Search
Search results
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Iron Man 2 (2010) in Movies
Jul 10, 2020
Ever since Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Marvel Studios have pretty much been on a hot streak. It's easy to forget that this titan of a movie house still had to finds its feet once upon a time, and unfortunately they do have a handful of underwhelming titles in their arsenal.
Iron Man 2 is in of these titles, and whilst bit a far cry from a bad movie, the formula wasn't quite there yet.
It's main issues comes from the writing I think. The plot dates to tackle issues such as Tony Stark's trouble with alcohol, a result of slowly being poisoned by the very mechanism that's keeping him alive. He hits rock bottom, pisses off everyone he loves, creates a new element (in probably the most ridiculously convoluted and stupid scene in the MCU) and somewhere amongst all this, there's some big dumb superhero action.
As much as I admire this route, the balance is off, and a big chunk of the movie gets bigger down by these issues.
The side plot that involves a B list villain Whiplash is a nice touch, but it's ultimately wasted in yet another ending brawl that features the hero against an evil version of himself, the second Iron Man film to be released and the second Iron Man film to feature a final boss in a bigger Iron Man suit. It just doesn't feel over imaginative.
It's not all bad though - Iron Man 2 boasts an incredible cast of talent. Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow of course return from the first movie. Mickey Rourke is the aforementioned Whiplash (I find it hard to dislike Mickey Rourke in general), Don Cheadle takes over the mantle of War Machine, and of course we get the first appearance for Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow.
And a big reason why Iron Man 2 is better than it should be is down to the always fantastic Sam Rockwell. He plays secondary villain Justin Hammer and he oozes charisma, and fits in effortlessly opposite Downey Jr.
Other than that, the effects still hold up for the most part, and the set pieces are fun - the racing track scene is a particular highlight, and its always a treat to see the wider MCU being established as the main plot chugs along.
Iron Man 2 isn't as good as it's predecessor, and is at the lower and of the MCU quality spectrum, but there's still a lot to enjoy if you switch off a bit.
Iron Man 2 is in of these titles, and whilst bit a far cry from a bad movie, the formula wasn't quite there yet.
It's main issues comes from the writing I think. The plot dates to tackle issues such as Tony Stark's trouble with alcohol, a result of slowly being poisoned by the very mechanism that's keeping him alive. He hits rock bottom, pisses off everyone he loves, creates a new element (in probably the most ridiculously convoluted and stupid scene in the MCU) and somewhere amongst all this, there's some big dumb superhero action.
As much as I admire this route, the balance is off, and a big chunk of the movie gets bigger down by these issues.
The side plot that involves a B list villain Whiplash is a nice touch, but it's ultimately wasted in yet another ending brawl that features the hero against an evil version of himself, the second Iron Man film to be released and the second Iron Man film to feature a final boss in a bigger Iron Man suit. It just doesn't feel over imaginative.
It's not all bad though - Iron Man 2 boasts an incredible cast of talent. Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow of course return from the first movie. Mickey Rourke is the aforementioned Whiplash (I find it hard to dislike Mickey Rourke in general), Don Cheadle takes over the mantle of War Machine, and of course we get the first appearance for Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow.
And a big reason why Iron Man 2 is better than it should be is down to the always fantastic Sam Rockwell. He plays secondary villain Justin Hammer and he oozes charisma, and fits in effortlessly opposite Downey Jr.
Other than that, the effects still hold up for the most part, and the set pieces are fun - the racing track scene is a particular highlight, and its always a treat to see the wider MCU being established as the main plot chugs along.
Iron Man 2 isn't as good as it's predecessor, and is at the lower and of the MCU quality spectrum, but there's still a lot to enjoy if you switch off a bit.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014) in Movies
Oct 15, 2020
This first sequel to Captain America: The First Avenger is everything a sequel should be. It has bigger and better set pieces, it has a bigger emotional centre, it brings in already established MCU characters and introduces new ones, and is arguably one of the best entries into the MCU to date.
Chris Evans does nothing more than tighten his grip around his most famous role. He joins Robert Downey Jr. in the category of irreplaceable actors for these characters.
Scarlett Johansson is once again great as Black Widow, and newcomer Anthony Mackie as Sam Wilson/Falcon provides Cap with a likeable new ally. The three of them as a sort of mini Avengers in this movie are fantastic.
Sebastian Stan plays The Winter Soldier with aplomb, and gives us a truly dangerous antagonist. The dude is fucking terrifying, yet his relationship with Steve Rogers gives us the heart of this movie. It's a tragic story which of course will be further explored in Civil War further down the line.
The cast is rounded off with Samuel L. Jackson returning as Nick Fury, Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce, Emily VanCamp as Agent 13, Frank Grillo as Brock Rumlow, and some smaller roles for Cobie Smulders and Hayley Atwell.
It's a really solid cast all in all, an area that Marvel Studios rarely missteps.
The set pieces are hugely high octane and thrilling. The opening scene on the barge is a highlight, as well as the teams fight with the Winter Soldier midway through. Even Nick Fury gets a banger of an action sequence. Also, this film boasts probably the biggest plot twist gut punch in the whole MCU with the SHIELD/Hydra reveal. It's an extremely well crafted, ballsy narrative that impacts the shape of the MCU going forward.
There's honestly nothing bad to say about this one. It's top tier comic book cinema.
Chris Evans does nothing more than tighten his grip around his most famous role. He joins Robert Downey Jr. in the category of irreplaceable actors for these characters.
