"Captain America: Civil War" Review

I'm going to give my SPOILER ALERT early, because any information can ruin a movie - something I wish I remembered before devouring every sneak peek I could find for Captain America: Civil War. If you sneak too many peeks, you gain a pretty good grasp of the whole without even seeing it. You can predict the plot.

Strangely, a fan like me often wants to predict the plot, which is why there are so many web sites and podcasts and YouTube channels specifically dedicated to that purpose. Like an appetizer, it tides you over while increasing your appetite, and all the while, you just assume the filmmakers are still going to surprise you.

And then they don't.

It's not their fault. Not entirely. Sure, sometimes formulaic writing and genre tropes are to blame; but again, if I watched every Captain America: Civil War trailer, tv spot, and clip leading up to the film's release, why am I surprised by the lack of surprise?

(Knowing this was another Russo movie, I even watched Community for the first time - every single episode! - because that's how eager I was for more of their work. At least now I notice the cameos.)

I guess what I'm saying is that I don't agree with a lot of the hype surrounding Civil War - specifically that it's the best superhero movie ever, or even within the Marvel Cinematic Universe. For me, Winter Soldier still holds that title. Repeat viewings might cause a change of heart, but like they say, you can't un-ring a bell, and I can't undo all my sneak peeking. My sons and I walked out of Ant-Man gushing pleasant surprise because we walked in knowing very little. We walked out of this...divided. Given its theme, maybe that was appropriate!

However, it seems like I only muster the energy for a review when I'm disappointed by a movie, which is kind of sad and not entirely fair. After all, I only see them and write about them because, under all the nitpicking, I do enjoy them. So as I delve into details, I'm going to try a binary approach and balance all my complaints with sincere praise. I know that's a bit ironic, given this movie largely resists binary, black-or-white interpretations, but whatever.

I'm going to call these warring sides "Team Obvious" (led by Captain Obvious, obviously) and "Team Other Hand."

Angles on Ultron

It has been over two weeks since I saw Avengers: Age of Ultron with my brother and two sons. We made a celebration of it, as it was also Free Comic Book Day. (You can still see the pictures I tweeted on the right.) By now it's a bit late for a review. I've read a number of other people's, though, and here are some of my favorite angles. Beware major spoilers.

Where it Fits in the MCU

Emily Asher-Perrin (Tor.com) reviews the movie "as a piece of the Marvel Cinematic Universe jigsaw puzzle" because it's more successful that way. That's how I've invested since the post-credits scene of Iron Man, which I saw late, after Iron Man 2 was on its way to officially, maybe awkwardly announce the MCU. The first one I saw in the theater was Avengers because the individual characters' stories hadn't won me over yet. (With the exception of Iron Man 3, I've attended every Phase Two theatrical release.) For me, the serial continuity is what's fun, so all the Easter Eggs and fan service are easy bait.

Like Asher-Perrin, I'm hopeful that we might actually get an extended cut of AoU to redeem those moments that feel tacked on. The Maximoff twins are force-fit and Quicksilver's death completely hollow. (And unnecessary? I need to see it again, but couldn't he have just rushed Hawkeye and the kid out of harm's way instead of intercepting the bullets? I guess he was fridged for Wanda's development, which at least flips the common trope.) Thor's subplot is even less coherent, and I understand that Joss Whedon was forced by Marvel to include it. Again, I like when one MCU film sets up future ones, but hopefully not by sacrificing itself. I find AoU more guilty of that than IM2. Even the closing shots of the New Avengers (Falcon, War Machine, Scarlet Witch, Vision) struck me as cheesier than I would have hoped. Was Wanda flying, though?

"Edge of Tomorrow" Stuck in Yesterday

www.edgeoftomorrowmovie.com

In Edge of Tomorrow, a video game character's ability to reset or "respawn" is a very apparent metaphor (and intentional, according to this Hollywood Reporter interview with director Doug Liman). It occurred to me that the movie's central question could be "What if you had to keep playing a video game until you won?", which at first sounds intriguing. But on second thought, wouldn't it be more poignant and memorable a movie if it made me think about things like reincarnation, resurrection, or succeeding in life? The metaphor inside a metaphor is a bit convoluted. More interesting to me is the premise of a villain that can respawn and learn from its mistakes, sort of like the robots in The Incredibles or maybe the artificial intelligence of the xenomorph in the upcoming game Alien: Isolation.

