Captain America: Civil War (2016)

It was in the summer of 2006 that Marvel Comics published Civil War, a massive company-wide storyline built around a seven-issue series by writer Mark Millar and artist Steve McNiven. Civil War had a huge (albeit somewhat temporary) effect on the Marvel universe, shaking up the status quo in a number of ways, most notably with the public revelation of Spider-Man's secret identity and the assassination of Captain America.

And despite the mixed reaction it got from readers and critics during its original run, it still remains one of Marvel's most talked-about stories even a decade later. Elements of it appeared in the Avengers cartoons on Disney XD, it inspired the story for Activision's Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2 video game in 2009, and now, ten years later, it has crept into the live-action Marvel Cinematic Universe with the release of Captain America: Civil War.

Much like the comic that inspired it, the movie seeks to shake up the status quo by pitting the Avengers against not a god, not alien invaders, not an army of killer robots, but one another. And in a summer that already gave us one horrible attempt at pitting hero against hero, it's nice to see someone take that idea and make a good movie out of it.

We begin in Lagos, as the Avengers have arrived to stop members of Hydra from acquiring a deadly biological weapon. They are successful in stopping Hydra, but an attempt by Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen) to thwart a suicide bomber accidentally causes a number of civilian casualties. With public opinion of the Avengers already drastically declining following the incident with Ultron, this only adds fuel to the fire and leads to the United Nations to pass what it calls "the Sokovia Accords." These accords would establish a committee to oversee the Avengers, essentially putting them at the UN's beck and call.

The Sokovia Accords split the Avengers right down the middle, with Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) on one side, believing that forfeiting the team's autonomy would make them political pawns instead of protectors. On the other side, however, is Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), whose guilt over his role in Ultron's rampage has convinced him that the Avengers need to be governed by outside sources who would hold them accountable for their actions.

But things get really shaken up when it comes time for the Accords to be ratified in Vienna. Ten people — among them, the king of the African nation of Wakanda — are killed when the UN conference building is bombed, with all evidence pointing to Steve's old friend Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Stan). Already an international fugitive because of his past actions as the Winter Soldier, he immediately shoots to Public Enemy #1 across the globe despite his protests of innocence.

Not only does this mean that every law enforcement agency in Europe is looking for Bucky, but so are the Avengers that have agreed to sign the Accords. Also on the hunt is Prince T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman) of Wakanda, who has vowed to kill him and avenge his father's death. Steve is steadfast in his defense of Bucky, however, further ruining the strained relationship between he and Tony and forcing the Avengers to pick sides as the tensions rapidly reach a boiling point.

DC Comics just can't catch a break. It's bad enough that Batman v Superman was met with terrible reviews and awful word of mouth, but Civil War is pretty stiff evidence that Marvel Studios can make what is essentially the same movie and do it a hell of a lot better. Civil War is everything that Batman v Superman is not: fun, exciting, serious but never dour, and willing to let its heroes actually be heroic even in spite of their personal flaws and their quarrels with one another. And even when the movie is at its weakest, Civil War is still proof that the Marvel Cinematic Universe is firmly standing at the top of the superhero movie mountain.

Returning to direct the continuing adventures of Captain America are Joe and Anthony Russo, who once again do a fantastic job behind the camera. The movie itself is essentially Avengers 3 in all but name, but considering that the Avengers are actually fighting one another instead of some giant alien threat or an army of killer robots, it has a different feel than Joss Whedon's two movies. It feels more personal, more intimate. By putting the focus entirely on the Avengers themselves rather than their battles with some new supervillain, the Russo brothers add a level of drama you don't really see in movies like these. We the audience have spent the better part of the last decade watching these characters develop on the big screen, seeing their universe blossom and grow as they fought alongside one another. And to see them come to blows really makes the movie feel a lot more drawn in, if that makes sense. Things look differently when you're fighting your friends instead of your enemies.

But that's not to say the Russos don't cut loose and give us the spectacle we've come to expect. Oh, there's plenty of that. While I'd say the airport battle royale pitting Captain America's Avengers against Iron Man's Avengers is most certainly the movie's biggest draw and quite a bit of focus is put on it, the Russos make sure that each action sequence is the right blend of exciting, tense, and emotional. And as I said before, that feeling of intimacy makes the action feel different. The stakes feel higher since the Avengers are their own opponents for a change.

While the Russos direction is solid, the script penned by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely isn't always perfect. I doubt Mackie and McFeely wanted to write another political thriller in the same vein as The Winter Soldier, but I actually would've liked seeing that. The Sokovia Accords don't really seem that important in the scope of things, as the movie becomes more about the Winter Soldier being the wedge driven between Captain America and Iron Man rather than the Accords. The fact that this seemingly important plot device doesn't really seem that important at all makes me wonder why they even bothered. I mean, I'm sure future Avengers movies will show us that it's changed the MCU's status quo much like Millar and McNiven's comic book did, but for now, it feels a little pointless.

Speaking of pointless, I really don't see why the movie needed appearances from Ant-Man and Spider-Man. Outside of showing off that Marvel Studios had reached a deal with Sony that allowed Spidey to join the greater Marvel Cinematic Universe, I just don't get why either he or Ant-Man really needed to be in the movie. But I will admit, however, that their presence here is still quite welcomed at the very least.

I'm also surprised by just how little the movie's actual villain appears in the movie. The vast majority of the movie's plot is set into motion by Helmut Zemo (played by Daniel Brühl), who is barely in the movie at all. I'd honestly be surprised if the total sum of his screen time surpassed twenty minutes. Did they just not come up with anything for Brühl to do? Did they prefer a villain who was working in the background so as not to distract from the whole "Steve vs. Tony" dynamic? It's probably more the latter than the former, but it still sometimes gives the impression that Zemo is a non-factor. Maybe I'm just used to seeing the villains being put on something even remotely resembling equal footing with the protagonists in these movies as far as screen presence goes, I don't know.

But let's move along to the cast, pretty much all of whom hand in strong performances. It seems like that's par for the course with the MCU, but it's still worth saying. Tom Holland and Chadwick Boseman are great as Spider-Man and Black Panther respectively, and I really liked what Elizabeth Olsen brought to the table as Scarlet Witch. I wish she'd been able to do this in a smaller movie more focused on her character rather than playing a secondary role among an ensemble cast, because I'd love to see how Olsen would play Wanda when the spotlight is shining on her alone. Olsen playing Wanda as being scared of her powers accidentally hurting people and being unsure of herself make for a fascinating bit of character study had the character's arc not been one of a whole bunch of different things going on in the movie.

The movie also boasts some great moments from Sebastian Stan and Paul Bettany (who returns as Vision), and the aforementioned Daniel Brühl makes the most of his limited screen time. But the stars of the show are very obviously Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr. Both of them once again step up to the plate and knock it out of the park as Captain America and Iron Man. Their performances are exactly whet this movie needed; both characters are justified in their beliefs, and Evans and Downey play their parts in a way that a viewer leaning one way or the other as to whose side they'd chose to be on is totally reasonable.

While I personally think Civil War is the weakest of the Captain America trilogy, it's only because The First Avenger and The Winter Soldier are just that damn good. Civil War is still a very entertaining, very exciting way to spend two and a half hours at the movies. And that's a hell of a lot more than I can say for that absolute mess Zack Snyder and DC Comics made with Batman and Superman.

Final Rating: ***½

Ant-Man (2015)

I wrote in my review of Guardians of the Galaxy that Marvel Studios has been so unbelievably successful that they can make practically whatever movie they want at this point. They made a movie starring a gun-toting talking raccoon, for crying out loud! And it was a huge hit! It's probably this line of thinking that brings us here to take a look at their newest effort, Ant-Man. It may not be as risky a venture as the off-kilter space opera that was Guardians, but considering the Ant-Man character's relative obscurity among mainstream audiences, it seemed like it might have been a hard sell to some. But while Ant-Man may not be widely known among those who aren't comic book geeks, his movie is still a ton of fun.

The focus of our story is Scott Lang (Paul Rudd), a talented cat burglar who, as we're introduced to him, is being released from a stint in prison after robbing his employers and posting evidence of their corporate malfeasance online in the process. His attempts to return to civilian life are wrought with failure; his ex-wife won't let Scott see his daughter Cassie (Abby Ryder Fortson) until he can start making his child support payments, but he can't hold down a job because most businesses won't hire a convicted felon.

Stuck in a serious Catch-22, Scott agrees to take a job breaking into a safe in a retired businessman's basement. He's able to get into the safe with very little effort, but the only thing inside it is what he initially believes to be a motorcycle suit and a odd-looking helmet. Scott, not wanting to leave empty-handed, takes the suit home and figures he'll try it on. But he's startled when he hits a trigger sewn into one of the suit's gloves and is shrunk to the size of an insect. The disorienting experience terrifies Scott so much that he immediately tries returning the suit to its rightful owner, only to be caught by the cops and arrested while trying to break back in.

Fortune soon smiles upon him, however, when he's visited in jail by Dr. Hank Pym (Michael Douglas). Pym reveals that he's not only the owner of that suit, but set everything up so Scott could steal the suit in the first place because he wanted him to have it. And since Pym has greater plans for him, he smuggles the suit into into Scott's cell so he can escape.