Scarlett Johansson is once again great as Black Widow, and newcomer Anthony Mackie as Sam Wilson/Falcon provides Cap with a likeable new ally. The three of them as a sort of mini Avengers in this movie are fantastic.
Sebastian Stan plays The Winter Soldier with aplomb, and gives us a truly dangerous antagonist. The dude is fucking terrifying, yet his relationship with Steve Rogers gives us the heart of this movie. It's a tragic story which of course will be further explored in Civil War further down the line.
The cast is rounded off with Samuel L. Jackson returning as Nick Fury, Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce, Emily VanCamp as Agent 13, Frank Grillo as Brock Rumlow, and some smaller roles for Cobie Smulders and Hayley Atwell.
It's a really solid cast all in all, an area that Marvel Studios rarely missteps.
The set pieces are hugely high octane and thrilling. The opening scene on the barge is a highlight, as well as the teams fight with the Winter Soldier midway through. Even Nick Fury gets a banger of an action sequence. Also, this film boasts probably the biggest plot twist gut punch in the whole MCU with the SHIELD/Hydra reveal. It's an extremely well crafted, ballsy narrative that impacts the shape of the MCU going forward.
There's honestly nothing bad to say about this one. It's top tier comic book cinema.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Iron Man 2 (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
Iron Man 2 picks up right where the first one left off, and manages to continue the enjoyment without losing too much steam in the process. Jon Favreau has kept the exciting action, lost a bit of character development, but added more of a comic-book dimension to the film series.
The plot was slow to start, but once you see how events start fitting together for the eventual showdown, the movie picks up speed and leads in for a very satisfying finish. Thankfully, there weren’t too many slow moments (this is an action movie, after all), and the plot flowed well from scene to scene. The action-packed ending more than makes up for any slow moments toward the beginning.
The interplay between the characters definitely felt more formal than the first film. Robert Downey, Jr. plays the title character with just as much snarky humor and snide dialogue as he did in the first film, but he seems to play his dramatic scenes with less emphasis than the first. Don Cheadle, as Colonel Rhodes, continues with the memorable character that Terrence Howard defined, but doesn’t come into his own until near the finale. Scarlett Johansson performs the part of the sultry and mysterious Natalie Rushman/Natasha Romanoff quite well, although aside from one stunning action scene, her role is relatively minor compared to the rest of the cast. The villains, Ivan Vanko, played by Mickey Rourke; and Justin Hammer, played by Sam Rockwell, more than match their opposition on screen. Rockwell in particular is absolutely fantastic in his portrayal: totally believable, animated, and fun to watch. I just wish everyone had his enthusiasm for the film, because I sensed less emotion this time around.
Iron Man 2 also has much more of a comic-book feel than the previous movie. Marvel fans will notice quite a few more nods to the Marvel Universe, but even more than that, Iron Man feels more like the fantastic character that he is when he has a properly villainous opponent. In the end, this film is a fitting sequel that nearly matches it’s predecessor.
The plot was slow to start, but once you see how events start fitting together for the eventual showdown, the movie picks up speed and leads in for a very satisfying finish. Thankfully, there weren’t too many slow moments (this is an action movie, after all), and the plot flowed well from scene to scene. The action-packed ending more than makes up for any slow moments toward the beginning.
The interplay between the characters definitely felt more formal than the first film. Robert Downey, Jr. plays the title character with just as much snarky humor and snide dialogue as he did in the first film, but he seems to play his dramatic scenes with less emphasis than the first. Don Cheadle, as Colonel Rhodes, continues with the memorable character that Terrence Howard defined, but doesn’t come into his own until near the finale. Scarlett Johansson performs the part of the sultry and mysterious Natalie Rushman/Natasha Romanoff quite well, although aside from one stunning action scene, her role is relatively minor compared to the rest of the cast. The villains, Ivan Vanko, played by Mickey Rourke; and Justin Hammer, played by Sam Rockwell, more than match their opposition on screen. Rockwell in particular is absolutely fantastic in his portrayal: totally believable, animated, and fun to watch. I just wish everyone had his enthusiasm for the film, because I sensed less emotion this time around.
Iron Man 2 also has much more of a comic-book feel than the previous movie. Marvel fans will notice quite a few more nods to the Marvel Universe, but even more than that, Iron Man feels more like the fantastic character that he is when he has a properly villainous opponent. In the end, this film is a fitting sequel that nearly matches it’s predecessor.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Iron Man 2 (2010) in Movies
May 9, 2019
"if you could make god bleed people would cease to believe in him"
What made Iron Man so great was its original story, exciting action, and stellar performances. But beneath all the spectacle was a heart, characters we cared about and a coherent story in which we watched a narsasistic asshole become a good guy. All of that has vanished in the rushed, noisy, but enjoyable sequel.
Tony Stark is now living the life of a rockstar, a superhero that everyone knows the identity of, enjoying a celebrity lifestyle. Meanwhile, a villain connected to Tony's past recreates his technology and seeks revenge. Tony also deals with the mystery of his dead parents, his relationship with Pepper, wards off government attempts to control his technology, rebuffs his corporate rival, and has to rework his technology that is slowly killing him. Oh, and The Avengers show up.
If that sounds like an overcrowded movie to you, that's because it is. Iron Man 2 acts as an Iron Man sequel and an Avengers prequel. The clashing of these two stories is due to an unfocused narrative trying to cram in ten different storylines. Half the stories don't conclude in a satisfying way, and we're left with a pretty looking movie.
