Movies: Tomorrowland

Score:  ****1/2 out of ***** (A)

Directed by Brad Bird
Starring George Clooney, Britt Robertson, Hugh Laurie, et. al.
Running time:  130 minutes
Rated PG

Long Story Short:  Based on a Disney ride, like Pirates of the Caribbean (although that's where the similarities end), Tomorrowland is a difficult to define sci-fi adventure.  What isn't difficult to say is that it's a resounding triumph.  A strong cast includes a solid lead in newcomer Robertson, the reliable Clooney, and a stunning (hopefully break-out) performance from young Cassidy.  They help propel a strong story, interesting, hopeful ideas - and yes, some cool visuals.  Highly recommended.


In 1964, a young boy named Frank visits the World Fair in New York City.  Not content to watch others, Frank has brought his own jetpack to the inventors' competition, though the judge, Nix (Laurie) is unimpressed by its flaws.  A young girl, Athena, watching nearby meets Frank, and tells him to follow her as she and Nix go on what appears to be an ordinary ride.  Frank obeys, and the ride takes him to quite literally a whole new world - one much more receptive to his grand ideas.  Later, in the present day, Casey (Robertson), is another curious teenager frustrated by a limiting world holding her back.  One day, after her frustrations get her in trouble, she has a bewildering but brief experience in the same world Frank found.

Enraptured by the visit, Casey is determined to find a way to get back.  However, forces in our world have been waiting for someone to try to do just that, and will do anything to stop her - for the other world holds a secret that they will not let out.

Tomorrowland is one of the strangest - yet also one of the best - cast movies in recent memory.  Despite what the previews may show, Britt Robertson as Casey is the lead, rather than Clooney's Frank.  Robertson, whom I have not seen before, gives a strong performance.  It's also restrained - I'm going to say this was on purpose, since it works well to allow the audience to, in a sense, use her as their surrogate in the adventure.  But she conveys personality of her own, particularly determination and courage.  With no love interest or similarly limiting cliches, her Casey seems a great role model for younger (esp. girl) viewers.  Though his role is smaller than expected, Clooney's presence is most welcome - at once the stable, safe adult chaperone and also the charming curmudgeon (is that a thing? Well, George is here).  Clooney also does a good job giving the impression of a sharp, exciting mind that is shaking off years of neglect.

The film also features some very strong supporting roles.  None are better than Raffey Cassidy's Athena.  Although somewhat passive early on with young Frank, later she helps out Casey in a vibrant role.  Just twelve years-old, Cassidy is remarkably expressive and equally controlled in her acting.  Anytime she has an active part on screen, my attention was drawn to her like a magnet, though she also easily pulls back when not featured.  Maybe it's just me, but Cassidy's ability to project her emotions off screen is outstanding, and also has great humor and timing.  Really, really hoping filmmakers in Hollywood take notice.  Hugh Laurie is great every time I see him, so not surprisingly he is a pleasure here as well.  And there are small roles (one scene, really) for Kathryn Hahn and Keegan-Michael Key; they are as hilarious as expected.

Tomorrowland is a difficult film to describe succinctly, which is likely (one reason) why the previews are deceptive.  It is also a reason, along with the strong cast, as mentioned, story and sentiment, why it's so good.  With such a premise - there's a parallel universe with future technology and always blue skies! - the filmmakers could easily have leaned on the special effects, from glittering city portraits to high-tech action, to carry the film.  While there is a healthy-enough dose of wondrous imagery, the film wisely instead relies on good old-fashioned characters, story and ideas.  The cast I've already discussed individually, but it's a very good balance in size and chemistry, particularly Casey, Frank and Athena.  They relate well and naturally, unforced.  The script is very good, including dialogue that avoids cheese and/or cliche, and explains enough to bring you into the world but not so much that it bogs down everything else.  And the ideas!  Beyond the high-tech wonders is a strong sense of optimism, of exploration and creativity.  Yes, there are some "bad guys" in the film - including one notable, entertaining scene of Frank and Casey evading attack in his gizmo-laden home.  But the main point is not to defeat someone else, it is rather to become their - and our - best selves.

***

Tomorrowland is a great film, in my opinion, but it is not a straightforward classic.  That's why it has a 49% on RT (although it has plenty of great reviews, shame on critics overall for not giving it more thought), and why it's disappointing at the box office (that, and it's not part of a franchise).  It was not made for any one demographic; I think it's intended for all.  Different parts of it will appeal to different people.  To me, and I've said this about other highly-rated films before, this is just classic, excellent filmmaking.  It does take advantage of today's technology - but only in support of telling a good story, not to replace it.  And working in tandem with the great story and ideas is a great team of characters, with some of the best casting I've seen in years.  This was not a "must-see" movie for me; I thought it looked entertaining, and a good change of pace after last week's Mad Max.  And it was both of those things and so, so much more.  So if you're looking for a great quality entertainment - and especially if you'd like less violence and more optimism - then do yourself a favor and see this.

