Late to the Party: Thor: The Dark World (2013)

So much handsome.

I have this thing called The Avengers Syndrome. I came up with it after I saw X-Men: First Class. I didn't see that film until two weeks after I saw The Avengers and I didn't much care for it. I felt very underwhelmed and didn't get the excitement many other people had for it when it first came out. Ever since The Avengers came out, other comic book films have felt obsolete. Everything worked so well in that film that we didn't get from the others. This is going to make it increasingly difficult for future comic book films, whether it be Marvel, DC, Dark Horse, or whatever. I say this because The Avengers Syndrome came into play in several parts of Thor:The Dark World and that isn't really anyone's fault.

Taking place after the events in The Avengers, we return back to Thor and his fight against enemies of the universe. We also return back to his bitchy, bland, stupid girlfriend, Jane and her "sassy" friend, Darcy. After being threatened by the Dark Elves lead by Malekith, Thor must resort to desperate measures in order to save not only Asgard, but Earth as well. That's were LOKI comes in and saves this movie from being really boring and useless.

A quick recap of the first Thor movie, I thought it was good. It could have been A LOT better, but there wasn't really anything to get mad about. Thor definitely felt more like a pilot episode as most of it is establishing the characters and the overall conflict is pretty minor in retrospect. Thor: The Dark World continues that, but still feels episodic. I said the same thing about The Wolverine, but with that movie, there were so many new characters thrown in. I didn't give a damn about any of them much less the bland story. At least with Thor: TDW, I still know these characters and still care about what happens to them. None of this makes either of the films bad, but for a Thor movie, I was really expecting something more. Thor is such a strong character surrounded by a complex environment that could make for an epic movie. I wish they took more time with it and didn't push it out so quickly. The only thing I hated about the last Thor movie was the same thing I hated about this movie, and that's Jane.

Jane is such a terribly written character. There's a difference between a strong-willed, intelligent woman and just a bitchy, arrogant girl. The intention was for Jane to be the first part, but turned out to be the latter. Why does Thor like this girl? She brings nothing to the table. She doesn't care about him. She is only motivated to do things if it benefits herself. When Thor comes back after 2 years, instead of being happy to see him, Jane bitches him out. She slaps him- twice, and starts going off on "Where have you been?! I've been waiting for you! I don't care if you been fighting all these battles and had this huge responsibility brought on you while I've been sitting on my ass doing science that is completely useless!"
Bitch, he's a god. He can't devote all his time for your sorry ass. You knew going into this relationship that would happen. Aside from that tidbit, why is Jane even in this film. She felt very shoe-horned in. I do feel that bringing in a love-interest for Thor is essential not only because she was in the comic, but because it brings another dimension to him. If they're going to have this character they could have done a better job. I don't think it is entirely Natalie Portman's fault, but she is a very mediocre actress. I don't much care for her and she wasn't the best choice.

While on the subject of bad female characters, there's Darcy, played by Kat Dennings. I didn't think Darcy was as annoying as many other people do, but she is really high up there. The good thing is that she isn't in this film a whole lot. I do give credit for their attempt at having a comedic female character, but the execution was terrible. I more so blame poor writing rather than Kat Dennings's acting. I really didn't get as mad as her as I did towards Jane.

Okay, enough negativity. I really do think this sequel is an improvement from the first. There's more focus on the beautiful Asgard rather than a boring, small town in New Mexico. It was random and pointless that they moved to London, but it beats looking at the desert.The special effects for this film is incredible. Asgard feels so real and it is easy to invest into the environment. The same can be said for the character designs. There's is also more focus on the other characters with room to develop. I'm glad we got to know Odin, Frigga and the other side characters more. I am a bit disappointed they killed Frigga. She was a very strong character I wanted to do more. But lets move onto the real star of this film, Loki.

I love Loki. I love Tom Hiddleston. He is such a handsome bastard. Some argue that he isn't the best villain in terms of motivations, but he is definitely a great character. Something about his dialogue and the things he does really make him engaging. However, the downside of him being such a good villain is going to make it nearly impossible for anyone to beat him. This is going back to my theory of The Avengers Syndrome. I didn't give a a fuck about Malekith at all. He was pretty boring actually. Apparently Loki may or may not be in any future films and that is really unfortunate as he is a huge draw. Hopefully Thanos or Ultron will be more dominant but we'll see!