Luckily the performances are still great, Robert Downey Jr. is again a delight to watch, Sam Rockwell is fun as his counterpart rival, and Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as best friend Rhodes, a worthy replacement. Scarlett Johansson joins the cast as an Avengers refenerence, with very little to do other than look good and kick ass.
Jon Favreau seems much less interested in the project this time around, as he falls under the weight of the studio pushing for a sequel in two years as opposed to three. The script has a couple of witty highlights, mostly with Same Rockwell as Tony's business rival.
The action is thrilling and everything you'd want when it comes, but it doesn't show up often. The visual effects are improved, and the sound design is top notch. The score is mediocre, with a few notable exceptions.
There is too much going on for one movie, but by the end of the movie you're left wanting more. Not enough time was devoted to the different characters and plot lines, which results in a highly uneven movie with short bursts of excitement and a solid cast. Worth one watch.
Tony Stark is now living the life of a rockstar, a superhero that everyone knows the identity of, enjoying a celebrity lifestyle. Meanwhile, a villain connected to Tony's past recreates his technology and seeks revenge. Tony also deals with the mystery of his dead parents, his relationship with Pepper, wards off government attempts to control his technology, rebuffs his corporate rival, and has to rework his technology that is slowly killing him. Oh, and The Avengers show up.
If that sounds like an overcrowded movie to you, that's because it is. Iron Man 2 acts as an Iron Man sequel and an Avengers prequel. The clashing of these two stories is due to an unfocused narrative trying to cram in ten different storylines. Half the stories don't conclude in a satisfying way, and we're left with a pretty looking movie.
Luckily the performances are still great, Robert Downey Jr. is again a delight to watch, Sam Rockwell is fun as his counterpart rival, and Don Cheadle replaces Terrence Howard as best friend Rhodes, a worthy replacement. Scarlett Johansson joins the cast as an Avengers refenerence, with very little to do other than look good and kick ass.
Jon Favreau seems much less interested in the project this time around, as he falls under the weight of the studio pushing for a sequel in two years as opposed to three. The script has a couple of witty highlights, mostly with Same Rockwell as Tony's business rival.
The action is thrilling and everything you'd want when it comes, but it doesn't show up often. The visual effects are improved, and the sound design is top notch. The score is mediocre, with a few notable exceptions.
There is too much going on for one movie, but by the end of the movie you're left wanting more. Not enough time was devoted to the different characters and plot lines, which results in a highly uneven movie with short bursts of excitement and a solid cast. Worth one watch.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Enola Holmes (2020) in Movies
Oct 18, 2020
A Winning (enough) combination
I'm a sucker for Sherlock Holmes. I grew up watching the fantastic black and white Holmes films from the 1940's starring Basil Rathbone and Nigel Bruce. I checked out '70's Holmes flicks like MURDER BY DECREE and the 7 PERCENT SOLUTION and then re-fell-in-love with Holmes with the Jeremy Brett BBC SHERLOCK HOLMES TV series of the 1980's and, of course, Benedict Cumberbatch's modern take on the master sleuth in the 2000's was "must see TV" for me. I was even on-board with Robert Downey Jr's. "take" on this iconic sleuth and was thrilled when Sir Ian McKellen portrayed an elderly Sherlock Holmes in MR. HOLMES.
So...I eagerly awaited the Netflix treatment of the "younger" sister of Sherlock Holmes in ENOLA HOLMES -and, I gotta say, I wasn't disappointed.
Based on the Young Adult series of novels by Nancy Springer, ENOLA HOLMES introduces us to the (heretofore unknown) younger sister of Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes. Raised by a fiercely independent mother in the late 1880's, Enola goes searching for her when she goes missing and gets mixed up in the "The Case of the Missing Marquess" along the way.
Millie Bobbie Brown (STRANGER THINGS) is a winning, charismatic (enough) performer as Enola. She is a steady and sure hand at the helm of this ship throughout the course of this 2 hour and 3 minute adventure. While I would have liked her to command the screen more with her presence, she does enough to make it a good, solid, effort.
The supporting cast is just as good. Helena Bonham Carter (FIGHT CLUB) is perfectly cast as Enola's (and Sherlock's and Mycroft's) mother - she has that fierce streak of independence and "don't mess with me" energy while carving her own path. She is the type of character that one would go looking for if she went missing. Sam Claflin (HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE) is finely unrecognizable (at least to me) as Mycroft - written in this piece as the more "traditional" of the Holmes family and Henry Cavill (MAN OF STEEL) brings a strong arrogance to his portrayal of Sherlock. He also brings something else - heart - to this character, a character trait that has "traditional" fans of this character up in arms. For me, it works well in the context of this film.
As for the film itself - it is good (enough). I found myself enjoying the mystery and the characters and enjoyed my time in this world. It's not anything new, but it's like putting on a pair of old shoes - comforting to wear.
This is an adaptation of the first book of the series, and I, for one, hope that there are more. It's a winning combination that was pleasant to watch.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
So...I eagerly awaited the Netflix treatment of the "younger" sister of Sherlock Holmes in ENOLA HOLMES -and, I gotta say, I wasn't disappointed.
Based on the Young Adult series of novels by Nancy Springer, ENOLA HOLMES introduces us to the (heretofore unknown) younger sister of Sherlock and Mycroft Holmes. Raised by a fiercely independent mother in the late 1880's, Enola goes searching for her when she goes missing and gets mixed up in the "The Case of the Missing Marquess" along the way.
