'Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom' Review

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom proceeds three years after the incident at Jurassic World which caused the park to close down. Dinosaurs roam free on Isla Nublar, but Owen Grady and Claire Dearing must return to the island to save the remaining dinosaurs from an extinction level event and relocate them to a sanctuary when the island's dormant volcano becomes active. Along the way, a conspiracy is discovered that threatens to disrupt the Earth's natural order.

The adjustment that most excited me about Fallen Kingdom was the switch-up of directors behind the camera, with Colin Trevorrow handing the franchise baton off to J.A. Bayona for this fifth installment. Though I enjoyed Jurassic World, the 2015 rebootquel lacked Trevorrow's directorial voice and was seemingly genetically engineered by Universal Studios to rake in all the dough (wound up grossing $1.6 B worldwide and currently is the fifth highest grossing motion picture of all time). On top of that, I haven't whole-heartingly loved a Jurassic film since the original, so I was really hoping Fallen Kingdom might rectify that and reinvigorate my interest in the series. After seeing Bayona's work in A Monster Calls, my anticipation then went through the roof though because that flick showcased his sensibilities and skill as a filmmaker who could tell emotional, character-driven stories with striking visuals. 

Fortunately, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom does the same whenever the suspense-driven blockbuster is at its best. Viewers are in for a treat anytime Bayona and his longtime collaborative cinematographer, Oscar Faura, get a chance to play around with suspenseful scenery. The third act is full of gothic horror-esque imagery that will have your spine tingling as you venture closer and closer to the edge of your seat and your heart sinks further and further to the bottom of your chest. It's probably the first film in the franchise since Jurassic Park to feature such inventive uses for the dinosaurs as devices of horror, and it's all thanks to Bayona's brilliant work behind the camera. Those key sequences work wonders for the film as a whole, truly elevating the more lackluster elements which I'll discuss in a second.

Also, be prepared to bear witness to the best opening the franchise has seen in quite some time. It's tense, riveting, and an utter delight that harkens back to the days when Spielberg was at the helm. I only wish Bayona had been given more control over the story so he'd have the opportunity to make more sequences like it...

However, there are some caveats I should probably mention... As skilled of a director as Bayona may be, there was nothing he could have done to salvage the atrocious script he had to work with. Colin Trevorrow and Derek Connolly were the only writers to stick around after Jurassic World and it's abundantly clear that they had ideas for the third installment which they actively wanted to set up here. Fallen Kingdom unfortunately falls prey to the reoccurring trend in which a franchise focuses on the future rather than telling a solid standalone story (I'd cite The Amazing Spider-Man 2, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and Pacific Rim: Uprising as prime examples of this trend). Laying the groundwork for a sequel is fine so long as it doesn't take precedence over the story at hand, but Fallen Kingdom is much more concerned with getting to Point B that Trevorrow and Connolly didn't seem to care how they got there. Therefore, logic is thrown out the window and there are retcons galore to ensure the writers reach their destination.

Fallen Kingdom borrows plenty of plot beats from its prehistoric predecessors, but it takes from The Lost World: Jurassic Park most egregiously. The first hour or so veers very closely in the direction of blatantly ripping it off altogether. As a result of all this, Fallen Kingdom is probably one of the more infuriating entries in the franchise. It's a film that's very confused for so many reasons. It wants to paint a picture of dinosaurs as creatures who deserve to be preserved and protected, but simultaneously shows them to be rampaging murderous beasts who are incredibly dangerous. This establishes an interesting debate in regards to whether humanity should be responsible for these animals almost immediately, but Trevorrow and Connolly hardly scratch the surface of that idea despite bringing it up fairly often. There's simply no nuance to the discussion because their script doesn't give the characters much opportunity to sit down and discuss the issue. Besides that, the pacing and narrative flow feels ridiculously jumbled as everyone seems to be in a hurry to reach the closing credits in spite of having two hours and eight minutes to do so.

