Archive for September, 2011

YATES: Movie entertaining despite ping-pong plot lines

Marvel Studio’s “Thor” is both a standalone superhero film and an integral part of the upcoming film “The Avengers,” which will also feature Marvel characters Iron Man, Incredible Hulk and Captain America.

I smell a little friendly film rivalry here as each Marvel film gets us closer to the much anticipated crossover film event in “The Avengers.” How would “Thor” stack up against its current box office rivals-yet-soon-to-be-allies?

Thankfully it is now out on DVD, so I laid the hammer of Thor down (actually just $3.50) to check out the new release and find out for myself.

As the plans to crown him king crumble, the God of Thunder Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is exiled from his home planet of Asgard to Earth for his extreme and costly arrogance. While on Earth, Thor — now a mere mortal — learns the meaning of humility thanks to the help of scientist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). While exiled, Thor’s devious brother Loki puts into action a plan to take over as King of Asgard. Thor must atone for his past mistakes in order to stop his brother’s plan and save both Arsgard and his family and friends.

As with most recent superhero films, the mis-en-scene is impressive. Director Kenneth Branagh (“Sleuth”) does a fantastic job in creating three contrasting limbs of the “tree of nine realms” in “Thor” in Earth, Asgard and Jotunheim. Asgard is the vibrant center of the realms, while Jotunheim is a dying, frozen rock. Different parts of Earth could qualify as either previous description, but flat, dusty, desolate New Mexico is the eventual locale that Thor lands at. Not quite dead, but close.

The film is credited with three screenwriters and two more “story” writers, and it shows with somewhat of a hyperactive plot. Sometimes simplicity is better, and although the name of the film is “Thor” it focus a bit too much on the battle between Asgard and the Frost Giants of Jotunheim. Thor, his childhood friend Sif, and fellow gods The Warriors Three are almost a side story that we bounce back to now and again.

While both stories are important to the integrity of the comic, it would have been nice to see a bit more of a focus on the character Thor. The exposition is a clever loop that begins and ends with Foster hitting Thor with her vehicle while chasing a weather phenomenon, with the Asgard-Jotunheim backstory sandwiched in the middle. Unfortunately the somewhat chaotic back and forth frenzy continues for the remainder of the film.

I admittedly have a bit of trouble critiquing superhero films. They combine many genres — comedy, drama, action — by including cheesy one-liners, cliché moments, and common protagonist character arcs inner-struggles. Verisimilitude is thrown out the window, plots are usually predictable and most characters outside of the superhero are flat with little depth. Despite all this, the superhero genre film is usually a very fun 120 minutes of cinema — especially on the big screen (or in this case, large LCD screen).

“Thor” was no different. Despite the ping-pong plot lines on Earth and Asgard and ascertainable story, it still manages to be entertaining. I would even argue that today’s superhero films share a heart beat with 80s cinema — campy dramas that win you over in the end despite whatever character or plot flaws exist. It worked for a decade in the 80s, so we might as well enjoy the ride — especially with “The Avengers” right around the corner!

Travis Yates

WIEGENSTEIN: Results vary in first of ‘Avenger’ films, but earnestness reigns

In a summer piled high with superhero movies, there had to be one that embraced its overwrought silliness wholeheartedly, and “Thor,” newly released on DVD, serves that role dutifully for 2011. While it lacks both the smarts and style of “X-Men: First Class” and the period-piece verve of “Captain America,” the film makes the wise decision of delivering a relatively ridiculous plot (even in the realm of the comic world) in an enthusiastic and straightforward manner.

“Thor” begins in the otherworldly realm of Asgard, where the cities resemble pipe organs and the landscape is just this side of a three-wolf-moon T-shirt. Oddly enough (and this may be a leftover effect from the 3D theatrical print), these scenes are drab and dark enough that much of the early action in the film is difficult to discern. What is clear is that Thor, son of Odin (Anthony Hopkins in rare scenery-crewing form), is enthused about becoming king without giving any thought to the diplomacy required for the role. By the 30-minute mark, he’s thrown his kingdom into war and enrages his father so much that he’s stripped of his power and cast into the hellish realm of Earth.