Millie Bobbie Brown (STRANGER THINGS) is a winning, charismatic (enough) performer as Enola. She is a steady and sure hand at the helm of this ship throughout the course of this 2 hour and 3 minute adventure. While I would have liked her to command the screen more with her presence, she does enough to make it a good, solid, effort.
The supporting cast is just as good. Helena Bonham Carter (FIGHT CLUB) is perfectly cast as Enola's (and Sherlock's and Mycroft's) mother - she has that fierce streak of independence and "don't mess with me" energy while carving her own path. She is the type of character that one would go looking for if she went missing. Sam Claflin (HUNGER GAMES: CATCHING FIRE) is finely unrecognizable (at least to me) as Mycroft - written in this piece as the more "traditional" of the Holmes family and Henry Cavill (MAN OF STEEL) brings a strong arrogance to his portrayal of Sherlock. He also brings something else - heart - to this character, a character trait that has "traditional" fans of this character up in arms. For me, it works well in the context of this film.
As for the film itself - it is good (enough). I found myself enjoying the mystery and the characters and enjoyed my time in this world. It's not anything new, but it's like putting on a pair of old shoes - comforting to wear.
This is an adaptation of the first book of the series, and I, for one, hope that there are more. It's a winning combination that was pleasant to watch.
Letter Grade: B+
7 1/2 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Enola Holmes (2020) in Movies
Oct 4, 2020
Millie Bobby Brown - a confident raw talent (1 more)
Henry Cavill as a new take on Sherlock
The unsinkable Millie Bobby Brown
Sherlock Holmes never had a sister. But if he did, what adventures would Enola Holmes get up to? That’s the premise behind this Netflix feature. starring rising star Millie Bobby Brown.
Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) thinks she’s been named as such because it spells “alone” backwards. (But then, she admits, that it doesn’t seem to follow for either kcolrehs or tforcym!)
Enola has been brought up by her dearest mother Eudoria (Helena Bonham Carter) to be a strong and confident woman, free of the normal 19th century rituals of ladylike husband-seeking niceties: for her, it’s all mental gymnastics and martial arts. But when on her 16th birthday her mother vanishes, Enola sets out on a quest to find her. But Eudoria is a Holmes, and knows the value of clues and how to cover her tracks.
Of greater concern to Enola is her brother and ward Mycroft (Sam Claflin), who is intent on packing her off to the Victorian finishing school of Miss Harrison (“Killing Eve’s” Fiona Shaw). But while trying to escape from her brothers – not a trivial matter when one is the famous detective Sherlock (Henry Cavill) – Enola encounters a Marquess on the run (Louis Partridge) and adventure, intrigue and murder are on the cards.
Filming in this “Fleabag” style – where the lead is constantly breaking the fourth wall – requires a confidence in delivery that many young actors would struggle with. But not Millie Bobby Brown. Her asides and camera glances – while not quite as skillful as the astonishingly accomplished Phoebe Waller-Bridge – are nonetheless impressive and constantly entertaining. An underwater wink at the camera was particularly enjoyable.
So… actress – tick!
But perhaps more impressive to me was that the 16 year old – most famous for her role in “Stranger Things”, which I still haven’t watched – was also a PRODUCER of this movie. Which makes me think she is a serious person to watch in the movie business (if there ever is a movie business left after 2020). I read that she is the youngest person ever to appear on the annual list of the “world’s 100 most influential people” by Time magazine: so others agree!
The supporting case are a broad array of British acting talent, with Henry Cavill being particularly appealing as Sherlock, Burn Gorman at his slimy evil best as a murderous henchman, and Sam Claflin being as anonymous as I always find him. (That’s a compliment by the way: whereas I see some actors and think “oh, there’s <<Tom Hanks>> again”, I never recognize Claflin until the credits role… he is a chameleon of the acting world).
But acting the socks off everyone else for me is Frances de la Tour as the Marquess’s grandmother. A deliciously twinkling and charming performance from an old dame of the screen.
The similarities with “Fleabag” are not coincidental, since the director is Harry Bradbeer; director of all of the episodes except the original pilot. But it’s unfortunate in some ways that the style has been interpolated into the Holmes story. Since, of course, this approach was previously done by Guy Ritchie in the two very entertaining movies featuring Robert Downey Jnr and Jude Law. And for me, that’s a shame. Since although the styles are markedly different – here we have a lot of Paddington-style cardboard animations – the “feel” of the films is the same. As such, it doesn’t feel as novel as it should do. Why couldn’t she have been someone else’s sister? Houdini perhaps? Or Oscar Wilde?
As two hours of entertaining escapism, Enola Holmes worked well for me. Brown is eminently watchable, and given the Netflix response to the movie, a sequel would be – I expect – on the cards.
(For the full graphical review, please visit the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/10/04/the-unsinkable-millie-bobby-brown/. Thanks.)
Enola Holmes (Millie Bobby Brown) thinks she’s been named as such because it spells “alone” backwards. (But then, she admits, that it doesn’t seem to follow for either kcolrehs or tforcym!)
Enola has been brought up by her dearest mother Eudoria (Helena Bonham Carter) to be a strong and confident woman, free of the normal 19th century rituals of ladylike husband-seeking niceties: for her, it’s all mental gymnastics and martial arts. But when on her 16th birthday her mother vanishes, Enola sets out on a quest to find her. But Eudoria is a Holmes, and knows the value of clues and how to cover her tracks.