Hiding out from the police at Pym's house, Scott learns that his new benefactor had invented the suit during the Cold War, operating as an agent of SHIELD codenamed "Ant-Man." After forcing Pym out of the technology company he founded, Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) ― Pym's former protégé and the current CEO of PymTech ― is now on the verge of replicating the chemical that Pym developed to allow the Ant-Man costume to shrink. Doing so would allow him to manufacture what he calls "the Yellowjacket," a flying suit of armor that could be used to create miniature armies. And to make matters worse, he fully intends to sell the prototype to everyone's favorite terrorist organization, Hydra.

Disturbed by Cross's growing insanity and refusing to allow his creation to be weaponized, Pym and his estranged daughter Hope (Evangeline Lilly) have conspired to sabotage Cross's plans before he can bring them to fruition. That's why Pym sought Scott out, because his history with burglary and corporate espionage makes him the perfect person for the job. Scott will need to break into PymTech in order to accomplish this, but he'll have to learn to properly use the Ant-Man suit and a built-in device that would allow him mental control over ants. And that'll be far, far harder than it looks.

A lot of people, myself included, thought Ant-Man might be kind of a hard sell to some people. The character doesn't have quite the notoriety of an Iron Man or a Captain America, and his powers (the ability to shrink and use mind-control on ants) admittedly sounds like a weird joke. And then there was the initially troubled development that saw delay after delay between its initial announcement in 2006 and the beginning of principal photography early last summer. The good news, however, is that while Ant-Man isn't one of the best chapters in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it's still a funny, entertaining movie that is definitely worth checking out.

The movie was helmed by Peyton Reed, a last-minute replacement for Edgar Wright, who had originally been pegged to write and direct the movie. While I would have liked to have seen what Wright could have done with the movie, I thought Reed still made a movie that was better than I'd anticipated. His direction is tight, fluid, and makes the movie an engaging watch. The quick transitions from big to small as Ant-Man changes his size can be dizzying, especially if you see it in 3D on a large-format screen like I did, but other than that, Reed does a satisfying job building the movie.

I do wonder, though, how the movie would have turned out had Wright actually stuck around and directed the movie. Similarly, I'm also curious what would have happened had the script by Wright and Joe Cornish not been rewritten by Adam McKay and Paul Rudd. While Wright and Cornish are given co-writer and "story by" credits, I don't know quite exactly how much of their work survived the rewrites. The final result is something of a mixed bag. There are elements that are strong and well put-together, and the story ― a superhero-themed heist movie ― is simple enough to suit the movie's needs and make it stand out from the rest of the MCU franchise. I also liked how the characters of Hank Pym and Scott Lang were set up to mirror each other as two sides of the same coin. Scott is trying to rebuild his relationship with a daughter who never sees him yet adores him all the same, while Hank tries the same with a daughter who resents him for being too controlling. It's an intriguing dichotomy that isn't really dwelt upon for too long but still adds a bit of depth to the movie.

But there are also parts that that don't really click either. The relationship between Scott and Cassie is painfully underdeveloped, and ends up taking a back seat to Scott's training to become Ant-Man. The sort-of romance between Scott and Hope feels unnecessary and doesn't add much to the movie. And the movie ultimately feels like the first Iron Man movie was just retooled to suit the Ant-Man character and reflect where the franchise has gone in the wake of the two Avengers movies.

But at least the weaknesses are counterbalanced by its positives, among them its cast. Corey Stoll plays his character solidly, but much like Obadiah Stane in Iron Man, his character is a rather generic villain. Stoll still does a fine job with it and makes the role his own. Evangeline Lilly is capable and strong despite not having a lot to do other than react to everyone else in the movie, and I really enjoyed Michael Peña as the movie's token comic relief. But Ant-Man is really bolstered by the performances of Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas. I thought Douglas was appealing as Hank Pym, bringing a lot of depth and pathos to the role. Rudd, meanwhile, is charismatic and very likable as Scott Lang, but a bit more low-key than you might expect from Rudd's past roles. He plays the role in the way that makes the characters feel like he's realized he's in way over his head but knows this is the best chance to do something good. I know Rudd doesn't seem like he'd be the first choice to play any superhero, but he still plays it to the bets of his ability and the movie is better for it.

Ant-Man feels like it might be the least of the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies, with its smaller scale and lesser-known characters. But after the bloated mess that was Avengers: Age of Ultron, some low-key superheroics were a nice change of pace. It'll never be accused of being the best entry in the franchise, but Ant-Man is still an amusing ride that I thought was most certainly worth the price of admission. But I'll tell the truth: I still want to see how the director of Shaun of the Dead and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World would have made Ant-Man instead of the director of Yes Man and The Break-Up. I can always wonder, right?

Final Rating: ***½

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

It's weird thinking that what started in 2009 with a movie based on the Marvel Comics superhero Iron Man has blossomed into a mega-franchise that has grossed over seven billion dollars worldwide and shows absolutely no signs of stopping. Some people thought that the franchise's final endgame would have been The Avengers in 2012, but here we are three years and five movies later talking about an Avengers sequel. The hype machine is in full gear and the anticipation is high, but Avengers: Age of Ultron isn't quite as good as I'd hoped it would have been. But you know what? It's still pretty fun.

The movie takes us immediately into the action, as the Avengers launch a raid on a secluded Eastern European laboratory where Hydra scientists have been using the mystical powers of Loki's scepter for human experimentation and creating super-soldiers for Hydra. Despite the interference of Pietro (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Wanda Maximoff (Elizabeth Olsen), twin siblings granted superpowers through Hydra's experiments, the Avengers' raid is successful. The bad guys are apprehended and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) claims Loki's scepter for himself so that he can study it further.

His research proves fruitful, as Stark discovers that the gem within the sceptre contains a hyper-advanced artificial intelligence that Stark and Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) believe could be the key to perfecting "Ultron," Stark's unfinished global defense system. But upon its activation, Ultron (voiced by James Spader) proves to be not only sentient, but also very, very angry. It downloads itself into Stark's mechanical peacekeeping drones and attacks the Avengers before escaping with the sceptre.

Using it in tandem with the now-abandoned Hydra lab's leftover resources, Ultron builds himself a new, more powerful body and a personal army of robots. He recruits Pietro and Wanda to help him in his fight against the Avengers so that they might settle an old grudge with Stark, but what the Maximoffs don't know is that he has more than just killing a group of superheroes on his mind. In truth, his final goal is far more sinister: human extinction.

I entered Age of Ultron excited to see it, but afraid that it wouldn't live up to the hype or that it wouldn't be as good as the first Avengers movie. And while I did think Age of Ultron was a tremendously fun, exciting ride, I simply didn't think it was as strong as the first one. It's a solid movie, don't get me wrong, but I felt a little... I don't know, perhaps "underwhelmed" is the word I'm looking for.

Returning to the Avengers saga is writer/director Joss Whedon, who, from the looks of it, adopted an "if it isn't broken, don't fix it" approach to making the movie. I saw a double feature of both Avengers movies at my local theater, and in watching them back to back, I couldn't help but notice so many similarities that it's like they're practically the same movie. There are differences, sure, but Whedon hits so many of the same notes that he hit back in 2012 that it feels like he isn't interested in bringing a lot of new to the table. Perhaps it was a case of burnout or being exhausted creatively, or maybe Whedon was being hassled by Marvel and Disney executives to deliver a certain kind of movie. I wasn't on the set, so I don't know for certain.

And maybe it's me, but the film's pacing seems to stutter and stumble every so often almost as if it was being put together from scraps. And truth is, Whedon's original version of the movie is supposedly over three hours long, but word on the street is that he had to do a bunch of haphazard editing due to Marvel executives being unhappy with some of the material he was producing along with wanting to keep the movie under two and a half hours.

But what I thought was the movie's real problem was its script. The plot is typical paint-by-numbers superhero stuff, and the returning characters are written pretty much the same way they were before. That's not what bugged me, though. What got me was the addition of some unexpected subplots that don't really go anywhere or add anything to the movie. Case in point: the Hulk/Black Widow quasi-romance felt awkward and forcibly tacked on. I didn't think it was really all that necessary to the story (or even well put-together, really), and all it did was make me wonder what the heck ever happened to Betty Ross? Did Liv Tyler not want to return, and Marvel Studios didn't want to replace her? Or could they be distancing themselves from The Incredible Hulk due to its relative lack of success compared to the rest of the franchise?

There were some things I did enjoy, though, like the additions of Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch, and The Vision to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I though each of them added something very cool to the movie, like there's more to the world of the Avengers than just good guys fighting bad guys. And I know a few people who were curious to see how this version of Quicksilver would compare to the one that appeared in X-Men: Days of Future Past last year. They're so completely different, though, that it's almost not worth comparing them. X-Men's Quicksilver was barely in the movie but contributed the movie's best, most memorable scene, while Age of Ultron's is an important character and appears throughout, which means he might not make as huge an impact as the one from Days of Future Past but still plays a continually important part of the story. Apples and oranges, the two Quicksilvers are.

