THE AVENGERS REVIEW

Avengers was on my most awaited films of 2012 list.
So, does it disappoint? Of course NOT. I never doubted you, my dear Whedon. 

There are tons of reviews out there, and you can pick any one of them up and read them and it won’t change the fact that you’ll be watching this film (unless you’re an idiot, in which case, get back to your made-for-TV romcoms). So why read this? Because it’s a review by a comicbook fan for a movie for comicbook fans (and others) directed by THE comicbook fan of our era.
And Avengers is (arguably) the greatest most perfect comicbook adaptation ever.
Now, I’m not saying it’s the greatest comicbook movie ever (Batman Begins/Dark Knight still holds that position) but it is the best adaptation of a comicbook ever. Dark Knight doesn’t feel like a comicbook, but it is a better movie. But this one, it feels so much like a comicbook. And I think that’s because of Joss Whedon, who’s got quite a lot of experience writing comics (Astonishing X-Men, Runaways, Buffy the Vampire Slayer) and he’s marvelous here. HE’S THE REAL STAR. Nobody else could have done it better. He handles the characters amazingly well, and gives each character their time to shine. A character like Hawkeye or Coulson is given as much importance as Iron Man or Thor. And Hulk…he’ll have you cheering and screaming and laughing, because this is the best interpretation of the Hulk so far.

A lot of twitter reactions say that Iron Man overshadows every other character in the movie. Those reactions are absolutely wrong and possibly written by RDJtards. Nobody overshadows anybody. They stand together in the movie. Side by side. As a team. As. They. Should. And I absolutely applaud Whedon for that. I had some fears that Iron Man would serve as the leader-type given his current popularity, but that isn’t the case. Captain America LEADS the Avengers, and Whedon gives us good reason why he SHOULD lead them and why everyone else is listening. But since Whedon has to appease Robert Downey Jr’s ginormous ever-expanding ego, he does something really cool with Iron Man, but handles it so that it doesn’t overshadow other characters.  To get these guys together and to do such justice to them… Whedon accomplishes an absolutely impossible feat and I congratulate him for that.

Hiddleston is amazing as Loki. It also helps that he looks so much like the Loki of the comicbooks. When he gives you that maniacal grin, you know that they couldn’t have gotten anyone better for it.
I love the Avengers. I love how they were handled and I love how they are treated with such respect.

What I didn’t love in the movie is Nick Fury. Whedon writes him as a manipulative General who’ll do anything in his power to save the world and it isn’t his fault that Fury doesn’t shine. It’s Samuel L Jackson’s. A person’s badassocity can only carry a character till so much, and I feel SLJ isn’t fit to play Fury. Sure, Fury’s shrewd and manipulative, but he’s also noble. And that’s where SLJ fails. He just didn’t shine like the rest of the cast, and it wasn’t because he was underwritten or anything… SLJ just couldn’t pull it off. And I’m saying that as a huge Samuel L Jackson fan who keeps on using his dialogues in real life situations, mind you.
Another thing I didn’t like was the story. It felt as if someone handed Whedon an outline of the Ultimates comicbook and told him to write a screenplay off that. I feel Marvel didn’t really trust him enough to come up with a marvelous story. So the story as a whole is lackluster. But you’ve got some great dialogue and some magnificent action sequences, so all is forgiven. Avengers could have been a much better movie, in my opinion, if they let Joss Whedon off the chains and let him do whatever he wanted. Maybe he’ll get more freedom while doing the sequel (which is very likely given the Nerdgasm-inducing mid-credits scene.)

And then there’s the Chitauri (AKA Skrulls) (it isn't a spoiler, they're namedropped five seconds into the movie) who look nothing like Skrulls and behave more like Random Alien Army. But that isn’t a problem because the last hour or so of Avengers is absolute carnage. But within this carnage is drama. These aren’t just a few cool scenes that show off CGI unlike the Bayflicks. You do get the sense of something happening. You care about the characters. You want them to win. And you’re most probably cheering for them and you don’t even know it.
The dialogue is amazing and smart and all kinds of awesome and it is an absolute act of sin to not listen to it. Do yourself a favour: if anyone’s talking in the theater, tell him/her to shut the fuck up and if they don’t listen throw a tub full of popcorn on their head (as I did). Whedon is a maestro of dialogue, and every bit of it in this movie is nothing short of brilliant. And most of it will make you laugh out loud. I guarantee.
Avengers is a movie made by people who love the characters, and it shows, because that love kind of crosses over to you from beyond the screen. And I love that. This is how movies should be made. Out of love and a little bit of respect, and not out of formulas or magic potions or whatnot the industry believes in.
8/10
Avengers opens on 4th May in the United States. It is currently running in European and Indian theaters. 

