The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[KilloWertz]

Originally Posted by DjMethod

Thanks killowertz. I missed out on buying tickets too... So I subscribed to the SDCC twitter page and jumped on the 4-day passes when they released more about a month ago.

I definitely won't be able to make every panel because of lines/crowds and such, but the ones I am primarily aiming for:

• Underworld: Awakening sneak peek and panel with Kate Beckinsale
• Sony Panel (sneak peek + cast panel for Amazing Spider-man, 30 Minutes or Less, etc.)
• True Blood Panel and Q&A
• Batman: Year One world premiere (DC Original Movie) + possible blu-ray giveaway
• DreamWorks Fright Night Panel with Colin Farrell, Anton Yelchin, Christopher Mintz-Plasse
• WB/Hanna Barbara Blu-ray Panel (possible blu-ray giveaway)
• Fox Panel (Sneak peek titles unannounced )
• Robert Rodriguez Panel
• Jon Favreau/Guillermo Del Toro Panel
• ...and a bunch of other Comic-related non-blu-ray related panels like Todd McFarlane, Batman, and Street Fighter X Tekken Panels

Pretty excited because this is my first year going. I'll be headed for exclusives before anything.

You're welcome. I never thought to sign up for their Twitter page, but oh well. In a way it's probably for the best even though I would have loved to attend the Chuck panel for their last year there and the Underworld one, and it would have been my first year too. A decent amount of money has gone/is going to a couple of concert trips.

I would give Army of Shadows a watch. I thought it was a great film.

Maybe, but the divided opinions on this film in here of late has me a little worried.

[Diesel]

Iron Man

I'm pretty sure I've reviewed this one before, but my opinions has slightly changed on it a few times since first seeing it in the theater in 2008, so I feel it deserves a fresh one.

Before 2008 I could count the number of great super hero movies on one...finger. Sure there were some good/very good ones (Spider-Man 1 & 2, Superman, X-Men 1 & 2), but that's it. Iron Man was the second great comic book movie in my opinion.

It does almost everything correctly. It has funny (at times hilarious) humor where needed, seriousness when it is called for and a very large fun factor.

And it is one half of the comparison that is used for every comic book movie today. "Is it more like The Dark Knight or Iron Man?"

Iron Man is not an all time great movie up there in my opinions with Lord of the Rings, Empire Strikes Back, etc. But it knows exactly what it is and does what it sets out to do incredibly well for the majority of its run time.


My only real gripe about the structure of the film is that the final confrontation is very underwhelming. I've thought so since the first time I saw it. It doesn't sink down to 'bad' territory, not even close, it's just not as good as expected given the excellent first 100+ minutes that precede it.

I used to not be too big a fan of the opening portion of the film with Stark

[Show spoiler]in the caves building the suit.

But I've moved past that and quite enjoy it now.


Robert Downey, Jr. is Tony Stark. His performance is perfect. He's witting, quick talking and provides the audience with a character they can become attached to and progress through the film with as he progresses. I rank him behind only Ledger (TDK) and Bale (Batman Begins) and a tiny bit above Jackman.

Paltrow is okay at best (in both films), but I think she was a little better in the second film.

Howard is my least favorite actor by far in this film. He isn't BAD, he just isn't all that good either. I wish Don Cheadle had been in this one

Jeff Bridges is pretty good as Stane. Though, his character isn't written terribly well in the first portion of the film. They should have just stamped

[Show spoiler]I'M THE BAD GUY

on his forehead. In the later portion of the film he becomes a better character. Bridges carries the character throughout.


If you like action, humor, a fun ride and are not Bearcat...then you should see this movie.


Rating - 4.5/5

[tanujdua]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Iron Man

I'm pretty sure I've reviewed this one before, but my opinions has slightly changed on it a few times since first seeing it in the theater in 2008, so I feel it deserves a fresh one.

[Show spoiler]Before 2008 I could count the number of great super hero movies on one...finger. Sure there were some good/very good ones (Spider-Man 1 & 2, Superman, X-Men 1 & 2), but that's it. Iron Man was the second great comic book movie in my opinion.

It does almost everything correctly. It has funny (at times hilarious) humor where needed, seriousness when it is called for and a very large fun factor.

And it is one half of the comparison that is used for every comic book movie today. "Is it more like The Dark Knight or Iron Man?"

Iron Man is not an all time great movie up there in my opinions with Lord of the Rings, Empire Strikes Back, etc. But it knows exactly what it is and does what it sets out to do incredibly well for the majority of its run time.


