving way, with Steve Rogers getting to reclaim a part of his past he thought he lost many years before. It is not spoiling anything to say this is Evans’ last time playing this superhero, but seeing him take his curtain call here is wonderfully fulfilling.

Coming out of “Avengers: Endgame,” all I could say was, wow. It’s the perfect capper to an amazing franchise, and my hat is off to everyone at Marvel for crossing the finish line in such an unforgettable way. DC Comics and Warner Brothers can only hope to be this successful with their own cinematic universe. Not once was I worried this franchise would flame out the way “The Matrix” did with “The Matrix Revolutions.” Everyone involved hit it right out of the park with this installment, and you don’t even need record breaking box office to prove it.

Of course, the question now is, where will the MCU go from here? I cannot see Marvel topping what they did here, especially with the cast taking their bow in the way the original Enterprise crew did at the end of “Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country” by providing their signatures. I imagine there are many more Marvel movies in our future, but the journey from here will still be fraught with expectations which may or may not be met. If this was to be the last MCU ever, it would have been perfect. All the same, superhero/comic book movies still reign supreme at the box office, so hopefully the ones coming soon to a theater near you will still be wonderfully entertaining. Whether or not they are as glorious as this one is another story.

* * * * out of * * * *

 

 

‘Avengers: Infinity War’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Avengers Infinity War poster

You know how many advertisements for movies say how “everything has led to this” from time to time? Well, for once, this statement makes perfect sense with “Avengers: Infinity War” which is, thus far, the biggest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie yet as it gives us their most threatening foe yet in Thanos. This particular Marvel character, an intergalactic despot from the planet Titan, has been hinted at in post-credit sequences from Marvel movies past, and now he is here to take center stage in a never-ending franchise which typically sees its greatest heroes get the majority of attention.

Thanos longs to get his hands on the Infinity Stones, six incredibly powerful, not to mention beautiful, gems which will allow him to impose his will on all of reality. Clearly, this is a character determined to gain unlimited power at any cost, and he is determined to re-balance the universe in the process. Thanos is looking to create his own version of Year Zero, and this means many characters will die whether we want them to or not.

Not only does “Avengers: Infinity War” arrive with a wealth of anticipation and expectations, but we also come into it with a sense of dread as we know some of our favorite characters may not survive this particular adventure. Then again, these Marvel movies do exist within the science fiction genre, and you can never be sure if anyone can ever truly stay dead. Spock died in “Star Trek II,” but he did come back to life in “Star Trek III.” Knowing “Avengers: Infinity War” will get a sequel, I can’t help but believe we will see some of these superheroes again. Besides, many of them have sequels in pre-production, so their fate is not exactly sealed. Who will live and die for certain? Well, we will find this out in the summer of 2019.

Directors Anthony and Joe Russo, both responsible for the “Captain America” sequels which rank among the best of the MCU, have a near impossible task with this “Avengers” movie as it features dozens upon dozens of main characters we have been introduced to in the past. The fact these characters are not all equally represented here is not a surprise, but what surprised me was how well the Russos were able to balance things out to where it felt like everyone had a good dose of representation throughout. Perhaps certain characters get more screen time than others, but I was too wrapped up with what was going on to really analyze this movie all too closely.

It is also worth noting how while these characters all inhabit the same cinematic universe, they do exist on different tonal levels. Some Marvel movies like “Iron Man” and “Thor” have their moments of levity, but they are generally serious adventures as their heroes are faced with obstacles both physical and psychological. Then again, there is “Guardians of the Galaxy” which came out at a time where Marvel movies in general were threatening to become as deadly serious as anything coming out of the DC Comics Extended Universe. James Gunn’s film of Peter Quill and his merry band of Han Solo-like bandits proved to be a comedic blast from start to finish, and it proved to be much lighter than the average superhero/comic book movie.

I bring this up because “Avengers: Infinity War” could have ended up being a very uneven motion picture in terms of tone as John Krasinski’s “The Hollars” was (granted, Krasinski did score a rebound with “A Quiet Place,” but still). The Russos, however, make everything blend together in a satisfying way to where nothing felt completely off-balance, and this is very commendable.

