Category: Todd’s Movie Reviews

The Internship Movie Review

The point of an internship in real life is to lead to something better. Ironic because that’s what happens as I watched The Internship with Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson. Also ironic because the song “Ironic” by Alanis Morrisette is featured prominently in the opening scene. We keep wanting the script to give us something more than a formulaic tale of two old-timers entering the tech world complete with cliched characters and stale jokes. It doesn’t.

The selling point of The Internship is obviously the reunion of Vaughn and Wilson eight years after their 2005 smash Wedding Crashers. It’s a little surprising just how safe this follow-up plays it. The most curious decision is to make it PG-13 when their first collaboration was heralded as a welcome return to raunchy R-rated comedy.

Vaughn and Wilson play watch salesmen whose company falls victim to the fact that everyone checks the time on their cell phone (though last time I checked, lots of people still own watches). The duo decide to apply for an internship at Google and they are grouped with a gang of much younger computer nerds. The team must face off against other teams, one of which is headed by a bully (Max Minghella, who appeared in the Citizen Kane of Internet films The Social Network).

None of this is particularly fresh or interesting. Vaughn and Wilson spend most of the movie coasting on their chemistry together, but the screenplay (co-written by Vaughn) doesn’t bring the funny. We also have a tacked-on romantic subplot between Wilson and Rose Byrne that is just dull. Even cameos by John Goodman and a certain comic superstar who also had a surprise appearance in Crashers add little to the proceedings.

Towards the third act of The Internship, we start to get the feeling through Vaughn and co-writer Jared Stern’s dialogue that they may have something worthwhile to say about the current tech age. There are nibbles here and there about how the younger generation can’t communicate with people as well as older generations. A scene where the two stars convince a business to join the computer age is fairly well-written. It mostly never materializes though.

The only serious problem I had with Wedding Crashers was it could have probably been fifteen minutes shorter and that same complaint applies here with its bloated 120 minute running time. Crashers had a heckuva lot going for it though. Real chemistry between Wilson and Rachel McAdams over a boring subplot here. Outrageous R-rated comedy over conservative PG-13 jokes. A truly hilarious Will Ferrell cameo over a forgettable one.

Anything with these two stars will have a few laughs and Vaughn and Wilson give us that occasionally. There’s no question, however, that when you do a Yahoo or Bing search on Best Vaughn/Wilson comedy, this won’t be it. I could have said another search engine company that you might have heard of, but they just got two long hours of product placement in the film I just watched.

** (out of four)

The Heat Movie Review

Paul Feig’s The Heat answers the question as to whether a picture can simply coast on the charms of its personable leading ladies Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy. That answer, for the most part, is yes. This buddy cop comedy displays all the hallmarks of the genre with the notable exception of said cops being female. We’ve had countless examples of male-driven movies in this category from Lethal Weapon to Bad Boys to Rush Hour to The Other Guys and so forth. As far as I can recall, there’s more examples of male cop/dog cop genre pics than straight up female buddy cop entries. Only 1988’s long-forgotten Feds with Rebecca DeMornay and Mary Gross springs to mind.

Bridesmaids director Feig changes that here and enlists some big stars to headline it. Bullock plays Sarah Ashburn, the uptight FBI agent forced to team up with foul-mouthed and streetwise Boston cop Mullins (McCarthy). Both think their brand of law enforcement is the best method and they’re naturally diametrically opposed… so let the hijinks ensue!

There’s really nothing about the plot that separates The Heat from its counterparts in the genre. Let’s face it – it’s pretty tough to bring much new to the buddy cop flick. That’s where Bullock and McCarthy are able to make this fairly worthwhile. The duo is chasing after a group of drug runners and there’s a mole either in the FBI or Boston PD that they’re trying to nab. All this plot stuff is incidental, however.

McCarthy exploded onto the movie scene with her Oscar-nominated turn in 2011’s Bridesmaids. She deserved the nomination and I’ve used one particular scene in that pic with Kristin Wiig as an example of Movie Perfection previously on the blog.

https://toddmthatcher.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/movie-perfection-melissa-mccarthy-becomes-a-movie-star/

Here McCarthy is given some humorous scenes with her dysfunctional family who haven’t forgiven her for sending her own criminal brother (Michael Rapaport) to the slammer.

