Err, anyways...
I will not lead with my opinions on "The Avengers", mostly because it is the most recently watched, but also because I know you will stop reading right after it. I am a sly boots, you know.
American Dad
In the beginning, I had a general disinterest in this show. Like every other college student, I watched "Family Guy" and "Simpsons" and "Futurama", but "American Dad" looked so stupid. The alien looked annoying, the concept overdone, the fish just plain stupid...the only point of reference I had was the whining voice of Roger the Alien saying "You forgot the pecan sandies" and that is all I needed to know to say I was not interested.
But we had Netflix Instant Queue before it became cool and American Dad was one of the more interesting shows available when there was literally nothing else to watch of interest...so I tried an episode. From there, Michael and I ended up watching the first four seasons and really liking the show. When we saw that the fifth season had been added, we were excited to have it back to watch during lunchtime.
Thus far, half way through the season, I have been disappointed.
Family Guy is known for its non sequiturs that sometimes work and sometimes don't; American Dad feels like it is trying to capitalize on that and it is falling flat. I hate to keep drawing the comparison, but as with the later seasons of Family Guy, American Dad has started trying to use topics as jokes that make me frankly uncomfortable and it ruins the entire episode for me.
Okay, so admittedly I am getting older and I am the mother of three young, impressionable kids, and--oh yeah--I am conservative southern republican church of Christ. So what the hell am I doing watching these shows in the first place?
Controversial topics or mildly tasteless jokes I can find humor in. Insensitive (or offensive) as they may be, the show never hides the fact that it is irreverent, which is why I can hardly take affront just because it does ventures into topics that make me unhappy. But some of them feel like they just aren't trying. Can we as a society just please move past the anal-raping hillbilly stereotype and jokes? I do not plan on ever watching "Deliverance", but it is 40 years old at this point--it beat you to the punch, can we just drop it now?
Anyways, some episodes are all right, but for the most part they are falling below the level of hilarity that we found in it before.
The Hunger Games
When there is a book or series that is causing a lot of commotion, I make a point to read it. Of course I was at the midnight release for the later Harry Potter books, and I plowed through all four "Twilight" travesties (hey--don't shoot the messenger, Bella spoiled the whole deal). So when I heard of "The Hunger Games" and got confirmation from my sister that the books were good, I bought a bundle pack on my Kindle app for iPhone to read with my husband.
Once I started, I couldn't stop and read the whole trilogy in a weekend.
Some parts were tedious, and at parts it became overly political...but it was an interesting concept and engaging story, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. When Michael's parents agreed to watch the kids, Michael took me to Popeye's Chicken (yum, yum, yum!) and to watch the movie version of "The Hunger Games".
The brutality was considerably toned down for the movie, which I for one greatly appreciated. It is one thing for you to read it, but I cannot imagine actually watching some of these things enacted. I really liked the girl they got to play Katniss--she was pretty but not inaccessibly-so and she did a very good job playing the role.
I am going to take a moment here to say: anyone who tries to make a case that Katniss is a Mary Sue should reexamine the definition. A Mary Sue is without notable flaw, creating a one-dimensional wish-fulfillment for reader or author. Katniss Everdeen was emotionally stuck at 11 years old and unable to read or interpret normal, healthy human interaction. The girl herself is not what was important. The rebellion needed a symbol and they made her into one.
Anyways, not to get off on a tangent there. The movie was very good. I really liked Peeta, just as I did in the book. Gale was well-played and quite attractive. The show was stolen, however, by the marvelous Haymitch Abernathy. He was so perfect, so well done that it brought the entire thing together. They absolutely did the book justice, even if they changed minor details to fit the story.
Supernatural
Everyone had been talking about Supernatural, the show on CW. Once again having shotgunned all currently interesting shows, we were searching for something new to fill the void, and Michael suggested this show about paranormal hunters.
As soon as I saw Jeffery Dean Morgan, I was sold.
The first time I had seen JDM was as Comedian in Watchmen, and I did not like the character. It is a common discussion between me and Michael--which characters are redeemable through selfless action, regardless of a heinous and vile past. Comedian was not I could see redemption in.
Months later, I fell in love with him as Denny on Grey's Anatomy, a handsome terminal heart patient that Katherine Heigl got involved with. He was wonderful, and I was warming to the actor considerably.
So when we start this show and he is looking like a major component, my interest is peaked. The sons were both actors I recognized as well--one as a love interest in Gilmore Girls, the other as a former boyfriend of Miss Lana Lang in Smallville--and the opening introductions was one of the most compelling I have ever watched.
Since then it has somewhat become a demon-of-the-week type, like Angel in early seasons but more light-hearted, which is fine but I am hoping for more substance, more long-term enemies.
The Avengers
We all know you only read to see what I thought about Avengers. I mean, come on--it is all anyone anywhere is talking about, which is why I deliberately kept my opinions off Facebook. When officially does saying anything ever at all become spoilers? Because if you don't want spoilers, read something else, I won't censor myself adequately.
My husband pretty much summed my feelings up with "I would have paid the price of admission just to watch the mid-credit scene".
Oh, my god you guys...Thanos.
Fucking. Thanos.
I cannot express with any words how wildly and obscenely excited I am about seeing that half a second of purple sock face. It was....so awesome.
Let me give you some back story. I didn't read comics before I met Mike. But as any good girlfriend, I was going to show interest in what he enjoyed, which meant that I started by playing Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2 and Devil May Cry 3 for his love of video games, and I started reading The Infinity Gauntlet to gain more insight into his love of comics.
That was some 6 or 7 years ago at this point and I have since adopted these interests as my own and started forming opinions and insights and tastes regarding what I read and play, but I fell in love with the character of Thanos from that series. He is one of the unknown strengths of the Marvel Universe and I am glad he is getting a chance to really shine in the world.
