Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness (2022)

Score: 3.5 / 5

This is getting a little ridiculous. I'm just not sure I'm here for all the back-and-forth, media-spanning new directions of the MCU, and movies like this are, frankly, why.

Feeling like it was written by committee and produced by a room of execs instead of artists, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness is about as confused and jumbled as you might expect. It's nominally a sequel to Doctor Strange, though the only points on which it follows that film is with its inclusion of Christine Palmer (Rachel McAdams), who is getting married to another man, and its incredibly awkward inclusion of Mordo (Chiwetel Ejoifor) who is actually playing an alternate version of the character rather than the one set up as a villain in the previous film. This film makes almost no sense, though, unless you've seen the Infinity War and Endgame Avengers films as well as Spider-Man: No Way Home, which it also directly follows. And yet it is most accurately a sequel to WandaVision, and that's just one project too many for me to include here. It's all an unholy Frankenstein's monster of a movie, one that picks up many threads from different places and strings them together -- I haven't even mentioned the incredible importance of Loki and What If...? to understanding this film -- in an insane two-hour fever dream of chaos. This film does not -- cannot -- exist on its own, and it never develops its own sense of identity as a result; more or less a lynchpin in the franchise, we can only hope things calm down a bit for the studio after the dust settles. I have doubts.

Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), at the wedding of Christine to another man, has to leave when the street outside is attacked by an invisible massive one-eyed octopus thing (that looks suspiciously like the villain in The Suicide Squad). While fighting it, he meets America Chavez (Xochitl Gomez), a queer young woman of color who has the unique ability to create star-shaped portals to alternate universes, though she's having some trouble controlling it. After dispatching the demonic monster, America reveals that she's been fleeing similar demons across the multiverse and that someone seems to be after her. Strange suspects witchcraft, and goes to consult with Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen), who is still grieving the loss of her children and the fracturing of her mind. Wanda is willing to do whatever it takes to live a life with her children (not Vision, curiously), and as such the Darkhold (an evil book she got at the end of WandaVision that appears to be somewhat sentient and has her in its grip) offers a possible means to that end.

The Darkhold is one of those hot items that requires more knowledge than this film is willing to give, but it's the kind of obvious reference to director Sam Raimi's work that makes this film such an aesthetic oddity. It looks like Raimi's Necronomicon, and later events in the film -- yes, including a crucial plot point involving the possession of dead bodies -- remind us a bit heavy-handedly that this is a Raimi picture. It's got all his visual gusto and mind-boggling aggressive weirdness that we expect, but unfortunately it's not the kind of Raimi I personally like. There are some genuine scares here, and it's really primarily a horror movie, even if it's also fantasy and sci-fi and superhero. I'd have much preferred to see what original director Scott Derrickson and his team would have done with this material, and I expect I'd have liked that better. This film isn't The Evil Dead so much as it is its sequels (which I abjectly detest). There's a sequence early on when America and Stephen launch themselves through the multiverse, including prehistoric, cartoon, and even paint realms. It's just bonkers stuff, and frankly I couldn't make heads or tails of it. Thankfully, the studio anchors him a bit and the story in our universe (labeled number 616, if memory serves) proceeds apace.

Unfortunately, that same studio seems intent on including as much of its established material as possible, including locations and people and events from all across the shared universe, even obscure ones, shoehorned plot points that felt far too forced and fast rather than organic or earned, and an enormous cast of cameos. This last point reaches its incredible climax when, in one universe after meeting an alternate Mordo, Stephen is brought before a group they call the Illuminati, including Agent Carter (Hayley Atwell, What If...?), Black Bolt (Anson Mount, Inhumans), Maria Rambeau (Lashana Lynch) as Captain Marvel, the Fantastic Four's Reed Richards (John Krasinski, as hopefully more than fan service), and even Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) in his yellow wheelchair. It's amazing, and the crowd cheered much as it did for the villains and alternate heroes in No Way Home. But to have this happen twice now in similar films is starting to feel a bit overwhelmingly banal.