New - rolling rankings of the summer's movies (click to go to my reviews):

1. Tomorrowland (A)
2. Mad Max: Fury Road (A-)
3. Avengers: Age of Ultron (A-)

As you can see, it's been an outstanding summer movie season so far - I hope you're enjoying it!

"Tomorrowland movie poster".  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrowland_(film)#/media/File:Tomorrowland_poster.jpg

Movies: Mad Max: Fury Road

Score:  **** out of ***** (A-)

Directed by George Miller
Starring Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron, Nicholas Hoult, et. al.
Running time:  120 minutes
Rated R

Long Story Short:  With Mad Max: Fury Road, George Miller has resurrected the franchise he created - and last visited 30 years ago.  Tom Hardy takes Mel Gibson's place in the title role, but the true lead belongs to co-star Charlize Theron - they make a good, if hesitant, team.  The film's true strength is its blistering action, focused on chase scenes in gnarly vehicles in a desert world.  Go along for the ride - it's a must-see.


In a post apocalyptic desert world, Max (Hardy) is a former patrol man whose family has been destroyed by elements of the uncivilized remains of humanity.  His own survival is precarious, and he quickly finds himself pursued and captured by a gang known as the War Boys.  Max is taken back to their home, an outpost ruled by the brutal, masked Immortan Joe.  From that same outpost, a commander named Furiosa (Theron) has taken a convoy to get more gasoline - but in reality has a different mission.  When Immortan Joe realizes this he orders his entire army of suicidal War Boys into pursuit on a fleet of modified and supercharged vintage vehicles, with Max along for the ride.

Eventually able to free himself, Max joins up with Furiosa.  Both flee from Immortan Joe but do not know or trust each other.  However, the two strong personalities must work together to avoid a shared grizzly demise.

In the frenzied journey that is Mad Max: Fury Road, there is relatively little dialogue but the cast still comes up with intriguing performances.  Tom Hardy plays the title character, Max; we get none of his backstory (three films made from 1979-1985) except brief, vague flashbacks to a traumatic past.  Max has little personality, the implication being that spending years alone in this desert world has stripped it from him.  Still, Hardy does a good job as a tough, sometimes brutal and even vulnerable action hero.  The real main character in fact, as you may have heard, is Charlize Theron's Furiosa.  Theron slips naturally into her role as a tougher-than-nails heroine, similar to Sigourney Weaver and the like.  The film doesn't give much space for character development, but Furiosa achieves the goal as coming off the equal, if not the stronger, in her partnership with Max.  Nicholas Hoult has the only other significant role, as the War Boy Nux.  He is quite good as a deranged acolyte of Immortan Joe early on, and still does alright when Nux starts to change later on.

The newest Mad Max is first and foremost a high-octane action film, and a damn well-made one at that; riding shotgun are several plots that succeed to varying degrees.  The film essentially comes down to one big chase, and so the vehicles used in that setting are almost characters themselves.  Moreso because they, unlike the gleaming but generic rides in Furious 7, are each customized creatures - big rig oil trucks with VW Beetle husks mounted on top; double-decker muscle cars; porcupine attack cruisers; etc. etc.  There are at least four main chase/fight scenes (amongst scattered thrills throughout - and limited CGI!), and each one has a new dynamic and new dangers to add; you almost start to cheer for Max and Furiosa's big rig itself.  Along with this, Mad Max keeps things fresh along the way by incorporating different filming techniques (the opening sequence is in semi-"fast forward"); gonzo, sometimes loony characters, behavior, and dialogue appropriate to this "mad" world; and a nifty, atmospheric score with everything from pounding percussion to hard rock to grand orchestral music.  It's the more straight-faced plot elements that are merely "meh".  Furiosa's backstory, mission, and pre-climactic "twist" are been-there-done-that, though decently executed.

***

With a stunning 98% on Rotten Tomatoes, Mad Max is widely viewed as one of the best films of the summer, if not the year, so far.  And I would agree, too, that it's one of the best pure action movies in years (this is the vehicle-based action franchise that deserves further entries, unlike some others *cough*).  What George Miller, the filmmaker who also created the series 35 years ago, understands is that there's a fine balance in great action films between excellent production and awe-inspiring moments on the one hand, and a level of craziness/creativity (that's different for each film) on the other.  I would hope to see some character development for Max, Furiosa and/or (even better) some new personalities in further entries.  The lack of this in Fury Road is not a mark against it, but rather a condition of the kind of film it is, nevertheless capping my initial score for it to A-.  Again, this is an outstanding action film; if you want to see the most entertaining film available and don't know much about superhero films, I'd even recommend it over the new Avengers movie.  Go see it!



"Mad Max theatrical poster"  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mad_Max:_Fury_Road#/media/File:Max_Mad_Fury_Road_Newest_Poster.jpg

Movies: Avengers: Age of Ultron

Score:  **** out of ***** (A-)

Directed by Joss Whedon
Starring Robert Downey, Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Chris Evans, James Spader, et. al.
Runtime:  141 minutes
Rating:  PG-13

Long Story Short:  Joss Whedon unleashes his follow-up to the 2012 superhero all-star blockbuster and delivers another smashing success.  The action soars in a variety of fun fights and battles, as the Avengers are challenged by AI nemesis Ultron.  While there's maybe a little too much going on this time around, we get more of the same great work on the heroes and their relationships too.  Highly recommended.