Yet it’s the chemistry of the two stars that makes or breaks The Heat and Bullock does a commendable job as the straight woman. Throughout her career, Bullock has shown a keen ability with dramas and comedy. This film gives her the opportunity to show those chops in something other than a rom com.

There’s a whole lotta familiar territory to find here. Since Agent Ashburn is the tightly wound cop, it’s up to Mullins to get her drunk and they’re eventually getting the whole bar to dance to Deee-Lite’s “Groove Is In The Heart”. Ashburn’s loner personality is explained because – well, she was a foster child (of course). The ladies learn that the old trick of holding a suspect over a balcony doesn’t always go as planned.

Bullock and McCarthy, though, have a winning chemistry and they manage to often rise above the cliched material and allow The Heat to be a mildly entertaining experience. Their fans should be mostly pleased. This isn’t like the previously mentioned The Other Guys that both satirizes the genre while also being an entry in it. That pic worked much better because audiences know all the tricks of buddy cop pics and The Other Guys had fun with it. The Heat is more safe and serviceable. And the two leads do just enough to make it tolerable.

**1/2 (out of four)

Only God Forgives Review

In the fall of 2011 came a picture that I liked a lot when I saw it in the theater and have since grown to love. That would be Nicolas Winding Refn’s Drive starring Ryan Gosling, Carey Mulligan, and Albert Brooks. The unconventional action thriller has a strangely wonderful hypnotic feel that I responded very positively to. Its occasional bursts of graphic violence and its absolutely terrific musical score accentuated an entirely unique film watching experience. It’s among my favorite pictures of the 21st century.

Needless to say, when I heard about director Refn and star Gosling reuniting for Only God Forgives, the pic immediately became one of my most anticipated titles of 2013. The film has had a rather bizarre journey to audiences since then. Currently it’s playing in the arthouse circuit on a limited number of movie screens. However, the decision was also made to simultaneously release it on Video On Demand and services like Vudu. I watched it through Vudu in the company of my own home. Just a month or so ago, I would have definitely told you I’d see it theatrically. The fact that Only God Forgives is not getting much of a wide release at the multiplex indicates a lot of skepticism from the studio. While Drive posted decent box office numbers, audiences didn’t respond well to it. It’s easy to understand why. Drive is not a mainstream picture (though its got quite a cult following).

And Only God Forgives is even less mainstream. Furthermore, it’s receiving mostly negative reviews and was booed a couple of months ago at the Cannes Film Festival (reports also suggest some attendees awarded it a standing ovation).

Shot on location and taking place in Bangkok, the pic actually has a pretty straightforward plot. Gosling plays Julian, a drug dealer who also runs a boxing club with his brother Billy. When Billy brutally murders an underage prostitute, a badass police lieutenant (Vithaya Pansringarm) allows the murdered victim’s father to exact revenge on Billy. When Julian is presented with this information, he chooses not to retaliate because of his late brother’s despicable actions. That is, at least, until Julian and Billy’s crime lord mother Crystal (Kristin Scott Thomas) rolls into Bangkok determined to hold all those responsible for her first-born son’s demise accountable. Along the way, we find out some rather disturbing details about the family dynamic between Julian, Billy, and their violent mother. To say Julian has Mommy (and Daddy) issues would be quite an understatement.

For those who have seen Drive, though, you know that plot is really secondary compared to Refn’s use of visual images, bursts of violence and placement of musical score. That holds true for Only God Forgives as well. First, the score by Cliff Martinez is absolutely stunning (he also scored Drive). The cinematography by Larry Smith is dreamlike and effective (he worked with Kubrick on Barry Lyndon, The Shining, and Eyes Wide Shut in various capacities). Like Drive, the violence comes often unexpectedly and is quite graphic (be warned).