Of greater concern to Enola is her brother and ward Mycroft (Sam Claflin), who is intent on packing her off to the Victorian finishing school of Miss Harrison (“Killing Eve’s” Fiona Shaw). But while trying to escape from her brothers – not a trivial matter when one is the famous detective Sherlock (Henry Cavill) – Enola encounters a Marquess on the run (Louis Partridge) and adventure, intrigue and murder are on the cards.
Filming in this “Fleabag” style – where the lead is constantly breaking the fourth wall – requires a confidence in delivery that many young actors would struggle with. But not Millie Bobby Brown. Her asides and camera glances – while not quite as skillful as the astonishingly accomplished Phoebe Waller-Bridge – are nonetheless impressive and constantly entertaining. An underwater wink at the camera was particularly enjoyable.
So… actress – tick!
But perhaps more impressive to me was that the 16 year old – most famous for her role in “Stranger Things”, which I still haven’t watched – was also a PRODUCER of this movie. Which makes me think she is a serious person to watch in the movie business (if there ever is a movie business left after 2020). I read that she is the youngest person ever to appear on the annual list of the “world’s 100 most influential people” by Time magazine: so others agree!
The supporting case are a broad array of British acting talent, with Henry Cavill being particularly appealing as Sherlock, Burn Gorman at his slimy evil best as a murderous henchman, and Sam Claflin being as anonymous as I always find him. (That’s a compliment by the way: whereas I see some actors and think “oh, there’s <<Tom Hanks>> again”, I never recognize Claflin until the credits role… he is a chameleon of the acting world).
But acting the socks off everyone else for me is Frances de la Tour as the Marquess’s grandmother. A deliciously twinkling and charming performance from an old dame of the screen.
The similarities with “Fleabag” are not coincidental, since the director is Harry Bradbeer; director of all of the episodes except the original pilot. But it’s unfortunate in some ways that the style has been interpolated into the Holmes story. Since, of course, this approach was previously done by Guy Ritchie in the two very entertaining movies featuring Robert Downey Jnr and Jude Law. And for me, that’s a shame. Since although the styles are markedly different – here we have a lot of Paddington-style cardboard animations – the “feel” of the films is the same. As such, it doesn’t feel as novel as it should do. Why couldn’t she have been someone else’s sister? Houdini perhaps? Or Oscar Wilde?
As two hours of entertaining escapism, Enola Holmes worked well for me. Brown is eminently watchable, and given the Netflix response to the movie, a sequel would be – I expect – on the cards.
(For the full graphical review, please visit the One Mann's Movies review here - https://bob-the-movie-man.com/2020/10/04/the-unsinkable-millie-bobby-brown/. Thanks.)
Darren (1599 KP) rated Iron Man 2 (2010) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Characters – Tony Stark revealed his identity at the end of the last movie, he has become even more famous as the man that ended conflict in the world, the government want control over the suit and worry that other parts of the world could develop their own version of the suit. He must deal with his own mortality when the one thing keeping him alive, is making him sick. He will also need to fight for his father’s mistakes, pushing his closest friends away. Pepper Potts has been given a promotion by Tony, to CEO, she already runs his affairs, she is now running his company, while trying to control him during his self-destruction. Rhodey is still in his role in the military, he is still challenging Tony, but gets to use his own suit the correct way, for guiding the military. Natasha goes undercover in Stark’s company, she is a member of SHIELD where she uses her skills in combat to keep Tony out of trouble. Justin Hammer is a rival inventor still trying to get ahead of Tony in the weapons business, he has been working on his own Iron Man suit, without much success, he hires Ivan to build him a suit. Ivan Vanko has built his own weaponised suit, he is the son of a rival of Tony’ father, which sees him want to take revenge on Tony for his father’s action, becoming whiplash, the one man that has created a suit that could rival Iron Man.
Performances – Robert Downey Jr is still great to watch, he keeps the charisma required for his role, while bringing an emotional factor which is needed for where his character goes in this film. Gwyneth Paltrow does have a bigger role here and brings us a much stronger performance with her character. Don Cheadle is an improvement on Terrence Howard, bringing Rhodey to life more. Scarlett Johansson has the perfect look for this character which is only first jumping into the franchise. Sam Rockwell as another inventor arms dealer who is filled with the swagger required. Mickey Rourke as the villain has good motives he does everything he can even if he character does grumble a lot.
Story – The story follows up the beginning of Iron Man dealing with the idea that the military would want control of the equipment and the rest of the world will be playing catch up, with their own versions of the Iron Man suit. This is a strong world building exercise to the Iron Man universe, we get to see how SHIELD are operating in the shadows watching over the potential threats. We have a villain that is competition and another one that is out for personal revenge. We up the stakes in this one, Tony does have to deal with his own problems by needing to improve the suit and we get to set up the position of who is one the good side with teases of the eventual Avengers team up.
Action/Sci-Fi – The action in this film relies on a couple of big scenes, we have the racing introduction, the mid-life crisis sequence and the showdown, each has their own way to make an impact. The sci-fi side of the film continues to show the technology advances that Tony is dealing with.
Settings – The film uses the settings more for the action with one of the most iconic action sequences in the franchise, we continue to see Tony’s lab which tends to get destroyed a lot too.