While the script may be messy, Bayona still sets aside enough time for some truly beatuiful moments which serve as sweet, subtle homages to the beloved original. Most memorable of these was a scene involving a brachiosaurus (you'll know exactly what it is once you see it). From a visual standpoint, Fallen Kingdom is a substantial improvement over Jurassic World's flat aesthetic with spellbinding cinematography from Oscar Faura and a better blend of practical and digital effects which are quite convincing. Meanwhile, Michael Giachinno's score is a swell accompaniment for the onscreen insanity, although not nearly as memorable as any of John Williams' legendary work in the first two.

In regards to performances, Chris Pratt continues to be the charming movie star whom studios can always count on. It doesn't seem like Owen Grady is a challenging role for him whatsoever, but Pratt portrays him well thanks to stellar comedic timing and his perky personality simply lends itself well to the character. He's mostly just playing an extension of himself, but I wouldn't say that's a bad thing since Pratt's a guy who seems fun to be around.

Returning opposite Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard's Claire Dearing has drastically improved her choice in dino-park footwear (no high heels to be found this time around) and has a more active role in the action than her administrative position last time. Here, Howard seems to have more personality as Claire in addition to more believable chemistry with Pratt, both of which were somewhat lacking in Jurassic World. Newcomers Justice Smith and Daniella Pineda play animal rights activists Franklin Webb and Zia Rodriguez, but both prove to be little more than plot devices in the grand scheme of things. Franklin, in particular, is an incredibly obnoxious character who seemed unnecessary because all he did was hack things and scream really loud anytime they saw a dinosaur. He's basically the token hacker that all blockbusters have these days and just might be the most annoying character in the franchise thus far...

Isabella Sermon has a peculiar role as Maisie Lockwood because her character is relegated to her grandfather's mansion so she can snoop around and gather intel for herself and the audience to understand exactly what's going one. There's one twist involving her character that I found to be really strange because it serves almost no purpose towards the story at hand. It simply left me scratching my head in response. In relation to her, James Cromwell is introduced as Benjamin Lockwood and does a fine job as the kindred old man somewhat akin to John Hammond. 

As for baddies, Fallen Kingdom's got little more than generic corporate types up its sleeve. Rafe Spall, Toby Jones, and BD Wong are a greedy businessman, auctioneer, and familiar mad scientist respectively. These archetypes are nothing new for the franchise, but the actors each gleefully chew up the scenery with their cartoonish characters. 

If you're going to see Fallen Kingdom in hopes of seeing a solid supporting role for Jeff Goldblum, you're going to be woefully disappointed as the actor is totally wasted in a glorified cameo. He's probably in that Jeep ad which aired at Super Bowl more than he is in this movie, and about 90% of his screentime has already seeped into the trailers. 

My feelings towards Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom are complicated to say the least. Despite everything J.A. Bayona was able to accomplish which made me love Fallen Kingdom more than its predecessor, there were many components that I absolutely hated and lead me towards a middle-of-the-road opinion when reflecting on this fifth series entry. Regardless of my growing indifference towards these sequels, I still can't quite justify the franchise's extinction since I'm admittedly interested in seeing where the next one goes from here. Here's hoping Trevorrow steps up his game...

Film Assessment: C+

Throwback Thursday Review: 'The Lost World: Jurassic Park'

After a hectic round of reviews two weeks ago, things have settled down a bit here on my blog. I recently returned from a trip and had planned to prepare this review beforehand so I could publish it while I was away, but alas, that didn't end up happening so I'm publishing it now instead. For those wondering, I saw Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom last Saturday and will have a review online relatively soon. As for content through July, you can look forward to Throwback Thursday Reviews of Mission: Impossible II, Mission: Impossible III, The Equalizer, and Mamma Mia!, Triple-R Reviews for Sicario, Ant-Man, Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol, and Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation, and reviews of new releases Sicario: Day of the Soldado, Ant-Man and the Wasp, Skyscraper, The Equalizer 2, Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again, Mission: Impossible - Fallout, and Teen Titans Go! To The Movies.