More important than the film's overwrought plot and desperate attempts at unifying the franchise despite its obvious unraveling is its emotional core. It begins with Stephen's unrequited love for Christine, which we've seen before and this adds nothing new. Then it concerns America and her self-control and doubt issues, adding again nothing new to the stories of multiple other heroes. Ultimately, this film seems most concerned with Wanda and her grief, and it is here that things get pretty hairy. Obviously -- and it's revealed very early on -- Wanda is the "villain" of this film, and while seeing her embrace her inner witch is utterly delicious, it rings hollow after the intense emotional insight we got for her out of the Disney+ miniseries. While grief can certainly turn people into monsters, it's an interesting choice for the MCU to about-face on this fan-favorite character so quickly. Moreover, the film's characterization of Wanda might have been more interesting and satisfying if it didn't take so much pleasure in turning her into a vindictive, bloodthirsty monster so quickly. I was fine with her embracing her greed and pain and becoming evil, really, until in her second or third scene she shows up and outright slaughters half the sorcerers at Kamar-Taj. It's a brutal and vicious sequence that sets up the horrors to come effectively, even as it divorces us from our love of the raw work Olsen has done with the character before now.

While this movie is clearly crucial for the MCU -- the parts that led us here and wherever we go next -- it's also the most solid proof we've yet received of the oft-repeated criticism that this franchise exists primarily to keep people coming and paying for it, rather than to tell any story with integrity. I loved it, I hated it (I haven't even talked about how absurdly, unabashedly awful the editing is!), and now we're just waiting for another installment because that's what this film forces us to do. I'm hopeful this isn't the last we've seen of Olsen, because really she is one of the most interesting characters in the franchise, but as the multiverse keeps expanding and new properties are introduced, the MCU is going to have to simplify and ground themselves, or they'll lose the reins on this series and everything they hold dear. Kind of like Wanda. 

Ingrid Goes West (2017)

Score: 4.5 / 5

Ingrid Goes West is the darkest comedy I've seen in a long time. Naturally, I loved it!

Ingrid Thorburn is a product of our culture. Can we call her mentally unstable? Legally, sure, as she's seen to stalk people via Instagram. Well, one person, initially, named Charlotte. Charlotte has a large following, and apparently once commented on one of Ingrid's posts. Ingrid took that as a declaration of intimate friendship, which climaxed in violence when Charlotte did not invite Ingrid to her wedding. After showing up and macing her in the face, Charlotte is sent to a mental hospital. Even there, she has access to her phone and magazines, and soon learns about Taylor, another social media "influencer" (celebrity is far too strong a word) who lives in sunny California. Thanks to the unexpected death of her mother (yes, it's a shady, shady world) and a sudden inheritance, Ingrid packs up and indeed goes west.

Aubrey Plaza plays Ingrid with lots of gumption, not shying away from the chilling stalking episodes but imbuing honesty and compassion into a character we would say is a freak, a weirdo. She's the definition of a creep, but Ingrid is also all of us. Plaza gets us to root for her from the get-go, even as we watch her cross line after line in the sand. She's a nearly perfect antihero, and she owns every second. And why shouldn't she? We get her. Everyone who uses social media is a kind of stalker, or someone who encourages stalking, right? Which is worse? Can we blame people for getting so invested in the lives of others, when they're splashed on screens we carry in our pockets? When all they post is the sweet, sexy, lovable images of their seemingly perfect lives? How can we defend the Instagram/Facebook/Snapchat media when, by definition, it invites envy and greed and discontentment into our lives?

This film doesn't answer that, but it certainly provokes those thoughts. It's a hilarious film, bubbling over with whip-smart comedy that strikes smack in the middle of young adult culture. It's also deeply disturbing, and more than once I expected it to take a horrific turn. Taylor (played to perfection by Elizabeth Olsen) is the sweet icon of grace, and her innocence begs for disaster to approach. Not unlike Cate Blanchett's character in Notes on a Scandal, she allows the unbecoming predator into her intimacy, disregarding all the warning signs, and is subsequently forced to enact extreme damage control. Her savior -- in the form of a magnificently pseudo-naked Billy Magnussen -- keeps his eye on Ingrid, though even that isn't quite enough to spare her humiliation and some fear.