Special Effects – The special effects in the film make each fight, drone or Iron Man suit look realistic through the film which is what needed for the film.
Scene of the Movie – Monte Carlo entrance.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There is a small pacing issue.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun sequel that continues to build the universe we know now, Tony still needs to learn about his place and how to handle the suit which is important and shows the past could come back to haunt you.
Overall: Fun sequel.
Performances – Robert Downey Jr is still great to watch, he keeps the charisma required for his role, while bringing an emotional factor which is needed for where his character goes in this film. Gwyneth Paltrow does have a bigger role here and brings us a much stronger performance with her character. Don Cheadle is an improvement on Terrence Howard, bringing Rhodey to life more. Scarlett Johansson has the perfect look for this character which is only first jumping into the franchise. Sam Rockwell as another inventor arms dealer who is filled with the swagger required. Mickey Rourke as the villain has good motives he does everything he can even if he character does grumble a lot.
Story – The story follows up the beginning of Iron Man dealing with the idea that the military would want control of the equipment and the rest of the world will be playing catch up, with their own versions of the Iron Man suit. This is a strong world building exercise to the Iron Man universe, we get to see how SHIELD are operating in the shadows watching over the potential threats. We have a villain that is competition and another one that is out for personal revenge. We up the stakes in this one, Tony does have to deal with his own problems by needing to improve the suit and we get to set up the position of who is one the good side with teases of the eventual Avengers team up.
Action/Sci-Fi – The action in this film relies on a couple of big scenes, we have the racing introduction, the mid-life crisis sequence and the showdown, each has their own way to make an impact. The sci-fi side of the film continues to show the technology advances that Tony is dealing with.
Settings – The film uses the settings more for the action with one of the most iconic action sequences in the franchise, we continue to see Tony’s lab which tends to get destroyed a lot too.
Special Effects – The special effects in the film make each fight, drone or Iron Man suit look realistic through the film which is what needed for the film.
Scene of the Movie – Monte Carlo entrance.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – There is a small pacing issue.
Final Thoughts – This is a fun sequel that continues to build the universe we know now, Tony still needs to learn about his place and how to handle the suit which is important and shows the past could come back to haunt you.
Overall: Fun sequel.
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated Avengers: Endgame (2019) in Movies
May 13, 2019
Ending The Game
Contains spoilers, click to show
Avengers: Endgame - the concluding installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe's 'Infinity Saga', has made box office history, breaking a number of records on its' journey (thus far) of becoming the second highest grossing movie ever in a short period of time. Bringing together the story threads of 21 films before it 'Endgame' had a number of hurdles to overcome - not only did the Russo Brothers have to find a satisfying way to reverse the effects of 'The Decimation' (if you have to ask then you're probably reading the wrong review!) but they had to do so in a way that did not lessen the impact of 'Infinity War', whilst bringing to a close a number of character arcs for many well respected and founding members of Marvel's flagship superhero team and setting the course and direction for whatever comes next.
The question is, did it succeed?
At the time of writing 'Endgame' has been in cinemas for over two weeks and all embargoes pertaining to spoilers have since been rescinded. It is on that note that I will make the following SPOILER ALERT and advise anyone yet to see the movie (is there actually anyone out there daring to call themselves a fan who hasn't seen it?!) to leave now.....
Endgame picks up a few short weeks after the events of 'Infinity War' and depicts the surviving heroes of Thanos's snap coming up again him once again. The encounter is very short lived but doesn't go as planned/hoped effectively destroying all hope for returning the vanished. Que a five year time-jump..
Steve Rogers heads up a support group for the survivors, Natasha Romanoff directs the remaining Avengers refusing to move on, Tony Stark and Pepper Potts are living a quiet life raising their daughter, Thor has spiraled into despair at New Asgard effectively leaving Valkyrie in charge, Clint Barton has become the blood-thirsty vigilante Ronin - tracking down and eliminating those criminals who escaped the decimation when his family didn't, and Bruce Banner has found a way to merge personalities with the Hulk allowing both to co-exist as one (Professor Hulk).
Things look pretty grim until AntMan (Scott Lang) returns - quite accidentally, from the Quantum Realm bringing with him the key to bringing everyone back and reversing Thanos's decimation. And that's where time travel appears...
The Avengers must travel back to key moments in their history to remove the Infinity Stones and bring them to the present where Stark and Banner create their own Gauntlet to house them. This involves the second act of the movie displaying some time travel shenanigans as our heroes interact with events - and themselves, of previously seen movies. Such encounters include revisiting the events of Avengers Assemble, Thor:The Dark World, and Guardians Of The Galaxy. Don't expect a retread of the 'Back To The Future' franchise however, as Avengers: Endgame creates its' own rules for time travel. Basically, going back in time and interfering with established events does not alter the future - instead it creates a branched reality (think parallel timeline), however traversing the Quantum Realm will still return you to the original timeline you came from. In other words, go back in time kill Thanos, return to the future and you've changed nothing.... Simple, right?!
That's the basic gist, and all I'll give you for now.