'The Lost World: Jurassic Park' Review

Nominated For: Best Visual Effects.

The Lost World: Jurassic Park accompanies Ian Malcolm as he journeys to Isla Sorna, an island neighboring Isla Nublar where the creatures inhabiting Jurassic Park were bred, on behalf of John Hammond so that he and his team may observe and document the dinosaurs before InGen can exploit them for financial gain once more.

The Lost World is a curious case in the Jurassic franchise. It's unique in being the first follow-up to Jurassic Park and the only franchise sequel which was directed by Steven Spielberg, featured a John Williams score, and based on another Michael Crichton novel like the original. After the success of the first film, Crichton felt pressured to write a second novel based on fan demand and Spielberg's willingness to adapt a sequel. The Lost World was actually the only sequel Crichton ever wrote, so additional installments were based on entirely original ideas as a result. In the case of The Lost World, screenwriter David Koepp returned to pen the second entry and loosely adapted Crichton's novel per Spielberg's instructions by preserving Spielberg's favorite concepts from the novel with a largely original story at the core. Aside from those differentiating factors, The Lost World may as well have became the template for every other Jurassic Park sequel as it prioritized spectacle over story in just about every instance. 

Even with Spielberg at the helm, The Lost World has the bearings of a blockbuster meant to make its way from one set-piece to the next. As a result, it's simply a slog because the exposition this time around is tiring and tedious while the new characters hardly have a personality and are little more than walking, talking plot devices. You're meant to be concerned about the character's safety due to their affiliation with another character rather than any goodwill they've established themselves. The characters' stupid choices only make it more difficult to invest in their actions. For instance, all the audience really learns about Malcolm's daughter Kelly is that she's a young gymnast related to Ian. She stows away to accompany Ian on his expedition because she doesn't want to be left behind, but it's not till the dinosaurs attack that she realizes what a dumb decision she's made. What then follows is an hour and a half in which she mostly whines and screams before eventually taking out a velociraptor in the film's silliest moment. Beyond bonding with her father, she doesn't have any arc of her own and is a nuisance to the other characters and audience. 

The Spielbergian sense of awe and wonder that occupied the original is present in but a scene or two, and we've already seen the dinosaurs so it's no longer impressive and awe-inspiring. In its place, Spielbergian suspense. Despite my growing indifference to the Jurassic sequels, Spielberg's influence on key sequences in The Lost World can't be ignored. The sequence where the trailer dangles over the cliff ledge is absolutely brilliant to say the least and the T-Rex attack on San Diego is quite entertaining to watch. In regards to the technical elements, Janusz Kaminski's cinematography is quite captivating, there's some clever editing from Michael Kahn, the visual effects and animatronics are on-par with the original for the most part, and John Williams' score doesn't disappoint. I won't deny that The Lost World is a well-constructed film with a few stand-out sequences, but it lacks the heart and soul of the original.

Sure, there are flashes of brilliance sprinkled throughout The Lost World. Even I'll admit that much, but these bright spots ultimately don't elevate the weak foundation of a lackluster script. I've sourced most of my complaints already, but my biggest gripe is that I didn't care about any characters aside from Ian Malcom (whom I already had a vested interest) and the film is largely a series of characters making bad ideas. David Koepp goes out of his way to address any possible gaps in logic that may accompany the introduction of Isla Sorna by explaining any and all questions away via exposition. The retcon is effective, but I wish the same care had gone into justifying character motivation. 

For instance, Ian Malcolm is the character from the original you'd expect to have absolutely no desire to ever be involved with dinosaurs again. Malcolm says as much in a conversation with John Hammond. However, Malcolm changes his mind immediately upon learning Sarah Harding is already on the island. Now, I understand that Malcolm went to Site B to rescue Harding because she's his girlfriend. That much is obvious, and I think Koepp expects that's more than enough to explain the sudden shift away, but I don't feel the film itself ever justified her importance to him beyond that connection. When they're reunited, you don't really get a sense of why Malcolm cares so much. They have chemistry, but Malcom's continuously trying to save her while she either enabling other's mistakes or making her own. 