The same can be said for Thor and Chris Hemsworth's performance. Thor is not supposed to be this obnoxious character and Hemsworth does a great job keeping him as he should be. Hemsworth isn't the best actor as he is pretty one-note but he fits into this role really well. Some of Thor's actions are questionable but goddamn, he is just so awesome.

Overall, this movie was pretty good. I liked it for what it was and felt like it was more focused than the first. I am hoping in the next Thor movie to stay the hell away from Earth and mortals and keep it on Asgard. The first half was a little boring but things picked up toward the second half. I found myself only interested when Loki, Thor, Heimdall, Frigga and Odin came on screen. Those were the only truly interesting characters with great performances. There was an obnoxious amount of cop-outs that were unnecessary (you can't kill Loki off and chop off Thor's hand, come on). I wish I saw this film in theaters as it was a lot of fun to watch. I am really eager to see these next incarnations leading up to The Avengers sequel and hopefully this syndrome wains.

Grade: B

Getting better, just not quite.

Fashionably Late: Sita Sings the Blues (2008)

I am honestly surprised I did not hear about this movie beforehand. How did my group of friends in high school that wanted to become animators not know about this? Independent animated films are essentially their own genre that happens to be my favorite one. Something about them how they can do whatever story they want, how they want, in whatever medium really makes them amazing. There is almost no rules or audience they have to abide with. Sita Sings the Blues is a good example of that.

Sita Sings the Blues is an adaptation of the Indian epic, The Ramayana. The story of Sita and her husband, Rama, is told through multiple styles of animation and music by Annette Hanshaw. On the side, the animator, Nina Paley, shares her story of her divorce with her husband. The two stories are compared to one another with old and modern elements. This film is also free! That's right, you can go on YouTube and watch it and not get in trouble for it! Isn't that nice?

I was worried I would not be a fan of the animation. Most of it is flash which I am not a huge fan of. Often times it feels cheap and rushed when done incorrectly. However, this films switches between multiple styles in such a creative way that it looks wonderful. This isn't the greatest animation ever put in film, but it is certainly the most inspired. What makes the difference is the overall design. It is pure eye-candy. The characters and environment are so beautiful that it is impossible to become disengaged from what is happening. Nina Paley obviously had a hell of a time making this with such great attention to detail.

With the integration of the 1920's music, I didn't mind so much as others might. The one thing is that there is a lot of songs in this film and honestly there could have been less. Some of the songs were similar to one another and sometimes felt long. However, I have to give credit for combining a Indian folktale with 1920's jazz music. Something about it made the two fit together wonderfully and gave the story a fun twist.

Some parts of the film did seem long or repetitive. After a while, you do get lost into this world the animator created. It is a story I can definitely sympathize with as it hits on a very personal level. On a side note about this movie being free, I think that is a great idea. I don't think that all movies should become public domain, but more should. Though it would be difficult for the artists to gain profits it would definitely help them spread their name around. If you ever have time I would definitely give this a watch and help those that made it.

Grade: A

Late to the Party: Dallas Buyers Club

I went into this film with zero expectations. I didn't hear hardly anything about it until it was nominated for an Oscar. I watched it a couple weeks ago before the ceremony and was blown away.

Based on a true story, Matthew McConaughey plays cowboy, Ron Woodroof. After living life in "I don't give a fuck" mode, Ron is diagnosed with AIDS with 30 days to live. While at first being in denial, Ron decides to turn his life around after discovering the FDA drugs approved in the US are not making him any better. With help from others, such as the transgender Rayon, played by Jared Leto, Ron begins to smuggle drugs from all over the world and sells it to others diagnosed with the virus. Together they fight not only their illness, but against the federal government that are trying to stop the illegal trade.

This isn't the greatest film of all time, but it is still damn good. This takes a subject that is very difficult by a different approach. How is this film different from other ones featuring HIV/AIDS, like Philadelphia or Angels in America? People have been saying there isn't that many films about this subject. Well, there is, they just don't come out too often. HIV/AIDS can happen to anyone and that is what Dallas Buyers Club does a great job of pointing that out. The focus wasn't entirely on the fact these characters were sick, it was about what they did to try to resolve it and how it changed them. It is more of a character study than it is a plot driven movie, much like American Hustle. The only difference being that the characters here are more believable while in American Hustle they were really all-over the place.