The Adventures of TINTIN review

Tintin taught me English.
No joke. Seriously, that's how I learnt the alphabet, that's how I learnt to read. It was Tintin all along. Little four year old Bob, holding a Tintin book in front of him, slowly turning the pages, absorbing the illustrations, trying to decipher those letters, yes, that was me. And I deciphered each and every letter (with some help from my grandma, ofcourse) and learnt the language. And after that was learnt, I sought out each and every other Tintin book and soon I had all 24 in my collection, and I read and reread them and I still do, and I love each and every one of them. So yeah. Tintin is special for me. Very special.
And so is Spielberg. If Tintin infused in me a love for the comic art form, Spielberg made me love movies. Jurassic Park was the first movie I ever watched, and I've watched all his movies since. Indy, ET, Close Encounters of the Thrid Kind, you name it.
And Moffat. Oh, what a wonderful creation of God he is. I loved his Jekyll, loved his Doctor Who work and got absolutely bowled over by that wonderful episode of Sherlock that he wrote. Heck, I'd go so far as to call him the greatest screenwriter the world has ever seen.
And he was working on Tintin. With Edgar Wright. And Joe Cornish. And Andy Serkis. And Pegg and Frost. And Peter Jackson. And John Williams. And Spielberg.
Now THAT is a perfect team, isn't it?
Yeah. I was freaking excited.
So, here we come to the million dollar question : Does it disappoint?
Somewhat. Yes, it does. But it's not a bad film. It disappoints because I expected so much more from it.
What it doesn't get right is surprisingly (or unsurprisingly if you believe in that proverb) the script. It's just a messy script. And it's obviously written by brilliant, brilliant writers because there are so many good moments, but it's problem lies in its confused tone and style. Moffat, Cornish and Wright are, no doubt, brilliant writers, but their styles are very different and unique. Moffat wrote the first draft and it's quite obvious, because the storyline is cleverly (very cleverly) mashed up from three books. And there are moments that are pure Moffat, especially the ending which is sure to delight Tintin fans and belay their fears that Professor Calculus' character wasn't done justice. That's him, that's Moffat's writing. Even my little brother could point that out. But after his first draft was done, Cornish and Wright worked on it and brought their fast-paced style to it, and that's where disaster struck. The result is a convoluted, confused screenplay that doesn't even know what it's style is. The tone, though, is consistent, and there are many moments when the screenplay shines, but we don't dwell upon those shining moments for enough time to make them magical. It's all a bit too rushed.

The Cinematography is PERFECT

But everything else is absolutely perfect. Everything. Spielberg directs the best action piece he's ever directed, thanks to the amazing motion capture technology. Motion capture shows its brilliance here and it's as if this technology was waiting for this movie, and Spielberg exploits it brilliantly. He takes the camera to places cameras have never been before, pulling off absolutely impossible shots, especially during the brilliant action scenes. I had seen some of the behind the scenes material from this movie and what they had done was create life-size models of the sets...in WIREFRAME! And Steven had a virtual "camera" in his hand that he could take just about anywhere and get absolutely any angles he desired. And oh, how he exploits that is nothing short of brilliant. You've got to see the movie to believe it.

Spielberg and Jackson with the virtual "Camera"

I could find no flaw in the acting. Every character is pulled off perfectly (Although Haddock is a bit too Scottish for my taste), and Jamie Bell shines as Tintin. Thomson and Thompson are pulled off well, but have very little screen time than they should have had. But every minor character is treated seriously, from Alan to the guy who sells Tintin the model ship in the flea market. I love the seriousness on display. Why can't we have more people like them acting in the movies, I wonder.
I bet these guys thought Haddock would steal the show with Andy Serkis at his bumbling best, but they were wrong. Tintin's loyal furry companion, Snowy steals it. Watching Snowy protecting his master, dodging bullets, jumping on cars and chasing eagles is an absolute charm. Expect him to win over your kids, your wives and your girlfriends, because this one's an absolute charmer.