The movie might have its share of weaknesses, but it also has its strengths as well, the greatest of which is its cast. Many of the returning actors have played their characters so many times that they could probably do it in their sleep, and although they're not given any material to shake things up, the cast is still top notch. Mark Ruffalo and Jeremy Renner get to do a bit more dramatic heavy lifting, with their characters being the only ones to experience any kind of growth or evolution. Both Ruffalo and Renner are great, showing why both of them were great choices for their roles. And despite the contractual hangups regarding it, I still want to see Ruffalo get his own solo Incredible Hulk movie.

But of the actors returning to the franchise, I thought Paul Bettany really stood out in particular. Having only appeared previously as the voice of Iron Man's snarky digital assistant Jarvis, Bettany gets to stretch his legs as the android superhero The Vision. While Vision doesn't appear until the third act of the movie, Bettany still gets to make a heck of an impression. He's really likable in the role, and it left me wanting to see more of the character.

Among the franchise's newcomers, we get some really great performances from Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, and James Spader. Taylor-Johnson still plays his role in a way that's fun to watch, but he ends up being overshadowed by Olsen. Olsen is a very talented actress, and she brings a lot of depth and a sympathetic nature to Scarlet Witch. And like with Bettany as The Vision, I'm genuinely excited to see Olsen turn up in future movies in the franchise.

The real star of the show, though, is James Spader. One could make the argument that the Ultron we see here is kinda boring and underdeveloped (could his "kill all humans" supervillain plan be any more clichéd?), but Spader's charismatic voicework makes the character captivating to watch. He's essentially playing a dark, twisted version of Tony Stark, believing his intentions are noble but in truth causing more harm than good yet with a more intimidating, angry, evil tone to it all. Ultron takes Stark's egotism and "know it all" nature and cranks them up to a million, and Spader plays it up for all it's worth. He absolutely steals the entire movie, and despite Age of Ultron's flaws, Ultron himself makes the movie worth seeing.

I know that for a lot of this review, I've been kinda down on the movie. And personally, after how good Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy were, Age of Ultron is a bit of a letdown. But I really couldn't imagine a better way to open 2015's summer blockbuster season. Even if it's nothing we haven't seen a million times before, I can't ague that the movie isn't a totally fun way to spend two and a half hours. I enjoyed the hell out of it, but then I'm totally a sucker for this kind of stuff. And there's nothing wrong with that, is there?

Final Rating: ***

Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

No one could have possibly foreseen just how big the Marvel Cinematic Universe would get when it began with Iron Man in 2008. After six years and nine movies, it's second only to the Harry Potter movies as one of the biggest movie franchises of all time. And when your movies make billions of dollars at the box office, with one of them making one and a half billion alone, you can get away with having a little bravery in future installments. So for their tenth movie, Marvel Studios chose to step away from the Avengers characters audiences have come to know and love so much and give us something different. Based on a team of characters that could be accurately described as obscure D-listers from outer space, Guardians of the Galaxy is a gamble that paid off in spades because it's one of the most entertaining movies I've seen in a while.

We're quickly introduced to Peter Quill (Chris Pratt), who was abducted by aliens as a child in 1988. Raised by a band of intergalactic pirates known as the Ravagers, the adult Quill has become one of their ranks, fancying himself an outlaw with the self-bestowed moniker of "Star-Lord." When we meet him, Quill has arrived on a desolate planet to retrieve a mysterious orb he's heard will fetch him a hefty chunk of money. His attempt to abscond with it is interrupted by Korath (Djimon Hounsou), a subordinate of the notorious terrorist Ronan the Accuser (Lee Pace), but he manages to escape with both the orb and his life. He also comes away with a bounty for his capture thanks to Ravager leader Yondu (Michael Rooker), who was angered by the knowledge that Quill would dare disrespect him by stealing and selling the orb without cutting him in on the deal.

But before he can fence his new possession, however, he is ambushed by Gamora (Zoe Saldana), an assassin sent by Ronan to acquire the orb after Korath's failure. Quill's attempt to fight back draws the attention of two bounty hunters ― the genetically modified anthropomorphic raccoon Rocket (the voice of Bradley Cooper) and tree-like Groot (the voice of Vin Diesel) ― looking to cash in on Yondu's ransom. The resulting brawl ends with all four being arrested and sent to a massive mega-prison called the Kyln.

Gamora is given a particularly hostile welcome upon their arrival by the brutish warrior Drax (Dave Bautista), whose family was killed by Ronan years earlier. But his attempt at having a modicum of revenge by killing her is halted when she reveals that she had planned to betray Ronan and prevent him from getting the orb. Upon mentioning that she had lined up a buyer offering a fortune for it, Quill, Rocket, and Groot immediately volunteer to help stage a jailbreak.

With Drax tagging along in the hopes that he will eventually encounter and duel with Ronan, the group heads to the buyer's outpost on the edge of the universe. However, not only are Yondu and the Ravagers following closely behind them, but so are Ronan and his armada. While the Ravagers merely wish to steal the orb for their own financial gain, Ronan has much more sinister plans for it and the immeasurable power it contains.

Making Guardians of the Galaxy was a brave experiment on Marvel's part. The characters don't have a built-in audience like Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America do, their lack of mainstream notoriety potentially serving as a stumbling block for some audience members. And the fact that it's not a typical superhero movie, instead being more of a space opera akin to Star Wars or Flash Gordon. This is not the kind of movie one would expect Marvel Studios to make. But they've defied all expectations with Guardians of the Galaxy. They've gone above and beyond the call of duty when it comes to showing the audience a good time, making a movie that is more fun and more entertaining than I ever imagined it could have been.

Part of what makes the movie so good is the direction courtesy of James Gunn. Hiring Gunn was another gamble by Marvel, as his prior work is comprised solely of low-budget, low-tech indie affairs that all failed to strike gold at the box office. Handing the guy that made Slither the reigns of a multimillion-dollar summer blockbuster seems kinda off at first, doesn't it? But Gunn's off-beat, mischievous, and ultimately irreverent sense of humor is perfect for this movie. It allows Gunn to build something that is lively and never takes itself too seriously. He's crafted a deep, rich world that effortlessly balances excitement, drama, and a feeling of wide-eyed awe. It never ceases to feel like an adventure, and when the credits roll, you'll wish it could have kept going.

And for all his low-budget work in the past, Gunn shows he can definitely handle the huge studio movies as well. I was impressed by how cool the visuals, represented mostly via CGI and motion capture work with practical effects mixed in, looked. They're seamlessly integrated into the movie, with Rocket and Groot looking especially awesome. It honestly looks and feels like they're really there. And I'll also give a big thumbs-up to the movie's 3D efforts. It was shot flat, but you'd never know it from how good the post-production conversion looks. Gunn supposedly filmed the movie in such a way that would benefit the added depth, and personally oversaw the conversion himself. His effort shows, and while I'm sure the movie looks just as good in 2D, seeing the movie in 3D just adds to the on-screen spectacle.

I also really liked the script, written by Gunn and Nicole Perlman. They must have worried about the obscurity of the property as well, because they've developed it in such a way that it is surprisingly accessible even for those who've never so much as touched a comic book. The story never gets muddled or over-complicated, the characters all have their own distinct personalities and motivations, and every scene and every line of dialogue (even the snappy comedic banter) builds toward something. Everything matters here. It's either moving the plot forward, developing the characters, or bringing us deeper into the movie's universe. There are a few hiccups along the way, mostly in the form of dangling plot threads that will surely be resolved in the inevitable sequel (which is currently set for release in 2017). But Gunn and Perlman have still put together something great.

The same can be said for the cast, all of whom are all great in their own ways. Among the supporting cast, I really liked Benicio del Toro, Michael Rooker, and John C. Reilly in their minor roles, while Lee Pace isn't bad as Ronan the Accuser. I wasn't totally impressed with Pace at first, since I honestly wanted to see more of Josh Brolin as Thanos (especially since we probably won't be seeing much of Thanos for a few years). But after seeing the movie a second time, I thought Pace did a fine job.

The primary cast, meanwhile, is the movie's main drawing point, and they're all strong and likable. Chris Pratt plays Star-Lord as if Luke Skywalker were desperately trying to be Han Solo; he's a cocky, swaggering wannabe outlaw with a blossoming sense of heroism. Pratt is very fun to watch in the role, putting forth a fantastic performance. Zoe Saldana, similarly, brings a confidence to Gamora, along with a certain vulnerability as well. She is more subdued than the rest of her castmates, something I felt worked in her favor. It makes her more intriguing to watch, because she's not as wacky or over-the-top as the others.

And I must admit that I was surprised by former WWE star Dave Bautista. Most pro wrestlers aren't very successful in translating from the ring to the big screen, with the only real exception I can think of being Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson. But Bautista is excellent here. He's hilarious, complex and nuanced, and actually really impressive.

But as funny as Bautista's Drax is, the movie is almost completely stolen by the characters of Rocket and Groot, thanks in part to the voice work from Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel. Cooper's Rocket is braggadocios yet secretly neurotic about his lot in life, and he makes it work. I've heard he based it on Joe Pesci's performance in GoodFellas, and I believe it. It really shows, and it makes Rocket more memorable.