My only real gripe about the structure of the film is that the final confrontation is very underwhelming. I've thought so since the first time I saw it. It doesn't sink down to 'bad' territory, not even close, it's just not as good as expected given the excellent first 100+ minutes that precede it.

I used to not be too big a fan of the opening portion of the film with Stark

[Show spoiler]in the caves building the suit.

But I've moved past that and quite enjoy it now.


Robert Downey, Jr. is Tony Stark. His performance is perfect. He's witting, quick talking and provides the audience with a character they can become attached to and progress through the film with as he progresses. I rank him behind only Ledger (TDK) and Bale (Batman Begins) and a tiny bit above Jackman.

Paltrow is okay at best (in both films), but I think she was a little better in the second film.

Howard is my least favorite actor by far in this film. He isn't BAD, he just isn't all that good either. I wish Don Cheadle had been in this one

Jeff Bridges is pretty good as Stane. Though, his character isn't written terribly well in the first portion of the film. They should have just stamped

[Show spoiler]I'M THE BAD GUY

on his forehead. In the later portion of the film he becomes a better character. Bridges carries the character throughout.


If you like action, humor, a fun ride and are not Bearcat...then you should see this movie.


Rating - 4.5/5

Great review. I love this film a lot and I'm actually surprised I don't have it on dvd or blu-ray .

Also 110% agree with the highlighted bit above - was so

[Show spoiler]utterly disappointed with it! Just thought 'oh, is that it?!'.

[iam1bearcat]

Paris, Texas

Slow, Very.

*sigh* another mistake on my part. damn this fricken Criterion sale and damn my job promotion that gave me the courage to apparently waste appalling amounts of money on films that suck!

i'm done blind buying. for good.

even Source Code which i was very much looking forward to in a week, will now be put on hold and rented first before i spend $10 on that! ($5 RZ and $5 BB coupon in case you were wondering )

Paris, Texas doesn't suck. it's just... dull. soooooo dull. i knew it was a slow movie. hell, it's two and half hours long. no movie that is two and a half hours long is gonna be fast paced, so i had no issues with the pacing. i love a lot of slow burning films. Paris, Texas i just could not care much less about.

the score was pretty good but became relatively annoying after the 90 minute mark and very repetitive.

...err, there was more here but somehow got deleted?

needless to say, i disliked Paris, Texas because the story is awful and because it's about a man and his family () my eyes glazed over and i was completely disconnected from it.

looked neat from time to time (directing / cinematography) but overall not much substance here. at least, for me.

2.5/5

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Iron Man

If you like action, humor, a fun ride and are not Bearcat...then you should see this movie.

Rating - 4.5/5

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest rental: “King Kong” 1976.

You’d think it’d be hard to screw up this type of story. Whether looking at the groundbreaking 1933 original, or the ambitious 2005 remake, “King Kong” is synonymous with high adventure and awe-inspiring special effects. At least it is with these two versions.

In between, there is this 1976 version. Back in the day, this might have seemed like a really cool idea to modernize the franchise and kick-start something new. Considering that I’ve never really seen this version around much, I can only conclude that their efforts have been forgotten.

To be fair, the film is not totally boring; it does follow the same basic story and formula of the other renditions. You can expect to see some action. The problem is, it takes a while for the film to get to its point (same could probably be said for Peter Jackson’s 3-hour epic, but at least he makes it fun all the way through; this film drags in one too many spots).

The story is familiar ground; ship goes to Skull Island, people mess with some natives, steal the girl, kidnapped by giant ape, blah blah blah… Key difference is, this takes place in modern times, and the dudes are oil entrepreneurs instead of filmmakers. But in the end, such differences make the story underdeveloped and unrefined more than anything; the best that can be said is that we get to see Kong fighting helicopters instead of biplanes…but so what?

Worst of all, the film is cheap and cheesy as hell. Photography has some good parts, and the editing is okay, but there are quite a few camera tricks and gaudy special effects that haven’t aged well. Acting is okay for the most part; Jeff Bridges is a dude, even back then, and I enjoyed Jessica Lange, even though her character was a bit ditzy. Writing is okay. Production value is cheap, featuring one too many fake-looking sets, props, and costumes. Some parts show a decent amount of ambition, but nothing really stood out that much (especially compared to the other versions of this movie). The music sucks.

This version is merely okay, but it reminds me greatly of how strong Peter Jackson’s remake truly is, and how endearing the original film is.

