Captain America: Civil War

Anthony Russo, Joe Russo - 2016

IMDB

4/5

Along with the Iron Man films, the Captain America Marvel installments have proven to be the most dependable and consistent, possibly even more than the former. Winter Soldier was such a solid film that I was convinced I will give them all a view when the opportunity arose. When I was browsing through Netflix and saw Civil War - the only thing keeping me from putting it on for so long was the 147 minute run time. Interestingly enough, while Captain America is a central figure in the film, Civil War could really be a stand-alone film not bound to the Captain America narrative. This is the first film to put normally very friendly characters at odds with each other. There's always the small conflicts and differences between the various characters but this is the first outright battle story.

Faced with the global ramifications of some of the collalteral damage that the Avengers created, the UN has drafted an agreement holding the Avengers accountable for their actions. Tony Stark, feeling the weight of his actions, is eager to sign the agreement while Steve / Captain America is against doing so. The main thing keeping Steve from signing is it pits him against his old friend Bucky (Winter Soldier) who has been accused of a terrorist attack and is now a global target. Steve being loyal and protective to Bucky forces him to create a Captain America vs. Iron Man dilemma.

The tension builds between Tony and Steve and while the divide grows between them, they both build their own camps on each side. It all erupts into one of the big moments which of course is the battle sequence between them all. The delicate balance of conflict leading up to it is so impressively well-done. It's also another great showcase of these well developed characters in the Marvel Universe coming together in these big moments.

Civil War actually did something for me that hasn't been done since I saw the first Avengers film back in 2012. I admit that, like many other people, had become fatigued a bit by the constant superhero movie drops. Since that Avengers film, I would casually check in with the Marvel universe periodically, never at release point but with more of a "when i get to it" attitude. What continued to be absent for me was that level of excitement that I would get. That little boy excitement. Can't even remember the last time I had a gross sense of that excitement. Decades ago probably. But Civil War managed to resurrect at least a hint of it. Civil War also managed to resurrect a character that I had written off in Spiderman. Being a fan of the Tobey Maguire Spiderman films, when it was announced that Maguire was no longer going to be involved in the franchise and Andrew Garfield was taking over in a rebooted version I basically checked out. For me it was going to be just another product of money-hungry studios rebooting the shit out of everything and their inability to turn down the next dollar-making opportunity.

Tom Holland brings an energy to Spiderman that should have always been there. High School-age innocence and youthful naivety. Tobey Maguire was 27 when he played Peter Parker for the first time so of course he just wasn't able to fully capture a high school student. But Holland is 21, and could easily pass for a 17 year old. When he meets Tony Stark for the first time, he is at a loss for words and is completely star-struck. Later when in costume doing his thing, he talks too much and makes rookie mistakes just like any high school age kid would 6 months into having superpowers. There's a lot to look forward to with Holland in the Spidey suit. It seems like Marvel Studios cutting a deal with Sony may have saved the character from total mediocrity.

The level of quality that these films are working with should override the cultural fatigue that the marketing executives are inadvertantly unleashing upon us. There's no reason to believe that these films are going to degrade anytime soon.

Prince Avalanche

David Gordon Green, 2013


3/5

Responsible and self sufficient Alvin (Paul Rudd) and unsophisticated Lance (Emile Hirsch) are two road workers who tediously paint the yellow lines on the Texas pavement after wildfires ravaged the state. At night they camp on the roadside, and they occasionally have the opportunity to travel to town to socialize and gather supplies before they have to get back to the grind.

David Gordon Green pushes the quirk in this minimalistic limited storytelling piece that at times feels like a love letter to Wes Anderson. There are points in the film where it almost feels like a car may pull up and Bill Murray may get out. It's a piece that's largely filled with abstraction and vulnerability. Some may not be so satisfied with images of a mustached Paul Rudd dancing by himself with a fishing pole in hand. Others may credit him for taking a risk with another independent role. He certainly puts himself out there as the dorky outcast just looking for some validation. He doesn't hide his love for Madison, and continues to write her letters like he has gone off to war. And perhaps he has, in his mind. But strangely there's not much urgency to finish his work and return to the general population. Without her presence she feels very imaginary. Alvin is searching for something while he is isolated in those woods. Perhaps he is rebuilding like the world around him. And Lance is fighting his own kind of war as well. Hormones raging, he returns to town seeking short term flings and without which leaves him feeling empty. Emile Hirsch delivers a particularly impressive performance as the inexperienced oafy hand to Alvin. The humor in his character is subtle but memorable. The dynamic between Alvin and Lance is unstable, and why wouldn't it be? Basically opposites stuck together in the middle of nowhere. At times hating their job, other times indulging in the freedom. But at the end of the day their companionship is going to be more fulfilling than their monotonous daily grind. They both have something to offer one another.