What’s the main difference between Drive and Only God Forgives? To me, Drive felt like it had a soul due to the relationship between Gosling and Mulligan’s characters. Forgives does not. Julian’s character does have an underwritten connection with a prostitute Mai (Rhatha Phongam), but it goes nowhere other than a rather memorable scene where the couple go to dinner with Mama Crystal.

Only God Forgives basically just feels like an exercise in style with little to no substance. Gosling barely speaks in the picture (it makes his Drive character seem like a blabbermouth) and while his performance is serviceable, he doesn’t have much to do work with. Scott Thomas has by far the most colorful character and she mostly succeeds in not going too far over the top.

From a technical point of view, there is much to be admired about the film and I still will anticipate future Refn projects to a high degree. That said, Only God Forgives is a bit of a disappointment. If you didn’t respond well to Drive, don’t even bother with this. For those who did, you may feel let down like I did but still consider it a worthwhile experience watching a talented director display his individual and often exciting style.

**1/2 (out of four)

Man of Steel Review

Man of Steel may fall short in a number of ways from being a satisfying film experience, but none of them are related to decibel volume. From Hans Zimmer’s score (which never seems to stop running with its dramatic flourishes) to the ear-splitting near constant action, this reimagining of the Superman saga is filled with loud noises! Or as Brick puts it much better:

300 and Watchmen director Zack Snyder was brought in to reinvigorate a franchise that devolved into utter silliness in the late 80s with the Christopher Reeve versions (after a solid first two outings). And there’s the matter of Superman Returns just seven summers ago. That picture was meant to restart the series but was deservedly met with mixed critical and audience reaction. Returns, directed by Bryan Singer, chose to establish a continuum from the original Reeve flicks. Nothing wrong with that… it just didn’t work for the most part. Box office results were not great. Even though it made $200 million domestically, that was considered a letdown and the idea of Brandon Routh ever donning the cape again fell by the wayside.

Man of Steel goes its own way and concentrates more on treating the Superman character as what he truly is… an alien. And an alien who is unsure how to establish himself on planet Earth. Man of Steel correctly plays up the notion that us Earthlings may not be so quick to welcome this superhero to our world. Yes, he can help us. He could also destroy us.

The decision to go that direction marks the film’s most satisfying and new concept. The execution of the concept is a mixed bag. Henry Cavill makes a serviceable Superman, though if we’re in comparison mode – he doesn’t leave even close to the impression that, say, Christian Bale did as another famous crusader. There’s no time for him to play the nerdy Clark Kent and we’ll wait until the inevitable sequel to see how that pans out.

Casting is an issue here. Amy Adams is a supremely talented actress, but I would maintain she’s miscast as Lois Lane. Nothing particularly wrong with her performance, but the character is not well-written and she has limited chemistry with Mr. Cavill. Michael Shannon is another terrific actor, but he’s a bit shackled to what he can do with his General Zod character other than dramatically spout sometimes silly dialogue. The actors who acquit themselves the best are Kevin Costner as Clark’s Earth daddy and Russell Crowe as Krypton daddy. And Antje Traue as Zod’s second-in-command is actually the most memorable villain.

The makers of Man of Steel obviously wanted to go in a more serious direction here  than previous Supes pictures, closer in spirit to the Nolan Dark Knight flicks (Chris Nolan is an exec producer). A lot of the early action set on Krypton is well-developed and exciting. To me, it’s the last half of the movie that gets tiresome. It’s pretty much wall-to-wall action. A lot of it works, but some of it doesn’t. There are certain special effects shots that surprisingly look cheesy. There are others that look amazing. The main problem: the movie fails for the most part to establish any emotional connection to the audience (save for the Costner/Crowe scenes). The idea that Superman and Lois fall for each other feels forced. By the time we’re sitting through the endless fighting in the final 45 minutes, I got… well, bored to be honest.