The way I see it “Avengers: Infinity War” gets off to a good start, but things feel just a little bit off to where this movie threatens to be more episodic than its filmmakers intended. But as it goes on, things improve to where the Avengers are given a real depth which reminds us they are as vulnerable as anyone else. Sure, they may be endowed with tremendous powers, but when faced with their greatest foe, they become as mortal as anyone else, and this makes their latest adventure all the more perilous.

There are many performances worth noting here, and this Marvel movie is overflowing with strong ones which would take forever to point out. Robert Downey Jr. continues to revel in the evolution Tony Stark/Iron Man as he gives his most soulful performance yet as this iconic comic character which got the MCU off to such a strong start. Zoe Saldana gets to take Gamora to an even more epic level as her character has a much closer relationship to Thanos than she would like to admit. The same goes for Chris Pratt who, as Peter Quill/Star Lord, finds even more depth than in the previous “Guardians of the Galaxy” movies to where it makes me look forward to the third movie in that franchise more than ever before.

But the one performance worth singling out above all others is Josh Brolin’s as Thanos. This could have been the typical one-dimensional antagonist bent on obtaining the most power any individual could ever obtain, but the “No Country for Old Men” actor makes him into an almost tragic figure who has yet to discover what price he has to pay for his quest for power, and it is a heavier one than he could ever expected. As a result, Brolin forces this character into the center stage in a way audiences could not have easily expected, and the final scene he has is a frightening reminder of the prominence Thanos has in the realm of Marvel Comics. Seeing this makes me believe no other actor could have portrayed Thanos as effectively as Brolin does here.

“Avengers: Infinity War” ends on a cliffhanger, and it feels like a bold move on the part of the Russo brothers and Marvel Studios to do so as it concludes on a note which truly left me breathless. We do get the typical post-credits sequence and the message of how so-and-so will return, but both these things take on a different meaning to where you almost wish this Marvel movie ended without them. In a year from now we will see the follow up to “Infinity War,” but until then we will be reminded of how our heroes will not always be there for us. Can they return for another round? We have yet to find out.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

‘The Avengers’ Was Well Worth The Wait

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

The Avengers movie poster

So now we finally have “The Avengers,” a movie which has been hinted at over the past few years in “Iron Man,” “Iron Man 2,” “The Incredible Hulk,” “Thor” and “Captain America: The First Avenger.” Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) has made cameo appearances here and there to remind these superheroes there is this way they can all come and work together, and for a bit it seemed too good to be true. But low and behold, Joss Whedon has given us a summer blockbuster which was worth the wait and focuses on character as much as it does on spectacle.

“The Avengers” starts off with S.H.I.E.L.D. experimenting on a powerful energy source known as the Tesseract when Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Thor’s brother and nemesis, appears out of nowhere and steals it. His plan is to use it to subjugate Earth and its inhabitants because he feels they wanted to be lorded over more than they realize. From there it’s up to these various superheroes to join forces and defeat Loki and his army before it’s too late.

This movie does take its sweet time getting started, and it almost seems unnecessary considering how well acquainted we have become with all these superheroes through their individual movies. Still, meeting up with them again feels good as we are curious to see what they have been up to since their last set of adventures. Captain America/Steve Rogers is still trying to acclimate to present day life after being frozen for decades, Dr. Bruce Banner/The Hulk spends his time in a foreign country helping its people while trying to control his anger, and Tony Stark/Iron Man is busy completing a new skyscraper along with the love of his life, Pepper Potts. Others make their entrance at unexpected times and play more of a role here than they did in previous movies.

What makes “The Avengers” work so well is that Whedon never lets the iconography of these characters speak for them more than the actors do. While these few have amazing superpowers we all dream of having, they are seen as freaks who are not part of society as a whole. Being so alienated from the common man and woman, their relationship with themselves and those around them is dysfunctional to say the least.