Green took a risk with making the film as it won't appeal to all crowds. The fortunate thing is it feels like he succeeds in what he set out to do. The theme of self-discovery while slowly walking the Texas pavement almost gives it a Wizard of Oz feel. At times the film drags very much like the painting machine they push slowly through the day, and at times it feels like it circles in one spot. It could certainly be a better film if there was more meat on the bones. But there's certainly something here worth watching.

Our Idiot Brother

Jesse Peretz, 2011


3/5

Ned (Paul Rudd) has run into some tough luck with some legal troubles and a breakup with his girlfriend Janet (Kathryn Hahn). He turns to his three sisters, who all seem to be preoccupied with their own lives to provide support.

An ensemble cast fuels the film with a lot of the usual suspects of the modern comedy world. Paul Rudd brings his very Paul Rudd persona to the film, and that's never really a bad thing. His character in this film would be the equivalent to his character in Wanderlust if he lived in the commune for years and were suddenly evicted. He possesses a certain naivete that doesn't really help him elevate him in any kind of professional capacity but he certainly should sleep better at night than his sisters do. He means well. Tries to do the right thing. A happy failure. Failure is a subjective term though. Is he a failure because he doesn't have the house, or the children, or the job? His sisters play hot potato with his couch surfing, and don't really feel any kind of familial gravitational pull. Miranda (Elizabeth Banks) is completely obsessed with making her mark in her journalism career. Liz (Emily Mortimer) is wrapped up in with her children and seemingly disinterested husband. Natalie (Zooey Deschanel) is just wrapped up in herself. Maybe they all are. All of these different lifestyles, but with one common theme. They all push Ned away despite the fact that he is really the one force that can help them. How does he help? That's sort of complicated. Hard to say really. You could say things have to get bad before they get better? Sometimes you need a good shakeup in your life? Testing the foundation? Maybe all of those. Ned comes in like a hippie tornado, and completely disrupts their lives, and the whole time has this whole "Whoa, was just trying to help... didn't mean for all of this to happen!" approach to it all. And that feels genuine, and quite charming.

And it's a modern comedy so of course it has its flaws. The attempt to ugly up Rashida Jones is quite obvious, and quite honestly... still fails. You need more than a giant pair of dorky glasses on her face to do that. Why did she need to be "uglied up" in the first place? Let her be her. Is it Peretz' attempt to make her more of the tomboy lesbian type? In the end, not really important and not so pertinent to the overall plot. Emily Mortimer's English accent leaks throughout the film. The attempted backdrop of New York City feels completely absent. The fact that those are the flaws actually speaks well for the film. Everything is actually put together quite nicely. The funny hits the target when it needs to (often having an effective Improv-ish tone), and the dramatic moments hit close enough.

Wanderlust

David Wain, 2012


4/5

George (Paul Rudd) and Linda (Jennifer Aniston) get over their head in expenses after purchasing an apartment in New York City. After George loses his job, and Linda's documentary gets turned down by HBO they decide to get out of the city. They venture down to stay with George's brother in Georgia. On the way down they decide to stop at a bed and breakfast which turns out to be a hippie commune. The freedom and positive energy that is connected to the lifestyle becomes attractive to them and they contemplate staying.

This comedy by Wain (Wet Hot American Summer, Role Models) blends some social commentary with some slapstick elements. Because the film jumps head first into the story the characters feel like caricatures. Once things get moving that fades away and the film really maintains a steady pace using solid characters. It effectively uses a lot of the same actors as Wet Hot but provides them with much better writing. The picture itself at times feels like a much more grown up version of Wet Hot. It examines the communal lifestyle, which of course in real life has proved to be a failed experiment over and over again. The human emotional spectrum always precedes the ideals of an attempted Utopian community, and no matter how many good vibes you try to spread - there's still going to be conflicts that are unavoidable (jealousy, deception, greed). Wain examines a lot of these through comedy, and very effectively at that. Nudism, Free love, Organic farming, New age pregnancy techniques, Primal screaming, hallucinogenics. Some really stand-out performances in the picture. Paul Rudd, who is always consistent, is particularly good in this. His brother, Rick (Ken Marino), is perfect as the douchey brother who surrounds himself with materialism to peacock his success. His character comes off as very Apatowian, reminiscent of Bradley Cooper's character Sack Lodge in Wedding Crashers. Some of the scenes felt like you were watching a good improv group at work (ie. the truth circle, or Paul Rudd talking into the mirror). It will be interesting to see what Wain does in the future. Some of his past work felt loosey-goosey, but he had some solid writing here to work with. Hopefully he keeps the same people on board for future work.