Man of Steel sets itself up perfectly for a sequel and I hope it gets better… same feeling I had when I watched The Amazing Spider-Man last summer. Don’t get me wrong, film fanatics – Man of Steel is worth a look, but it might leave you feeling a little hollow inside. At least there’s a whole lotta:

**1/2 (out of four)

Behind the Candelabra Movie Review

Though most of its events take place just three decades ago, Behind the Candelabra often feels as much of a period piece as Jane Austen or William Shakespeare. For those in my generation, Liberace is known as an immensely influential piano player who also happened to be gay.

What may not be known to many in my age bracket is that the performer was ferociously protective of his public image. He was successful in lawsuits against publications that insinuated his sexuality was anything but straight. According to Lee (as his friends knew him), he just had never found the right girl.

Behind the Candelabra is based on a book by Scott Thorson, Liberace’s companion and lover from the late seventies to mid-eighties. He is played by Matt Damon in one of the most impressive performances of his career. Liberace is portrayed wonderfully by Michael Douglas. Like Damon, this is a career highlight of a role. Douglas is not only doing an impersonation (and a good one at that), he infuses the role with character traits that Lee himself probably wouldn’t approve of.

As the film portrays it, Liberace was a man who wanted to completely control everything around him. This included not just his public image, but also controlling every aspect of his life that public didn’t see… and that he dared not show them.

His relationship with Scott is a prime example. After Liberace takes him under his feathered wings, he eventually insists on Scott getting plastic surgery to make him in his own image. He also puts Scott on a weight loss program – “the California diet” that consists of taking lots and lots of pills. This is all administered by Lee’s plastic surgeon who definitely practices what he preaches to ridiculous levels. The doc is played in a humorous performance from Rob Lowe. His work on Liberace himself leaves the piano prodigy unable to close his own eyes.

Lee’s control of Scott comes to unravel their once promising, if always slightly off-kilter relationship. It’s never fully determined whether Liberace wanted to be more of a father figure to his younger companion or just another fling (albeit a long one) before he tosses Scott aside for a younger model.

The last chapters of the picture focus on the disintegration of their union, which includes Scott’s growing cocaine addiction. This may all be based on fact, but it can’t help but have a been there, seen that effect on the viewer.

Where Candelabra succeeds best is its sense of time and place. Steven Soderbergh is always adept at providing a visual feast and his visualization of Vegas in this era is a treat. The pic is also littered with solid supporting players, from Dan Aykroyd at Lee’s fiercely protective agent to Debbie Reynolds as Lee’s mother, whose relationship with her son was complicated, even if the screenplay doesn’t delve into it that much.

Behind the Candelabra works the most as an experience when exploring Liberace’s fear and demons with his own sexuality. His unwillingness to come out is portrayed as an obvious choice and something he would dare not do. The fact that this was happening just three decades ago shows us how things have changed. Here’s a man who went out of his way to control everything, except he couldn’t ultimately control his own identity. After after his death, his manager goes out of his way to push a story that Lee died of heart failure and not of the real cause of death, the AIDS virus.

The release of Candelabra may ultimately show that things haven’t changed as much as we might think, however. It’s got an A-list director and A-list stars, but still couldn’t strike a deal for theatrical distribution due to its subject matter. HBO snapped up the rights and will likely be rewarded for it with high viewership. Had Candelabra been released theatrically, I wouldn’t be surprised if both Douglas and Damon had received Oscar nominations. The Emmys and the Golden Globes will probably take notice.

Parts of Behind the Candelabra might feel familiar, but the performances and occasional boldness of the story make it worthwhile.

*** (out of four)

Savages Movie Review

In Savages, director Oliver Stone take a rare break from making films about politics and instead concentrates on a fairly straightforward drug crime flick. There’s no grand statements about the drug war (this isn’t Traffic), but there is one fascinating subtext. A corrupt DEA agent (John Travolta) explains at one point that eventually the U.S. is going to legalize pot and it got me thinking about how all the bloody mayhem involved in this picture probably wouldn’t happen if that occurred. However, that’s a discussion for another day and it’s not the primary focus here.

Savages centers on two independent marijuana dealers – one is short fused Afghanistan War vet Chon (Taylor Kitsch) and the other is Ben (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), a Buddhist and more of a pacifist. Together, they make a fortune out of developing a potent product with highly elevated THC levels. Other than a successful business, they also share something else: Ophelia (known as O), played by Blake Lively, a beach babe who loves them both.