It was Incredibles director Brad Bird who first piqued my interest in this movie when he tweeted the following:

Sure, he may be biased, being a sci-fi aficionado and having directed EoT star Tom Cruise in Mission: Impossible -- Ghost Protocol. Then again, he is also the writer/director of some of my favorite movies, including those mentioned, The Iron Giant, and Ratatouille. That, and I was intrigued by his calling EoT "original." He made a similar pitch for Gravity, another movie that won me over and that inspired the amateur film study on this blog.

While EoT is not a sequel or a reboot, it is an adaptation of a Japanese book called All You Need Is Kill, and therefore not original in the sense of a "new idea." Bird suffered a lot of Twitter backlash on this point and so clarified two days later that he knew it was a book adaptation and simply meant "original" as "first film."

Now having seen it, I have to call "foul" on interpreting originality so loosely. As a fan of retellings, I have no complaints about recycling old ideas; however, I personally felt a little betrayed by his and critics' praise for the film as something unexpected and fresh. I did enjoy it, but I kept waiting for the originality I'd paid for, wishing I could reset my expectations. Like Tom Cruise's character in the movie, it's only on the edge of tomorrow because it's still stuck in yesterday.

To demonstrate, the following are plot points or other elements from the movie that draw from existing films (spoilers follow):

The Staying Powers of Superhero Shows

This article was edited and accepted by Deseret News a week ago, but as it has yet to appear online or in print, and as the subject is somewhat time-sensitive, I'm posting a slightly updated version here.  It reflects standard AP style (i.e., titles of films are in quotation marks instead of the usual italics).

Last November I wrote an article for the Deseret News about “The staying powers of superhero shows,” highlighting Cartoon Network’s then-new or returning animated television series “Young Justice,” “Star Wars: The Clone Wars” and “ThunderCats.” Of these revamped characters and continuities, I argued that older audiences just might appreciate them more than newer generations — or at least differently.

By way of update, Cartoon Network recently launched a special Saturday morning block for DC’s animated counterparts—what they’re calling “DC Nation.” Preceding DC Nation is the returning season of “ThunderCats,” a show that continues to take an independent detour from the cartoon it's based on.

I previously commented on the more mature nature of the plot, which holds true. One episode told the backstory of the cast’s comic relief siblings Wilykit and Wilykat, proving even their past is fraught with realistic tragedy. As predicted, my 6-year-old treasures a plastic Sword of Omens but can’t seem to stay interested in the show itself, which progresses somewhat slowly.

This has also been true of “Star Wars: The Clone Wars,” which finished its fourth season in March. Viewers familiar with the Episode 1 prequel film may have (may have) gone giddy over the return of Darth Maul, previously supposed dead, but my kids had no clue who he was and couldn’t have cared less. As far as CGI goes, they prefer “Green Lantern” (which, in my opinion, is a very similar space opera) or “Kung Fu Panda: Legends of Awesomeness,” a far more comical show airing on Nickelodeon.

“Young Justice” has the edge over them all. Though filled with as many twists and turns as the TV show “Lost” and combining continuity from a variety of heroes’ backgrounds, the result is satisfying to adults and children alike.

We all cheered during the first season finale, “Auld Acquaintance,” when Robin and Batman faced off in a mind-controlled duel, Superboy and Superman reconciled their differences and all the guy-girl pairs stole a New Year Eve kiss. The show’s mixture of action and complexity is to thank. The questions I field from my sons lead to discussions as rich, even profound, as the ones we share while hiking through the hills near our home. Fortunately, the new season, subtitled “Invasion,” already premiered two weeks ago.  While my kids and I are baffled by the five-year leap forward, we're also loving the debuts of additional teen heroes like Batgirl and Beast Boy (both alluded to in the first season).