Whilst this does follow on from 'Infinity War', 'Endgame' is stylistically and tonally a different movie. Whereas the former threw us straight into the thick of the action and never let up until the devastating conclusion, throwing a cavalcade of heroes at us in a relentless fashion, 'Endgame' scales it all back (for two thirds of the running time at least) focusing on the original six core Avengers (with strong support from Don Cheadle's War Machine, Karen Gillan as Nebula, Paul Rudd (returning as AntMan), and of course, Rocket Raccoon! With the preceding movie been Captain Marvel you would be forgiven for thinking Brie Larson would play a strong role in this movie, however - with a throwaway line earlier on justifying her absence, Carol Danvers features for all of around fifteen minutes! That's not to say she doesn't make an impact when she does I might add! Given the downbeat tone to 'Endgame' there is a lot of humour from start to finish - Chris Hemsworth, Paul Rudd, Bradley Cooper, I'm looking at you most here!, which in no way detracts from the weight of what's at sake here.
Josh Brolin is back as Thanos, and Thanos...that's right, two versions of the mad Titan appear. The one whom our heroes go up against during the final third act is a past version who travels forward in time to present after seeing into his own future and witnessing the efforts of Earth's Mightiest Heroes and the lengths they are prepared to go to in order to 'decimate' his plans. This is a Thanos whom I would deem more ruthless that 'Infinity War's' protagonist, a Thanos now determined to erase ALL life in the Universe.
I imagine the biggest question - well, one biggie amongst many, fans going into this movie blind had concerned who would return after the shocking climax to 'Infinity War' (along with whether those who died in that movie stayed that way). There was never any doubt - was there, that the vanished would return? It isn't that much of a spoiler then to reveal that the final thirty minutes or so of 'Endgame' features every MCU hero on screen together embroiled in the biggest fight of their lives. And what a visual delight it is. The visuals in this film are fantastic and the final battle rivals anything Peter Jackson gave us.
I was fortunate enough to see 'Endgame' at the first screening (pre-midnight) at a local cinema and what an experience it was - a mini comic con. The atmosphere was electric and it was a highly memorable experience.
Everyone involved in this movie deserves kudos, for this lifelong superhero fanboy Avengers: Endgame is the best movie....ever.
If I may digress somewhat, there has been much confusion reported concerning the movie's ending, namely the resolution to Steve Rogers' story. Having returned the Infinity Stones to their rightful place in the MCU timeline Cap chooses to remain in the past (circa 1940-ish) and to live out his life with Peggy Carter (the final shot shows the two having that well overdue dance). Whilst the perfect sendoff this has left many conflicted as to the implications with some reviewers claiming this goes against the rules established earlier in the movie relating to the use of time travel. It really isn't that complicated. Essentially there are two theories at play that can explain the climax.
The first is that Steve simply lived out a life in secrecy within the established continuity, choosing not to involve himself in major events. This does not contradict what we've seen so far - back in 'The Winter Soldier' we see archive footage of Peggy from the nineteen fifties in which she talks about Captain America saving her (un-named) husband during the war. It isn't really a reach of the imagination to suspect that Cap and this man are one and the same. In the same movie, present day Steve visits a dying Peggy - clearly suffering the effects of dementia, who apologises to him for the life he didn't have. Could this be a reference to the man she married having to live a life of secrecy, choosing to stay out of the fight for fear of creating a divergent reality? Given that the movie establishes that actions in the past will not change the future (within the main timeline) Steve's interference would not change anything in 'our' reality anyhow.
The second theory is that Steve created a branched reality by reuniting with Peggy and lived a fulfilling life in that alternate timeline, only returning to the main timeline an old man when the time was right to handover the shield to Sam Wilson/Falcon (as seen at the end of the movie). Sure, this raises questions as to how Steve was able to cross realities but to be honest - that's a story for another time and the answer isn't important (for now).
Further confusing things is the fact that the Writers and Directors cannot seemingly agree, with Marcus and McFeely disputing the alternate reality theory that the Russo brothers subscribe to. You could argue that surely it is the Writer's view that counts, as..after all, they wrote it! Well, yes and no. The directors translate their understanding of the written word onto the screen and it has been reported that additional material was filmed after test audiences struggled with the time travel aspects of the film. Therefore it's not that hard to believe that the film - and that ending, were shot in a way that supported the film-makers understanding. I subscribe to the former - the romantic in me and all that, with Steve's story coming full circle with the revelation that he was always there with Peggy. Either way, both theories work and preserve the integrity of what has come before.
In any regard it's the perfect ending for Captain America!
So, to conclude....did it succeed? OH YES!!
The question is, did it succeed?
At the time of writing 'Endgame' has been in cinemas for over two weeks and all embargoes pertaining to spoilers have since been rescinded. It is on that note that I will make the following SPOILER ALERT and advise anyone yet to see the movie (is there actually anyone out there daring to call themselves a fan who hasn't seen it?!) to leave now.....
Endgame picks up a few short weeks after the events of 'Infinity War' and depicts the surviving heroes of Thanos's snap coming up again him once again. The encounter is very short lived but doesn't go as planned/hoped effectively destroying all hope for returning the vanished. Que a five year time-jump..
Steve Rogers heads up a support group for the survivors, Natasha Romanoff directs the remaining Avengers refusing to move on, Tony Stark and Pepper Potts are living a quiet life raising their daughter, Thor has spiraled into despair at New Asgard effectively leaving Valkyrie in charge, Clint Barton has become the blood-thirsty vigilante Ronin - tracking down and eliminating those criminals who escaped the decimation when his family didn't, and Bruce Banner has found a way to merge personalities with the Hulk allowing both to co-exist as one (Professor Hulk).
Things look pretty grim until AntMan (Scott Lang) returns - quite accidentally, from the Quantum Realm bringing with him the key to bringing everyone back and reversing Thanos's decimation. And that's where time travel appears...