Diesel approaches his role, on the other hand, as if it were similar to his role in The Iron Giant. His only dialogue is the oft-repeated phrase "I am Groot," a phrase that means so many different things depending on the tone and inflection, and Diesel makes it oddly believable. Watch the movie intently enough, and you'll start to see what I mean. The fact that Diesel was able to communicate so much through just saying three words over and over is a real testament to how impressive he can be when he really wants to be. (And the fact that he apparently recorded the line a thousand times in multiple languages for the movie's international releases gets him a ton of respect from me.)

Long story short, Guardians of the Galaxy is an all-around awesome movie. It's everything one could hope for from a movie like this. Blending an unbridled sense of adventure with silly humor, enjoyable characters, and an awesome soundtrack of '60s and '70s hits, the movie is some of the most fun I've had in a theater in a long time. And it's a shame I'll have to wait until 2017 to see the characters again, because the Guardians of the Galaxy are a great change of pace from the Avengers.

Final Rating: ****

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

While many of the characters in the Marvel Comics superhero pantheon made their debuts during Stan Lee's legendary run in the 1960s, one of the most popular dates back to before the company was even called "Marvel." The one and only Captain America first appeared in a comic published by Timely Comics in 1941, and has spent the last 73 years cementing his place as one of the industry's most venerable characters. It hasn't always been an easy road for Cap, as he fell into dormancy and faced irrelevance after the end of World War II, and attempts at reviving him were relatively unsuccessful until Lee and Jack Kirby introduced him into the Avengers in 1963.

Much like those attempts to bring him back into comics, Captain America hasn't had the easiest road to travel when it comes to being translated into live-action movies. The serials produced by Republic Pictures in 1944 paid little respect to the character and his comic book origins, while attempts at feature-length movies ― two made-for-television movies in 1979 and a direct-to-video effort in 1990 (that wouldn't even be released in the United States until 1992) ― were all thoroughly lame.

That changed in the summer of 2011 when Captain America: The First Avenger hit theaters. Produced as a means to bring the character into the Marvel Cinematic Universe and build towards The Avengers, the movie was a big fat hit and a pretty awesome flick to boot. But now it's been two years since The Avengers, and much like how the stories of Iron Man and Thor have progressed since then, Cap's story has as well. That brings us to Captain America: The Winter Soldier, another damn fine movie from Marvel Studios that once again proves why the "Star-Spangled Man with a Plan" is such a great hero.

As he continues getting acclimated to modern society, Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) also maintains his activities as Captain America by operating as one of SHIELD's top agents. His latest mission takes him, Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson), and a team of operatives to the Indian Ocean to rescue a hijacked SHIELD freighter from a band of pirates. The mission is a success, but Natasha's odd, secretive behavior during it is enough to make Rogers suspicious of how SHIELD really works.

He has every right to be suspicious, and Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) pretty much tells him that outright. Fury admits to keeping secrets from Rogers, but chooses to make amends by letting him in on one of SHIELD's biggest secrets, a classified project called "Project Insight," a surveillance program that would allow SHIELD to track and eliminate any target on Earth.

But Fury also warns Rogers to trust no one, a point he reiterates when he's attacked and seemingly killed by a group of mercenaries. Rogers follows a trail of clues left for him by Fury that leads to a horrifying discovery: the terrorist organization Hydra successfully infiltrated SHIELD not long after its inception following the end of World War II. The Red Skull's plans may have been thwarted, but Hydra has survived, secretly operating within SHIELD's ranks for decades and encouraging chaos throughout the world. Their influence goes all the way to the top, their members including United States Senators and high-ranking SHIELD official Alexander Pierce (Robert Redford), who is coincidentally Project Insight's biggest supporter.

Pierce knows full well that Rogers can bring Hydra's entire operation down around them, and thus brands him a fugitive, sending Rogers on the run as he gets to the bottom of their conspiracy. Although Rogers has Natasha by his side and a helping hand from Sam Wilson (Anthony Mackie), a retired Air Force pararescueman with an experimental winged jetpack at his disposal, his search for truth will find a speed bump in the form of a mysterious Hydra assassin known as the Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan). With Hydra's forces and the Winter Soldier hot on their trails, Rogers, Natasha, and Sam must go underground if they hope to uncover SHIELD's darkest secrets, and more importantly, if they hope to survive.

The bar for the Marvel Cinematic Universe was set especially high when The Avengers came out two years ago, a bar that neither Iron Man 3 nor Thor: The Dark World really met. But then Captain America: The Winter Soldier comes along and not only hits that same bar, but completely shakes up the world of the franchise as we know it. It's got a real "must-see" vibe, a feeling that the movie is an event. Fans of the Marvel Cinematic Universe are making a mistake if they miss this one, because Captain America: The Winter Soldier is an absolute game-changer.

At the helm are Joe and Anthony Russo, whose prior credits include You, Me, and Dupree and several episodes of Community and Arrested Development. Those credits don't make the Russos sound like the kind of guys who would make a mega-budgeted superhero blockbuster, but they actually pulled it off. The movie is energetic from beginning to end, largely due to the Russos maintaining a high level of intensity throughout. Everything feels important, even the seemingly insignificant things, because this is the kind of movie where everything is important. Nothing is taken for granted, down to the tiniest detail. Everything the Russos do here is either building to something or a payoff to something else; precious few moments are wasted.

And like all superhero movies, the action sequences are one of the movie's big selling points. Many people will be going into the movie anticipating Captain America's acts of heroism and derring-do, and these people will not be disappointed in the slightest. Each of the action sequences are very exciting and impressively made, and thankfully never resorts to that annoying "shaky-cam" that plagues so many action movies nowadays. The Russos approach these moments with a steady hand and a ferocity that makes them feel even bigger and bolder.

They also manage to make the absolute best out of the movie's 3D conversion too. I've talked about these post-production conversions in the past, about how they never look quite as good as the movies shot natively in 3D, but this particular conversion is actually pretty great. It's a consistently good conversion, with plenty of depth and pop in each scene.

Continuing with the theme of the movie's impressive components, let's move onward to the screenplay penned by Christopher Marcus and Stephen McFeely. Drawing inspiration from both Ed Brubaker's 2005 comic book storyline that introduced the Winter Soldier and political conspiracy thrillers from the 1970s, Markus and McFeely have penned a script that's more intelligent than a lot of other superhero movies. The dialogue is smart, the jokes are funny, and the plot has enough twists and turns to keep the audience glued to the screen, wondering what will happen next. And the whole setup with Hydra is such that it can have major repercussions within the whole Marvel Cinematic Universe franchise. The aftershocks will surely be felt on that Agents of SHIELD television show, but it also changes how one could look at the prior movies. I mean, just how entrenched was Hydra behind the scenes? A cameo from a certain character from Iron Man 2 and the revelation that he's secretly in league with Hydra completely alters the tone of his scenes in that movie. And that could just be the tip of the iceberg for all we know!

But it also makes us look at the world of Captain America as a whole. The movie pits the black-and-white world Steve Rogers where there are clear-cut good guys and bad guys against the modern world's shades of grey. It's idealism versus cynicism, hope versus fear. Captain America was created in a simpler time for a simpler world, at a time when we could trust those in power and our only enemies were the Nazis. But now, seventy years after the end of World War II, we live in a different day and age. The character's idealism is almost out of place nowadays. But it's refreshing to see a superhero movie where the title character has hope and inspires it in others. He fights evil not because of some grave injustice in his youth or some greater compulsion, but because he believes the world can be a better place and is worth standing up for. Captain America represents the best of human potential, a regular guy who stands up for what's right not because he's forced into it, but because it's the right thing to do.

Anyway, all that's left for me to discuss is the acting, which is very good all the way across the board. Among the supporting cast, Scarlett Johansson contributes a fine performance as the Black Widow. Much like her appearances in Iron Man 2 and The Avengers, Johansson plays the character as putting up a cold, emotionless front to hide her true self behind. The character is really layered, and she brings a lot of nuance to it that really shows how good a choice Johansson was for the role. Samuel L. Jackson also reprises his role as Nick Fury, and this time around, he's given far much more to do than in his earlier appearances as the character. Jackson is given the opportunity to be the badass we all know he and Fury both are, making the most of it with his nothing short of awesome presence and approach to the character.

New to the franchise, meanwhile, is Anthony Mackie, who makes the Falcon's debut in the Marvel Cinematic Universe a memorable one with his likable and charismatic performance. He's a lot of fun in the role, and I'm totally looking forward to seeing him play the Falcon in future movies. And as our villains, Sebastian Stan and screen legend Robert Redford provide some damn good work. Stan plays the Winter Soldier with a coldhearted ferocity, but as the movie progresses, the chinks in the character's psychological armor become more apparent and Stan pulls these moments off effortlessly. Redford, on the other hand, brings a more cerebral approach to his role. He's the brains to the Winter Soldier's brawn. And while I'm actually surprised to see an actor like Redford in a movie like this (he was reportedly offered the role as an homage to his appearance in Three Days of the Condor, and accepted it so his grandchildren could see one of his movies), I'm glad he took the part because he adds a modicum of credibility to the whole production.