Naturally, Chon and Ben’s thriving company attracts the fascination of the Mexican drug cartels, who look to buy out the boys. When things don’t go as planned, O is kidnapped and thy must figure out a way to get her back.

We meet the disreputable cast of characters who make up the cartel. It’s headed by Elena (Salma Hayek), who inherited the business through her dead husband. She’s lost some of her children in brutal fashion as well and her daughter (who lives in the States) wants nothing to do with her. This is actually a fact that makes Elena proud. If you’ve been lucky enough to watch the documentary Cocaine Cowboys (if not, watch it immediately), you’ll notice that Elena’s character is very similar to Griselda Blanco, a real-life drug kingpin who was just recently assassinated. Elena is the best character in Savages – so much so that I wish the entire movie had been about her.

Elena’s enforcer Lado is played in a typically solid and slightly bizarre performance by Benicio Del Toro. He has a memorable scene with Travolta’s DEA agent that comes towards the end. Once again, the fine acting of Hayek, Del Toro, and Travolta and their dynamic could have been one unique picture.

Alas, Savages is more about Chon, Ben, and O. And therein lies the central flaw of the film… it’s central characters aren’t very special. Especially O. I will not blame Lively wholly for this, even though her performance is lackluster. It’s more that her character is written as nothing more than a dull pothead beach babe. Frankly, with her being the character in the most danger, it’s hard to really care much about what happens.

Savages is no doubt a stylish feast for the eyes. Stone is, of course, a heckuva director. And the secondary performances mentioned above are noteworthy. It’s the main troika of characters and their relationship that makes Savages a bit of a letdown, albeit a good looking one.

**1/2 (out of four)

Side Effects Movie Review

Side Effects is not an easy movie to review without major spoilers, so my thoughts here on the picture will be fairly brief.

Steven Soderbergh is one of the most exciting and versatile directors of the last quarter century. He’s directed everything from sex, lies, and videotape to Out of Sight to Erin Brockovich to Traffic to Contagion to Magic Mike. And there’s that enormously successful Ocean’s 11-13 trilogy, too.

The director has said that Side Effects may be his last theatrical feature, but I doubt this will be the case. I hope not. Soderbergh is way too important to movies to stop making them. Hell, this Sunday, you can watch his HBO Liberace biopic Behind the Candelabra starring Michael Douglas and Matt Damon. It’s getting fantastic reviews by the way and don’t be surprised if I have a review of that posted quite soon.

The plot of Side Effects is pretty damn clever. The film begins as an expose of the pharmaceutical industry with a psychiatrist (Jude Law) treating a depressed patient (Rooney Mara) whose husband (Channing Tatum) has just been released from prison. And then it becomes something else entirely.

And… ladies and gentlemen, that’s about all I can reveal about the plot without ruining stuff. You’ll thank me later. Part of the joy of Side Effects is discovering the truly unexpected paths the film goes down. There are plot twists that are genuinely surprising. The movie shifts from one genre to the next with mostly successful results.

Rooney Mara and Jude Law anchor this twisty little picture with effective performances. Their doctor-patient relationship goes through a number of iterations in Scott Z. Burns’ screenplay and their interplay is always intriguing. Many reviews have compared Side Effects to the work of Hitchcock, especially the final half. I can see why, but saying more would spoil the fun.

Even though the Hitchcock comparison is fair, Side Effects doesn’t come close to reaching the level of the master’s greatest works. And it’s not in the upper echelon of Soderbergh’s cannon either, but it is sharply written, well-acted, and will keep you guessing for nearly its whole running length. The last few minutes or so get a tad predictable, but it’s a trip getting there.

*** (out of four)

Jack Reacher Movie Review

A list actor Tom Cruise dives into B pulp movie territory with Christopher McQuarrie’s Jack Reacher, a film with style to spare but plenty of flaws to go along with it.