Okay, enough of my girl-boner for Thanos (now THAT is an unnerving phrase. Now you're thinking about it. Stop that.). What about the actual other 2 and a half hours of movie?
Obviously I knew this movie was going to be fan-freaking-tastic. What else could it be with Joss Whedon at the helm? The man is a wonderful writer with strong connections in both the movie and the comic world. He knows how to make a movie exciting, a story compelling, characters engaging, and all without sacrificing the integrity of established universe. He treated all these characters with the utmost respect which is something you cannot expect from a director that sees comics as "intended for children" (a gross assumption made by the majority of people). Everything in the movie was great.
The two brightest spots in that movie for me were Jeremy Renner and Mark Ruffalo.
First, Ruffalo.
The first two Hulk movies I enjoyed. Probably more than I should have, but I took them for what they were and even though they weren't great, they were entertaining to watch. Somewhere during the more recent Hulk movie, I developed a strong dislike for Edward Norton, and at no point in either movie did I feel they captured both the characters of Bruce Banner and the Hulk. It is like they were told basics about these characters and made assumptions based on that--Banner is a scientist which makes him a total dorky-dork, and Hulk is a mindless, anger-fueled beast. I would personally disagree with both of those assessments.
In this movie, I think they solved the fundamental problem with other incarnations....Hulk is not meant to be a stand-alone character.
In comics, sure--you can have entire series devoted to him. But those are differently paced than a movie, and a 50 years of back story and recap can be boiled down to a half page of print. For a cinema version of the character, you have to waste precious screen-time trying to explain who this guy is before you can actually have him do anything, and that hurts the story.
With him in a team, all you need to know they tell you, which is that he is a genius scientist that was exposed to gamma-radiation and now has a rage-beast form. Now he is free to interact with the rest of the story and develop as an individual without the tediousness of trying to force a love interest or him trying to figure out how to control this thing.
What I really liked was that the other characters respected his work and saw the potential in him, instead of writing him off as a mindless beast. And they played the Hulk as a redeemable character, one that aimed for an abandoned factory instead of falling on a bunch of innocent people; one that fought the invading enemy alongside the hero, and that caught a falling Tony Stark from the sky. If we had used the Ed Norton Hulk, there was not enough expressed inherent good or usefulness in him to explain why he is on the team--he was portrayed as the villain, as the enemy, even when fighting a greater threat.
Ruffalo played not only a fantastic Hulk, but a spot-on Bruce Banner. There was no caricature of a nerd here, but a respected doctorate-level genius that is more-or-less in control of his baser urges to become a valuable asset to the team. There is none of that whipped-puppy thing going on with him, the guy that took crap all his life until he found an outlet through a monstrous transformation. I hated that. Come on, we have enough of that through many of the villainous characters that are portrayed; have faith that the character that has stood on his own story for nearly half a century has the chops to make it on the big screen.
Jeremy Renner is not a man I would normally find attractive. No offense to the guy, but I have a very specific type and he is just not my cup of tea.
Holy crap, does he make one sexy Hawkeye.
Now, I am not positive they ever called him Hawkeye. They more or less referred to him as Barton, occasionally Clint, and once "the Hawk", but I cannot recall an actual incidence of Hawkeye. Which is fine, as he never "officially" suited up either, just maintained his SHIELD uniform which was admittedly badass.
I was a big fan of him being a bad guy for half the movie. I mean, talk about true to the character. It also gives him a chance to come into his own. As all the other characters have been introduced in some form or another previously to this movie, he had to work harder to prove his worth than the others, I believe. Sure, he had that brief cameo in Thor, but all we saw was a brawny guy wielding a sweet-ass bow. He never even got to shoot it.
The way that he mapped his targets so that he was not even looking at them when he let loose his arrows? Masterful. The set up of traditional arrows with unique tips, easily interchangable without mix-up? Brilliant. The aforementioned Katniss looks like a big pile of suck and die next to our Clint. He was just the right amount of cocky and quippy, head-strong and obedient. I loved every second he was on screen.
Why am I not fawning over Cap (Chris Evans), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), and Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr), the admittedly big 3? Because they all had their own movies--I have been excited about them for years. I feel like they are finally having Captain America come into his own as he lacked the confidence he needed to lead a group of self-absorbed superheroes. Leader of a patriotic and indebted World War II soldiers, absolutely. But we are talking about is individuals that have rarely if ever worked with anyone else, and that Steve has no understanding of.
Black Widow I would like to send a gift basket to Joss for not reducing her to eye-candy and sexy poses. As the only female character on the team, the respect we afford her sets the tone for any female characters yet to come, and I think Scarlett knocked it out of the park.
As for minor quibbles, I will say this:
Nick Fury has been black for 10 years. Get over it. It does not break the character if he is black, white, Asian, or Martian--he is the comic embodiment of badassery and there is no one and nothing more badass than Samuel L. Jackson.
JLA will never happen. Why? Because it would suck ass. That and the sheer force of Ryan Reynolds, Christian Bale, and Brandon Routh would never ever in a million years work and could not possibly contend with the magnitude of the characters of Batman and Superman. There would be no screen chemistry, no one knows enough of the characters, there would be a tedious amount of explaining why this movie is just happening...if you want a good DC team up, try the Superman/Batman animateds. They are quite good and they are not trying too hard. Part of the reason Avengers worked so well is because the average asshole is passingly familiar with the characters, but not enough to know anything about them. Batman and Superman everyone feels personal ownership over and you will be walking a fine line the entire time just trying to maintain the sanctity of those characters to satisfaction before even taking into consideration the other members of the team.
Not gonna happen. Forget about it now.
Ah! Gotta go.
--Andie
No comments:
Post a Comment