Three films
Jul. 31st, 2013 04:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
daibhidcJust realised I've got out of the habit of doing a write-up of films I've watched. So here's a quick comment on the last three films I saw at the cinema. All contain spoilers.
Iron Man 3
Really good. Having a running plot-point that Tony reallydidn't want to talk about what happened in New York worked well, aknowledging the Avengers film without tying this story into it too much.
I liked the twist with the Manderin; really when a character was created in the sixties as Fu Manchu with added anti-communism, you can't actually run him straight. The 90s Iron Man cartoon made him a generic supervillian type. The Iron Man Armoured Adventures cartoon went for the more interesting idea of a Well-Intentioned Extremist kid who was actually friends with Teen Tony before they learnt each others' secret identities.
The film went for the double-whammy of updating the "He's everything America hates" concept and then having the reveal that this wasn't true at all. In the process they made Aldrich Killian more of a villain than he was in the comics, but I can live with that.
Speaking of the comics, I read all Warren Ellis's Iron Man run, and this was the first time I had the slightest idea what Extremis actually did. Seperating it from "thing Tony injects himself with to get remote control of his armour" was a good move.
I spent longer than strictly necessary trying to work out if the kid was a reference to a comic book character I was unaware of. I eventually decided he wasn't.
Star Trek Into Darkness
I enjoyed this one too.
I liked the references to Section 31 and the model of the NX01 in the Admiral's office. It's good to make a nod to the fact that Trek's history was only changed after a point. (On the subject of the NX01, it still bugs me that this version of the 1701 looks smaller than Archer's ship.)
I hadn't realised that Scotty's transwarp beaming extended the range of the transporter to interstellar distances (although the speed Enterprise was going at, I suppose it must have). If you can do that, I'm not clear why you need a Starfleet.
Since the Carol Marcus reveal was obvious to any Trekker, I'm glad they didn't pad this out too much. We've been introduced to an Admiral Marcus, she's a blonde scientist, do the maths. She was an interesting character, and I'm glad it looks like she's going to be a regular.
The Khan reveal ... well it might have been a shock if two newspapers hadn't both told me that John Harrison was an alias and there was a nice twist for long-time fans. So thanks for that, newspapers. Cumberbatch was, of course, excellent in portraying someone with a fundemental conviction that he's better than everyone around him.
And the story itself certainly moved along. Klingons! Evil Starfleet! Uhura and Spock talking about their relationship! Old Spock saying "I can't tell you what to do next, but it's this"! All the regulars get something to do, even if they aren't on the ship. (Scotty resigning in protest counts as a Crowning Moment of Awesome in my book, and then because of that, he gets the big infiltration scene.)
Not sure about Wrath of Khan Remix Album towards the end. But fundamentally, I liked the message of the story, which is that if the people who's job it is to enforce the rules start thinking this entitles them to break the rules themselves, we're all in trouble. They didn't even kill Khan!
Talking of whether or not to kill the villain...
Man of Steel
Okay. I enjoyed this, but I can really understand why people didn't.
I liked liquid-metal Krypton, which made a nice change from the glowy ice crystals. And I loved that Jor-El's service robot was named Kelex; a nice nod to the comics.
The characterisation seemed solid, allowing for the fact that this isn't Superman. It's Clark Kent learning to be Superman. I sat through ten years of that on television, I can cope with two hours of it at the cinema. And I've always prefered the more human "Clark is who I am, Superman is what I do" character to the "perfect alien hero who walks among us".
(One of my problems with the current comics is that they pay lip-service to the former characterisation, but it's more like "Superman needs to be Clark to remind himself what humans are like". Otherwise, presumably, he'll become the Kryptonian Victorious...)
I didn't like the continual flashbacks, especially since they seemed to have been cobbled together from different drafts of the script in which Jonathan had very different ideas about his son's powers. Seriously is he early-Smallville "They'll cut you up" or The Movie "You have a destiny"? If he's supposed to develop from one to the other, that really doesn't come across.
And then there's what happens to Zod. Do I have a problem with it? You bet. Do I think it ruins everything and makes him Not Superman? Weell...
The thing is, like I said, he's not Superman, not yet. And he's in a desperate situation without any real experience in how to deal with things like this. I can accept he gets it wrong.
And, after all, I started reading comics in the 80s. As far as I'm concerned, "Superman kills Zod" is how the story goes. And at least in this version, he does it to save lives, not acting as the executioner of a powerless Zod.