3/5 (entertainment: 3.5/5, story: 3/5, film: 2.5/5)

Recommendation: Only for diehard King Kong fans. I recommend either the 1933 or 2005 version instead.

This would probably look okay on Blu-Ray, but I won't be getting it.

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest blind-buy: “Rango.”

You might think it mad, but despite all the hype I saw and all the glowing reviews, I didn’t really feel that interested in this film. Something about the goofy lizard and the plot summary (a chameleon with an identity crisis) didn’t sound all that thrilling.

Well, right from the start, this film has surpassed my low expectations. It’s quite fast-paced, loaded up with lots of silly and witty humor, lots of spectacular action, and some great vivid imagery. It’s pretty long, especially compared with most other CGI-animated films that only last 70-100 minutes, but there is hardly a dull moment.

The story is pretty darn strong. The identity crisis element provides a decent thematic undertone for the main character, which ultimately relays some intriguing and important messages about living life and discovering one’s potential. On the surface though, it’s also a adventurous western tale with all the right elements, an engrossing mystery, and lots of cool twists and turns.

The film has awesome animation quality. Camera angles and editing are often excellent. Textures and renderings are insanely detailed and very slick, making most things appear almost lifelike. Lighting effects, creature and character designs, settings, and props are all rendered with incredible attention to detail. Voice-acting is top notch; Johnny Depp is quite distinctive and witty, and I enjoyed the rest of the cast. Writing is good. Music is quite good, with half of it sounding like a Tarantino mix and the other half sounding more like Ennio Morricone.

4.5/5 (entertainment: 4.5/5, story: 4.5/5, film: 4.5/5)

Recommendation: Yep.

[Al_The_Strange]

Next greatest blind-buy: “True Grit” 2010.

Once again, I wasn’t expecting to really like this movie. Even with the Coen Bros directing, I tend to regard westerns as being on the dull side.

Somehow, I wound up becoming entranced by this film. It’s pretty well-paced; it immediately cuts through the BS and starts off the journey that eventually leads to some thrilling shootouts and fights. As far as westerns go, this is certainly one of the more entertaining ones.

The story is what really stands out though. It’s pretty simple, but it’s hard not to become intrigued by this revenge plot. As it goes on, it presents us with a strong cast of characters; each one finds a unique balance between being likable and unlikable, but I believe that they can exist in real life (unlike most other heroes and villains), and I wound up caring for them by the end of the movie. Their journey underscores some key truths regarding life and death.

As expected, the film is well-crafted, featuring lots of gorgeous photography and quality editing. Acting is great; Jeff Bridges is perfect as Rooster Cogburn, Hailee Steinfeld is perfect as Mattie, and everybody else was good. Writing is great. Production value includes lots of quality sets, props, and costumes. Music is not bad.

4.5/5 (entertainment: 4/5, story: 4.5/5, film: 5/5)

Recommendation: Unless you hate westerns, then yep.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Paris, Texas

[Show spoiler]Slow, Very.

*sigh* another mistake on my part. damn this fricken Criterion sale and damn my job promotion that gave me the courage to apparently waste appalling amounts of money on films that suck!

i'm done blind buying. for good.

even Source Code which i was very much looking forward to in a week, will now be put on hold and rented first before i spend $10 on that! ($5 RZ and $5 BB coupon in case you were wondering )

[Show spoiler]Paris, Texas doesn't suck. it's just... dull. soooooo dull. i knew it was a slow movie. hell, it's two and half hours long. no movie that is two and a half hours long is gonna be fast paced, so i had no issues with the pacing. i love a lot of slow burning films. Paris, Texas i just could not care much less about.

the score was pretty good but became relatively annoying after the 90 minute mark and very repetitive.

...err, there was more here but somehow got deleted?

needless to say, i disliked Paris, Texas because the story is awful and because it's about a man and his family () my eyes glazed over and i was completely disconnected from it.

looked neat from time to time (directing / cinematography) but overall not much substance here. at least, for me.

2.5/5

...but Diesel and I approve of that film, I'm certain it is a safe Blind Buy, just think of the $10 you'll save by listening to us

Anyway, I just watched...

Office Space

Very, very, very funny film!

A few minor complaints like a few of the minor characters felt a bit disconnected and/or wasted, and I didn't feel any of the romance built between Rachel and not Ross.

And I don't like Rap music.

But I laughed, that's the point of the film, to satirize office life, and it satirizes the hell out off it. And I laughed a lot.

9/10

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Paris, Texas

Slow, Very.