We're also told time and time again that Sarah is an experienced animal behaviorist and paleontologist (Hammond even proclaims her to be a foremost expert in the field), but her knowledge is scarcely shown in her interactions with the creatures. Despite her awareness of the peril posed by interacting with the young stegosaurus and tyrannosaurus rex, she carries on without a care in the world only to find severe consequences in both instances. I suppose you could chalk it down to her strong will and ambition, but you'd think a behaviorist would be more careful in her study of these dangerous dinosaurs. It's just frustrating to witness because Sarah isn't particularly well-developed and Malcolm's decision to go to the island never feels fully justified because their relationship is merely an afterthought when all is said-and-done. Koepp just needed an excuse to get Malcolm on the island, so he took the shortest path possible. 

Meanwhile, the performances across the board are hit or miss. Jeff Goldblum, of course, can do no wrong imbuing Ian Malcolm with his trademark sardonic wit and levelheaded rationale. Julianne Moore, Vince Vaughn,Vanessa Chester, and Richard Schiff are all equally acceptable as Sarah Harding, Nick Van Owen, Kelly Curtis, and Eddie Carr, but bring little personality to their one-note characters so they're largely static and uninteresting. Richard Attenborough, Joseph Mazzelo, and Ariana Richards also briefly reprise their respective roles from the original to great effect. 

As for a highlight, Pete Postlethwaite delights in the role of a cartoonish game hunter named Roland Tembo and stands out as an intriguing presence. Those who hired him are sadly textbook greedy, corporate types though.

The Lost World: Jurassic Park may not have completely been a lost cause, but it was still an ill-advised effort at the very least because it rarely ventured anywhere near the excellence of original. While it may not have been fossilized as the worst Jurassic sequel, it's still a significant step-down from the first and should have been a red herring to audiences and Universal Studios that Jurassic Park sequels were a very, very bad idea. 

Film Assessment: C+

Throwback Thursday Review: 'Jurassic Park'

I apologize for what must seem like an onslaught of reviews these past few days, but I simply knew I had to write this when I learned today was the 25th anniversary of Jurassic Park. I had originally intended to share this review back in March to coincide with the release of Spielberg's Ready Player One, but that plan fell through when I took a brief hiatus from this format. Anyways, things worked out nicely in the end because I'm now able to share this on the actual anniversary. For the rest of the week, look forward to my Throwback Thursday Review of The Incredibles in addition to reviews of new releases Tag (2018) and Incredibles 2. I'll be preparing my Throwback Thursday Review of The Lost World: Jurassic Park to share while I'm away next week and then I'll certainly be reviewing Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom when I return. If you're wondering about the other Jurassic films, I'm saving those reviews for another time. 

'Jurassic Park' Review

Nominated For: Best Sound, Best Sound Editing, and Best Visual Effects. 

Won: Best Sound, Best Sound Editing, and Best Visual Effects. 

Jurassic Park ventures alongside a select group chosen to tour and approve an island theme park off the coast of Costa Rica that is populated by dinosaurs recreated from prehistoric DNA. When the preview tour goes awry and the dinosaurs break out of their enclosures, the excursion soon becomes a scramble for survival. 

Jurassic Park was directed by the astounding Steven Spielberg and featured a screenplay written by David Koepp and Michael Crichton which served as an adaptation of Crichton's own novel. It's often said that no one makes a movie like Spielberg, and that statement couldn't be any closer to the truth. Just take a glance at the man's body of work, and you'll soon see his range and flexibility as a filmmaker. He's helmed a film in just about every genre from action-adventure to holocaust dramas... Hold on a second... He actually directed two films attributed to those categories in the same year when both Jurassic Park and Schindler's List were released in 1993 with overlapping productions. As I was saying, the man can make whatever he'd like whenever he'd like, but his sense of Spielbergian awe and wonder remains present through just about all of it. Even his lesser work is enhanced by his special touch.