Wet Hot American Summer

David Wain, 2001

3/5

It's the last day of camp and the hormones are running high. The camp counselors are in a heated offensive to hook up with a member of the opposite sex before everyone has to pack up and go home. While not everyone may have the same luck in the romance department, they are all pursuing closure in one form or another.
In this satirical take on 1980's summer camp films (written by original staff members of the cult-classic MTV series The State), WHO KNEW that all you really need is some isolation in a camp cabin and a couple sticks of gum? You are immediately served with some familiar faces (Elizabeth Banks, Paul Rudd, Bradley Cooper, Michael Ian Black, David Hyde Pierce, Amy Poehler), and you will continue to see more throughout the film. There is a youthful innocence to the camp staff, and everyone is likable in some way. The stand-out performance is by Christopher Meloni, who plays Gene, someone you rarely see playing a comedic role. Seeing Molly Shannon made me miss Molly Shannon! Be prepared to witness so much tongue-kissing that it leaves you wondering how fast the mononucleosis spread throughout the set. After watching I wondered what I would think of this film had I seen it ten years ago. Maybe I've become jaded... or GROWN-UP - but I feel I would have enjoyed this film much more when I was younger. That was a constant thought throughout: "Okay, that's funny even if I'm not laughing". I enjoyed The State back in the day, so that was a selling point for me here. It's not a perfect film, but its not meant to be. Wain succeeds in exaggerating some the common themes of the 80's summer camp genre (teen love, social stigmas, nerd outcasts, montages). What's admirable about this film is it doesn't take itself seriously. It has its flaws and it knows it does. So what if for every funny scene there is another to match it that trips over itself? While I wasn't amazed by it, nor laughing every second, I have to admit that I was entertained. It's an important film that has its place.

This is 40

Judd Apatow, 2012


2/5

A.K.A. This is 40 Minutes Too Long

          This sort-of sequel to Knocked Up focuses on the life of Pete (Paul Rudd) and Debbie (Leslie Mann). It is a fly-on-the-wall observation of a married couple reaching their mid-point in their lives. Watching the exhaustive process of raising two girls (with one in her pubescent phase), managing careers, and keeping the passion alive is enough to intimidate any young couple in their early years of marriage.
         While I LOVED Knocked Up, this film had some really endearing features but I believe it fell victim to Apatow's typical treatment of letting a film run too long. If this film ran 90 minutes instead of 134, I feel it would have succeeded. Some of the jokes and pop-culture references feel too forced, as if Seth MacFarlane were one of the punch-up writers. 40 also has that Big-Hollywood liberal plastic family feel to it. I would think that married couples in their mid-40's living in Oklahoma will have a tough time relating to the trials and tribulations of a family living in the perfect house and driving the $70,000 BMW and Land-Rover. I found myself laughing late into the film, but really only holding on to the scattered comedic moments and while having trouble adapting to the dramatic elements. Unfortunately because of all of the quick-cuts and choppy-edits, you never really get a chance to maintain footing. That's disappointing, because along the way there is some really great acting by Leslie Mann, Albert Brooks and John Lithgow.
          Apatow clearly has a lot to say, and this may be his most personal film. While I do think there is plenty of fat that could have been trimmed, I appreciate this film in the sense that Judd gave you some access to his own life, more than in his earlier films. He's the guy with the cupcake problem, the guy who sits on the toilet phantom-pooping with his iPad, and the guy who is trying to keep the love alive. Maybe we just didn't need it all at once.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower

Stephen Chbosky, 2012

4/5

"Perks" has all of the innocence and awkward moments of being a freshman in high school, but also contains the complexity that separates itself from other high school dramedies. Chbosky wrote the book, the screenplay, and directed it so you can rest easy knowing that the popular book is in good hands. It has the snappy dialogue and the naive youthful sense of invincibility that reminds me of "Empire Records" although it is a much better film. Logan Lerman, Ezra Miller and Emma Watson all provide great performances. I haven't seen Ezra Miller since "We Need to Talk About Kevin", which was really night and day compared to this. I am interested in seeing more of his work, he seems to have quite a bit of range. Like "The Virigin Suicides", this film also hit my emotional Achilles heel - the beautiful girl dancing in the middle of the school dance to the cheesy Rock song. Still dont know why that gets to me. Its not like thats the memory I have of my awkward school dances growing up. In fact, they were nothing like that. They were devoid of any spontaneity, or any music that would strike an emotional nerve in me.