Last but most certainly not least is Chris Evans as our titular hero. Evans is charming as always, in the role, continuing to play Captain America with every bit of the courageousness that makes the character so great. Bravery and that aforementioned idealism make up the core of Captain America, as he'd stand up to any threat, no matter how huge or insurmountable, if it meant protecting people and keeping them safe. Evans portrays that perfectly, making one believe that Cap is everything people say he is.

At the risk of sounding hyperbolic, Captain America: The Winter Soldier is one of the best the Marvel Cinematic Universe ― and the superhero genre as a whole ― has to offer. It's fun, exciting, and thoroughly engrossing. It's the kind of movie that sucks you in and doesn't let you go until its final frames have flickered across the screen. Any flaws it has, any complaints I have, are all minor gripes and nitpicks, nothing that can't be gotten over. The movie is definitely worth seeing as soon as you get the chance, and I can't wait to see where it all goes from here.

Final Rating: ****½

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

When the "Marvel Cinematic Universe" seemingly climaxed with The Avengers last summer, the movie's billion-dollar success all but guaranteed that the franchise would continue. And continue it did, both with the release of Iron Man 3 this past May and the debut of the TV series Marvel's Agents of SHIELD on ABC two months ago. This brings us to the next entry in the saga, Thor: The Dark World. The first Thor movie was actually pretty surprising, as I've never really been the biggest fan of out-of-this-world fantasies yet I thoroughly enjoyed it. The idea of a sequel was enough to get me excited even before the release of The Avengers, and now that the franchise is in its post-Avengers state, I was intrigued to see where things were in Asgard. Nut enough chit-chat, let's dive in.

With the Chitauri invasion of Earth successfully repelled, the mighty Thor (Chris Hemsworth) returns to Asgard with Loki (Tom Hiddleston) in custody. Their father Odin (Anthony Hopkins) angrily sentences Loki to spend the rest of his existence in the palace's dungeon, while Thor and his warrior compatriots travel across the Nine Realms diffusing the tensions raised by the Bifrost Bridge's destruction at the end of the first movie.

Back on Earth, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and her crew tour England, investigating bizarre gravitational anomalies similar to the ones encountered when she first met Thor. One of these pulls Jane into another realm where she inadvertently absorbs a liquid-like energy field that attacks anyone who touches her. This draws Thor's attention, and he whisks Jane away to Asgard to figure out how to separate her from it.

This energy, they discover, is "the Aether," a weapon of mass destruction unleashed eons ago by the dark elf Malekith (Christopher Eccleston). Malekith and his armies were eventually defeated in battle by Odin's father, who hid the Aether away where it was believed no one would ever find it. But it has indeed been found, and it has awakened Malekith and the dark elves from thousands of years of slumber. And as the Nine Realms approach a rare convergence, acquiring the Aether will allow Malekith to achieve his goal of throwing the universe into darkness. Forced to disobey his father's direct orders in order to protect both Jane and Asgard, Thor must forge an uneasy alliance with Loki if he is to combat Malekith.

I honestly didn't think Thor: The Dark World was one of the strongest entries in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It has one too many flaws keeping it from being more than the sum of its parts. But I will say that the movie is a genuinely fun ride in spite of those flaws. The movie gets off to a fine start and doesn't let up for more than a few moments at a time, keeping the audience continually intrigued in the adventure. And really, that's all I could want from a movie like this.

Director Alan Taylor's body of work doesn't exactly make him sound like the type of filmmaker who would make something like this, but he does a very good job with it. Not only does he put some lovely cinematography to good use, but Taylor builds the movie in a way that makes it feel like it were some kind grand fantasy. Much like what Kenneth Branagh did with the first Thor, Taylor makes Asgard's scenes feel epic, while Earths seem like there's always something going on beneath the surface that we just can't grasp yet. He also crafts the action sequences in as exciting a way as possible, making them as big and boisterous as a movie like this needs.

I was mildly disappointed, though, with the movie's 3D effects. The problem with it is that it suffered from the same woes that most movies converted into 3D in post-production suffer from. It works really well some of the time, like during the scenes in Asgard and others that are heavy on CGI, but looks flat the rest of the time. It's not a particularly successful transfer, but I just don't see why a movie with a budget of 170 million dollars couldn't afford to spend at least a little cash on cameras that would allow its crew to shoot it natively in 3D.

But in the grand scheme of things, I did think the movie's 3D worked slightly better than its script. Written by Christopher Yost, Christopher Markus, and Stephen McFeely from a story by Dan Payne and Robert Rodat, the script is very weak in more than a few spots. The story is kinda there, mostly serving as a series of setups for each action sequence. I can overlook that, considering that this is a superhero movie, but it gets worse from there, primarily in regards to the characters. I'm specifically referring to the movie's villain, who is so badly written that I'm just flabbergasted. Malekith barely exists here, a one-note villain who's actually missing the one note. He barely has enough screen time to justify even being in the movie at all, and does so little that the movie might have been better off making Loki the villain again.

Malekith is quite simply an empty slate, a villain who's only in the movie because the movie needed a villain. His motivations are beyond simple, and he comes across as a generic pseudo-villain. I've made references in the past to movies having what felt like placeholders for characters, and Thor: The Dark World does this with Malekith. There are five credited writers, and this is the best they could do?

But at least the movie has a decent enough collection of actors to work with. Anthony Hopkins and Rene Russo are fine as the king and queen of Asgard, though Hopkins does get a little hammy at times. I also enjoyed Kat Dennings,w ho reprises her role as Jane Foster's sidekick. While I understand why people might find her annoying, I thought Dennings added some humor and levity to her scenes.

The movie is owned, however, by the great performances of Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston. Hemsworth is charming and likable as Thor, playing him with both a wisdom and bravado that makes the character so much fun. Hiddleston, meanwhile, once again shines as Loki. He doesn't go for the scenery-chewing overacting he brought to The Avengers and the first Thor movie, but Hiddleston still approaches Loki in a way that makes it hard to dislike him.

Unfortunately, not everyone in this movie does so well. Natalie Portman, for example, is incredibly dull here. She has a few moments that I thought were cute, but it feels like she's going through the motions, as if she'd rather be in any other movie but this one. Christopher Eccleston, on the other hand, fails to leave an impression simply because he's never given anything to work with. The character of Malekith is so undercooked and so underdeveloped that they could have brought any actor to play the part and nobody would have noticed. I honestly think they could have stopped some random person that happened to be walking by the set on any given day, slapped Malekith's makeup and costume on them, and it wouldn't have affected the movie in the slightest.

But all flaws aside, I did enjoy Thor: The Dark World. I can forgive flaws so long as the movie is entertaining, and that's exactly what this movie is. Much like the first Thor movie, I left the theater satisfied and looking forward to seeing where the Marvel Cinematic Universe would go next. So if the preview of Captain America: The Winter Soldier before the movie and the mid-credits scene featuring Benicio del Toro's character from Guardians of the Galaxy are any indication, then 2014 will be a good year for fans of Marvel Comics movies. And if being a fun movie and wanting to see more are signs of success, then Thor: The Dark World hits the bullseye.

Final Rating: ***

Iron Man 3 (2013)

It was around this time one year ago that we saw the release of The Avengers. The climax of "Phase One" of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, The Avengers brought together characters from five different movies to create a comic book geek's dream movie. But if all of those movies were building for one billion-dollar epic, where do they go after that? There's only one thing you can do: go forward with "Phase Two" of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And it begins the same way that Phase One began, with a new movie starring Iron Man. And like the previous movies starring the character, Iron Man 3 is a fun watch.

Some time has passed since the Avengers repelled the alien invasion instigated by Loki, but his near-death experience during the battle has left Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) suffering from severe post-traumatic stress. Unable to sleep and plagued by panic attacks, Stark spends every moment he can obsessively building new Iron Man armor, his suits now numbering in the dozens. His behavior is such that he's started alienating his girlfriend, Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow), who is left confused and agitated by Stark's emotional distance.

But life is about to get much more complicated for our armored superhero. A terrorist known as "the Mandarin" (Ben Kingsley) has been orchestrating a series of bombings around the United States, one of which leaves Stark's friend Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) in a coma. Stark publicly swears revenge, an act that leads the Mandarin to destroy his house and seemingly kill him.

While Jim Rhodes (Don Cheadle), in his own suit of armor as "the Iron Patriot," scours the globe in search of the Mandarin, an off-the-grid Stark follows a trail of clues that connects the Mandarin to Aldritch Killian (Guy Pearce), a bitter scientist whose ideas were rebuffed by a more egotistical Stark a decade earlier. Utilizing the research of Maya Hansen (Rebecca Hall), one of Stark's past one-night-stands, Killian has developed Extremis, an experimental treatment designed to assist with the healing of devastating injuries. As he follows the trail of clues further, Stark discovers that not only are the Mandarin's bombings are tied to Extremis, but that both the U.S. President (William Sadler) and Pepper are in great danger.

After the pure, unbridled spectacle that was The Avengers, Marvel Studios would have been out of their minds to try topping it so soon. I guess they had the same idea, because Iron Man 3 doesn't try to top or even match The Avengers. Instead, it's a more intimate affair. Yes, it still has the same action and humor one would expect from Tony Stark's solo adventures, but it's more about how the character is affected by his exploits than the exploits themselves. This shift in focus allows Iron Man 3 to be a more intriguing movie than it might have been otherwise.

