The Walking Dead "Sick"

Yes, I'm very late with this one. Been a busy couple of weeks. I don't know how much it matters though, because I'm not sure I have a tone to say about this episode except that it was outstanding. The pacing was great, the action was great, the story and emotions were great and the stakes were huge. I'm spoiling a lot here, but let me try and explain what a great setup this episode had. Hershel was bitten on the leg by a walker. In order to save him, Rick chops of his leg with an axe. We then see that there are in fact human prisoners left in the prison which the group must deal with while trying to save Hershel. And did I mention that the only person who is at all qualified to help someone survive this ordeal is Hershel himself? Oh, and that if Hershel dies there will be no one to deliver Lori's baby, especially considering she'll likely need a C-section? And of course there are the prisoners, one of which has already proven to be hostile towards Rick and his group. Everything is timed well with every scene taking no more than what it needs to serve a purpose. The acting as always superb. I don't think I've talked much about how unbelievable Andrew Lincoln is as Rick. He brings an intensity and humanity that perfectly conveys the character. Is he as good as Bryan Cranston is in Breaking Bad? No. But I can't think of many actors as good as Cranston is in that show, so that's hardly a fair comparison. No, Lincoln is very good, and I hope his performance in this show will lead to more roles later on.

(SPOILERS)

Now the thing that is sure to be controversial here is Rick's decision to execute one of the prisoners in cold blood. I just thought it showed how different Rick is from the good cop we saw in the pilot. There are new rules in this world, and Rick is using them. Was he right or wrong? I don't see an answer to that question. He did what he felt he had to do. It'll be interesting to see where this new attitude takes the group in the future.

The Walking Dead: "Seed"

Just like I promised, here is the first review in my series of reviews for each episode of The Walking Dead. I was really hyped for this episode after the stunning season 2 finale. It was an episode that finally let the show live up to its potential and go all out. No slow pacing, no bullshit, just straightforward zombie action coupled with a pretty good story. Did this episode live up to the hype? Well, not exactly, but I still enjoyed it a far bit. SPOILERS!!!!!

The episode started out fantastically with the group trying to take down a group of walkers and take over a house. It's very well done: there is no dialogue and the group acts like a well oiled machine. They efficiently take down a group of walkers and then proceed to flee when an even bigger group approaches them. We see Carl has fully embraced this world now. He is carrying a gun and participating in the attack. We also see Rick has really enforced his "This is no longer a democracy" rule. People can advise him on his decisions, but he gets the final say. It's also clear there has been a large passage of time since the last season ended. Since Lori mentions at one point that their baby is just "days away," I'm going to go ahead and say it's been nine months. The episode does have a very cinematic feel. It really seems like a sequel to a movie that came out years ago. The pacing is much better. It does drag at times, but for the most part everything seems to be moving well. I also liked the evolving dynamics. Rick and Lori have clearly become hostile towards each other, and I'm amazingly not blaming Lori for that. She actually tries to have a conversation with him to try and sort out some "things," but Rick will have none of it. I didn't mind Lori a ton in this episode, but that's largely because she didn't have much to do. Hey, that's a great solution for the Lori problem: ignore her! The zombie action was great, and the ending was top notch and more than a little bloody and shocking. I kind of saw part of it coming, but I did not see the results coming. Now, I said I didn't like everything about this episode. The biggest problem I had were the occasional pointless scenes. I did not get the scene that had Maggie and Beth singing. Maybe there was some symbolism behind it or maybe it was meant to generate atmosphere, but I felt it just brought the episode to a screeching halt for two or three minutes. I also did not like the scenes with Michonne. Yes I know she's important, but you could have held off on her for a bit, or at least just kept the single scene she had with Andrea. Again, those scenes brought the episode to a halt. But at the end of the day, those may just be nitpicks. It was a good return for the show, and I hope to see it improve next week.