The real triumph of “Thor” is in its casting of the central role — Chris Hemsworth was previously known to me only as the actor able to make about two minutes of screen time in the latest “Star Trek” installment affecting and memorable as James T. Kirk’s late father. Now about three times his original size, Hemsworth delivers his purposefully florid dialogue without a hint of smirking. The earnestness brought by both Thor and Captain America this summer will be something to see once the two rub against the sarcasm of Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark in the eventual “Avengers” ensemble piece.

Meanwhile, Hemsworth’s costars are varying degrees of just-okay, with villain Tom Hiddleston’s confused rage and jealousy topping the scale. Director Kenneth Branagh (!) makes his touch felt in the actors’ tendency to bellow their lines — of course, if mythical gods aren’t allowed a touch of hamminess, who is? Clark Gregg shows up once more as the snarky connecting thread between all the “Avengers” films, a SHIELD agent able to survive explosions galore.

“Thor” was one of a rather-puzzling series of films starring Natalie Portman released after her Academy Award win for “Black Swan.” (The others included the formulaic romcom “No Strings Attached” and the meh-level stoner comedy “Your Highness.”) Oscar cred or no, she’s a ho-hum drag on the movie who could use more of the tartness provided by Kat Dennings, who has the thankless role of third-wheel science intern. While suspension of disbelief is a constant in the realm of cinematic romance, it seems entirely unlikely that after four days (by my count) in her company, Thor would be wooed enough to cross a Lisa Frank-style rainbow bridge to get to her.

The first in a comic film series is almost always an origin story of the gaining of power, which the hero must master in the course of 90-some minutes. The backwards nature of “Thor’s” plot — a powerful man stripped of his awesomeness at the start — is an intriguing one. And while it’s clear that everyone from Branagh on down is trying their hardest to sell material that could easily edge into camp, the results vary.

Anna Wiegenstein

YATES: Despite flaws, ‘Contagion’ entertains

It’s the end of the world as we know it … at least that’s what the filmmakers of “Contagion” would like you to believe. Actually, the tagline of the film is “Don’t talk to anyone. Don’t touch anyone.” That does paint a pretty grim picture, does it not? Like a moth to a flame, I cannot stay away from disaster flicks, so I was eager to check out Hollywood’s latest contribution to the genre. Unfortunately, I soon found myself questioning the decision to spend two hours in dark, cramped quarters surrounded by sniffling, coughing strangers. I suppose that’s part of the hook with the other tagline of the film — “Nothing spreads like fear.” In looking at the Hollywood box office numbers, nothing sells like fear either.

A U.S. corporate executive (Gwyneth Paltrow) travels to Hong Kong on business and contracts an unknown disease that quickly kills her and her son. The highly contagious disease, known as MEV-1, begins to spread rapidly — first throughout the U.S. and soon thereafter the entire world population. As the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention spearheads an investigation to find the cause for the disease and a cure, social journalist Alan Krumwiede (Jude Law) claims that the government is ignoring a holistic cure, which fuels public panic and fervor over the disease. It becomes a race against time to find a cure while basic services shut down, rioting and looting become the norm, and the U.S. death rate climbs into the millions.

This type of disaster film based around a virus is nothing new (“Outbreak” and the more independent “The Signal” are two of my favorites). I assumed that “Contagion” would bring something new to the genre, and I was disappointed to discover that wasn’t the case. The film plays out more like a paint-by-numbers account of how a virus could evolve from a single patient to a planet-wide death knell. In fact, director Steven Soderbergh (“Ocean’s Eleven” series) gives us a visual roadmap via “Day X” titles throughout the film. The storylines are extremely fractured — you’re not sure if the film is about Mitch Emhoff (Matt Damon) and his family or the CDC and their race for a cure. At one point a World Health Organization scientist — who up until this point is a major character in the film — is kidnapped in a pivotal scene, and then seen only one more time in the film. Like many films before it, “Contagion” simply tries to fit too many storylines into a two hour narrative.

The film makes a strong social commentary while staying surprisingly neutral. Government red tape, Wall Street and pharmaceutical corruption and holistic vs. chemical cures are all touched upon but never deeply explored. We’re left wondering if there was, in fact, a holistic cure out there, but the film never answers the question. The government drags their feet once a cure is discovered, but they do in fact come up with a cure. Perhaps I’m asking too much from today’s filmmakers, but I believe that if you introduce such controversial subject matter, you should take a side. We don’t need the politically correct response — that’s what congressmen are for.