Writer-director Matt Spicer knows exactly what he's about here, and the greatest pleasure of the film is watching his total control over the proceedings. He allows the actors to play, the scenic beauty to enchant, and the humor to wax and wane naturally. He exhibits time and again his uncanny knack for pure awkwardness, an unconventional but highly effective form of cinematic humor like we saw in the sixth Harry Potter, and the pauses in dialogue when people have said or are trying not to say something are absolutely squirm-inducing. I nervously giggled my way through the entire film, because while little is laugh-out-loud funny, the whole damn thing will trigger any latent social anxieties you have.

Of course, it does drop a few guffaw-worthy gimmicks, mostly delivered by O'Shea Jackson Jr., who plays Ingrid's boyfriend née landlord Dan. An aspiring screenwriter, Dan loves Batman. In fact, he loves Batman so much, that during their unexpected but highly entertaining first sexual encounter, he has Ingrid dress up as Catwoman, call him "Batman" as he repeats it, and recite to him "Gotham needs you." That scene took the cake, though there are plenty more belly-laughs where it came from.

The ending is of particular interest to me, because I think it can be read a couple ways. After her unrequited friendship-affair blows up in her face, Ingrid confesses her loneliness and reveals her true self on an Instagram video, after which she overdoses on pills. Dan's intervention saves her, and following the attempted suicide Ingrid awakes to find herself a star. Her video has gone viral and supporters are lauding her honesty. As she scans the comments on her phone, she smiles. And that's the end. At first, I wanted to read it as her finally becoming content, expressing her pure joy that she is finally loved. And that would be a lovely sentiment, especially since the last twenty minutes or so of the movie work so hard to make her sympathetic and tragic. But I'm not convinced. The whole film before that showed her to be desperate, creepy, and downright dangerous. I think her smile is a sort of falling-off-the-wagon moment, realizing the high she has been denied her whole life. She won't rest now. If her attempted suicide got her this much attention, what will she possibly do to one-up that? It's a sly ending, one that deftly skewers the issues the film had been juggling up to that point, and one that will prompt good conversation at dinner after the screening.

IMDb: Ingrid Goes West

Wind River (2017)

Score: 4.5 / 5

If Wind River doesn't cool down your summer, you're probably already dead. Taylor Sheridan's newest desert crime-thriller is as bleak and violent as his others (Sicario, Hell or High Water) but takes place in a frozen Wyoming winter. When a young woman's body is discovered half-naked in the snow of the Wind River Indian Reservation, a lone FBI agent teams up with local law enforcement to investigate, despite the hostile bitterness of nearby residents. Clue leads to clue, leads beget leads, and eventually they find themselves in a mire of mystery. The killer, though, isn't alone, and in a frigid wasteland, it takes hardened predators to hunt murderers.

Taylor Sheridan, finally in control of his own script, displays his keen sense of timing and pace here, keeping things slow and entrancing while he drives you to the edge of your seat. He knows the power of silence, and half the scenes feature no dialogue at all, relying on striking images and the immersive eyes of our leads to carry the film. Speaking of which, Elizabeth Olsen plays our FBI investigator, a woman of small stature and questionable judgment when she arrives at Wind River. Showing up in the thick of a snowstorm, laughably unprepared for the environment, she resorts to asking a resident for proper attire and recruiting the Fish & Wildlife agent to help her solve the case. That agent is played by Jeremy Renner, and he is a nearly perfect foil to her. Knowledgeable, pragmatic, and sensitive, he found the corpse in the snowy field while hunting a mountain lion that had been preying on livestock.

The two ill-matched trackers, however, develop a working relationship quickly and sift through possible suspects with aplomb. They know they're on the right track when one of their first suspects reacts with sudden violence. Slowly, the two impress each other with their skills and ability to adapt, and in one memorable scene, Renner's character emotionally bares himself to Olsen's, and it'll tug at your tear ducts something awful.