And the action pieces are just brilliant. Micheal Bay should learn a thing or two about staging action scenes from Spielberg because with Tintin, he's proved himself a master of action. And I bet Peter Jackson directed a few shots because there are some moments of desperation and comedy that are pure Peter Jackson material. And they're brilliant.
Animation : Flawless. Except for a few scenes. The closeups on Tintin during the last few scenes look a tad unfinished and there's a shot were a woman looks as if she's made of plastic. But they get Herge's style right, it feels like Herge's universe. Even the animals look Herge-esque : in one of the shots, a camel looks as if it just burst out of the pages of a Tintin book. So big kudos to Weta for getting that right.

And finally, the score. Oh, the score. This is pure John Williams. This is him scoring the Indiana Jones, or the Star Wars, this is John Williams in top form! It's as if you're watching Spielberg's most unique film yet and the score just reassures you that it's still classic Spielberg. Although it's a tad reminiscent of the Indiana Jones score, (not that I'm complaining, though some of you will) it's still right, it's still brilliant. And it feels like a Tintin score, that's the best thing about it.


All in all, The Adventures of Tintin : Secret of the Unicorn is a good film. But not a great one, and that's what makes me sad. But I liked it nonetheless, because the direction, the animation and the music are so damn good. Also, the fact that it felt like an old-school Spielberg movie done with brilliant technology helped.
With a better script, this one would have been an Oscar Winner. Without it, it's not. But don't let that discourage you from watching this. And check it out in 3D. The 3D's brilliant on this one. No gimmicky-things-thrown-at-you stuff and darkened screens for a change. (Also, it's somewhat funny that a comicbook using Herge's Ligne Claire style would inspire such a beautiful 3D film, given the flatness of the comics.)
Expect "Red Rackham's Treasure" to be released in two years' time (or more, Jackson's working on Hobbit at the moment).

Final thoughts: GO WATCH IT. NOW. 

So, what do I rate this one?
A solid 7/10. And that's mainly because of the technical feats that they've achieved with this movie and the love and respect they've shown for the source material here, while adapting three books into one 109 minute long movie. With a more slower, solid script, this would have been a definite Oscar winner.




Also, Tintin fans, be very, very observant. There's Easter eggs galore. Even Cutts the butcher makes it into this movie! And the opening credits are PURE fanservice!

So, I just finished Arkham City

How do you not love a game as beautiful, as amazing, as spectacular as Batman Arkham Asylum?
In 2009, Rocksteady made the Batman Begins of videogames. While other Batman games let us control the character, define his actions and lead him in directions, this one made us actually feel like him; whether it was facing off against Bane, beating up Joker's thugs, or scaring the living shit out of a bunch of armed criminals. Yeah. Asylum truly was a triumph that it let us actually feel like the protagonist.
And Arkham City just turns up that feeling a thousandfold.
Arkham City is 9 hours + of fanservice, amazing gameplay, beautiful graphics and Batman. I love how it gives you the illusion of being in a city, roaming a map larger than Arkham Asylum, when actually, the map is, if not as big as, smaller, than Arkham Asylum. Yet, it does a wonderful job of setting up that illusion, due to highly detailed environments and too many easter eggs to keep count off.



The combat stays, more or less, the same, with many added animations, a few more quick combos and a better response time than the earlier game. Batman's fight mechanics have been perfected by this new system, but I can't say the same for Catwoman. Her response time is not as great as Batman's, but she's got some pretty slick moves, so that makes up for it.