Jon Favreau doesn't return to direct this third leg of the Iron Man trilogy, instead handing the reins over to Kiss Kiss Bang Bang director Shane Black. Black does an admirable job with the movie as he goes his own way rather than ride Favreau's coattails. The movie still boasts some tremendously fun action sequences, but Black instead brings the movie closer to the characters. Things are paced and composed in such a way that the movie feels more like a standard action movie than a grand superhero blockbuster. I honestly don't think that's a bad thing, however. It's actually refreshing to see a superhero movie where the human side of heroism takes center stage. Black throws everything into making the movie about Tony Stark and the world he occupies rather than Iron Man, and it really pays off.

I don't know if can say the same for the screenplay, though. Written by Black and Drew Pearce, the script takes the finale of The Avengers and uses it as the basis for what one could call Tony Stark's midlife crisis. Getting a glimpse of his own mortality really messed with Tony, and now he's not sure if he's building the armor or if the armor's building him. Black and Pearce don't delve into this quite as deeply as they could have; they could have turned the whole movie into a deep, dramatic character study, but were seemingly obligated to deliver a standard superhero movie.

That's where I felt Iron Man 3 stumbled. Black and Pearce come up with a number of really cool ideas, but don't quite build them together into something awesome. I understand that they probably wanted to write a movie that was a bit more low-key so the franchise could catch their breath after The Avengers, but they could have developed their ideas beyond something simple. Their script also suffers from being a little overlong and probably could have used a bit of trimming. I mean, did we need that subplot where Tony makes friends with some precocious kid? Did that kid contribute anything to the story that couldn't have been handled by another character?

I was also disappointed by the movie's 3D effects too. The movie was converted into 3D during post-production, and it really feels like it was done just because the Marvel Cinematic Universe's movies pretty much have to be in 3D now. There's no real need for it, and the movie is plagued by the same troubles that have plagued most movies that are converted into 3D. Not much depth is added to the visuals, with only a handful of scenes really benefiting from it. You honestly won't be missing much if you choose to see Iron Man 3 in 2D, to tell you the truth.

But as less-than-impressive as I thought the script and 3D conversion were, I thoroughly enjoyed the cast. Ben Kingsley is a lot of fun as the Mandarin, but I felt Guy Pearce's villainous turn outshined him. Pearce's character is such a snake, and he embraces the role and runs with it. While I think the movie could have benefited more from simply adapting the "Five Nightmares" comic book story written by Matt Fraction in 2008 and had Pearce play Ezekiel Stane, Pearce is still a damn fine bad guy.

I also thought Don Cheadle was really good as Rhodey. He plays the part like he was built for it and makes an amusing foil for our leading man. I don't know if they'd ever do an Iron Patriot/War Machine solo spinoff or include the character in one of the Avengers sequels, but if it means I get to see Cheadle play the character again, I'd be all for it. The same can be said for Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts. She plays Pepper as smart and strong, and you really believe that Tony Stark would fall in love with her. Paltrow provides some of the sweetest, most heartwarming moments of the movie, and the movie is better for having her here.

But once again, the movie belongs to Robert Downey Jr. For the fourth time, Downey contributes an absolutely excellent performance and once again steals the whole movie. He not only brings the charming irreverence he always approaches the character with, but also a vulnerability that makes him sympathetic. All you want to do is reach into the movie and give him a big hug. I honestly cannot imagine anyone being able to equal Downey were he to ever bow out of playing the role.

Rumor has it that this might be the last solo movie for Iron Man. A tag at the end of the movie's credits promises that "Tony Stark will return," but beyond Avengers sequels and cameos in other movies, the character's future seems uncertain. And while I will not call Iron Man 3 the best of the trilogy, it's a great way to end the story should this actually be the final Iron Man movie. It has its flaws, sure, but it's still an entertaining movie that I actually enjoyed a lot. It gets the Marvel Cinematic Universe's "Phase Two" off to a great start, and is certainly worth seeing. And between you and me, I can't wait to see where this franchise goes from here.

Final Rating: ***

The Avengers (2012)

When I say "the Avengers," your mind probably goes in one of two directions. One direction will take you towards the British TV show from the '60s, which was adapted into a movie starring Uma Thurman and Sean Connery in 1998. Or if you're like me, you automatically associate "the Avengers" with the team of superheroes that call the pages of Marvel Comics home.

Created in 1963 by industry legends Stan Lee and Jack Kirby, the Avengers have long been an important part of comic book history. And though the team's roster has changed dozens of times over the last forty years, it's the one comic where you're guaranteed to see Marvel's A-list (and a number of their top B-list) superheroes team up and fight a common foe.

When Marvel announced a few years ago that they would start producing their own movies based on characters whose film rights hadn't been sold off to other studios, it was also decided that these movies would follow in the footsteps of their comic book counterparts and have them coexist in a shared universe. The whole thing was set to build to a big payoff in the form of an Avengers movie. And after five movies that introduced the major players, the Avengers movie has finally arrived. I've been looking forward to it since 2008, and let me assure you that it was totally worth the wait.

As the movie begins, we discover that the espionage agency SHIELD has retrieved the Tesseract, the mysterious artifact that the Red Skull had tried using as a weapon of mass destruction during World War II, and has been conducting their own experiments on it. During one of these experiments, the Tesseract spontaneously opens a wormhole out into deep space. From this wormhole emerges the exiled Norse god Loki (Tom Hiddleston), who steals the Tesseract and uses a number of brainwashed SHIELD personnel ― including consulting scientist Dr. Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård) and master archer Clint "Hawkeye" Barton (Jeremy Renner) ― to make a daring escape from the facility.

Facing a powerful opponent armed with an even more powerful weapon, SHIELD director Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) reactivates the dormant "Avenger Initiative." He sends agent Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg) and super-spy Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johannson) to bring Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) and Bruce Banner (Mark Ruffalo) into the fold to study Dr. Selvig's research and track the trace amounts of gamma radiation the Tesseract produces. Fury himself approaches Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), who is still getting accustomed to life in the twenty-first century, and asks him to lead the mission to arrest Loki and retrieve the Tesseract.

Loki is found in Germany, but he almost immediately surrenders without a fight. He is apprehended and taken into SHIELD custody despite the protests of Thor (Chris Hemsworth), who tries desperately to talk his adoptive brother out of attacking the world he considers his second home. But Loki is seemingly content to remain incarcerated by SHIELD, secretly sowing the seeds of dissent and discord among his captors. As they bicker among one another, the still-brainwashed Selvig is using the Tesseract to build a tool for Loki that would open another wormhole. Waiting on the other side are the Chitauri, a race of aliens from a distant planet looking to claim Earth for their own. And though their wildly different personalities and methods cause them to come to blows on occasion, the team known as the Avengers must assemble together to fight a battle no single superhero could withstand alone.

If there is anything, anything at all, that I can say about The Avengers, it's that the movie is 100% pure fun. From beginning to end, The Avengers never ceases to be one of the most entertaining movies I've seen in a while. If the movie is the culmination of several years of planning and effort, then this final payoff is absolutely worth it. It is two and a half hours of unrelenting, unadulterated awesome.

The man in charge of things is the one and only Joss Whedon, who is no stranger to the world of Marvel Comics (having written 24 issues of their Astonishing X-Men book a few years back). The Avengers marks only his second go at directing a feature film, and I thought Whedon did an admirable job behind the camera. He utilizes some slick cinematography and fantastic special effects to make The Avengers a tremendous experience. Even the occasional quiet, dramatic moments feel like they have a sense of urgency. Whedon knows exactly what to do to keep the viewers engaged in what's happening on the screen.

Whedon also serves as the movie's writer, having rewritten a previous script by Zak Penn (who gets a "story by" credit). Whedon's writing style is often polarizing, due in large part to his fondness for snarky, sarcastic dialogue and killing off popular ancillary characters just to mess with the audience. I'll admit to thinking that much of Whedon's writing is guilty of thinking it's cooler than it really is, but Whedon's Avengers script is quite good. He really nails what makes each of the characters awesome in their own ways. You would think that a movie that combines so many dissimilar characters from so many movies would cause some people to get lost in the shuffle, but Whedon makes a point of letting everyone get a few moments to shine.

And while a lot of movie mash-ups ― Freddy vs. Jason, Alien vs. Predator, Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man ― tend to struggle somewhat with merging otherwise unrelated continuities, Whedon effortlessly makes The Avengers feel natural. Sure, he had five movies worth of buildup to work with, but the fact that he made a movie where Iron Man, Thor, the Incredible Hulk, and Captain America seamlessly coexist like they do in their comics is something awesome. Whedon also makes it worth all the buildup by making everything as big and as bold as a movie like this deserves. He never lets it get over the top, but makes the story feel like a grand epic. And I am happy to report the whole thing works.

But it's not just Whedon's efforts behind the camera that make The Avengers what it is. He also has a tremendous group of actors in front of the camera to bring these characters to life. Each and every member of the cast is on their A-game, with not a bad performance among them. Robert Downey Jr. returns to the role of Iron Man for the third time (well, fourth if you count his cameo at the end of The Incredible Hulk), and he continues to show why he was the perfect choice for the character. Downey gives Tony Stark the right amount of brash cockiness yet charming likeability, and the movie is all the better for having him around.