In Defence Of Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull And Condemnation Of Temple Of Doom

I realize the above title alone may turn most people away from this blog forever. You know what? I don't care. I like Indy 4. I don't love it necessarily, but I do like it. Is it the worst Indiana Jones movie? Not at all. This one is: 

Yeah, that's the one. The worst of the series by far. In fact, I think it's Speilberg's worst film, and matches only The Phantom Menace in anything Lucas has touched. Disagree? Well read on dear reader, and see if you agree (You probably won't, but whatever) 

Let me be clear: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (hereafter known as Indy 4) is very, very flawed. I really dislike the CGI effects in the movie, and I can't say I'm a fan of Shia LaBeouf's character, or at least in terms of LaBeouf's portrayal, but I'll get to that. There are just a lot of dumb moments, scenes with refrigerators included. But is that enough for it to be  the disgrace many people make it out to be? No. Not at all. I think much of the criticism aimed at the movie comes are signs of the times. In every negative review I read of Indy 4, one word kept on coming up: unrealistic. That the fridge scene is unrealistic, that the waterfall is unrealistic, that the alien plot is unrealistic, and that everything in general is unrealistic. Well, if I sat down to an Indiana Jones movie that completely realistic, I would walk out. This series is the ultimate in unrealistic action adventure. Making it realistic ruins the whole point. Sure, getting thrown through the air by an atom bomb while sitting in a lead lined fridge is absurdly unrealistic, but let's be honest: the first movie has Nazis opening the Ark of the Covenant, which literally melts their faces. That's okay? That's realistic? Using a life raft as a parachute is all right? I consider lack of realism as a weak criticism of this film. It was never supposed to be a realistic story, and I'm glad it's not. Everything has to be grounded in realism these days, and that's a shame. Cinema is an escape from the grind of real life, so it's too bad that realism has to be essential in Hollywood these days. These movies are meant to be carefree, wholesome fun and this movie has that sense. Is it as successful as Raiders or Last Crusade? No. But this movie does have a sense of adventure that is interesting. What's wrong with aliens in this movie? The other movies all dealt with religious artifacts, but this one did it in a different way. To the ancient civilizations portrayed, this was religion. Legends do tell of beings that came from the sky that acted as gods to them. Is it real? Well, it's a matter of belief.  But to them, it was real. Why can't Indiana Jones deal with alien beings? It's not like the other movies were crazy realistic with their religious symbols. Call me a bad fan, but I legitimately do not see a problem. Now, there are obviously problems with the movie. I'm not sure how I feel about Shia LaBeouf's character, but I don't care for LaBeouf's acting as the character. He did nothing new: he was basically just recycling his Transformers character. I hated the fact that there was so much CGI in this movie. It could have been a chance to honour the classic stunts from the original movies, but they screwed it up. We did not need the scene with the monkeys: that is the only scene in the movie that makes me cringe. But for all the flaws, this movie is still fun. That's all: good mindless fun that is well paced. 

Now for Temple of Doom. Good Lord, it's a trainwreck. Let me get out the most commonly cited problems with this movie: Willie and Short Round. I hate these two. God, I hate. They are without a doubt the most agonizing characters in this series. Willie is a female stereotype at its most offensive. She whines, cries, screams about breaking her nails and overall acts as a waste of time, film and oxygen. She is also given NOTHING to do. She's a throwaway character who is there for no reason other than to give Indy a love interest. Then there is Short Round. Another stereotype, this one being an Asian one. He spouts his accent because Speilberg thinks its funny and acts terribly. Hey, did you know the guy who would one day create Jar Jar Binks wrote this movie? And that the guy who directed it would one day go on to produce Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen? But the real problem I have with this movie is the tone. Now look, it's not unusual for sequels (well, technically Temple of Doom is a prequel) to be darker than the original, and that's not always a bad thing. On the contrary, movies like The Godfather Part II and The Dark Knight have used a darker tone to improve themselves as films, and even surpass the original in the case of The Dark Knight. In fact, Lucas had already made a great second act to a trilogy in The Empire Strikes Back. But this one just went way, way, WAAAAAY too far to the point where it's unpleasant to watch. Lucas and Speilberg were both going through divorces when this movie went into production and that really reflects in Lucas' script. Gone are the senses of heroism and adventure. Replacing them are child slaves, kidnapping human sacrifices, voodoo ceremonies, mind control through curses, human hearts being ripped out of chests and tons of blood flowing everywhere. Again, I have nothing against going darker for Part II in a series, but this was just hard to watch. The villain is terrifying, but overly so. He is disturbing in many ways because of how powerful and psychotic he is. Heath Ledger's Joker did not scare me this much. Keep in mind that much of the marketing for this movie was centred on children. There was a toyline and few video games. I would not take a kid to see this. I saw it when I was 11 and it scared the crap out of me. I know this is a weird criticism of a movie, to say the villain is too scary, but it really does go too far. Being scary is fine, but you have to know your audience. This guy was like something out of a voodoo Saw movie. The relationship between Indy and Willie is unbearable because I do not buy for a second that someone as tough and badass as Indy would ever develop feelings for someone this annoying and needy. He fell for Marion in the first movie, but Marion was tough and resourceful. When we first meet her she is taking shots with a bunch of guys. Elsa in the third movie was also believable because of her love for archeology and history. She and Indy had tons in common, even though she turned out to be a traitor. Willie has nothing in her personality that would make Indy think of her as anything more than an annoyance. In  fact he does view her as an annoyance for the beginning of the movie until they suddenly fall for each other for no real reason. If this movie did do one thing right was that it really established Indy as a hero. He has nothing to gain out what he is doing other than save the children who are captive. Outside of that, I do not like a thing about Temple of Doom, and I am not alone on this. Speilberg has openly admitted that he is not happy with this movie. I'm not 100% sure what Lucas thought of it, but considering it's the guy who did the Star Wars prequels he probably loves it. So why do people seem to like Temple of Doom more than Crystal Skull? I think it's the nostalgia googles. People have been watching this movie for years and is considered one of the "classic" Indiana Jones movies. The new one never had a shot. People will always remember the original trilogy and that's what they did. So that's it. Proof I have no intention of bowing to popular opinion. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull: not perfect, but still not bad. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom: awful movie. 