Reacher is based on a series of novels by Lee Child, which I’ve never read. Apparently the character in the novel is 6’5″, which is a bit of a stretch for Tommy boy who is like 4’3″ in real life (give or take). When a group of five random people are gunned down by a sniper in Pittsburgh, the arrested perp instructs defense attorney Helen (Rosemund Pike) to “get Jack Reacher”. Turns out Reacher is an ex-military cop who has a history with the arrested party and doesn’t believe the shooting massacre is as open and shut as the evidence suggests.

The picture follows Cruise along on his investigation to get to the truth. Per usual, no one can be trusted, from the detective heading the case (David Oyelowo) to the district attorney (Richard Jenkins) who happens to be Helen’s dad. There’s also a shadowy character named The Zec (Werner Herzog), a Russian gangster and his band of thugs.

For a good portion of Reacher‘s running time, McQuarrie keeps us intrigued with his polished direction and often effective B movie dialogue. McQuarrie has some credibility in this field as the screenwriter of 1995’s B movie classic The Usual Suspects (he also co-wrote Cruise’s solid 2008 thriller Valkyrie).

However, the plot of Reacher ends up not being terribly engrossing. The character of The Zec is a truly fascinating one who is given virtually no screen time, but famed German director Herzog makes the most of his limited role. None of the other supporting performances are bad but they’re not memorable either. I had to rack my brain trying to remember what else I’d seen Rosemund Pike in. Turns out she was a Bond love interest in the worst 007 flick ever, Die Another Day. She didn’t leave much of an impression there and she doesn’t here either.

By the time Robert Duvall shows up as a grizzled old Ohio gun range owner who helps Jack out, I found myself reaching for my cell phone to check the time. Duvall’s role is ultimately kinda pointless and seems written in simply to reunite the stars of Days of Thunder.

This is Cruise’s show and he acquits himself nicely. While he may not resemble the character in the books, Cruise is first-rate and believable in the role. McQuarrie and Cruise hold our attention for quite a while, but Jack Reacher turns out not worthy of its bloated 130 minute running time. If you’re a Cruise fan, I’d recommend a view just to see something a little different from the star. Be prepared to be a little disappointed though, as I was.

**1/2 (out of four)

Gangster Squad and Broken City Movie Reviews

January is typically seen as a dumping ground for films that studios have little confidence in. When a picture opens in the first month of the year with big stars, that can usually be seen as a red flag. And so it is with Gangster Squad and Broken City, which both opened in January to disappointing box office results. Audiences got it right here – they’re both forgettable titles that don’t deserve the considerable talent involved.

Gangster Squad is from Zombieland director Ruben Fleischer and takes place in Los Angeles circa 1949 when gangster Mickey Cohen (Sean Penn) has taken over the city with his particularly deadly Mob tactics. A straight-laced Sergeant (Josh Brolin) is enlisted by the police chief (Nick Nolte) to form a squad to take Mickey out and restore order at any cost. Brolin enlists lots of recognizable actors to help in the cause, from Ryan Gosling to Giovanni Ribisi to Michael Pena to Robert Patrick to Anthony Mackie.

The pic is a highly stylized exercise whose tone is closer to The Untouchables than other genre entries. The difference? The Untouchables was really good and effective. Squad feels unoriginal and derivative. Sure, it looks good, but you won’t remember much about it the morning. Most of the actors try their best, but they have skimpy material to work with.

Among the issues I had: we get a romance between Gosling’s character and Mickey’s girlfriend, played by Emma Stone. As you will recall, Gosling and Stone had major chemistry in 2011’s romantic comedy Crazy Stupid Love. Here, their relationship is underwritten and dull and it left me wishing I was watching their previous movie. Sean Penn, one of the finest actors of his generation, goes way over the top as Mickey. Also, his make-up job is pretty ridiculous. Brolin’s character is a bit of a bore and ultra cliched. He even comes with the pregnant wife whose character is straight outta Screenwriting 101.

Gangster Squad wants to bash us over the head with its excessive violence, but never bothers to give us interesting, well-written characters to get involved with. Director Fleischer showed tremendous promise with the original Zombieland. This movie doesn’t have an original idea or thought in its head.