Seeing these characters interact with one another gives this film its best moments. While they may have a lot in common, their ideas of protecting humanity differ quite significantly. Captain America is as old fashioned as they come, and his methods and beliefs have the more cynical people snickering behind his back. As for Thor, he’s from another planet which has all those around him wondering what the hell he’s talking about.

And then Tony Stark comes into this ruckus like John Bender in “The Breakfast Club,” gleefully and playfully chiding all those around him (he calls Thor “Point Break”). Robert Downey Jr. inhabits this character like few others could, and he makes Stark a likable character even while he’s being an arrogant bastard much of the time. In many ways, Downey is the most prominent presence among these Avengers even while others in the team are nowhere as selfish as Stark.

The actors in “The Avengers” confirm what we already knew in the past, that they were exceptionally well cast. Each one brings a depth of humanity to their characters in a way that keeps them from becoming mere caricatures of what we grew up reading about. Special kudos goes out to Chris Evans and Chris Hemsworth who make their roles as Captain America and Thor count for all they are worth. What could have been made inadvertently laughable has been rendered largely charismatic by these two thespians, and we cheer them on as they fight the good fight against Loki and his army.

It’s also nice to see Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner get more screen time here as Black Widow and Hawkeye than they did in previous films. Renner had one of those blink and you missed it cameos in “Thor” while Johansson’s role in “Iron Man 2” was in a movie which had more characters than it had any right to deal with. In “The Avengers,” the two of them are given more room to grow, and each invests their character with real emotions which makes us root for them throughout.

But the one actor who stands out above everyone else in “The Avengers” (literally and figuratively speaking) is Mark Ruffalo who is the latest actor to portray Dr. Bruce Banner, better known by his alter ego of the Hulk. Marvel has had the hardest time translating this particular comic book character to the big screen despite memorable performances from Eric Bana and Edward Norton. But like those two actors, Ruffalo finds his own interpretation of this famous character, and he succeeds in making this role his own. Unlike the moody Bruce Banners of the past, Ruffalo gives us one who yearns to fit in with everyone else regardless of the angry state he gets in from time to time. In the process, Ruffalo gives us a Hulk worth cheering for as he dominates each action scene he’s in thanks in part to vocal help from the original Hulk, Lou Ferrigno. As a result, I see a future for the actor as this character in a way I couldn’t before. Seeing him slam Loki all over the place as if he were a wet rag had the audience clapping loudly.

Are there plot holes and inconsistencies to be found in “The Avengers?” Probably, but with a movie like this you don’t really find yourself thinking too much about that. What sucks for Thor is he never gets to meet up with his earthbound love Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) who is sent off to some remote place where she’ll be safe. When “Thor” ended, the portal between his world and Earth was forever destroyed it seem. It’s never made clear how it somehow got fixed to where Thor could travel back, but anyway. You’d figure he would at least spend some time with Dr. Foster, but some superheroes can only be so lucky I guess. At least you can give Thor some credit for looking her up. Dr. Banner never looks up his old girlfriend who was been played in past movies by Jennifer Connelly and Liv Tyler. What gives Hulk? You smash things but did you also smash what’s left of your emotional connections? Oh well…

The big problem with big budget blockbusters like “The Avengers” is they can easily get overwhelmed by the special effects to where the human element is completely lost. But none of this is ever lost on Whedon who has given us such great entertainment over the years with “Buffy The Vampire Slayer,” “Firefly” and “Cabin in The Woods” which he co-wrote. Here he gives a satisfying blockbuster which works on us emotionally as much as it thrills us. This could have easily been a major disappointment, and the fact it is not makes the film a huge success.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written in 2012 not long after “The Avengers” was released.

‘Now You See Me 2’ Wants To Be Cleverer Than It Is

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Now You See Me 2 poster

There’s a great moment, one of the very few, in the 007 adventure “Die Another Day” when James Bond is being presented with the latest nifty gadget from Q. Upon seeing what the gadget does, Bond tells Q, “You know, you’re cleverer than you look.” To this Q replies, “Still, better than looking cleverer than you are.” Those lines of dialogue kept repeating in my head as I watched “Now You See Me 2,” a movie which tries to be cleverer than its predecessor. But in the process, this follow up become so infinitely exhausting as it heedlessly defies logic more often than not.

