The Rabbit Hole

I'm lumping together the two "actually good" categories of movies I saw in the theater because, really, after posting about the so-bad-they're-brilliant movies, I've just lost a lot of the oomph to keep going. So here we are, two weeks into 2012, finishing off my remembrances of 2011.

2011's Actually Good Movies

( Lots of discursion, needs a cut. )

So those were the movies I deemed good, subjectively or objectively, and you're free to disagree with me as you please. I don't have real dogs in any of those fights, though I suspect I won't have to defend myself overmuch. This next list, though, are movies that I foresee going into heavy rotation in future--go-to new classics and favorites. Be gentle with me on these?

2011's New Favorites:

( Love it or leave it! )

In all seriousness, yesterday, one of our post-docs, S, said I was a hipster. He said that I had told him as much. Buh-whaaaaat? Obviously, there is no way I would ever, ever say that, even as a joke. Today, in talking about it again, two other people gave him the O.o face as well, including A, whose response was pretty goddamned vehement. S maintains that he used to hang out with hipsters in Cincinnati, so he knows from hipsters. I came up with many defenses against my supposed inclusion into hipster-dom, but probably the best was this exchange.

S: "So what are hipsters like, if not like you?"
Me: "Let me put it in terms of movies: hipsters like movies in languages nobody speaks. I liked Thor."

This caused another post-doc to splutter loudly at his desk and set off a round of discussion about why or why not Thor was a good movie. At least I'm not defending myself against being a hipster any more!!!

Also, this reminded me that I needed to pre-order Captain America. Which I have. Come to me, sweet, sweet Blu Ray!!

Without a doubt, our 2012 May Movie is going to be The Avengers. (Warning: following that link to the IMDB, of all places, may potentially spoil you for...something. The internet is still debating what it might mean. If you care, you can read this post to find out what the spoiler even is, since I assume most of you wouldn't know you were spoiled even if you saw it. If you prefer to stay unspoiled, by all means, go to the IMDB and ignore that last link. Also, this is where you shout "NEEEEEEEEERDS" at people on the internet. Just saying.) In preparation for that most momentous event, about which I am already unduly excited and they haven't even finished primary filming for the movie, I have had an idea. I want to do a possibly monthly movie watching series leading up to The Avengers with screenings of each Avenger's title film. (Or, in the case of Iron Man, films.) I'm posting this to gauge interest. The best way to do that? POLL! It is an extremely short poll, not to worry.

Would you be interested in screening Marvel movies in anticipation of The Avengers?
1) With you? HELL TO THE YES.
2) It may be uncomfortable sitting next to you during Thor, but otherwise yes!
3) I may be in for one or two of the movies.
4) I don't think this is my cup of tea.

The order in which we watch the movies will follow, roughly, the in-universe timeline of the movies. That means we'd watch Captain America first, then Iron Man, then The Incredible Hulk, then Iron Man 2, and then Thor. There are some who could make the case that Thor happens concurrently with Iron Man 2 (Agent Coulson leaves that movie midway through to show up in a clip after the credits that itself takes places midway through Thor). There is also no absolutely certain way to place to The Incredible Hulk except that it has to take place after Iron Man but before The Avengers as its only connection to movie-universe continuity is Tony Stark's cameo in the credits, where he is pitching General Ross on the Avengers initiative, which would suggest it took place after Iron Man 2, when Tony is more on board with that, but he's known about it since the post-credits scene in Iron Man. Regardless, I am making the executive decision here to use the movie release schedule to call this thing, and since The Incredible Hulk came out between the Iron Man movies, we'll say that the post-credit scene is a post-Iron Man, pre-Iron Man 2 event, thus putting The Incredible Hulk between them in the roster. Plus, it means we don't spend four hours in a row with Tony Stark. (You want to pace yourself where exposure to exteme assholishness is concerned.) What say you, friends? Are you with me?