Gangster Squad: ** (out of four)

Mark Wahlberg and Russell Crowe headline Broken City from director Allen Hughes (who co-directed Menace II Society and From Hell with his brother). The city is New York City, where Wahlberg is an ex-cop turned private eye who’s hired by the corrupt Mayor (Crowe) to find out who his wife is sleeping with days before the Mayoral election. This leads to your usual double crosses and instances where “not all is at it seems!”.

The first hour or so of City is decent if unremarkable. Eventually, the screenplay moves toward twists and turns that rely on BIG and unbelievable conveniences, like Wahlberg finding key pieces of evidence in a dumpster where the rest of the documents are being shredded. Thank goodness they forgot to shred the most important piece of evidence!

Like Squad, the characters are poorly developed. Wahlberg’s story arc is a familiar one – he’s a cop who may or may not have shot an unarmed suspect. He had a drinking problem… wanna take bets on if he relapses? He’s conflicted about doing the right thing, yada, yada, yada…

Crowe adds some decent acting to an otherwise unremarkable character. Catherine Zeta-Jones doesn’t have much to do as his neglected wife, who may or may not be having an affair.

Broken City fails mostly because of a lackluster screenplay. Wahlberg and Crowe deserve better and director Hughes has certainly shown an ability to do far better.

Broken City: ** (out of four)

So the January curse holds true for these pictures. Are they both watchable? Sure, but with lots of end of 2012 titles just reaching home release and the summer season beginning at the multiplex, why waste your time? I just did that for you!

Iron Man 3 Movie Review

Iron Man 3 is essentially competing against two expectations from previous pictures. First, the general feeling (one I agree with) is that Iron Man 2 was a bit of a letdown. Second, the general feeling (which I also adhere to) is that last summer’s The Avengers was pretty frickin’ awesome.

So where does Tony Stark/Iron Man go from here? In Iron Man 3, the character goes into the hands of director/co-writer Shane Black. Jon Favreau directed the first two installments and he reprises his role as Tony’s former bodyguard Happy. But it’s Black who now inherits the franchise. For those who don’t know, Black is best known as the screenwriter of action extravaganzas such as Lethal Weapon and The Last Boy Scout. In 2005, he made his directorial debut with Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, a terrific action/comedy that starred… Robert Downey Jr.!

Shane Black’s contributions give Iron Man 3 a different feel than what we’ve seen previously. It’s darker in tone yet it also has a comedy spirit at times that works well. Black is a great writer and his work here shines. We also delve a bit deeper into Stark as a person. A lot of the action the character is involved in this time around is accomplished without Tony wearing the Iron Man suit. Furthermore, Gwyneth Paltow’s character Pepper is given more to do – she even gets to don the suit!

While Mickey Rourke ended up being a fairly blah villain in the second flick, this time around we have Sir Ben Kingsley as evil terrorist The Mandarin. It’s pretty much impossible to describe Kinglsey’s character without revealing major spoilers. I will say this: Kingsley is fantastic in the role and he will be the character you’ll probably talk about the most. Guy Pearce gives an effective performance as another villain… again, can’t talk too much about him due to spoilers.

I won’t get into the plot details of Iron Man 3 – I mean, you’re gonna see it anyway if you haven’t already. Bottom line: Iron Man 3 is not quite on the level of the first for me, but it’s a definite improvement over #2. Downey is brilliant as always in the title role and I particularly enjoyed his rapport with Harley (Ty Simpkins), a kid who Tony befriends.

The film doesn’t attempt to outdo the grandeur of The Avengers and that’s just fine. It feels like a smaller film – at least small compared to Avengers. It may not rank at the very top of the best superhero movies, but Iron Man 3 is well worth seeing and kicks off summer 2013 in good manner.

Iron Man 3 is solid enough that I certainly hope Downey doesn’t abandon the role. My guess is that he won’t. And I also hope Shane Black returns for a fourth installment. His presence is a welcome addition to the Marvel world.

*** (out of four)