The Avengers must travel back to key moments in their history to remove the Infinity Stones and bring them to the present where Stark and Banner create their own Gauntlet to house them. This involves the second act of the movie displaying some time travel shenanigans as our heroes interact with events - and themselves, of previously seen movies. Such encounters include revisiting the events of Avengers Assemble, Thor:The Dark World, and Guardians Of The Galaxy. Don't expect a retread of the 'Back To The Future' franchise however, as Avengers: Endgame creates its' own rules for time travel. Basically, going back in time and interfering with established events does not alter the future - instead it creates a branched reality (think parallel timeline), however traversing the Quantum Realm will still return you to the original timeline you came from. In other words, go back in time kill Thanos, return to the future and you've changed nothing.... Simple, right?!
That's the basic gist, and all I'll give you for now.
Whilst this does follow on from 'Infinity War', 'Endgame' is stylistically and tonally a different movie. Whereas the former threw us straight into the thick of the action and never let up until the devastating conclusion, throwing a cavalcade of heroes at us in a relentless fashion, 'Endgame' scales it all back (for two thirds of the running time at least) focusing on the original six core Avengers (with strong support from Don Cheadle's War Machine, Karen Gillan as Nebula, Paul Rudd (returning as AntMan), and of course, Rocket Raccoon! With the preceding movie been Captain Marvel you would be forgiven for thinking Brie Larson would play a strong role in this movie, however - with a throwaway line earlier on justifying her absence, Carol Danvers features for all of around fifteen minutes! That's not to say she doesn't make an impact when she does I might add! Given the downbeat tone to 'Endgame' there is a lot of humour from start to finish - Chris Hemsworth, Paul Rudd, Bradley Cooper, I'm looking at you most here!, which in no way detracts from the weight of what's at sake here.
Josh Brolin is back as Thanos, and Thanos...that's right, two versions of the mad Titan appear. The one whom our heroes go up against during the final third act is a past version who travels forward in time to present after seeing into his own future and witnessing the efforts of Earth's Mightiest Heroes and the lengths they are prepared to go to in order to 'decimate' his plans. This is a Thanos whom I would deem more ruthless that 'Infinity War's' protagonist, a Thanos now determined to erase ALL life in the Universe.
I imagine the biggest question - well, one biggie amongst many, fans going into this movie blind had concerned who would return after the shocking climax to 'Infinity War' (along with whether those who died in that movie stayed that way). There was never any doubt - was there, that the vanished would return? It isn't that much of a spoiler then to reveal that the final thirty minutes or so of 'Endgame' features every MCU hero on screen together embroiled in the biggest fight of their lives. And what a visual delight it is. The visuals in this film are fantastic and the final battle rivals anything Peter Jackson gave us.
I was fortunate enough to see 'Endgame' at the first screening (pre-midnight) at a local cinema and what an experience it was - a mini comic con. The atmosphere was electric and it was a highly memorable experience.
Everyone involved in this movie deserves kudos, for this lifelong superhero fanboy Avengers: Endgame is the best movie....ever.
If I may digress somewhat, there has been much confusion reported concerning the movie's ending, namely the resolution to Steve Rogers' story. Having returned the Infinity Stones to their rightful place in the MCU timeline Cap chooses to remain in the past (circa 1940-ish) and to live out his life with Peggy Carter (the final shot shows the two having that well overdue dance). Whilst the perfect sendoff this has left many conflicted as to the implications with some reviewers claiming this goes against the rules established earlier in the movie relating to the use of time travel. It really isn't that complicated. Essentially there are two theories at play that can explain the climax.
The first is that Steve simply lived out a life in secrecy within the established continuity, choosing not to involve himself in major events. This does not contradict what we've seen so far - back in 'The Winter Soldier' we see archive footage of Peggy from the nineteen fifties in which she talks about Captain America saving her (un-named) husband during the war. It isn't really a reach of the imagination to suspect that Cap and this man are one and the same. In the same movie, present day Steve visits a dying Peggy - clearly suffering the effects of dementia, who apologises to him for the life he didn't have. Could this be a reference to the man she married having to live a life of secrecy, choosing to stay out of the fight for fear of creating a divergent reality? Given that the movie establishes that actions in the past will not change the future (within the main timeline) Steve's interference would not change anything in 'our' reality anyhow.
The second theory is that Steve created a branched reality by reuniting with Peggy and lived a fulfilling life in that alternate timeline, only returning to the main timeline an old man when the time was right to handover the shield to Sam Wilson/Falcon (as seen at the end of the movie). Sure, this raises questions as to how Steve was able to cross realities but to be honest - that's a story for another time and the answer isn't important (for now).
Further confusing things is the fact that the Writers and Directors cannot seemingly agree, with Marcus and McFeely disputing the alternate reality theory that the Russo brothers subscribe to. You could argue that surely it is the Writer's view that counts, as..after all, they wrote it! Well, yes and no. The directors translate their understanding of the written word onto the screen and it has been reported that additional material was filmed after test audiences struggled with the time travel aspects of the film. Therefore it's not that hard to believe that the film - and that ending, were shot in a way that supported the film-makers understanding. I subscribe to the former - the romantic in me and all that, with Steve's story coming full circle with the revelation that he was always there with Peggy. Either way, both theories work and preserve the integrity of what has come before.
In any regard it's the perfect ending for Captain America!
So, to conclude....did it succeed? OH YES!!