CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR - Perpetual Motion Machine

Other Reviews in this Series.

Directors: Anthony Russo, Joe Russo
Writers: Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely
Cast: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Sebastian Stan, Scarlett Johansson, Chadwick Boseman, Daniel Bruhl, Anthony Mackie, Don Cheadle, Elizabeth Olsen, Paul Bettany, Jeremy Renner, Emily VanCamp, William Hurt, Paul Rudd, Tom Holland, Frank Grillo, Martin Freeman, Marisa Tomei, John Kani, John Slattery, Hope Davis
Runtime: 147 mins.
2016

In the month since the release of Captain America: Civil War, I have been trying to parse my feelings about the film. I've always been a sucker for comic book cinema, ever since I was weaned on Sam Raimi's Spider-Man movies,* but as I've become more discerning and my tastes have shifted, I've grown less and less comfortable with easy bankable formulas. In fact, my adoration of nerd culture in general has soured for reasons I'd prefer not to get into here.

*Spider-Man 1 + 2 still being the best pieces of superhero cinema in existence, with a sideward nod to The Dark Knight.

Over the years I've frequently pushed to redefine the arbitrary boundaries of what is fit to be included in discussions about art and academia to include certain "vulgar genre fiction" properties. I've tried to rally against biases folks have towards superhero fiction, children's movies, animation, speculative fiction, and so on. It's not about the surface level signifiers; it's about being able to meet a story on its own terms.

That being said, I've also had to flip that script on myself and confront my own delusions about properties that I wanted so badly to adore. 2012 was a watershed year for me; I had to face the one-two punch of The Amazing Spider-Man and The Dark Knight Rises, both movies that I wanted to love so badly that I was blinded to their myriad flaws. In both cases, my wake-up call came in the form of my favorite film critic, Film Crit Hulk, who wrote eye-opening screeds against both of these films. Here they are, if you're interested.

Film Crit Hulk Smash: THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN HAS 99 PROBLEMS BUT AN UNCLE BEN AIN'T ONE

Film Crit Hulk Smash: HULK VS. THE DARK KNIGHT RISES

HAIL, CAESAR!: Das Capitol

Directors: Ethan and Joel Coen
Writers: Joel and Ethan Coen
Cast: Josh Brolin, George Clooney, Alden Ehrenreich, Ralph Fiennes, Scarlett Johansson, Tilda Swinton, Frances McDormand, Channing Tatum, Jonah Hill, Veronica Osorio, Heather Goldenhersh, Alison Pill, Max Baker
Runtime: 106 mins.
2016

Hail, Caesar! is a dumb movie about dumb movies. As such, it never reaches the level of profundity of the Coen Bros.' long list of masterpieces, or even the escalating zaniness of their former comedic output like The Big Lebowski. If one were forced to rank their oeuvre, Hail, Caesar! has got to come in pretty low on the list, but the good news is that it doesn't aspire to be at the tippy top. I suspect that if seasoned filmmakers like the Coens tried to make their best-movie-ever every time they set anything to film, they would get burned out fast. Hail, Caeser! is clearly a screw around movie for everyone involved, and it ends up being a passionate and glorious one at that.

If you were to be so inclined to suggest that this movie has a plot, it would surround the activities of Eddie Mannix (Josh Brolin), a 1950's Hollywood fixer whose job it is to keep the aptly named Capitol Pictures up and running. He's not a creative, he just keeps the creatives functioning like cogs in a well-oiled machine. He has received an offer for a more stable job with reasonable work hours and far less stress, and this offer occupies his mind during the events of the film, which amount to a particularly trying few days for Mannix. His big movie star Baird Whitlock (George Clooney) has been kidnapped by a group of shady communists who call themselves The Future, the media is circling like vultures, and there are a laundry list of other on-and-off-set troubles that Mannix must aggressively manage. In the end, is the creation of Hollywood blockbuster films worth all the trouble?

AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON - Growing Pains

Director: Joss Whedon
Writer: Joss Whedon
Cast: Robert Downey, Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, James Spader, Elizabeth Olsen, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Paul Bettany, Samuel L. Jackson, Don Cheadle, Cobie Smulders, Anthony Mackie, Andy Serkis
Runtime: 141 mins.
2015

The Avengers: Age of Ultron is immediately different than its predecessor: it opens with a bang and a crackle. Scene 1 has the Avengers careening through a snowy wood, laying the ever-loving beatdown on a host of HYDRA thugs. Far more engaging than the dank exploding bunker opening of The Avengers, Age of Ultron shows the group at the height of camaraderie and teamwork. We see definitively that the Avengers are back. For now.

So begins the first of many comparisons between this game-changing series' first and second installments. The comparisons are unavoidable, occasionally unflattering, and often enlightening. Age of Ultron is a movie about growing pains. It's droopier, gloopier, stuffier, and a great deal more complex than the original. So if you're looking for more of the same thrills of discovery and wonder, you might be disappointed. Rightly so. Not everything can be a beginning, and the honeymoon phase has to end sometime. Joss Whedon seems to know this better than anyone, and gives us an Age of Ultron that has a handful of flaws, numerous successes, and never stops challenging the viewer.

Which is better? Everyone will benefit if we put that question to bed right now. Age of Ultron is a step forward in development, which means change has to happen, and change can be hard. But that doesn't mean fresh newborns are inherently better than awkward adolescents.

The Cool Girl: Women in Film 2014

I want you to watch something for me.

You've seen some of these movies before. You're all familiar with this plot beat. The woman, almost always a love interest, has been captured by the villain, and the hero has to brawl or bargain to save her. There's nothing inherently sexist about the situation, just as the use of such a plot device doesn't automatically make a movie sexist. But that's beside the point. This supercut puts a lot of unpleasant Hollywood trends in stark relief.

For starters, notice how in most of these clips the woman doesn't even speak. She's a prop. The only important dynamic in the scene is that between the (generally) male hero and the (generally) male villain. Their relationship is the important one, the real one, the dramatically resonant one. The men have all the dialogue, all the power, all the agency, all the charisma, all the audience's rooting interests--everything. Meanwhile, the women just have weakness and manufactured tears. They are little more than poker chips in these scenes, an observation driven home when the heroes start offering money to trade for her: "I'll give up the gold," "I gave you the money," "I'll open the safe." Then, as if it wasn't apparent enough, we have the litany of scenes that make the utter unimportance of the woman explicit: "This is between you and me," "She's not important," "She doesn't belong here."

If she's really so unimportant to the central conflict, why is she even in the movie? The answer is even sorrier than the question: She exists in these films as nothing more than a pawn, a plot device, and an eventual reward for the man to take home and mount on his mantle. Figuratively speaking.

HER: Artificial Emotional Intelligence

In which I am uncharacteristically honest and sensitive.

Director: Spike Jonze
Writer: Spike Jonze
Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson, Amy Adams, Rooney Mara, Chris Pratt, Olivia Wilde
Runtime: 126 mins.
2013

I try to sound smart on my movie blog. I try to identify and engage with what I deem to be the key aspects of any given movie. I talk about things I know a little bit about, like performance or story. I talk about things I really know nothing about, like sound design or editing or cinematography. I try to be honest. But perhaps more than that I try not to sound stupid or inane.

I do this because I'm afraid of being wrong. That has always been my fear. So I try to make ironclad arguments instead of tossing out a bunch of unsystematic sensory impressions. Sometimes, during the act of watching a movie, I am already formulating what sort of points or narrative I want to craft in a potential future post.

That's probably the right tactic for a movie blog, but it's not the conversation I want to have about Her. The golden rule of criticism should be to approach a piece of art or entertainment on its own terms, and evaluate how successful it is within those parameters. As I was watching Her, it became apparent that the right way to talk about the movie would be to share how it impacted me on a personal level.