Marvel Marathon-The Avengers

Well, this is the last part of Marvel Marathon, and like the series, is what this marathon has been building up to. It took a lot of work to do Marvel Marathon. I'm not a comic book guy, but I liked the movies a lot, meaning I had to do tons of research into who these characters are and how true the movies were to them. In hindsight, I still can't believe this movie exists. Crossover two franchises? Rare, but it has happened before. But let's be frank, those movies kinda suck (I'm looking at you AVP). But tying together four different action movies into one gigantic movie? Never been done before. The fact that only one of member of the main cast ended up being recast (For the best, I might add) made this movie even more of a huge accomplishment before it even hit theatres. It's funny how my personal hype went. I was excited to see it for sure, but The Dark Knight Rises was easily my most hyped movie of the year. It was in the hours before I saw this movie that I got excited. I went on opening day, and I saw a newspaper ad shortly before I left for the theatre. It featured the poster for this movie with a brilliant slogan above it: "TODAY THE WORLD WILL ASSEMBLE." Confused? The line comes from here:

It's a catch phrase from old Avengers stories. And for some reason, I started to get really hyped from that brilliant poster. When I got to the theatre, I was greeted by the longest lineup I had ever seen for an opening night showing (By that I mean the 7:00 showing: the real opening night showing). Bear in mind I have seen Spider-Man 3, Avatar, The Dark Knight, Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Parts I and II on opening night. None of those lineups were longer, and none of those lineups had as much hype. I sat down in my seat, begging the Movie Gods to allow this movie to be good. I had just had a sudden love affair with this thing. Don't let it suck. Ladies and gentleman, I am proud to say the Movie Gods are real. 

I already said in my Summer In Review post that I loved this movie, but I now want to say why I loved it, what was so good. Well I ask you: what was bad? What didn't work? Not much. Sure, there are inconsistencies and flaws, but those are minor. Does anyone really care how Bruce Banner was suddenly able to control his transformations into the Hulk? Not really, or at least from my point of view. This movie has it firing on all cylinders and managed to avoid any potential problems I was afraid it might have. The biggest fear I had was that some characters would be used more than others, especially Iron Man. He was hugely popular, and Robert Downey Jr. was suddenly the biggest thing in the world, so I assumed he would get the most screen time and development. I was completely wrong. Every character gets their time to shine. I didn't like one character any more than the other, and that is quite an accomplishment, and I got the sense the actors were having a ton of fun, and that extends to the audience. This is one of the most entertaining movies I have ever seen, but not in a Transformers way in which there is no story or character. This movie had heart. It tried to tell a good story. Yes, it is about an evil villain trying to take over the world, but it was done well in the execution. We cared about the characters and hated the villain. Tom Hiddleston really stole the show as Loki. He is still hateful, so despicable and so wonderfully villainous that you have to just love him. He loves what he is doing and always has a creepy smile on his face. The Avengers as a whole have good chemistry together and the actors manage to play off of each other extremely well. You can see the effort that everyone put into this. It was how an action-adventure like this should be done and acts as proof you don't need an Inception style story to have a great movie like this. You can have your explosions and your CGI effects, but you also need to have something beneath the surface. One of the movie's best aspects was the humour. Not only are there gags in here, but they work. Hulk grabbing Loki and throwing him around was completely hysterical, as was Hulk punching Thor. It kept the movie light and fun. Sure, comic book movies can get serious and have it work, but that would have been wrong for this one. It's about superheroes teaming up to save the world. You can't take that too seriously and I'm glad Joss Whedon was smart enough to not go down that road. Now, I can keep going all day about this movie, but it's pointless. Everyone has seen it, and there are millions of reviews on the Internet that point out every good aspect of The Avengers, so I will end it here. It's a fantastic movie, as we all know.