You might notice a few cosmetic changes to this review, but overall this is not a significant change in review style from my standard, as I had mentioned I would try.  I started writing this in a different style, but decided that I was doing too much describing, taking too long to do it, and still not getting to even my amateur-level analysis.  So I may try some tweaks through the coming months, but probably nothing huge.  Well, here is the first summer movie of the year and it's quite a doozy!  One of my most anticipated films of the year, though even this doesn't crack my top three.

Since saving the world from Loki-led alien domination last time, the Avengers have been cleaning up the leftovers.  At the beginning here, they assault one of Hydra's (evil organization) final strongholds to recover a powerful instrument.  Heading back to HQ in NY, the team is confident and ready to party.  However, a new villain rises from the very center of this victory in the form of artificial intelligence Ultron (Spader).  He calculates that the greatest source of danger in the world comes from humans themselves - none more so than the Avengers.

With the help of a new set of super twins, Ultron scatters the outgunned and outwitted Avengers.  Once again, it will take the Avengers working as a true team to stop their foe, but divisions are now greater than ever.

Age of Ultron is bursting at the seams with characters, both familiar faces comfortable in their roles and a few new ones as well.  Robert Downey, Jr. as Tony Stark/Iron Man stands out the most due to his relationship with Ultron, but it is definitely an ensemble effort.  Downey, Jr. delivers the goods as always with both his humor and his quasi-anti-hero attitude.  Chris Evans' Captain America is seen mostly as Stark's ideological opposite once again, and Thor (Hemsworth) also gets relatively little to do (most of it not even having to do directly with the film's main events).  Instead, we get a refreshing, closer look at "the Ringos", Hawkeye (Renner), Black Widow (Johansson) and the Hulk (Ruffalo).  Hawkeye brings in some of the first family elements we've seen in these films and delivers some strong scenes.  Meanwhile, the Hulk and Black Widow are drawn to each other and we get a closer look at what makes them tick.  The relationship is intriguing, and hopefully will be explored further later on.

James Spader voices the villain Ultron, and what a good choice he was.  Spader brings a laser intelligence to the villain, someone who toys with and menaces the Avengers simultaneously.  He unfortunately fades and becomes more generic as the film progresses; more on that later.  The new super twins are played competently by Elizabeth Olsen and Aaron Taylor-Johnson.  Frankly they're largely plot devices, but they bring some charisma with them.  And then we have a whole train of cameos from old friends, from Samuel L. Jackson to Hayley Atwell.  Nice to see them, and they are neither frivolous nor feel bloated.

Joss Whedon proved in the first Avengers, among many other things, that he could make a kick-ass blockbuster that also fully utilizes its characters and their relationships.  He shows the same skill here, if not quite reaching the same heights in doing so.  Age of Ultron brings the fireworks expected of this kind of tentpole film.  There are three main battles, each nicely distinct.  We start with the Avengers' raid on Hydras base, just giving a taste of their capabilities - and effectively foreshadowing events to come.  In the middle is a no-holds-barred slugfest between Iron Man and the Hulk that is a showstopper.  And the finale is an ensemble epic much like the one from the first film.  I view it as continuity rather than copying, but admittedly it drags a bit and is overall less thrilling.  Ultron enters between the first and second battles, but unfortunately never rises to his potential (he is involved in a fourth big battle that I had actually forgotten about initially).  He simply fades to the background, becoming almost a symbol against other diversions, some worthy some not.

All the action just described gets a considerable boost from the great character work that Whedon and his actors produce.  I've already mentioned the surprising but welcome focus on the lesser-known Avengers, but a theme taken from the first film and amplified is the conflict between Captain America and Iron Man.  This works quite well in several powerful scenes, and if anything I would have liked to see more on this (and a bolder statement at the conclusion).  Sadly, like Ultron these Avengers too have to make room for just a little too much extra stuff.  A new character comes in in the latter half representing connection to an even bigger Marvel universe, and it's the point of overload.

***

I was pumped coming out of the theater after seeing this, and while I realize now it's not as good as the first, it's still a damn good movie.  Seeing Furious 7 with a better RT score makes me sick - don't always trust the critics (or me, probably)!  Yeah, there is too much going on in Age of Ultron.  But considering just how many characters and stories Whedon was juggling, it is incredible what an outstanding job he did as both writer and director.  It's quite unfortunate that he is now done with the series.  And I didn't even get to mention above that Ultron retains the first film's sense of humor; has quite good pacing considering its runtime and "bloat"; and is much better written than most blockbusters.  There is some top-notch entertaining action, and a fun to watch cast with interesting dynamics.  While this doesn't quite rise to an A for me - at least not yet - I still highly recommend it to anyone looking for a fun flick to see early this summer (and essential viewing, of course, for fans of superhero movies).



"Avengers: Age of Ultron movie poster."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avengers:_Age_of_Ultron#/media/File:Avengers_Age_of_Ultron.jpg