But what’s new to this discussion comes by way of comparison to other franchises. Over at Disney XD, Marvel has responded with the return of “The Avengers: Earth’s Mightiest Heroes” and the series premiere of “Ultimate Spider-Man,” which boasts writing by Paul Dini and its own supporting cast of teenage superheroes. This is an interesting switch-up because Greg Weisman, who brought us the last and possibly best Spider-Man cartoon (“The Spectacular Spider-Man”), moved on to co-create the tightly written and mostly serious “Young Justice,” while Paul Dini, best known for his work on the famously dark “Batman: The Animated Series” and the wildly successful video games “Arkham Asylum” and “Arkham City,” has traded over to Spider-Man.

It’s arguable that even Dini won’t be able to pull off a group dynamic for the hero known to work alone — that he’d have been wiser to get in on “Young Justice,” which, in all honesty, is doing just brilliantly without him. Now with several successful cartoon series under his belt, Weisman is becoming the man to beat.

But any competition between DC and Marvel is probably more fan-based than otherwise. More than a few comic creators have worked for both companies, and crossover undoubtedly occurs among their fans as well.

In an interview for the documentary “Batman and Me: The Bob Kane Story,” Marvel mogul Stan Lee reminisces about going with the Batman creator to the 1989 motion picture premiere and laments that he didn’t live long enough to witness the big-screen success of “Spider-Man” in 2002. As for Dini and Weisman, they both wrote episodes to “Batman: The Brave and the Bold,” with Dini penning last fall's self-aware, franchise-parodying (albeit praising his own contributions) series finale.

Superhero fanatics may follow all of the above shows with equal adoration, especially with the aid of a DVR. They may even add Nickelodeon’s new “Legend of Korra” to that schedule — and should, because the follow-up to “Avatar: The Last Airbender” is just as spectacular and perhaps slightly more geared for adults, having grown with its fans.

But while that latter series’ embarrassing movie adaptation never should have been made, this year’s superhero theatrical line-up has generated so much hype that fans can’t help but get caught up in passionate debates. When it was announced that the newest trailer for "The Dark Knight Rises" would be attached to the release of "The Avengers," most commentators seemed to agree that the pairing constitutes an event you won’t want to miss.

Then there’s me, who at first admitted that the greater draw was that Batman trailer. Christopher Nolan showcased new footage recently at CinemaCon 2012, and according to Batman-News.com, one viewer Tweeted, “Avengers, you got nothing on this.”  But Warner Bros. made sure you don't have to see "The Avengers" to catch the trailer by releasing it online as part of their infamous viral marketing campaign.  I appreciated the separation.  Although I wore a Batman t-shirt to "The Avengers" last night, I still got caught up in the Marvel hype when the title appeared on screen and everyone cheered.  It was like ante-up time in a poker game: everyone wanted in.


And, if you ask me, they won their bets.  I'm a latecomer to Joss Whedon admiration, but in preparation for "The Avengers" I decided to sample his short-lived cult series "Firefly" on Netflix.  His trademarks are instantly recognizable: deft handling of an ensemble cast and well-timed combining of action and humor.  While this almost makes his plots too clean, too predictable ("Ah, hear that reference?  Hear that joke?  That's going to be important later."), it certainly doesn't take away from an entertaining movie-watching experience.  "The Avengers" is easily the best in the Marvel Universe franchise because this guy knows how to handle his heroes' strengths and weaknesses; the result is something real and even emotional but perfectly true to its comic book origins.


In the end, then, I'd say neither side in the Marvel vs. DC debate has gained any ground — or in other words, that your loyalties will lie with which heroes you like best.  This is a credit to the films because it means they bring out the best in what they have to work with.

The phrase “It’s just good business” comes to mind. Whatever the differences in characters and comic universes, it’s clear that the companies feed off each other. Nolan’s Batman franchise may have set a new standard in superhero films, but these would not have been possible without “X-Men” in 2000. And so on.

Now in one summer we’re getting new adaptations of the Avengers, Spider-Man, and Batman, with the rebooted Superman movie only a year away. In that case, maybe the question we should be debating is not which franchise is better, but whether any other genre will ever attain such staying power.