With that being said, I consider Jurassic Park to be top-tier Spielberg and it still reigns supreme amongst his filmography in my eyes (perhaps coming in second to Raiders of the Lost Ark). From the very get-go, Spielberg hones in on establishing the exposition and the film's underlying foundation as both exciting and informative. It all starts with men simply moving a crate, but the atmosphere of the scene makes the opening all the more mysterious and intense before a worker's suddenly killed by a velociraptor. Four minutes in and Spielberg's already hooked the audience's attention so he can start to steadily reel them in and ease them into his story before delivering the exhilarating, edge-of-your-seat action they all came to see. In the meantime, he and the writers must introduce all the major players along with furthering the story and educating the audience on some crucial dino-behavior for later. 

It's actually quite important that Spielberg took his time before he brought out the dangerous dinosaurs. He took the Jaws approach, and it only made the grand entrances for the Tyrannosaurus Rex and the Velociraptors all the more satisfying and suspenseful. For the first hour, we've gotten to know the characters and learned everything we need to know about these creatures. Now, we find ourselves invested in their survival when it matters most. The stakes are high for our heroes and we actually care about their safety, which is more than most Jurassic Park sequels can say. 

On that note, I'd like to briefly discuss why no Jurassic Park sequel will ever top the original. While I admit there are other franchises out there with additional installments I enjoy more than the first, the Jurassic franchise is currently batting 0-3. Why is that, you ask? Well, Jurassic Park was lighting-in-a-bottle and it's incredibly difficult to recreate the conditions that lead this film to become the masterpiece we still cherish today. Even with Spielberg behind the camera on The Lost World, the results weren't quite as great as one might hope. Who knows? Maybe Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom or the inevitable Jurassic World 3 might be the next great thing? However, I sincerely doubt it because it's already incredibly difficult for other films to measure up to Jurassic Park, let alone those within the franchise. 

On a brighter note, the practical and digital effects hold up remarkably well. The animatronics and CG-creations weave together seamlessly for an incredibly immersive experience that's only further enhanced by the sensational sound design, Dean Cundey's captivating camerawork, and one of John Williams' greatest film scores. Williams themes actually are the lynchpins that hold it all together as the accompaniment echoes the triumphant feelings of awe and wonder associated with the park and ratchets up the tension tremendously in the suspenseful scenes. 

As for the cast, everyone nails it as Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, Richard Attenborough, Samuel L. Jackson, and Wayne Knight lend the proper personality to their respective roles. Neill's Alan Grant is as stern as can be while Dern's sweet and badass as Ellie Sattler. Then Ian Malcolm is pretty much peak-Goldblum, Attenborough perfectly personifies Hammond as warm-hearted yet misguided, Jackson keeps it cool, and Knight's schtick is quite amusing. 

Also exceptional are the young child performers Joseph Mazzello and Ariana Richards as Tim and Lex. It's through their eyes that the entire experience is given an extra layer of authenticity as they look on in both horror and amazement at the wide assortment of dinosaurs. While they each may have slipped from the more mainstream movies in the time since, I'm sure they'll be forever remembered for the astonishing work they provided at such a young age. 

To simply call Jurassic Park a beloved blockbuster classic would be a massive understatement. It's endlessly iconic from start-to-finish and I can't imagine it will ever go extinct. It's really no secret that I strongly suspect Jurassic Park will forever be fossilized as one of the best action-adventure films to ever roam the Earth. 

Film Assessment: A+

'Isle of Dogs' Review

Nominated For: Best Animated Feature and Best Original Score.

In the near future (twenty years from now), snout fever (aka "dog flu") ravages the canine population of Megasaki City. By executive decree of Mayor Kobayashi, all dogs are hereby banished to a gargantuan garbage-dump otherwise referred to as Trash Island. Isle of Dogs then follows a determined twelve-year-old boy named Atari as he hijacks a miniature plane and flies across the river in search of his bodyguard-dog, Spots. Once he crashes on Trash Island, a pack of mangy mutts join him on his epic odyssey to find and rescue his long lost friend. 