We inevitably end up back at “Day 1” where we find out just how the disease came to fruition. It all seems rather anti-climactic at this point, as the scientists searching for the cause basically tell us in act two. I’m not sure if this was supposed to be a shocking ending or just a matter of fact scene — perhaps thrown in because test audiences didn’t like the fact that they never found out where the disease began. Such ambivalence from the final scene of a film is never a good thing. I kept waiting for some sort of twist to happen, but instead we get a visual representation of information revealed midway through the film.

For all its flaws, “Contagion” is an entertaining film, especially if you see it in a theater. About a half hour into the film my wife whispered to me, “I’m nervous now anytime somebody in the theater coughs.” I had to agree with her. That’s what you’re looking for in a film — some sort of strong emotional response from the audience. “Contagion” certainly plays on our fears — fear of an unknown virus (the bird flu and SARS played a role in the film), fear of how our governments will respond, and fear if how mankind will react in the face of adversity. It offers a predictably bleak outlook, but if you enjoy a good disaster film, you’ll get a (temperature?) rise out of “Contagion.”

Travis Yates

WIEGENSTEIN: ‘Contagion’ plot expands too far

Even without the title, it’s easy to tell that the world of “Contagion” is indeed very ill. Scenes are lit with harsh jaundice-tinted light. Hands seem to linger as long as possible over whatever they touch, giving off a horrible, sticky feeling. Humans are gross, and there are a lot of us. This claustrophobic feeling is created within moments of entering Steven Soderbergh’s latest film, and if it makes you want to reach for the hand sanitizer — well, that’s the point.

“Contagion” is an action film in micro. Though it takes a large chunk of the movie to confirm, Ground Zero for the disease seems to have been one person (Gwyneth Paltrow) making a trip to Hong Kong, coming home and dying within hours of hitting U.S. soil. Her husband (Matt Damon) is floored, and immediately has to deal with his stepson falling sick as well. From there, the number of people involved in the story multiplies as quickly as the disease itself, until it ultimately extends to everyone from Demetri Martin to Dr. Sanjay Gupta. (I was more surprised to see the first.)

As “Contagion” is about a worldwide epidemic, the plot attempts to expand itself as widely as possible — too far than it should, ultimately. There are a few solid threads touched on throughout: Damon rejoining his teenage daughter and turning his house into a de facto bunker, a CDC exec (Lawrence Fishburne) attempting to liaise with Homeland Security officials, an prickly epidemiologist (Kate Winslet, with an awkward air that suits her character well) who’s given the horrible task of explaining everything to the city of Minneapolis.

There’s a whole lot of explaining throughout “Contagion,” which is, I suppose, understandable. I’m told that much of the medical-ese is accurate, giving a viewing bonus to those in the science-genius community. The biggest problem comes in the repetitive pattern of the dialogue — a giant chunk of jargon is spouted out, and a dumbed-down example immediately follows. The Spanish flu, polio, and smallpox are all namechecked in an ultimately meaningless way, as the whole point of the plot is that the new disease isn’t the same as any of them.

It’s a shame that this attentiveness to scientific accuracy wasn’t equally applied to the other members of the “Contagion” universe: Marion Cotilliard’s World Health Organization operative tale has a major twist halfway through, and then is completely forgotten about for 40 minutes. Jude Law plays a freelance journalist/conspiracy theorist who’s able to reach millions through his website, and ultimately … I don’t know … finagles his way through the film’s last third and impacts the story very little.

Director Steven Soderburgh is used to working with groups, be it the team of “Ocean’s 11/12/13” or the cast of “Traffic,” so it’s surprising to watch the storylines get away from him. In keeping with the theme, though, some of the film’s most striking shots are either overpopulated, or in complete isolation. It may be in his nature to work large-scale, but “Contagion” would be better served by remaining in the tightness of a single city. The man-on-the-street reactions of Matt Damon are far more interesting than the numerous CDC global press conferences we’re privy to.

In a movie-going populace that’s become immune to the body horror of the “Saw” series and its colleagues, medical terror is something that has remained unsettling for decades. The violence of a seizure can top a shoot-out any day, and the still, shocked faces of the dead here are far harder to shake than the chum often left behind after a monster attack. While we tend to head to the theater to experience bigger-and-better thrills, “Contagion” opens with a dark screen and a single cough, and is immediately scarier than any outside force could ever be.

Anna Wiegenstein