*sigh* another mistake on my part. damn this fricken Criterion sale and damn my job promotion that gave me the courage to apparently waste appalling amounts of money on films that suck!

i'm done blind buying. for good.

even Source Code which i was very much looking forward to in a week, will now be put on hold and rented first before i spend $10 on that! ($5 RZ and $5 BB coupon in case you were wondering )

Paris, Texas doesn't suck. it's just... dull. soooooo dull. i knew it was a slow movie. hell, it's two and half hours long. no movie that is two and a half hours long is gonna be fast paced, so i had no issues with the pacing. i love a lot of slow burning films. Paris, Texas i just could not care much less about.

the score was pretty good but became relatively annoying after the 90 minute mark and very repetitive.

...err, there was more here but somehow got deleted?

needless to say, i disliked Paris, Texas because the story is awful and because it's about a man and his family () my eyes glazed over and i was completely disconnected from it.

looked neat from time to time (directing / cinematography) but overall not much substance here. at least, for me.

2.5/5

It's a tricky business with Criterions. I don't think you should ever listen to my Criterion opinions because I love Paris, Texas and The Double Life of Veronique.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Next greatest blind-buy: “True Grit” 2010.

Once again, I wasn’t expecting to really like this movie. Even with the Coen Bros directing, I tend to regard westerns as being on the dull side.

Somehow, I wound up becoming entranced by this film. It’s pretty well-paced; it immediately cuts through the BS and starts off the journey that eventually leads to some thrilling shootouts and fights. As far as westerns go, this is certainly one of the more entertaining ones.

The story is what really stands out though. It’s pretty simple, but it’s hard not to become intrigued by this revenge plot. As it goes on, it presents us with a strong cast of characters; each one finds a unique balance between being likable and unlikable, but I believe that they can exist in real life (unlike most other heroes and villains), and I wound up caring for them by the end of the movie. Their journey underscores some key truths regarding life and death.

As expected, the film is well-crafted, featuring lots of gorgeous photography and quality editing. Acting is great; Jeff Bridges is perfect as Rooster Cogburn, Hailee Steinfeld is perfect as Mattie, and everybody else was good. Writing is great. Production value includes lots of quality sets, props, and costumes. Music is not bad.

4.5/5 (entertainment: 4/5, story: 4.5/5, film: 5/5)

Recommendation: Unless you hate westerns, then yep.

The three principals were great. Steinfeld had to carry the story and she did.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Foggy

...but Diesel and I approve of that film, I'm certain it is a safe Blind Buy, just think of the $10 you'll save by listening to us

Anyway, I just watched...

Office Space

Very, very, very funny film!

A few minor complaints like a few of the minor characters felt a bit disconnected and/or wasted, and I didn't feel any of the romance built between Rachel and not Ross.

And I don't like Rap music.

But I laughed, that's the point of the film, to satirize office life, and it satirizes the hell out off it. And I laughed a lot.

9/10

just wait until you work in an office setting! you'll enjoy it a million times more

Originally Posted by Steve46

It's a tricky business with Criterions. I don't think you should ever listen to my Criterion opinions because I love Paris, Texas and The Double Life of Veronique.

funny how that works. absolute disagreement on these two and yet other films we completely agree on

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

funny how that works. absolute disagreement on these two and yet other films we completely agree on

Do you agree on any of my Criterion faves?

The 400 Blows
Au revoir les enfants
Blow Out
Broadcast News
Chungking Express
The Double Life of Veronique
El Norte
Kes
The Killing
Mystery Train
Paris Texas
Revanche
Walkabout
Wings of Desire

I had better slow down for a while. I spent $205 at Golf Town today on a new hybrid and 36 balls. I shot a 1-under par 71 last week; the first time I ever broke par

[jvince]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Paris, Texas

[Show spoiler]Slow, Very.

*sigh* another mistake on my part. damn this fricken Criterion sale and damn my job promotion that gave me the courage to apparently waste appalling amounts of money on films that suck!

i'm done blind buying. for good.

even Source Code which i was very much looking forward to in a week, will now be put on hold and rented first before i spend $10 on that! ($5 RZ and $5 BB coupon in case you were wondering )

[Show spoiler]Paris, Texas doesn't suck. it's just... dull. soooooo dull. i knew it was a slow movie. hell, it's two and half hours long. no movie that is two and a half hours long is gonna be fast paced, so i had no issues with the pacing. i love a lot of slow burning films. Paris, Texas i just could not care much less about.

the score was pretty good but became relatively annoying after the 90 minute mark and very repetitive.