My favorite performance in this film has to be Jared Leto. I really have not paid much notice to him in previous films (or his band) before but now he is really standing out. Playing the role of a transvestite challenging since if it is done wrong, then you're just a man in drag playing around. What makes Rayon stand out is that it is easy to forget that it is Leto playing that character and you believe him.

Then there's McConaughey, whom I have never taken seriously as an actor. I look through his filmography and there is a lot of shit in the mix. However, he has gotten a lot better. He is no longer the laughing stock, hillbilly in Hollywood. Much like Leto's character, McConaughey is very real. I actually feel like I met a Ron in real life. This is probably the greatest character arch I have seen in any film. Ron goes from a total bastard to someone working his ass off to help others, though still focusing on himself.

The rest of the characters somewhat blend into the background, as does the story. I wasn't really wondering how or even if they were going to get the drugs and sell them. I was more concerned with how the characters were going to react to certain things happening around them.

Overall, this really is a strong film. Obviously the message is very important, but I would watch it for the performances most of all.

Grade: A

On a side note about the Oscars, I thought it was very good. I predicted most of the winners ahead of time. The one I was very surprised with was McConaughey for Best Actor. Like Ben Affleck, he has definitely improved. Many people have been asking "How come Gravity won all those awards but didn't get Best Picture?"
First of all, you're an idiot. Second, Gravity was good in the technical features department. Great editing, sound, special effects and just overall a satisfying popcorn-movie experience. As far as a actual movie goes, it is still gimmicky in the end, but not at all in a bad way.There wasn't much of a story, the performances were okay and there wasn't much to take away from it except for the experience to be had. 12 Years a Slave had all that and more. Great performances, hard-hitting story, powerful themes, everything that made it deserve that Oscar.

The ceremony itself was actually pretty fun. Ellen did a great job though it became obvious she was getting stressed when they went into overtime. I really liked how everyone looked like they were having fun and all the stage performances were great.

The Lego Movie

What can I say about this film no one has yet said? The Lego Movie is great. It is funny, it has a good message, it has great voice acting, it is very creative, there's great animation, I could go on and on. It is everything that animated films these days are struggling to balance. For a film that people were not expecting much from, this film goes above and beyond.

The Lego Movie almost reminded me of Toy Story in a way that it would remind the audience of their childhood. The only major difference is that this film has no rules. It does whatever and does not care if it makes sense. It is similar to how we play with toys as children. We make up stories that are totally crazy and bring in all these cool characters and go to all these big places in our minds. I liked that this film did whatever it wanted and almost felt like a group of kids wrote it, in the best possible way.

In all seriousness, this is one of the funniest movies I have seen in a long time. Remind you, I am a 20 year old female. I am not the intended audience for this. But I was cracking up with how funny this was. I was mostly laughing for the sake of listening to Morgan Freeman and Liam Neeson saying ridiculous lines. I just imagine these actors in their recording booth thinking "What the hell am I saying? I was in Schindler's List for god's sake."

The only downside to this film is that some scenes did take a bit too long. Some moments you just wanted to say, "Okay we get it, next scene please." Some of the heavy action moments were also a bit jarring to see. As this film tries to emulate stop-motion and skips the frame rate (or whatever), when there is a fast-paced moment it is hard to follow.  No doubt this is a film you would have to see multiple times in order to grasp everything with so much going on in a single shot. That is pretty damn smart.

Even if you're not a fan of Legos or children's films in general, I still recommend this as a comedy. It is very entertaining and I really hope this becomes a classic. There is certainly something for everyone to enjoy.

Grade: A

Also, this is probably the closest to a Justice League movie we're going to get. So see it.

Late to the Party: Behind the Candelabra (2013)

I was thinking earlier, why didn't I add this to my list good movies from 2013? It is a really good film but I forgot to mention it because I was going based on what movie tickets I kept to remember what I saw. It was a theatrical release everywhere else in the world but was released as an HBO movie in the US because they didn't think it would do well in the box office. I could agree with that, this movie seems smaller than something for a major theatrical release but bigger than a cheap TV movie. I think it works better as an independent film if anything.

