Guardians of the Galaxy

First Hit: Came off as tongue in cheek, overly complicated, funny sometimes, and visually interesting from time to time.

When I watched the preview I wondered how the filmmakers would make one generic white man, one tree, one greenish beauty and one raccoonish fox type set of characters to become “Guardians”.

The complicated part: The filmmakers had a young Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) extracted from earth the night his mother dies by Kraglin (Sean Gunn). Kraglin raises Peter to be resourceful but Peter doesn’t like the way Kraglin lives his life so as an adult he goes on his own. Quill is a curious sort and resorts to listening to music on a portable cassette player given to him by his mom.

Upon finding an Orb with special powers by which the galaxy can be destroyed the enemy of the Galaxy ,Ronan, wants him captured. He gets caught along with a tree called “Groot” (Vin Diesel - voice), Drax (Dave Bautista) a buffed red scarred guy, Rocket (Bradley Cooper – voice) a raccoon/fox animal, and Ronan's daughter Gamora (Zoe Saldana) who has learned her father is bent on destroying a civilization.

OK, now you get it, the film's setup is overly complicated just to get characters into the game. Then to have them be united in their goal was the director’s next step and to do this he used tongue in cheek dialogue and scenes.

The film kept moving into taking itself seriously and then not. I enjoyed some of the Orb visuals along with some of the results of the weapons they used in fights. The outcome was predicted as well as introducing a sequel.

Pratt had a great way of being serious and not serious and carrying off the tongue in cheek way this film was presented. Gunn was good as the guy with an occasional heart. Saldana was strong as the woman who wants to make the galaxy a better place. Her strong body worked very well for the part. Cooper’s voice for Rocket was fun as was Diesel’s voice for Groot. The usage of Groot’s one sentence to express everything was inventive. James Gunn and Nicole Perlman wrote this fun but convoluted script. Gunn created a fun experience but I hope the sequel settles down and brings more of a point to the film.

Overall: This film was fun, it had some great laughs but it could have done more interesting and effective by being simpler.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

First Hit:  The story didn’t hold together and was simply a place to display CGI’s.

The best character parts of the film were in the interchanges between Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans) and Natasha Romanoff/Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson). And although Robert Redford as Alexander Pierce, brought a level of sophistication to his part, this film was all about creating HUGE computer generated imagery and having people do battle with the images.

The other interchanges that were engaging were with Sam Wilson/Falcon (Anthony Mackie) and the Captain. Didn’t have the same sense with Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) and other characters – he seemed removed from them (or the story) although he was a key piece. I had no interest in the story about CGIs because they are non-characters – only machines.

The film appeared to feature the technology that was being created but so what – it was uninteresting. Was any part of this story believable? Yes, the greed and lust for power. But, after just 12 hours of seeing the film and writing this, I can’t remember anything positive outside of what I’ve mentioned.

Evans is a good but the screen play written for him is rather lame and uninteresting. The scenes with his co-star Johansson were the best part of the film. I suspect it was Johansson that made those scenes work – she was really good. Mackie was perfect as Evans’ right hand guy. Redford was good with what he had, which wasn’t much. Jackson just seemed like he was in a film of his own. Although the scenes included him, he also seem detached from them. Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely wrote a week character screen play while the direction by Anthony and Joe Russo seemed disjointed and without life.

Overall:  One of the worse Marvel produced films – they cannot make CGI be a character in this way.

Noah

First Hit:  Initially bored, story interpretation unbelievable, and a few minor amazing scenes.

I enjoy watching biblical stories and a director’s interpretation of this book. I was put off by the beginning of the film with the screen captions stating the story of the beginning. Then we were led into an interpretation of the biblical story of Adam and Eve, Cain and Abel, then the story of Seth.

Then we are introduced to angels that ended up as moving rocks which are their prisons for assisting human kind. Director Darren Aronofsky shows the earth as mostly barren because of Cain’s clan mining of glowing rocks. First, I don’t believe for a minute that the Earth would be that barren in that time period by clans of people mining rocks.

There was a hint of technology by showing the audience some of the deserted mines, yet there was a primitiveness to everyone that seemed incongruent. Another item that didn’t work for me was the different accents of the actors. We had Australian/New Zealand (Russell Crowe as Noah), English/Wales (Anthony Hopkins as Methuselah), American (Jennifer Connelly as Naameh – Noah’s wife), English (Emma Watson as Ila), and it goes on.

There was no attempt to change this by the Director or Actors. Some of the highlights were some of the shots. One in particular that took my breath away was a shot of dusk, Noah and Naameh were silhouetted on a slight round hill against the sky – truly one of the most beautiful shots I’ve ever seen on film. I was also very impressed with the scene where Noah tells the story of life on earth because they used evolution and biblical terms and mixed them very well. It was simple and perfect.