Thor was better, by far, than I could have imagined. I was completely taken aback at how it managed to balance being so funny with being so completely serious, and captivatingly so. I hope Kenneth Branaugh is proud of himself. He did actually manage to meld an almost assuredly mindless action film with something possessing more gravitas in order to generate a popcorn flick that still made you feel ways about stuff.

A lot of credit must be given to the leads, Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston. "What is my motivation?" may be a cliche, but cliches are cliches for a reason, and it seems like both men took the time to really probe at the corners of their characters. This may have been especially hard to do for Thor, who starts off as something akin to a high school football hero making the most of his big fish, small pond status (right before being slapped with the reality of the real world that doesn't give a shit that he can throw a ball however many feet). There's almost no "there" there, and while that's sort of the point--Thor has a lot of growing up to do--Hemsworth still managed to find shades of uncertainty, even self-doubt in his character. In particular, ( minor spoiler ) One criticism I've heard is that Thor's maturity comes too fast. Indeed, it may--especially as regards the obligatory romantic subplot--but there's very little unnatural to it because you can pick up the threads that were woven, quite deftly and subtly, earlier in the movie. You have to be paying attention. For all that I admit to drooling over the man's body (oh how I drooled), I found myself most excited by his eyes. Hemsworth does a lot of emoting through significant gazes, and they are often just as sexy as the rest of him. (Oh so sexy. Holy God.)

Tom Hiddleston has a much richer part as Loki, and, as the antagonist, he should, really. Loki is a difficult character because, unlike some trickster archetypes, he doesn't really stand a chance of being misunderstood in a brainless bit of fiction. Loki is always the one you're going to suspect, and you'd be right to because he's probably doing something very naughty. Which is funny because most of what would have been Loki's mischievous ways starts off being only the hearsay of other characters. He's accused of having a "silver tongue" even though the worst you could say of him for most of the movie is that he has a politician's gift for extraditing himself--and others--from situations that might reflect poorly on him. For the most part, too, Hiddleston plays Loki as a straight-shooter with a sense of playfulness. An occasionally dangerous sense of playfulness, but not an unsympathetic one. He may even have been right to pull the prank he does at the beginning, ( minor spoiler )

Loki is incredibly savvy, very observant, and very atypical in his antagonism. He is not malicious, not needlessly so, but he knows where to stick which pokers to stir the pot the best effect. All of the credit can be given to Hiddleston for that, as far as I'm concerned. Looking at trivia about the film on the IMDB, I read that Hiddleston put himself on a very strict diet so that he would physically have a very hungry, sharpish aspect. And, now I think of it, he absolutely did. So you have this aura of starving, ravenous ambition at the edges of a performance where Hiddleston is otherwise very open--his face seems completely honest (the better to fool you with, my dear). You can believe his every emotion to be sincere even as his actions scream of duplicity. It's really a nuanced bit of character writing enhanced by a phenomenally minimalist performance.

That there is even this much to say about performances is a testament to the effort to make something more of Thor than just about anyone could have expected. There's more X-Men 2 to this than there is, say, Iron Man, despite my liking both. Iron Man is a tad skimpy on the thoughtfulness at times in favor of action and humor. I think Thor manages to combine that with the consideration of causes and effects, especially as regards statecraft, and it comes out the better for it. In the end, will I want to rewatch Iron Man more often? Oh, probably, but that doesn't take away the fact that Thor achieved something here. Captain America, the bar has been raised.

(Also: ZOMG CHRIS HEMSWORTH IS SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HOT. I cannot overstate how entirely distracting that man is. All weekend, if I would let my mind drift it drifted to this. And I really like what's going on around them hips in this shot. Goddamn, boy. I maintain that if you are female and claim to be heterosexual and you don't think he's hot, you are lying. All the ladies were aflutter after the MAY MOVIE, and with good reason. Personally, much as I want to lick that rise of muscle just over his pants in that one shot, I was as much in love with the bee-ee-ee-youuu-tiful eyes he has. Because they are very pretty. Very, very, verily.)