 And that is the end of Marvel Marathon. It took a lot of research into these characters, and I'm kind of glad it's over. But it was fun looking into these movies. Yes, even Iron Man 2. 

Revolution

I'm taking a break from Marvel Marathon to rant about this crap (Which is good, because I don't have to research old comic book stories just for a review). There are good people working on this show: J.J Abrams is a producer, as is Iron Man director Jon Faverau, who directed the pilot. But, this show sucks, which reminds me why I need to stop being hyped for upcoming television shows. I was super hyped for Terra Nova last year, but it ended up sucking, and sucking hard. But even it doesn't compare to this. Bear in mind I'm writing this based on the first two episodes, because that's all I'm planning on watching.

So, as the promos say, all technology in the world shuts off. All electronics go out, all cars stop working, planes fall out of the air. Of course, guns still work just fine. Isn't storytelling convenience great? So mankind falls back into feudalism, which is where we meet our main characters, living in a village 15 years after the blackout. There is Ben Matheson, a man (scientist?) who predicted the blackout. However, Ben is killed shortly after his introduction by the villain of the piece, Cap. Tom Neville, a member of the Monroe Republic militia (That is the name of the area they live which is headed up by Sebastian Monroe, who I guess will end up being the real villain: kind of a Darth Vader/Emperor thing). Following his death, his daughter Charlotte (Known as Charlie) swears revenge, and goes to find her Uncle Myles, based on her father's dying breath. Charlie...... so she is a tough, resourceful young woman who provides for her family by hunting with her weapon of choice: the bow and arrow. Gee, DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR????

But give Katniss Everdeen credit: she is nowhere near as annoying as Charlie. She whines and complains constantly, and the actress clearly has clue what she's doing, constantly trying to make anannoyed face for the camera. After all, she's supposed to be tough, right? Yeah, Jennifer Lawrence she ain't. So she and boring ragtag group find Uncle Miles, and he's a jerk. Yeah, the stereotypical cynical, one-liner spewing jerk who you know will go on a character arc which will result in him accepting his niece and becoming a good leader, blah, blah, blah. And Miles also feels guilty, because he was once friends with Monroe. Let me explain this idiocy: right after the blackout Myles and Monroe go to a military base where I guess Myles was stationed. Myles gets in with his ID, and Monroe gets in with...... a tattoo on his arm which bears his last name. So, the world just went to hell, and you let in a guy based on a tattoo? Even if Sebastian Monroe is known to them, maybe there's another guy who has a tattoo on his arm? Maybe the tattoo is military grade, but then why did Myles have to show his clearance instead of his own tattoo? You'd think the military would be on high alert, but I guess not. Before long Danny, the ungodly annoying little brother to Charlie is captured by Cap. Neville, who forces him to ride with them. They find a rebel towards Monroe who is hiding guns: punishable by death. They kill him and find the symbol of resistance: an American flag (symbolism, I'm sure) When Danny seems to disapprove, Neville demands to know the problem. The answer? "I think you just kill because you like to kill. Because you're a murderer. A psychopath." That line made me laugh so hard that I had to pause the show for a good five to seven minutes to regain my composure. The idea that this is Neville's only motivation: that a seemingly evil but sane man would do all this just so that he can kill? God this show is lazy. That and the delivery of the line is so forced, so weak and so painful that it is downright hysterical. Finally, there is the plot of Miles finding Nora. In fact, that is the plot of the whole second episode. Who is Nora? "She's really good at blowing up stuff." Yeah, that's all we get. She's good at explosions. Why should we care about them looking for her when we know nothing about her? Nora ends being a lot like Miles: cynical jerk who is working for the resistance. What is the goal of the resistance? To bring back the United States. Assuming this blackout is global, that is a dumb plan. It's implied that all of the country is split into these republics, and Monroe's Republic is just one of many. How is Nora going to destroy them all, restore democracy, get a new President, get all of the States back together and somehow get these people to honor the Constitution? Plus, what about the rest of the world? Do they just get hung out to dry? Then there is the whole kill-or-don't-kill issue. Seen it before, you're not doing anything new. As a matter of fact, everything here has been seen before, and that is one of the biggest problems. The concept of a post apocalyptic world is so overdone that it no longer carries any weight. The only way to make this seem powerful is to really drive home the fact that the world has ended. There is no future, there is barely a sense of history. There is just brutal survival. That would need to be adult and maybe a little graphic, but that can't happen: it's network TV. With better writing and acting, this might have worked on HBO or AMC. Even Fox probably would have let more stuff go. But this isn't HBO or Fox: it's on NBC, one of the worst networks around today. 