Isle of Dogs is the ninth feature length film to be written and directed by the idiosyncratic Wes Anderson. If you've ever seen a Wes Anderson production, you have a clear idea of what you should expect from an acclaimed auteur of his pedigree. There will be whip pans, symmetric shot composition, an obsessive attention to detail, colorful settings, obscure older music, quirky characters, and abundant instances of offbeat humor. Of course, all of these elements can be found within Isle of Dogs since the film champions Anderson's unique, eccentric style as its most defining attribute.

If you're a fan of Anderson's work, you'll likely be drawn to see Isle of Dogs because it's the distinctive director's return to stop-motion animation after his first foray utilizing the medium in 2009, Fantastic Mr. Fox. His obsessive-compulsive nature as a filmmaker simply means he's suited to deal with stop-motion because the process is absurdly tedious and requires an incredible attention-to-detail. In order for the models to move with an authentic fluidity, animators have to continually adjust puppets with the slightest alterations between individual photographed frames. It's truly a testament to the ability of these animators that I often forgot I was watching stop-motion because there was such a lifelike look to it all. It's really remarkable, and I'd consider it to be among the finest stop-motion animation I've ever seen on film. 

Like any other Wes Anderson production, the art direction, production design, cinematography, and score are all exceptionally executed as can be expected. Stylistically, the film pays homage to the traditional Japanese epic, and Japan in general, in so many ways. Tristan Oliver's cinematography excellently communicated a sense of scale and intimacy/aggression (depending on the scene's context) while sticking to the symmetrical shot composition characteristic of all Anderson's work. All the while, the film is immensely energized by the beat of Alexandre Desplat's percussive score that stands out as a unique addition to the two-time Oscar winning composer's resume. 

Meanwhile, the film is facing some online controversy of cultural appropriation... I'm not quite sure what exactly is being interpreted as such, but I didn't think there was anything in the film that could be construed as offensive. Perhaps I'm not "woke" enough to understand it, but I believe these claims are grossly over-exaggerated. If you see the film and think otherwise, feel free to let me know what I'm missing. I'd actually say Anderson does a great deal to honor Japanese culture by casting ethnically appropriate actors for the Japanese human roles, homaging Japanese cinema, art, and architecture, and incorporating elements of cultural significance. That's not even to mention the fact that Anderson made the stylistic choice for all the Japanese characters to speak in Japanese throughout the entire film. 

A title card appears in the beginning to inform the audience in addition to letting everyone know there won't be subtitles either. Fortunately, the dog barks have been translated to English and an interpreter and outside narrator are incorporated for occasional English translations. I'm sure this will be met with a divisive reaction from American audiences because we'd like to understand everything. I felt the decision paid off for the most part, but it admittedly impaired the narrative from as I found it difficult to completely connect with characters I didn't always understand. Although I respect Anderson's commitment to the concept, subtitles would have been immensely beneficial.

While I appreciated the broad overarching themes regarding the canine breed's celebrated characteristics of bravery, loyalty, and unconditional love, the film's storytelling is a little ruff (pun intended). This isn't to say film's story is entirely problematic, but rather to note it stands out as superficial when compared to Anderson's other work. The film relies heavily of the whimsical charm of these junkyard dogs cracking quips in deadpan, which worked wonders by the way. Otherwise, it's as if Anderson is holding audiences at an arm's distance from the human characters due to the aforementioned decision not to translate all the Japanese dialogue. There's enough expression for audiences to pick up on distinctive personalities, but they simply weren't fleshed out or developed as much as I'd have liked. 