But the violence is nowhere near over, and if you know Taylor Sheridan, you know there's a doozy of a climax still to come. Arrive it does, but not in traditional fashion. I've never seen a flashback be a climax (unless you count the revelation of Snape's unrequited love in the last Harry Potter, but that's another conversation), but Sheridan pops this one in kind of in the middle of nowhere. If you're keeping your eye on the clock, you know it's about time for things to wrap up, but otherwise you think this new search of a suspect's property is going to result in a final clue. Then -- blooie! -- here we are in a flashback to what really happened the night of the murder. It's lovely and sad and dark and horrifying, plus Jon Bernthal shows up and makes you feel things. Then, not even five seconds after we revert to the present -- blooie! -- some of the most gasp-inducing violence on screen this year explodes into your eyeballs.

Even then, it's still not over, because Sheridan has invested us so deeply into these characters that we need significant closure. That we get, thankfully, in a series of denouement scenes that mostly serve to wring out whatever tears you haven't shed. It's not a letdown at all, and Sheridan reinforces his themes of trust and care and sacrifice while underscoring the central characterizations of the film: that of predators and prey, and just how far one is willing to go to survive.

It may not be official Oscar season yet, but we've already seen too many possible big contenders. Keep your eye on this one for a nomination for original screenplay, and maybe cinematography or direction.

IMDb: Wind River

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

Score: 5 / 5

Just when I thought Marvel Studios had little left up its sleeve.

It didn't take much screen time for this movie to show me that it would be my favorite MCU film yet. The Russos had done such fabulous work on Winter Soldier that I hardly expected any better, especially from a film that promised so much and threatened so little. I mean, look at the other big-time mash-ups of whole teams of heroes. The third Spider-Man, the third X-Men, the disaster that was Joss Whedon's Age of Ultron. Too much, too fast, too spectacular, and no real script, style, or substance.

But Civil War blows it all away. There's little criticism I can aim at the film, so this isn't going to last long. The camerawork is consistently engaging and thrilling, and edited at an effective and appropriately frenzied pace. The effects are dazzling. The script couldn't be better. The film has a perfect balance of not only both sides of the conflict, but of each individual character in violent action and not. I'm not saying it's a fair fight (let's be honest, here: Rogers is being a whiny and stubborn fool, while Stark is actually doing the right thing for everyone). But I am saying that the film is so perfectly balanced that, apart from the film's title, there's no reason to think it's not a third Avengers movie.

It's got a lot of heart. I cried a li'l bit in Stark's climax. I cried over Peggy Carter. I cried for sweet, sexy Black Panther (who, by the way, I suddenly love. Not really a big fan of him in the comics). It's hilarious, too. Spider-man is finally handled perfectly, and Tom Holland delivers a pitch-perfect introduction as our webslinger and promises boons in his standalone film. Which is saying a lot, considering that half his scenes in this picture include Robert Downey, Jr.'s quick wit and sharp tongue, parried expertly by Holland at every turn.

I have nothing else. That's it. A brilliantly crafted film. Fun, fast, furious, entertaining, and intellectual. It's as close to high art as a superhero movie will ever get.

Captain America: Civil War

In Secret (2013)

Score: 4 / 5

Take an abbreviated Jane Eyre, turn it on its head, toss in some steamy sex, and you get In Secret, a quietly captivating erotic thriller that passed us all by two years ago. This dark adaptation of Emile Zola's Thérèse Raquin does little for those of us who want to be surprised by plot structure, but it works wonders for the rest of us. Not for a moment do we believe that the adulterous affair suggested by the title will end happily, but we also don't really care; anyone who disagrees has never seen Romeo and Juliet or any other romantic drama ever.

I suppose a brief outline will suffice, then: Therese (Elizabeth Olsen) is trapped in a loveless marriage to her sickly, spoiled cousin Camille (Tom Felton), watched over by her domineering aunt/mother-in-law Madame Raquin (Jessica Lange). When Camille's seductive friend Laurent (Oscar Isaac) comes calling, he and Therese embark on an intense affair that leads to murder, madness, and other exciting stuff. And if you don't expect all these things from the dark first scene, you can leave the fun stuff for us and go watch one of several mindless comedies in theaters right now.