So there we go, criticism over. This show sucks, and the fact it has gotten decent ratings is beyond me. There are better television shows out there. Speaking of which, The Mob Doctor, a show which looked kind of good is also terrible, although I'm not getting into a review of that. It's just bad and the TV season has not been kind to me. Don't fail me now, Walking Dead. 

Marvel Marathon-Captain America: The First Avenger

I love Captain America, and I'm a Canadian. There is a place in this world for a super patriotic superhero, and this is it. You just have to love Steve Rogers as a character. He's someone we all aspire to be: the grand hero who is still true to himself, the great leader who is never wrong, the good soldier who will take a bullet for his country. This is actually not the first Captain America movie Marvel has made. In 1990, another movie was made that was intended to mark Marvel's introduction into the movie business to compete with DC's hugely popular Batman movie. The result was a disaster. It was met with numerous delays which resulted in the theatrical run being cancelled and the film going straight to video I have actually seen that movie, and the production values are on par with movies from the late 60's and the plot is a mess. Here's the trailer: judge for yourself.

I always wanted a great Captain America movie. I saw the whole thing in my mind's eye and I wanted Marvel to create what I wanted. But my skepticism set in when I heard some questionable casting decisions. I wanted this movie to defy my expectations, more so than any other Marvel movie. Did I get my wish? Well....

The casting decision I spoke about was the casting of Chris Evans as Captain America. Evans was known to marvel fans for playing Johnny Storm/The Human Torch in the awful Fantastic Four movies. I did not like Evans in those movies at all. He tried way too hard to be funny and got on my nerves constantly. Hearing he was going to be Cap was terrible news. Thankfully, I was completely wrong. Evans owned this role as well as Chris Hemsworth and Robert Downey Jr. owned their respective roles. He is heroic and powerful, yet humble. Captain America is a simple man at heart, and Rogers perfectly captured that. I still remember when we saw him for the first time in the costume. The moment sent chills down my spine, because he was here. Captain America was real. He was there in front of me, living via this movie screen. Evans was so good that I forget he was playing a character. He was Steve Rogers. Sadly, I had the opposite reaction to another character, who I felt was a perfect choice going into. When I heard this movie was going into production I felt there was only one man who could play the evil Red Skull: Hugo Weaving. Much to my surprise, I got my wish. I walked into this movie waiting for Weaving to blow my mind with his performance, and that didn't happen. His performance was bland, but he was given nothing to work with. Red Skull as a whole was kind of underdeveloped, which is a real shame. He had the potential to be great villain, but it fell flat. I would say Red Skull as a whole was the movie's biggest problem. He looked fantastic, but he was underdeveloped as a villain. I never felt he was as hateful as Obidiah was in Iron Man. Yes, he is a Nazi, but that is really the only thing he was going for him as a villain. But even with a weak villain,
this movie shines in other ways. The best strength, excluding Evans' performance is the way this movie is put together. It's set in World War II, and the style of the movie reflects the times and culture of that era. It reminds me of the 40's adventure serials in many ways, which makes it feel very exciting and nostalgic. Director Joe Johnston had already made The Rocketeer, another love letter to that era. I loved the relationship between Steve and Peggy Carter. Let me explain the way this goes (SPOILERS) Steve and Peggy had been growing closer together throughout the entire movie. In the end, Steve is flying the airship over the ocean and knowns he has to crash the ship to destroy the weapons on board, but losing his own life in the process. Hearing Peggy beg him not to do this is heartbreaking, because I loved the chemistry between them. They make plans for a date when he gets back, to go dancing. They know he is not coming back, but they don't want their last conversation to be depressing. They wanted to end everything on hope. Steve is frozen in the ice and revived in modern times. He runs through New York City in confusion, and Nick Fury asks him what the problem is. His answer? "I had a date tonight." Now that is sad. I was ready to leave the theatre depressed, but luckily there was a trailer for The Avengers after the credits and I left full of anticipation. It has been confirmed Peggy Carter is still alive in 2012 in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, so I look forward to their eventual reunion. And that's all I got from Captain America. It's a good movie, but suffers from the lack of a good villain. But fear not. Our next review is the last part of Marvels' Cinematic Universe Phase 1, and also happens to be the finale of Marvel Marathon. And oh boy, are we going out with a bang. The Avengers is next!