Behind the Candelabra looks at the life of Liberace, played by Michael Douglas, and his relationship with his much younger lover, Scott Thorson, played by Matt Damon. The two fall  in love despite their differences in age and wealth. As their relationship grows, other people, and sometimes even themselves, begin to question their love for one another as they have their conflicts. Liberace tries to model Scott after him while others believe Scott is using him for his money. In turn, Scott resorts to drugs to escape from all the stress in the relationship. Although their relationship plummets, the couple still has admiration for one another that is unavoidable until Liberace's untimely death.

Despite it not getting a whole lot of attention, Behind the Candelabra is one of the best biographical films I have seen. The best part about it is that it looks at the other side of Liberace the world didn't see. On the outside, he is a bright, optimistic person. On the inside, he is buried in himself and helping others in order to gain their admiration. This begs the question what kind of person Liberace really was in the end.

Liberace was a very generous guy. He is also very open about his sexuality. He offers Scott to live with him, buys him is own house, clothes and jewelry and even pays for his plastic surgery to look more like him. He even says he wants not only to be a lover to him, but also a father figure he can look up to. Liberace also presented kindness to others, but mostly in the case of when he wants something. In the end, he was a very good manipulator. He knew how to gain sympathy from others and make them adore him only to probably break their heart in the end.

The whole film essentially questions if Scott is using Liberace in return. Though he makes several claims he is bisexual, there is question as to if he really was in love with Liberace. At first he seems very hesitant about being with him, he still accepts his gifts as he came from a poor background. As their relationship grows, Scott begins to expect these generous gifts from him as well as respect from the people that worked for him. When people outside their relationship try to dispute with them, they are in complete denial that they would hurt each other.

Their relationship does have an unfortunate ending. There is a large amount of distrust in one another that leads to their demise. Scott becomes restless with his life of luxury and resorts to heavy drug use that discomforts Liberace. Liberace's ego becomes so large that he suggests having an open relationship prior to cheating on him knowing that Scott could never leave no matter what he did.

Are either Scott or Liberace bad people? No. Fame and fortune got into their heads that made them believe that nothing bad could happen. Their lack of communication, honesty and commitment eventually lead to their end as it would for any relationship. Towards Liberace's death it does become apparent that they still have love for one another. Scott soon realizes that he has deep respect and admiration for him despite cheating on him. I feel like the initial focus for this film was to show that even though that this couple is a bit odd, they are still like any other couple with their conflicts.

Okay, enough with the analysis, time for an actual review. This movie isn't amazing, but it is pretty good in how thought provoking it is. Whether or not the story was accurate isn't what matters to me. I appreciated this film for their strong characters and story. The sets and costumes are also very much worth seeing in all their pure, rhinestone glitz.

Which brings me to the biggest thing about this film, the casting. Michael. Fucking. Douglas. as Liberace. Just say that out loud, Michael Douglas as Liberace. I remember seeing the cover of Entertainment Weekly with Douglas and Damon on the cover as their characters and I couldn't believe it.  Right away I knew this film was going to push boundaries. I was listening to my local radio station and they had co-star, Tom Papa, as a guest and he said it was pretty surreal seeing these mostly 'action' and 'macho' movie stars as these roles. That being said, Douglas does a great job in his role. There were some parts I forgot it was Douglas and it felt more like the real Liberace. Ranging from charismatic to dramatic made his character seem multidimensional. In comparison, Damon sort of seems bland. It is not entirely his fault, that's just how they were in real life. Liberace is entirely over-the-top while Scott blends into the background a little, at least in the beginning in the film. The supporting cast is just as great. Dan Aykroyd, Debbie Reynolds, and Tom Papa are great, although having smaller roles.

My one big complaint about this film is Rob Lowe. Just...why? I kept laughing at his face the entire time. I get the character had plastic surgery but Lowe was just trying way too damn hard. He looks like he's on a Saturday Night Live sketch instead and making a goofy face for laughs.

Other downsides to this film are pretty minor. The editing could have been done better. I felt like they should have taken more time in some parts. I wish they gone more in detail in Liberace's and Scott's lives as they are very interesting people. It seemed like several scenes were obviously cut from the film to make it more suitable for a television movie, even if it was HBO.

This movie is not for everyone. It does not hold back in telling the very personal and hidden life of Liberace. Therefore, there are some raunchy moments. If you're not easily offended, then I would definitely recommend this film if you ever have the opportunity. I feel it has some very important ideas that not too many films have brought up.  It takes a very enthusiastic person and looks at the other side of him and his very provocative and secret relationship.

Because too much of a good thing is wonderful.