Chris Hemsworth also brings a fine performance to the role of Thor, making the character engaging while adding the necessary pathos that's needed to play a godlike being that must fight his brother. Chris Evans also does a great job as Captain America, as he once again plays Cap as the brave, strong soldier that his counterpart from the printed page is.

And while Edward Norton is missed, Mark Ruffalo is great as Bruce Banner. I don't really want to compare Ruffalo to Norton because that's unfair to both actors, but Ruffalo really shines here. He plays Banner as being haunted by yet accepting of his mean green alter ago. The only crazy thing about it is that the actual Hulk might actually overshadow Ruffalo. Created via CGI and a motion-capture performance from Ruffalo, the Hulk almost completely runs away with the movie. He provides some of the movie's best moments, so I can't complain.

Scarlett Johansson and Jeremy Renner also make fine contributions as Black Widow and Hawkeye, while Samuel L. Jackson is once again fantastic as Nick Fury. I also thought that Clark Gregg, who returns to play Agent Coulson one more time, was amusing as always. And as our resident villain, Tom Hiddleston actually manages to outdo his performance in Thor. He makes Loki such a vile, cold-hearted monster that it's going to take something huge to top him in Avengers 2. (And if that scene in the middle of the credits is any indication, then the Avengers 2 villain could actually do it.) But Hiddleston's performance here is really good, and though he gets a little hammy at times, he's still a damn good bad guy.

And while I'm here, I should probably mention the 3D effects. The Avengers was shot in 2D and converted into 3D in post-production, a technique that in my experience has been hit or miss. But in the case of The Avengers, it's a big hit. It looks just as good if not better than some movies that were natively shot in 3D. The 3D makes a real difference in some scenes as well. Having seen the movie in both 3D and 2D, I can say I thought there were more than a few action sequences that benefit from the added depth that 3D brings. The movie is still effective in 2D, so if the glasses give you headaches, go ahead and see the 2D release. I'm just saying that I thought the 3D added to the fun.

And really, that's all The Avengers is: fun. From the moment the Marvel Studios logo appears to when the final images of Earth's mightiest heroes flicker on the screen, The Avengers never once ceases to be anything other than genuine entertainment. And there's not a single thing wrong with that. So yeah, as you may have imagined, the work that was put into building the Marvel Cinematic Universe and crafting this movie was totally worth it. And thus, I'll gladly give The Avengers four and a half stars on the scale. I've said it before, but I'm really hoping that the movie's record-setting opening weekend would cause DC Comics to take the hint and start building to a Justice League movie. That'd be awesome.

Final Rating: ****½

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

During World War II, American comic book publishers started cranking out tons of patriotic characters as a way to boost morale. While many of them would disappear as quickly as they were created, one would stand the test of time to become one of the most enduring characters in the industry. Created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby for Timely Comics, Captain America was introduced before the United States even entered the war, debuting a full twelve months before the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

With its title character memorably punching Adolf Hitler in the face on the cover of the first issue, Captain America's book was a success. But his comic was ultimately cancelled in 1950, thanks in large part to the decline in popularity superheroes suffered after the war ended. Timely's successor, Atlas Comics, tried reviving him in 1953, but it was a commercial failure and Cap was cancelled again only a year later.

But as superheroes regained their popularity and the company that was once Timely Comics evolved into Marvel Comics, Captain America would make a comeback. He was formally reintroduced by Kirby and Stan Lee in 1964 and immediately inducted into the Marvel superteam known as The Avengers. He's been around ever since and earned status as one of Marvel's most venerable and courageous superheroes. He's been adapted into video games, cartoons, action figures, and other merchandise, and he's even been portrayed in movies. The first three of these movies were pretty awful, but the latest one more than makes up for those prior attempts. In short, it rules.

As the movie begins, so has the involvement of the United States in World War II, and Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) wants nothing more than to serve his country. But because he's a frail little runt with a long list of health issues, recruitment centers repeatedly turn him away as being unfit for duty. Steve's conviction catches the attention of Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci), a scientist working with the government's Strategic Scientific Reserve. Dr. Erskine enlists Steve into a small group of Army recruits and puts them into basic training, where the one with the best performance will undergo an experiment to create the first super-soldier. And despite Steve constantly bringing up the rear in practically every training exercise, the intelligence and courage he shows are enough to make him the perfect candidate for the procedure.

This experiment proves to be success, with Steve emerging from it taller and with a physical strength that matches his determination. But it ends in disaster as well. A German spy infiltrates the laboratory, killing Dr. Erskine and destroying the lab. Without Dr. Erskine's expertise, it will take years to create a duplicate of the super-soldier formula from Steve's blood. Rather than let him sit around as a lab rat, the government puts Steve to work promoting war bonds and performing at USO shows as the costumed "Captain America."

But he'll soon venture into combat, as the military has learned that dozens of soldiers have been captured by Hydra, the Nazi regime's scientific research division. This news hits Steve particularly hard, as one of the prisoners is his best friend, Bucky Barnes (Sebastian Shaw). Steve goes behind enemy lines against orders and frees the soldiers from a Hydra laboratory, in the process discovering that the group's commander — the megalomaniacal Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) — intends to break Hydra away from Hitler and the Nazis with his own plans for complete global domination.

To accomplish this, Schmidt has acquired a seemingly magical object known as the Tesseract, harnessing its immense power and channeling it into high tech weaponry. And with these weapons, the destruction of all those who oppose Schmidt is imminent. An all-out attack on the United States is looming on the horizon, prompting Steve to assemble a team of commandos to lead into battle against Schmidt and Hydra.

I went into Captain America: The First Avenger hoping for the best. I've been enjoying Marvel's build to the Avengers movie thus far, and the trailers for the movie were promising. It looked like it would be pretty good. I just didn't realize that it would be this awesome. No joke, the movie is fantastic. It definitely rivals X-Men: First Class for the title of "best superhero movie of 2011." The movie is fun, charming, exciting, and entertaining, giving me all I wanted out of it and more.

At the helm is Joe Johnston, who I thought was a perfect choice to direct. If you're going to make a movie about a WW2-era superhero, who better to have direct it than the guy who made The Rocketeer? Johnston's direction is tremendous here, boasting a fantastic energy that really pulls the audience into the movie. While he doesn't quite give the truly epic feel that it probably should have, Johnston still does a damn fine job putting this thing together. The only bad part is that there are a few instances the CGI and green-screen effects looked really hokey. It's like the effects guys spent so much time making Chris Evans look puny (which I personally thought was pulled off really well) that they had to start rushing things towards the end of the movie.

And really, I didn't think the movie needed to be in 3D either. Having seen it in both 3D and 2D, there are a few instances where the 3D does give the movie a grander, more epic feel. But I felt that the movie still works in 2D. That, though, may be in part to Captain America being one of those 2D-to-3D post-production conversions. Those can be pulled off successfully, like how it was done for Thor. And like I said, there are moments in Captain America that look really cool in 3D. But you're not going to be missing too much if you choose the 2D version instead.

But let's move along to the script by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely. I actually felt that the script's flaws were few and far between. Mainly, there were two flaws I found. One problem I had with the script was how the Howling Commandos were handled. The team of soldiers assisting Captain America is basically a group of one-note characters who sadly don't contribute much to the movie. I know this is the Captain America movie and not the Howling Commandos movie, but you'd think they could have done more with the characters.

I also thought the ending came rather abruptly. It felt like the climax started trucking along at a pretty good pace and then it just plain tapered off. I don't exactly know what I was expecting, but I thought it felt a little on the rushed side. It felt abrupt enough that the emotional punch they were going for is somehow lessened a little bit. The whole thing is sadly anticlimactic, making it more disappointing than anything else.

The rest of the script, though, is aces. Markus and McFeely perfectly captured the essence of Steve Rogers, making him look like a hero even before he's introduced to the super-soldier serum. And outside of my complaint about the misuse of the Howling Commandos, the writers handled all of the other characters incredibly well. And the way that they crafted the story, with all its triumphs and tragedies, is well done. The combination of the story and the characters really makes you care about the protagonists and what happens to them, making it an effective piece of storytelling.

But it would have all been for naught had the cast been anything less than great. However, the actors are indeed up to the task and deliver solid performances across the board. Most of the reviews I've seen have pretty much ragged on Chris Evans's performance, but I thought he did a fine job. Evans plays the part believably, giving Captain America the strength and determination that he needed. He portrays the character as courageous and willing to fight for what he believes in, everything that the comic book Captain America is

But Evans comes dangerously close to being out-shined by Hugo Weaving, who is a hell of a lot of fun in the role. Weaving is perfect as the Red Skull, playing the role with a psychotic menace and a certain hammy Bond villain flair. He always plays great villains, though, and his performance here is no exception.

And the rest of the cast all provide fine performances. Hayley Atwell is enjoyable as British officer (and Steve's love interest) Peggy Carter. Atwell plays the role with charm and strength, and she and Evans have a nice chemistry together that makes their romance believable. I enjoyed their scenes together, but they could have used more scenes together in the final cut of the movie. It isn't bad as it stands now, but I thought it could have stood being developed a bit further.