...err, there was more here but somehow got deleted?

needless to say, i disliked Paris, Texas because the story is awful and because it's about a man and his family () my eyes glazed over and i was completely disconnected from it.

looked neat from time to time (directing / cinematography) but overall not much substance here. at least, for me.

2.5/5

Source Code was pretty entertaining, and while there are a few parts that are admittedly brilliant, it was pretty predictable and the film as a whole doesn't really do anything new. It is very Hollywood, complete with a bittersweet ending that is covertly quite creepy the more you think about it (one of my main gripes about the movie).

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Next greatest blind-buy: “True Grit” 2010.

[Show spoiler]Once again, I wasn’t expecting to really like this movie. Even with the Coen Bros directing, I tend to regard westerns as being on the dull side.

Somehow, I wound up becoming entranced by this film. It’s pretty well-paced; it immediately cuts through the BS and starts off the journey that eventually leads to some thrilling shootouts and fights. As far as westerns go, this is certainly one of the more entertaining ones.

The story is what really stands out though. It’s pretty simple, but it’s hard not to become intrigued by this revenge plot. As it goes on, it presents us with a strong cast of characters; each one finds a unique balance between being likable and unlikable, but I believe that they can exist in real life (unlike most other heroes and villains), and I wound up caring for them by the end of the movie. Their journey underscores some key truths regarding life and death.

As expected, the film is well-crafted, featuring lots of gorgeous photography and quality editing. Acting is great; Jeff Bridges is perfect as Rooster Cogburn, Hailee Steinfeld is perfect as Mattie, and everybody else was good. Writing is great. Production value includes lots of quality sets, props, and costumes. Music is not bad.

4.5/5 (entertainment: 4/5, story: 4.5/5, film: 5/5)

Recommendation: Unless you hate westerns, then yep.

I didn't like this at all. Very conventional, and way too many parts where a protagonist is about to get killed by an antagonist when another protagonist pops out behind the latter to save the day. I swear this happened about ten times. I was like, "Really?" Jeff Bridges was absolutely the best part in this film.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Steve46

The three principals were great. Steinfeld had to carry the story and she did.

I agree completely.

Originally Posted by jvince

I didn't like this at all. Very conventional, and way too many parts where a protagonist is about to get killed by an antagonist when another protagonist pops out behind the latter to save the day. I swear this happened about ten times. I was like, "Really?" Jeff Bridges was absolutely the best part in this film.

I was thinking earlier that it has a certain style and appeal that older westerns have (like "The Outlaw Josey Wales" or "The Good the Bad and the Ugly") but hasn't been seen in a while. I suppose it is conventional.

I did notice those deus ex machina parts too. I've probably seen worse in other movies, but it can be glaring.

[iam1bearcat]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Do you agree on any of my Criterion faves?

The 400 Blows
Au revoir les enfants
Blow Out
Broadcast News
Chungking Express
The Double Life of Veronique
El Norte
Kes
The Killing
Mystery Train
Paris Texas
Revanche
Walkabout
Wings of Desire

I had better slow down for a while. I spent $205 at Golf Town today on a new hybrid and 36 balls. I shot a 1-under par 71 last week; the first time I ever broke par

(blue = seen it) of those i have seen, just one!
damn! i don't think i could spend more than $50 on golf. probably because i suuuuuck however lol

[BohemianGraham]

I just watched Tom Jones from 1963 because it won Best Picture at the Oscars that year. My question is, Why? How the West Was Won and Lillies of the Field would have been much better choices, because Cleopatra was boring and I have yet to see America, America. The costumes were great, and normally I like Albert Finney, Susannah York, and David! Thomlinson! However, the movie was just boring, and not amusing; it tried too hard. Also, condensing the Fielding text into 2 hours is pretty stupid. 6/10, or 3/5 if you prefer.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by tanujdua

Great review. I love this film a lot and I'm actually surprised I don't have it on dvd or blu-ray .

Also 110% agree with the highlighted bit above - was so

[Show spoiler]utterly disappointed with it! Just thought 'oh, is that it?!'.

Thanks
You should definitely pick it up...if the price ever goes down. It looks great and sounds pretty good too. And if you are into special features, it's jam packed (Get the 2-Disc release)

I'm hoping with a new director that issue is resolved for Iron Man 3

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

Thought you'd enjoy that


I'll have a review up for Captain America later.

[Diesel]

Captain America: The First Avenger

Originally Posted by Diesel

Finally back home after going to see it this morning.