I thoroughly enjoyed the full engagement Watson gave in her performance – it was stellar. Crowe also gave his all to his performance and I believed that he believed he was doing “the creator’s word”.

Crowe, as I previously stated was very good. He emanated the strength of the role and story. Connelly seemed like a fish out of water – almost too sophisticated for the part. Hopkins was cute more than anything. I got that he probably enjoyed being a Yoda of sorts. Watson was sublime. Her innocence, beauty, and wisdom were all present and forthcoming in this role. Aronofsky and Ari Handel wrote an uneven script and at times implausible. Aronofsky’s direction followed the unevenness and implausibility of his own script.

Overall:  I was severely disappointed by this film.

Divergent

First Hit:  Not very believable, a little long, some good acting, therefore this film is all over the place.

The future looks grim if you think this film has any modicum of truth. If it is, then I’m not interested in being there.

Basically, the story is that one city, Chicago, is surrounded by a very high concrete wall topped by metal fencing that looks more like antennas. Is Chicago the only society left and how do we know? Society is made up of five different types of people. Really! Is it really possible to take 10’s of thousands of people have them predetermined and predisposed to fit into 5 or 6 personality types? No. These personality types are designed to fulfill certain societal roles.

The personality types (I won’t bother using the names they used as these words are as bad as the story) are:  People who govern. People who are brave. People who are peaceful. People who are intelligent. And, people who are truthful. Right, as if one is predisposed to truth, why can’t they be predisposed to also be peaceful? Oh, that’s where Divergents come into play.

The Divergents have no one predisposition. There is a “test” every young person takes which tells them what they are. Then after learning the results of their test, in a public presentation, each chooses a group to associate with. Although everyone can chose another role than the one they are predisposed, they don’t often pick something different.

However, once they chose a role they are stuck with it and cannot go back to their families or anywhere else. When someone fails the test, they are labeled a Divergent because they have no one predisposition and are considered a threat to society. Tris (Shailene Woodley) learns she is a Divergent but chooses to be in the brave group because they seem to have more fun and are active. As a recruit she excels at some things and struggles at others like fighting. She is mentored by Four (Theo James). Her mother Natalie (Ashley Judd) who is a govern (or is she?) tries to support her.

Her best friend is Christina (Zoe Kravitz) and her help each other pass the test to become a full fledge brave person. If one fails to pass their initiation test they become homeless. There is other stuff about a faction wanting to take over control of the government as led by Jeanine (Kate Winslet) as well but all this is part of an unclear story.

Woodley is very good and does her best with the role, but the whole thing is preposterous. James is good and the chemistry between him and Woodley is good. The downside of his acting or the screenplay is that his difference is telegraphed throughout the film. Kravitz was actually one of the best things about the film – I enjoyed the energy she brought to her role. Winslet was lost in this useless role. Judd was OK as Woodley’s mother and hid her secret well. Evan Daugherty and Vanessa Taylor wrote a poorly conceived script from a published book. Neil Burger directed this and given the script and story it was OK.

Overall: This was so poorly strung together that the result was; it was too long and unbelievable.

At Middleton

First Hit:  This was very enjoyable to watch the dance of this relationship develop.

The essence of this story is about two adults George Hartman (Andy Garcia) and Edith Martin (Vera Farmiga) bringing their two respective kids to a college in Middleton for a campus tour but find something greater.

Edith’s daughter Audrey (Taissa Farmiga) wants to come to Middleton because she wants to work with Professor Dr. Roland Emerson (Tom Skerritt) while George’s son Conrad (Spencer Lofranco) thinks this middle American country college is totally lame.

The film gives a view of their respective parental relationships by going from car to car as they drive to the college. The personality of each of the parents becomes solidified the moment these two cars park in the parking lot and there is a disagreement. There is a spark between these parents and it is visible.

As the film unfolds the kids have their experience of the college, each other and wondering about their parents, while the film focuses on the budding relationship of the parents. The sequence when they get roped into demonstrating a married couple in front of the drama class was very powerful. The twist about what their children choose is like icing on the cake.

Garcia was very good as the uptight cardio surgeon wanting his son to experience, possibly what he hasn’t. Vera Farmiga is strong as the sarcastic, vulnerable, and engaging woman who wants to have more in life. Her younger sister (by 21 years) Taissa was very engaging and screen stealing when she was on camera. Lofranco was OK as Garcia’s son, and his performance grew as the film moved along. Skerritt was really good in his short role as the admired professor. Glenn German and Adam Rodgers wrote a snappy (parking lot exchange) and heart-warming script. Rodgers directed the film with a caring touch by setting up some wonderful scenes, including the bike theft.

Overall:  This was a pleasure to watch – heartwarming.