Tommy Lee Jones and Toby Jones are also really entertaining as their respective roles, while I thought Sebastian Stan was also good despite not having a lot of screen time. It really did feel like a lot of Stan's scenes were left on the cutting room floor, because his role is played as being bigger than evidenced by the amount of time he's actually in the movie. His character, Bucky Barnes, is an important part of the Captain America mythos and the movie version is depicted as Cap's closet friend, yet he feels like he's barely in the movie at all. But Stan still contributes a solid performance that I can't complain about.

And last but most certainly not least is Stanley Tucci. Tucci makes the role feel bigger than it is, bringing a sense of hopefulness and kindness to the character. He plays the role so well that, even though my existing familiarity with Captain America's origin meant I knew going in that Dr. Erskine wouldn't live to see the movie's closing credits, I was still a little saddened by his demise. Tucci was that good.

I've read more than one review of Captain America negatively critiquing it, railing against the movie because of their perception that it's just an extended commercial for next year's Avengers movie. (And wouldn't you know it, there's a teaser for The Avengers following the movie's credits.) But to knock it for hyping The Avengers just seems like nitpicking just for the sake of nitpicking. As a standalone movie, I thought it worked. The movie is a lot of fun, a really entertaining way to spend two hours. And while we wait another year for The Avengers, I wonder how foreign territories will respond to this movie. Will Captain America be well-received overseas? Hmm...

Final Rating: ****

Thor (2011)

With the vast amount of powers that comic book superheroes have been able to tap into, they've practically become godlike entities whose stories exist within comic books and their adaptations. But while many are godlike, there's at least one superhero who is a literal god: the mighty Thor.

Based on the god of thunder from Norse mythology, Thor was created in 1962 by Stan Lee, Larry Leiber, and Jack Kirby. He's been an enduring character ever since, though he's never quite had the same mainstream notoriety of other heroes in the Marvel Comics pantheon. But he's finally been called up to the big leagues, starring in his own live-action movie. Sure, it's part of the build towards Marvel's Avengers movie next year, but let's take a look at how Thor's movie holds up on its own merits.

Beyond our universe exists a realm known as Asgard, a kingdom populated by the Norse gods and ruled proudly by Odin (Anthony Hopkins). But Odin's health is ailing, forcing him to temporarily step down as the king of Asgard. His son Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is next in line to the throne, but his coronation is interrupted by Asgard's longtime enemies, the Frost Giants of Jotunheim. Despite Odin's demand that he do otherwise, Thor picks a fight with Jotunheim's king (Colm Feare) and severely damages the fragile truce between Asgard and Jotunheim. As punishment for his arrogance and recklessness, Odin exiles Thor to Earth along with "Mjolnir," Thor's mystical hammer and source of his godly powers.

Thor lands in the New Mexico desert, where he is found by astrophysicist Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), her assistant Darcy (Kat Dennings), and her mentor, Dr. Eric Selvig (Stellan Skarsgård). Mjolnir, on the other hand, is discovered and confiscated by agents of the government agency SHIELD. Thor storms their facility and tries to reclaim his hammer, only to find he cannot lift it. As they were sent to Earth, an enchantment placed upon Mjolnir by Odin to prevent the unworthy from wielding it, and now Thor finds himself no longer worthy.

Thor resigns himself to exile, forging a relationship with Jane as he begins accustoming himself to the town he's landed in. But little does he know that his adopted brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) has set into motion a plan to make Asgard his. With Thor out of the way and Odin in a regenerative coma, Loki usurps the throne and forges a pact with the Frost Giants. And to make absolutely sure Thor doesn't return to Asgard, Loki dispatches an invulnerable metallic golem called "the Destroyer" to eliminate his brother before Thor's Asgardian compatriots can bring him home.

I wasn't sure how to initially approach Thor, since even as a comic book fan I didn't have much in the way of familiarity with the character or the fantastical world he occupies. I also went in with a bit of trepidation, due to a slight fear it would follow in Iron Man 2's footsteps and be mostly buildup for the Avengers movie. But Thor surprised me by not only working excellently as a standalone movie but being a wonderfully entertaining fantasy and action movie. It is flawed, but not so much that it detracts from the entertaining ride that is Thor.

Sitting at the helm is Kenneth Branagh, whose work as a director consists mostly of film adaptations of William Shakespeare's works. That doesn't exactly sound like the kind of filmmaker who'd be directing a big-budget superhero movie based on the Norse gods, but he did an amazing job with Thor. The movie looks absolutely fantastic, with gorgeous cinematography and visual effects, awe-inspiring set design, and great costumes. The movie is absolutely stunning, a real visual treat. Combining it all with Patrick Doyle's beautiful music, and Branagh makes Thor one hell of a ride.

I also thought the 3D added a lot to the movie. Most movies that are filmed in 2D and converted to 3D in post-production don't always look right, as evidenced by the ugly 3D conversions done for The Green Hornet and the Clash of the Titans remake. But Thor's 3D conversion not only looks really good, but it adds quite a bit of atmosphere to the movie. Asgard looks more majestic, Jotenheim is more desolate and intimidating. I didn't like the fact that the 3D jacked up my ticket price to almost 10 bucks, but outside of that, Thor was a fun 3D experience.

Where the flaws start to creep in, however, is within the script. Written by Ashley Miller, Zack Stentz, and Don Payne from a story by J. Michael Straczynski and Mark Protosevich, the script feels rushed. Branagh must have cut out a bunch in the editing room, because even at two hours, the movie doesn't afford us a lot of time to get to know some of the characters. There's not enough time on Earth to really connect with most of the human characters, and there's not enough time to let us connect with any Asgardians beyond Thor, Loki, and maybe Odin. And I can't speak for anybody else, but I would have enjoyed seeing more of Sif and the Warriors Three, because their moments were some of the most entertaining parts of the movie. I wouldn't have minded seeing more of Thor's "fish out of water" experiences in the town too. Maybe when Thor is released on DVD in a few months, there'll be a deleted scenes feature or an extended cut of the movie that'll help fix that.

But the script succeeds in giving us a hero worth watching. Thor's road to redemption and his relationship with his dysfunctional family are written extremely well, creating a movie that is at times quite captivating. The dynamic between Thor, Odin, and Loki is probably what drew Branagh to the movie, as it feels almost Shakespearian. There's the ailing king with two sons competing for the throne. One of them is cocky and stubborn, while the other is consumed with jealousy for his brother. Put it in medieval times, and it'd be pretty damn close to Shakespeare. It's actually some well-written stuff, which is helped by how good the acting is.

And oh man, is the acting good. Everyone in the movie puts forth their absolute best efforts. I absolutely loved everybody in the movie. Playing the title role is Chris Hemsworth, a relatively unknown Australian actor whose biggest prior claim to fame was playing Captain Kirk's father in the first ten minutes of J.J. Abrams's reboot of Star Trek. Casting Hemsworth proved to be a very wise decision, because he's perfect in the role. He's got not only the looks but the talent to pull off Thor. Hemsworth makes Thor's personal evolution believable every step of the way. As Thor's brash immaturity gives way to wisdom and humility, Hemsworth never once lets his performance become bland as he gives one of the most entertaining cinematic performances I've seen in recent memory.

Tom Hiddleston appears as our resident villain, playing Loki in a way you wouldn't expect from a typical villain in a movie like this. Hiddleston approaches Loki almost as if he were a child trying to cope with his problems. Loki feels like he's second-best, stuck in the shadow of a brother who he feels is taking all of their father's attention. It's a very passionate performance, one that practically makes the whole movie better.

And the rest of the cast isn't bad either. Natalie Portman is especially good, despite the role not being as strong as it could have been. She and Hemsworth have a convincing romantic chemistry, though their relationship is anemically written. They have a few cute scenes together, but it's another thing that could have benefited from the movie being half an hour longer. But Portman's performance is amusing, giving Jane a giddiness that makes her fun to watch.

I also thought Anthony Hopkins did a fantastic job with his meager part. Not much is asked of him beyond playing a stern father and king, but Hopkins is so good at it that you don't even think of any of the flaws in how the character is written. The same can be said for Kat Dennings, who's cute, quirky, and downright charming in her tiny role. Stellan Skarsgård also puts forth a fun performance as a purveyor of both some of the movie's exposition and some comic relief. Among the Asgardians, Idris Elba's cold stoicism makes his character look very cool, while Jaimie Alexander plays her part with a tomboyish charm. And as the Warriors Three, Joshua Dallas, Ray Stevenson, and Tadanobu Asano are quite entertaining. Stevenson is particularly funny and likable, stealing more than one of the scenes he's in.

Thor might not be a perfect movie, but as a piece of pure entertainment, it's a success. I enjoyed the movie a lot, which I'm sure was the reaction they were going for. It is an exciting, entertaining, enjoyable ride that is satisfying even if it felt like it should have been longer. At this point, I'm actually willing to skip The Avengers if it means I can go see Thor 2. I want to get in line for Thor 2 right now. As for this particular entry into the "Marvel Cinematic Universe," If you're into superhero movies with a touch of fantasy, it might be right up your alley too.

Final Rating: ***½