The movement mechanics have also improved greatly. Here, you have to jump from rooftop to rooftop, guide over buildings and can even divebomb into a group of thugs. As Catwoman, the movements feel very reminiscent of Spiderman; clinging to ceiling walls, scaling tall buildings.
Catwoman, while not handling to well during a fight, handles near-perfectly while in motion. She's quick. She's fast and flexible and nimble. So playing as her when roaming the city is an absolute treat.
Once you perfect the gliding mechanics, you'll no doubt spend hours and hours soaring over rooftops and singling out thugs, because it's absolutely wonderful. There's this amazing bit you can do while gliding : you divebomb into the streets, and if you get your timing right, and soar up, you'll accelerate farther and even achieve a greater height. It looks and feels brilliant and comes in very handy during a certain sequence (involving Ra's Al Ghul, bytheway).
The stealth mechanics, as usual, are brilliant. Batman's stealth sequences are quite different from Catwoman's, and they handle very, very differently in this case.And Detective Mode feels more realistic this time. And we are forced to use our normal vision as well, because these thugs aren't dumb. They've got signal jammers, laserscope snipers and thermal imagery and you'll need to make use of your normal sight to beat these guys.
Remember those Scare Crow sequences? He's not there in the game, but there IS something reminiscent of that and it doesn't deserve spoiling.
A bossfight involving Mister Freeze makes great use of these mechanics. This fight challenges you to vary your techniques, plan and strategize in more ways than one. I remember trying to fall asleep while thinking, 'I've got to beat this guy next. How do I do it?' and a thousand ideas popped into my head. The Mister Freeze fight is one of the most innovative and unique boss fights I've ever fought. Brilliant stuff.


The story, by Paul Dini, is, unsurprisingly, brilliant. Well, except it is predictable for Batman fans. When Hugo Strange mentions that there's some greater force behind him, you instantly know who this greater force is, if your Batman mythology is proper. What I hate about the story is most definitely the ending. You get something so crazy to be true, and so removed from Batman's continuity, that you simply can't believe it. And that, by the way, is the only major flaw in the game. The ending. I don't love it. I'm just okay with it, because something really clever happens before it. A very, very good third act twist. Also, the entire third act is brilliant. You just faced off against Joker and his thugs. You're standing on a crane, looking at Arkham City as it burns and crumbles to the ground. There's helicopters all over the place, shooting missiles, killing people, and you're helpless. You get a very The Dark Knight vibe off this and the amazing score helps as well.


The score is simply amazing. The way it builds up to a crescendo in the moments that lead up to the final battle, as you take on six-seven snipers off the rooftops is absolutely thrilling and feels like reliving the last moments of The Dark Knight where Batman rescues hostages dressed up as clowns from the building.
Darn. I wish we had more of that.
Also, besides the main story, there are side missions involving villains from Batman's amazing Rogue gallery. Of course, there's the Riddler, but then there's Deadshot, there's Mad Hatter, there's Azrael, there's Ivy, there's Zsasz and there's Hush. And I bet, they're going to release a Maxie Zeus Side mission as DLC soon. And I can't wait to buy it.
There's another side mission that involves helping "Political Prisoners". There're guys in Arkham who've been put in just because they picked a bone with Strange and you've got to save them from being eaten up by the Arkham thugs. A nice addition. After all, he's Batman. He's got to save people.
Another thing I absolutely loathe is that the thugs keep on calling Catwoman a "bitch". I mean, I can stand some foul language, but there's a limit and they cross it. But, then again, it keeps me on my toes. Anytime someone's about to say that, I kick him in the face.
The voice acting for most part, is very good. Daphne voices Catwoman, bytheway. A brilliant, brilliant choice. Penguin's accent is weird, but then it grows on you and you start liking it. Kevin Conroy fits Batman like a glove. Freeze, Strange, Joker and Harley Quinn are absolutely spot-on. Who I don't like is Ra's Al Ghul. The guy voicing him sounds too young to voice a psycopathic mastermind who's 600 years old. Two Face is also a bit off for me.


Some of the character designs didn't sit in with me, either. Deadshot looks like that fat Rebel guy from A New Hope and Penguin and Mad Hatter are too tall for their characters. Ra's is another character that felt too overdone. He's got tattoos and shit now. WTF. Tattoos? On Ra's Al Ghul? Are you freaking serious? Talia's costume has also been sexed up more, but I could stand it. Can't say the same about Harley Quinn, though. Wish she had the BTAS costume on.
But, let us not forget, that these are but minor quibbles in an amazing game. Just go and fucking buy it. Support the game industry. BUY IT.

Remember how hyped The Dark Knight was, and then it came along and exceeded expectations? That's what happened with Arkham City. This is a serious game, for Batman fans, of Batman fans, made by Batman fans that even non-Batman fans can enjoy. It's a fucking brilliant marvel of a game.
9.5/10