It was better than I thought it was going to be and as good as I hoped it was going to be.

This is the one I was most worried about of the Marvel films. The trailers looked good enough, but I was never able to get myself about it like I was for Iron Man 2 and Thor. So I was a little worried going in about how I would like it.

Would Marvel break its streak?

Would I walk out disappointed with the final Avengers lead in?

I walked out with my answer: No.

Marvel has now managed to go 5-for-5.

The movies tone was perfect throughout. It was 'campy' in a few key scenes when it needed to be, it was quite funny when it felt right, it was surprisingly quite sad when appropriate and it had a good sense of...how do I say it...oh yea, quite often.

I remember reading people being nervous when Johnston was chosen to head this one up. I wasn't sure what to think as I haven't seen his work outside of JP3. But after seeing the film, he was ABSOLUTELY the man for the job. He did wonderfully, and I sincerely hope he returns for the sequel (Branagh ).

The story is very solidly structured. It never feels uneven, too fast, too slow or disappointing. I was worried there at the end that we might be in store for another underwhelming final confrontation like with Iron Man and, to a lesser extent because of the Drone battles, Iron Man 2. But thankfully Johnston and cast delivered at the end and gave it a solid (though not extraordinary) final confrontation. Incredible Hulk is still the only film of the 5 with a GREAT final confrontation.

Steve is definitely the character that you can (or at least I did) get the most emotionally invested in of the four characters. Sure, we wanted to see Stark become the better minded person he became, we wanted Banner to find some sort of peace and we wanted Thor to grow into the humble warrior he becomes...but Rogers is instantly likable and admirable in his moral character. You feel for this guy and his rejection he's faced because of his size/health. When he becomes the Captain you are happy for him and glad he finally has his shot. And when he

[Show spoiler]loses someone close to him

, it is heartbreaking.

I've got to say, I didn't expect to enjoy the Bucky character that much, but I really did. I also don't know anything about Cap's past outside of the obvious, so I don't know if it is in the comics or not, but I did NOT expect

[Show spoiler]Bucky to fall off of that train.

I was actually sitting in my seat with my mouth open for a second or two.

Then when Steve is

[Show spoiler]speaking with Peggy at the end I found myself quite sad. I knew it was coming (obviously) and I didn't it would be a big deal.

But like I said, I had become emotionally invested in Steve, so it made the moments that much impactful.

If I had to come up with one small complaint about with the story, I would have liked to see a little more of Red Skull.


Like the movie as a whole, Chris Evans did better than I thought he would. I knew he would be good and I liked his casting, but I didn't know if he'd be great. He doesn't have anything for Downey's Stark or Hemsworth's Thor, but he did a great job in his own right. After now seeing his performance, I have to say, Ed Norton now ranks 4th among the Avengers' performances we gotten so far. Your move Ruffalo

Haley Atwell was pleasing as Carter. She worked very well with Evans. Great chemistry between the two of them. She's my second favorite among the Avengers' women....in actual character and looks

Hugo Weaving was good...but I was hoping for great. He is inferior to Hiddleston's Loki and Roth's Blonsky but better than Bridges' Stane and Rourke's Whiplash.

The supporting cast was great.
Tommy Lee Jones played...well he played Tommy Lee Jones. I also loved that to

[Show spoiler]get Steve to the plane at the end he had to push a little red button.

Men In Black anyone?
I loved Tucci and his character.

[Show spoiler]"I'm not having a procedure tomorrow, puh, drink it later. I'll drink it now."

And Cooper is very much believable as Tony Stark's father. When he came on screen, my friend leaned over and said, "Look. It's Robert Downey, Sr."

I would have liked the montage scenes to be taken down a little and show us some more full action sequences with Cap doing his thing
But I did enjoy the actual action sequences we got quite a bit.


Captain America is a very well rounded film. Strong performances, story and structure. I am incredibly glad I got the movie I hoped for instead of the movie I expected to get.

I loved it (though not quite as much as Thor)

Rating - 4.5/5


And with that and having watched Iron Man and Incredible Hulk yesterday (along with Iron Man 2 a few weeks ago), my official Marvel Studios order is:

Thor - 4.5/5
Captain America - 4.5/5
Iron Man 2 - 4.5/5
Incredible Hulk - 4.5/5
Iron Man - 4.5/5

Cap is the first film to not be ranked above the one that came before it.

[iam1bearcat]

ohhhh yeah! guess what just arrived!

[Show spoiler]

this just made my weekend!