But if they'd made it clearer that this was Clark going too far and realising that Superman Doesn't Kill (like Batman being about to shoot Joe Chill in Year Two before the Reaper does it for him) I'd be happier.
Iron Man 3
Really good. Having a running plot-point that Tony reallydidn't want to talk about what happened in New York worked well, aknowledging the Avengers film without tying this story into it too much.
I liked the twist with the Manderin; really when a character was created in the sixties as Fu Manchu with added anti-communism, you can't actually run him straight. The 90s Iron Man cartoon made him a generic supervillian type. The Iron Man Armoured Adventures cartoon went for the more interesting idea of a Well-Intentioned Extremist kid who was actually friends with Teen Tony before they learnt each others' secret identities.
The film went for the double-whammy of updating the "He's everything America hates" concept and then having the reveal that this wasn't true at all. In the process they made Aldrich Killian more of a villain than he was in the comics, but I can live with that.
Speaking of the comics, I read all Warren Ellis's Iron Man run, and this was the first time I had the slightest idea what Extremis actually did. Seperating it from "thing Tony injects himself with to get remote control of his armour" was a good move.
I spent longer than strictly necessary trying to work out if the kid was a reference to a comic book character I was unaware of. I eventually decided he wasn't.
Star Trek Into Darkness
I enjoyed this one too.
I liked the references to Section 31 and the model of the NX01 in the Admiral's office. It's good to make a nod to the fact that Trek's history was only changed after a point. (On the subject of the NX01, it still bugs me that this version of the 1701 looks smaller than Archer's ship.)
I hadn't realised that Scotty's transwarp beaming extended the range of the transporter to interstellar distances (although the speed Enterprise was going at, I suppose it must have). If you can do that, I'm not clear why you need a Starfleet.
Since the Carol Marcus reveal was obvious to any Trekker, I'm glad they didn't pad this out too much. We've been introduced to an Admiral Marcus, she's a blonde scientist, do the maths. She was an interesting character, and I'm glad it looks like she's going to be a regular.
The Khan reveal ... well it might have been a shock if two newspapers hadn't both told me that John Harrison was an alias and there was a nice twist for long-time fans. So thanks for that, newspapers. Cumberbatch was, of course, excellent in portraying someone with a fundemental conviction that he's better than everyone around him.
And the story itself certainly moved along. Klingons! Evil Starfleet! Uhura and Spock talking about their relationship! Old Spock saying "I can't tell you what to do next, but it's this"! All the regulars get something to do, even if they aren't on the ship. (Scotty resigning in protest counts as a Crowning Moment of Awesome in my book, and then because of that, he gets the big infiltration scene.)
Not sure about Wrath of Khan Remix Album towards the end. But fundamentally, I liked the message of the story, which is that if the people who's job it is to enforce the rules start thinking this entitles them to break the rules themselves, we're all in trouble. They didn't even kill Khan!
Talking of whether or not to kill the villain...
Man of Steel
Okay. I enjoyed this, but I can really understand why people didn't.
I liked liquid-metal Krypton, which made a nice change from the glowy ice crystals. And I loved that Jor-El's service robot was named Kelex; a nice nod to the comics.
The characterisation seemed solid, allowing for the fact that this isn't Superman. It's Clark Kent learning to be Superman. I sat through ten years of that on television, I can cope with two hours of it at the cinema. And I've always prefered the more human "Clark is who I am, Superman is what I do" character to the "perfect alien hero who walks among us".
(One of my problems with the current comics is that they pay lip-service to the former characterisation, but it's more like "Superman needs to be Clark to remind himself what humans are like". Otherwise, presumably, he'll become the Kryptonian Victorious...)
I didn't like the continual flashbacks, especially since they seemed to have been cobbled together from different drafts of the script in which Jonathan had very different ideas about his son's powers. Seriously is he early-Smallville "They'll cut you up" or The Movie "You have a destiny"? If he's supposed to develop from one to the other, that really doesn't come across.
And then there's what happens to Zod. Do I have a problem with it? You bet. Do I think it ruins everything and makes him Not Superman? Weell...
The thing is, like I said, he's not Superman, not yet. And he's in a desperate situation without any real experience in how to deal with things like this. I can accept he gets it wrong.
And, after all, I started reading comics in the 80s. As far as I'm concerned, "Superman kills Zod" is how the story goes. And at least in this version, he does it to save lives, not acting as the executioner of a powerless Zod.
But if they'd made it clearer that this was Clark going too far and realising that Superman Doesn't Kill (like Batman being about to shoot Joe Chill in Year Two before the Reaper does it for him) I'd be happier.