Thus, our focus here is on style over substance. I said the first scene is dark, by which I do actually mean chromatically. Yeah, sure, the whole film is "dark" thematically, but director Charlie Stratton rightly decided to pair the heavy drama of a period piece with the striking visuals of Gothic thrillers, making every moment fraught with tension and rimmed with shadow. Stratton's screenplay -- which moves along at a surprisingly fast pace, though it is disguised by Florian Hoffmeister's (Mortdecai) meditative cinematography -- features very little dialogue, allowing for the actors, sets, and lighting to paint a nightmarish vision of hell itself, as Therese herself once describes her situation. Gabriel Yared (Cold Mountain, Shall We Dance?, 1408) crafted a symphonic score to accompany, and the great sweeping runs of stringed instruments would make the film feel overscored if the visuals weren't already so dramatic. In fact, the whole film teeters dangerously on the edge of operatic excess. The only thing that grounded it, for me, was the cast.

Jessica Lange is the undisputed soul of the film. And really, even for younger audiences or romantic viewers who might prefer the star-crossed lovers to be their protagonists, the film wouldn't work without a conniving, vulnerable, and passionate Madam Raquin to run things. Though some might say we've seen enough of Lange's crazy time in American Horror Story, here she does what she always does: She finds yet another nuanced, fully-realized character in the throes of madness unlike any we've seen yet. Miraculously, Olsen, Isaac, and Felton all match her, though perhaps less gracefully, scene for scene, with their own idiosyncratic psychoses. Olsen carries the weight of the film really well, allowing her teary, fearful gaze to sweep, wide-eyed, across almost every scene. Felton's pale simpering oozes a charm of its own, countered marvelously by Isaac's smoky stares and aggressive sensuality.

For as much as I'm throwing around descriptions of these people as "crazy", I don't want you to think this is a film populated with fearfully unstable individuals. No, this film isn't "about" (vile phrase) insanity. This film is about the ways in which normal people act and react under heavy cultural weights. These people are single parents who dote on their children, surrogate children searching for love, spouses stuck together without love or respect, a woman seeking freedom from cultural oppression, a man risking everything to be with his lover, and, ultimately, two people who learn that the sins of the past can never really leave us. Whether or not we agree with these characters' actions -- and Stratton has very cleverly allowed a lot of room for discussions on class, gender, family structure, morality/ethics, social norms, and marriage -- we can easily participate in their navigating the murky waters of forbidden romance, and hopefully emerge a bit better off than they do.

IMDb: In Secret

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

Score: 3.5 / 5

You could hardly ask for a more explosive start to a summer blockbuster season, especially one with the lineup we have this year. But Avengers: Age of Ultron does something a bit surprising, and it's something I'm not sure paid off. Only time will tell, but it seemed that Marvel Studios might have dictated the film's central theme in order to make a statement about its future productions. That is, the characters' oft-repeated sentiments that change is inevitable, change is necessary, and evolution is coming -- coupled with the film's ending -- certainly seem to be preparing the vast fanbase for drastic changes as our stars move on with their lives and new stars jump on board the superhero express.

I suppose this theme of evolution implies both hope and tragedy, which might be why this film is far more melancholy than most of the films in its universe. Make no mistake, you parents who take young children to these movies: This picture is violent, it is heavy (though not as dark as, say, The Winter Soldier), and it is wildly complex. Its ending has no shawarma, no festivities, and not even much closure. In fact, it's about as tonally opposite to Guardians of the Galaxy as Marvel could have made it. If you know me, you know I prefer darker flicks to lighter pics, so why didn't I rate Ultron higher? Because it's a bit of a mess.

If we want to dig into it and read that the tonal instability of the film results from its central bittersweet heart, I can appreciate the otherwise messy script. The sheer number of characters is considerably harder to swallow, though. We have our core team of six (-ish?), but then we see a constant flow of secondary characters from the other films that pop in for a few hot seconds (Nick Fury's presence did nothing for me this time around, guys, though Agent Carter can come back any damn time!), and then Whedon has the nerve to throw in new characters who deserve more screen time and script treatment than they are given. Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are pretty fabulous, though neither gets much chance to shine until the last half-hour or so of movie time. On the other hand, though, one of this film's greatest successes lies in its greater appreciation for Black Widow and Hawkeye, though Ultron is probably the closest we'll get to a standalone film for either of them. Specifically, the tender moments between Black Widow and Hulk are charming, if a little forced.