We follow up with the Four Horsemen a few years after the events of the first movie, and they have managed to stay in hiding regardless of how impossible it is to stay off the grid these days. But Atlas (Jesse Eisenberg), Merritt (Woody Harrelson) and Jack Wilder (Dave Franco) are soon brought out of retirement to expose a Steve Jobs-like tech guru whose fraudulent practices have caused hardship for millions of people. Henley Reeves is out of the group, due to Isla Fisher’s pregnancy, and in her place is Lula (Lizzy Caplan) who quickly proves to be more than just a wannabe magician.

They work again in conjunction with FBI agent Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo), who was previously revealed to be the one who brought the Four Horsemen together, but their big comeback show goes awry when it is sabotaged by someone who shows that Jack never died and of Dylan’s role in the whole endeavor. That someone is revealed to be Walter Mabry (Daniel Radcliffe), a tech prodigy who invested a lot of money in companies run by Arthur Tressler (Michael Caine) and lost much of it after the Horsemen stole Tressler’s millions. Walter wants his money back and forces the group to pull off their greatest heist yet, and they run into additional trouble when the imprisoned Thaddeus Bradley (Morgan Freeman) finds a way to get his revenge from behind bars.

“Now You See Me” was a runaway hit back in 2013 and, while it had a number of plot holes, it proved to be a fun ride and had a terrific cast of actors whose charisma made it all the more watchable. But this same cast, even with new additions Caplan and Radcliffe, can’t save this sequel as we come to spend more time debunking their actions than we do in just going along for the ride. While I am prepared to suspend my disbelief through many films, it became impossible to do so with this one.

Watching “Now You See Me 2” becomes increasingly ingratiating as so many random characters try to stay one step ahead of each other. But while we go to a movie like this to see good defeat bad, the filmmakers have tried much too hard to keep the audience guessing from start to finish. Considering how this sequel takes place in a time long after movies like the “Ocean’s Eleven” trilogy have been released, you would think the bad guys would be better prepared. Then again, crime does make you stupid.

If it weren’t for the talented cast, this movie would be almost unwatchable. Ruffalo, Harrelson and Eisenberg have an effortless charisma about them, and they slip back into these roles as if a day hadn’t passed since the original. Both Caine and Freeman could play their roles in their sleep, and that’s what they do here. While it’s a bummer Fisher couldn’t return, Caplan proves to be an engaging presence and her enthusiasm is wonderful to take in. And it’s great to see Radcliffe join in with this ensemble as he reminds us of something which should be abundantly clear by now: there’s much to him than Harry Potter.

Behind the camera this time is Jon M. Chu who previously directed the “Step Up” sequels, “G.I. Joe: Retaliation” and “Jem and the Holograms,” a movie better known for its terrible box office opening weekend than anything else. While Louis Leterrier, who directed the original (he is an executive producer on this one), managed to keep things going at a steady pace, Chu stretches things out to where this sequel overstays its welcome by at least half an hour. He also ends this movie in a way which makes no logical sense considering where certain characters ended up in the original. Long before it ended, I found myself having a headache that had Excedrin written all over it, and I knew taking any would not make me feel any better.

You can only fool an audience for so long until they start analyzing the story very closely. When they start asking questions during the movie’s running time, you are in trouble. “Now You See Me 2” gets undone because the filmmakers didn’t care if it all made sense or not. Instead, they end up insulting our intelligence to where you wonder if it was worth it to even make this sequel.

In the future, I would love to see a prequel to this sequel in which we watch the characters get together and figure out how they will pull all their plans and magic tricks off. It will be worth watching just to see if the characters can convince themselves, let alone the audience, that their mischievous plans make any sense whatsoever regardless of the unpredictable variables which will come their way. If they can accomplish that, you will have one hell of a movie.

Copyright Ben Kenber 2016.

* * out of * * * *