Marvel Marathon-Thor

Let me start off by saying this: I bought a ticket to this movie completely expecting it to suck. I had never heard of Tom Hiddleston or Chris Hemsworth and did not think they were up to much of anything. I also did not think much of Natalie Portman (I had not yet seen Black Swan yet, sue me) I also had not yet seen Hamlet, so I do not anything about Kenneth Branagh as a director. I only knew of him as Gilderoy Lockhart, and the thought of Gilderoy Lockhart directing Thor was laughable. I also thought Thor as a concept was close to impossible to take seriously. The weird helmets and outfits, the capes and the overall idea made the God of Thunder the hardest of the Avengers to bring to the big screen. I bought a ticket, put on my 3D glasses and sat down in the theatre for what I expected to be a two hour suck-fest. Gods, was I wrong.

I had no clue that Hemsworth was another brilliant casting decision on Marvel's part. He NAILED this character. The arrogance, the regality, the power, the nobility. It's all here, and believable. He plays Thor as a character as an arrogant jerk who must find the noble man within. We see him in the beginning thinking he's the king of the world, and a lesser actor would have just made him completely unlikeable. But Hemsworth gives him an air of charisma and likability that carries on later. We know that he is a good character at heart, and this movie is about him discovering that for himself. He has great chemistry with Natalie Portman. I liked the relationship between Thor and Jane Foster a lot, much more than the Betty and Bruce relationship from The Incredible Hulk, although has more to do with the fact Portman was actually trying. I felt very sad at the end when Thor has to destroy the Bilfrost Bridge, preventing him from coming back to Earth. I was a tad disappointed to see that Jane not appear in The Avengers (she is mentioned), but am excited to see her back in the upcoming sequel. Tom Hiddleston.... I love this guy. True, he is much more dastardly and hateful in The Avengers, but he was not meant to be a monster here. This was the setup. He realized the history of his origins and swears revenge. Simple, but understandable. Towards the end he really does become more evil. I think this carefully balanced performance proved no one other than Hiddleston could have played this role. Anthony Hopkins is good as always, and I really liked the ragtag group who tags around Thor, them being Lady Sif and the Warriors Three. They had great chemistry and provided for some great battle scenes. That reminds me: this is easily the most visually stunning of all the Marvel movies. The realm of Asgard looks jaw dropping, as does the Bilfrost Bridge. The action scenes are spectacular, especially the final fight between Loki and Thor. The only issue visually belonged to the Frost Giants. They were not CGI: they were actors wearing latex costumes. I can't fault them for not going the CG route, but they never really looked giant. The original Godzilla movie did the best job for making something small look giant. Everything was shot from a low angle against objects made to scale. There are too many shots of the Giants alongside the main characters, and that can get distracting, but I guess that's not a huge deal. Branagh was really the only director who could have done this movie. Yes, the characters are all wearing capes, helmets and viking inspired armour. But he never loses sight of the human angle. This movie still feels real, even if the concept may be silly. It's proof almost any concept can work if the execution is good.

I love this movie. Yeah, there are a few nitpicks here and there that I didn't mention, but they're not important. (Except for the pointless Hawkeye cameo. Seriously, why?) This was a huge step up from Iron Man 2. Yeah there is setup for The Avengers, but it feels natural. Loki's villainy felt like a natural progression from this movie. Kudos to this movie, and good on you for proving me wrong.