Who else is new? Oh yes, Ultron, the weirdly sassy megalomaniac spawn of Tony Stark's hubris. James Spader's voice is nice and all, but come on. A supervillain? Hardly. This hunk of computer-generated junk is only dangerous because Joss Whedon's team made him look sleek and a little vampiric. Oh, and the character's consciousness can be omnipresent, which is pretty awesome. But for someone (something?) who has literally all the world's information inside his head, he has pretty basic plans for global destruction. Turn a city into a meteor, and annihilate humans with it. But does he use his supercomputer skills to try and cause chaos around the world, maybe even as a distraction for his foes? Nope. Except in his attempted creation of Vision, which is actually rather wonderful until the Avengers hijack him, essentially hobbling Ultron's master plan before the climactic battle has even started (what kind of plot device is that??).

The worst, though: Ultron isn't even interesting. I mean, we never ever think that he might be good (Stark, baby, you named your own computer Jarvis...does "Ultron" have any kind of sweet, familiar ring to it at all?). From the first moment we hear his voice, we know he's evil, even though that particular characteristic is never explained or qualified. As a full-fledged creation, he's strangely neurotic, so he often feels like a man in a suit. Which is just weird. Okay, I might be a little biased because I just saw Ex Machina and its AI character Ava is sympathetic, sweet, and totally ominous. Hell, even the Winter Soldier was a scarier villain than Ultron, if we're going for sheer screen presence. The Pinocchio song Ultron sings is a little unnerving, but it doesn't quite fit with the character (though it might have, had the filmmakers made him into some kind of Frankenstein's monster who became disillusioned with Stark).

Instead of interesting, our villain is a product of rotten computer programs, and he unleashes a legion of uniform robots that serve much like the Chitauri in the first Avengers. That is, bodies to be destroyed by the droves. This brings me to my main problem with the film: the action scenes. They're fast, they're furious, they're even pretty darn cool. But the camera is so shaky, the editing so sharp, and the attention to all the characters so uneven that I can scarcely keep track of which hero is doing what and where and why before another set piece explodes. Add to that the downright insane levels of complicated scenarios our heroes need to fix (much like the dwarves' inane plan at the end of the second Hobbit), and the plot becomes a nightmare that feels much to large for Whedon's hands. That's not to say there aren't a few nice moments, notably the opening sequence, and near the end when all the heroes gather in a crumbling church to fight off the horde in slow-motion. And for all the filmmakers' cleverness in making the team actually work together as a team, the camera and editing don't do much to help our awareness of it. Rather, we are bombarded with things smashing and sparking and breaking and the drama is just absent.

Maybe I'm just bitter because it felt more like a video game than a movie. Special effects are great, but when you sacrifice decent character development and plot points in order to show off a huge climax scene or some cool fight moves, I'm going to roll my eyes until a hero shows off his muscles.

That said, I loved the stupid thing. It's noisy, it's silly, it's messy, it's downright fun. Is it epic? Hell no. But (despite obnoxious popular claims of everything being "epic") how many movies these days actually are, even in the superhero tradition? What it is is a rollicking (if not quite swashbuckling) action picture with some of our favorite characters doing ridiculous things and looking great in the meantime. Parts are heavier than its predecessor, and yet the whole thing feels less consequential (as a direct result of the overblown fight sequences), and so it's a pretty spot-on sequel, as far as that goes. And its last gambit is one that deserves a little nervous consideration: Do the last few scenes mean that we might not be seeing much more of Hulk, Iron Man, Hawkeye, or Thor? Don't get me wrong: Disney is not going to let these bankables slip away. And I haven't been keeping track of the stars' contracts. But Hulk running away, Iron Man's odd send-off, Hawkeye's tender homecoming, and Thor's adventurous exit all smacked of finality in a way we have not yet seen. Our last moments were instead focused on the new Avengers: War Machine, Falcon, Vision, and Scarlet Witch, led by Captain America and Black Widow. It does make one wonder what will happen in Civil War and Ragnarok, if Hulk will get a standalone picture (unlikely), and if our current heroes will be reduced to supporting roles or even cameos in Infinity War.

