Thor: The Dark World (2013)

2/5

Thor 2 is just as bad as Thor 1, but mired in even more CGI nonsense than its predecessor. The characters are boring, the plot is boring, and even the action is boring. It's like watching a bad video game. I really have nothing more to say about this movie.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1981115/

Thor (2011)

2/5

Marvel's Thor is a surprisingly silly movie compared to the company's earth-centric counterparts: the Captain America and Iron Man franchises. Focusing on the inhabitants of an entirely fictitious world called Asgard, it naturally spends a good 30 minutes on definition and exposition. It's boring, bland storytelling, full of made-up methods of transportation like horse-riding across rainbow roads and being slingshot out of gyroscopic planetariums.

My biggest problem is that I find all the characters unlikeable, including the eminently pleasant Natalie Portman. Although he gains a little depth by the end of the film, Thor is essentially a loud-mouthed, arrogant, English-accented buffoon with an idiotic smile. (And, as a side note, how come all the Asgardians speak English?) Portman plays a physicist who enjoys hipster clothes and gets easily distracted by cut male figures. Happily, the movie has some gripping action scenes that pull you in and keep your eyes glued to the screen. But besides their visual appeal, they aren't particularly compelling aspects to the film. Some are outright ridiculous, like a muddy wrestle in the rain.

But Thor is not a particularly good movie. And certainly not a movie good enough to take the Marvel name and stand with the rest of them. To be honest, I only watched this movie so that I could see the second Thor movie so that I could be prepared for the second Avengers movie. I wish I had just never watched it. The best thing about my decision to watch this movie is that I won't feel bad deleting it from the DVR and recording something better.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800369/

The Avengers (2012)

4/5

The Avengers is a spectacle in the most gaudy way possible. I suppose that's not entirely unanticipated given the fact that the last six movies put out by Marvel have basically been advertisements for this one. And that this comic book nerd's fantasy has been decades in the making. It had to come out with a bang. And bang it did, with the most profitable opening weekend of all time. And yet, despite all its financial success, I don't feel like this movie will be remembered for very long. It's one of those movies everybody just had to see because everyone else was talking about it, but then it seemed to slowly fade into obscurity.

Iron Man and The Dark Knight were, for me, the two big superhero movies from the last 10 years, each taking wildly divergent paths. The Dark Knight was serious, filled with gritty realism and terrifying villains. Iron Man was humorous, good-natured fun. The Avenger is firmly entrenched in the latter camp; it's the next movie in a line of factory-made films cut from the same cloth as Iron Man aimed to guarantee success with the least risk possible. And it is an entertaining, well-written, well-paced film that probably didn't offend anybody. But it was more of a Marvel movie than a Joss Whedon movie, and I think that's my issue with the film.

Joss Whedon's writing and directing here was relatively uninspired compared to The Cabin in the Woods, Serenity/Firefly, and Dollhouse. There were some clever lines and cool twists in the plot, and Whedon effortlessly balanced five major leads with widely varying characteristics and motivations, but nothing about this movie really impressed me in any way. It's a fine movie; I just expected a lot more given Whedon's involvement. He can--and will--do better.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0848228/

Midnight in Paris (2011)

4/5

Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris is a delightfully light fantasy comedy that takes place in Paris over the course of several magical midnights. The plot follows Gil (Wilson) and Inez (McAdams) tagging along with Inez's parents in Paris for a few weeks. They bump into one of Inez's old pseudo-intellectual friends (Sheen), who is absolutely infuriating to Gil (and the audience), and Inez naturally wants to spend as much time with him as possible. After a few frustrating nights together, Gil decides to walk home by himself only to find himself wandering the streets of Paris utterly lost. An old Puegeot stops by at midnight and picks him up to take him to a very different kind of Paris (which I will let you have the pleasure of discovering for yourself).

The movie is very similar to Allen's previous works, especially The Purple Rose of Cairo, albeit with literary references instead of filmic ones. And it is just as charming, airy, and melancholy as that film. Unfortunately, because it feels so identical, I felt I didn't get much out of the film. It's hilarious in that Woody Allen way, but not much more. It's a very pleasant way to spend an afternoon, but nothing compared to Allen's best work.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1605783/