But we still have a long damn time before all that.

P.S. There's an awkward little mid-credits scene that reminds us that Thanos is still a thing, and that he's pissed off about these Infinity Stones getting scattered all over. Does anyone else get the feeling that Marvel Studios is going for a Harry Potter thing where it's not until the last movie that the villains and heroes fight over control of a set of holy objects? Maybe if they spread the big plot points out a wee bit we wouldn't need two parts to the climax. Just a thought.

P.P.S. I think the film might have been stronger without Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, simply because they distracted us from the dynamics of our core heroes. And because I think they fit in better with the X-Men than the Avengers. But both actors were great, and Witchy rocked in the climax. I guess if someone needed to die, I'm sort of glad it was a new person rather than one of our favorites. But is Quicky dead? That last shot of him next to Hawkeye was kind of bizarre, and in a movie where the villain can transfer his consciousness at will, I'm not counting anybody out.

IMDb: Avengers: Age of Ultron

Godzilla (2014)

Score: 4.5 / 5

Infinitely superior to Roland Emmerich's 1998 attempt, this Godzilla is a welcome reboot of the franchise. Hardcore Godzilla fans are particularly pleased with the titular monster's design, as he looks like a contemporary version of the original monster rather than a glorified dinosaur. And this one has fiery blue breath, so of course he's better. Gareth Edwards brilliantly directs this two-hour, big-budget sci-fi thriller like a drama or art film, drawing attention to atmosphere and character rather than spectacle.

The main story is familiar enough: humanity's aggressive scientific efforts have brought forth monsters, the otherwise unnamed MUTOs (Massive Unidentified Terrestrial Organisms), which feed off radioactive material. Godzilla rises from the ocean to eliminate this new threat and bring balance. The heart of the film, though, resides in its characters. The Brody family seems intertwined with these monsters, and suffers both tragedy and redemption through the horrors of their rampage.

Joe and Sandra Brody (Bryan Cranston, Juliette Binoche) work in a Japanese nuclear power plant until its destruction in 1999, following unusual seismic activity that causes a radiation leak and Sandra's death. In the present day, Joe enlists the help of his son Ford (the very hunky Aaron Taylor-Johnson) in returning to their old home -- now in quarantine -- to retrieve his old research on the true case of the seismic activity. When they are detained by soldiers working to cover up the secret workings inside the ruined plant, the first MUTO awakens and Joe is killed. Ford works with special task forces in tracking and observing the monsters, in an unspoken effort to fulfill or honor his father's work. The emotional core of this movie isn't Ford becoming a hero; it's his coming of age and learning to love his family again.

The film feels a lot like War of the Worlds (2005). Tonally and chromatically, it's gritty and dark and bleak, because when a disaster movie is centered on the human experience, the horrors of the proceedings come into focus. We aren't battered into submission by endless images of buildings crumbling and clouds of dust everywhere; instead, we follow the characters into the dust and see just about what they see. The big Cinematic Moments are reserved for the profoundly human images. In fact, my favorite scene was a shattering surprise to me: I'm talking about The Scene. The scene that seems to be highlighted in every promotional image of the movie, wherein soldiers skydive into the hellish San Francisco skyline, trailed by red smoke, in search of a warhead. It's a gamble of a mission, and the jump is in many ways the central metaphor for the movie. I had wondered why this scene was getting so much promo attention, and now I get it. In context, it is the emotional turning point of the film, and the camerawork/editing is particularly beautiful. You'll just have to watch it to understand.

And watch it you should! Haunting and thrilling, dramatic and beautiful, I hope this one does well for Oscar nominations (though it's far too early to predict with any certainty, we can hope it'll get nods for visual effects, sound mixing and editing, and maybe even cinematography and score). Oh, I almost forgot: the lovely score, composed by the incredible Alexandre Desplat, can be added to his already lengthy list of masterpieces. He's one of the best. I've said it before and I'll say it again, but this year we've seen a lot of special effects-driven movies. Godzilla may be one of them, but it's got real craft too.

IMDb: Godzilla