Isle of Dogs does however feature an especially distinguished cast composed of Bryan Cranston, Scarlett Johansson, Francis McDormand, Greta Gerwig, Liev Schreiber, Kunichi Nomura, Koyu Rankin, Ken Watanabe, and common Anderson collaborators such as Bill Murray, Edward Norton, Jeff Goldblum, Bob Balaban, F. Murray Abraham, and Tilda Swinton voicing an assortment of humans and hounds. To discuss them all individually would be a logistical nightmare, but do know that each actor added a great deal of charm and lent themselves well to their respective roles. Cranston is undoubtedly the standout as the surly stray alpha dog, Chief, and I have to say Koyu Rankin did remarkably well for his first role in a feature film in spite of the Japanese language barrier I brought up earlier. 

Before I wrap things up, I suppose I ought to mention that adults will have more to take away from Isle of Dogs than children. I realize the appeal of cute dogs and a young protagonist might make it appear to be made with children in mind, but that couldn't be further from the truth. There's not really much in the way of inappropriate humor, but the comedy is dark on occasion and the story itself is fairly mature. Significant portions of the film also move at a slower pace that I can't really envision kids enjoying, especially when the humor will fly over their heads. One other thing well worth mentioning is that you may look to see where you can watch Isle of Dogs after reading this review to learn it may not be playing at a theater near you just yet. That is because the film's had an especially limited release roll-out from Fox Searchlight. They'll be expanding in the coming weeks, but I'm unsure when the wide release date is. I was fortunate enough to attend an advanced screening of the film though and wanted to share a review regardless of that.

I may not consider Isle of Dogs to be one of my favorite films from Wes Anderson, but Anderson sure is one sly dog, because I can't dispute the fact I left the theater with my tail wagging (metaphorically, of course). It's taken three months, but Anderson's given audiences the first animated feature worth barking about this year!

Film Assessment: B+

'Thor: Ragnarok' Review

[This review was originally written in November 2017 and is now being published that my internship is over. For an explanation of this, visit my Fall 2017 Important Update post.] 

Thor: Ragnarok picks up about two years after the events of Avengers: Age Of Ultron as Thor is following up on the visions he had regarding the destruction of Asgard, also known as Ragnarok. After seemingly stopping Ragnarok for good, Thor returns to Asgard only to learn Loki has been impersonating Odin since the end of Thor: The Dark World. The two adopted brothers then journey to Earth in order to retrieve the Allfather, but things don't go as planned when Hela, the Goddess of Death, escapes her eternal imprisonment, destroys Mjionir, and the two brothers wind up on the gladiatorial planet of Sakaar. Once there, Thor is made one of the Grand Master's champions and pitted in battle against one of his fellow Avengers, the Hulk. Thor must then find a way to escape Sakaar alongside his friends and make it to Asgard to stop Hela from bringing ruin and destruction to the Nine Relams.

Thor: Ragnarok happens to be the seventeenth installment in Marvel's ever-expanding catalogue of superhero films on top of being the God of Thunder's third outing, so naturally Marvel would want to shake things up, and they have done just that by bringing comedic director Taika Waititi onboard. The Thor franchise honestly needed a facelift, and Waititi rejuvenates the mighty Avenger by infusing his own comedic sensibilities and an electrifying eighties-vibe while fundamentally deconstructing the titular character. Ragnarok effectively integrates the cosmic fun of Guardians of the Galaxy with the world first established in Thor. It's the Marvel cosmos meeting Marvel's take on Norse mythology.

This change-up is made abundantly clear once Thor's mighty hammer is smashed to smithereens, his luscious locks are snipped, and he's thrown into an arena to battle the Hulk. Thor's also traditionally been the straight-man, but someone over at Marvel must have taken note of Hemsworth's natural knack for humor, so instead he spouts quips from the get-go. This departure is a tad unusual and admittedly jarring at first, but you'll settle into the adjustments as the film proceeds. In fact, that won't take too long due to the lightning-fast pacing of Thor: Ragnarok's opening. 

Once the film starts, it doesn't take time to breathe, so the beginning portion of the film effectively feels very rushed with the intention of hurriedly sweeping many of the remaining franchise elements under the rug. For me, the film didn't totally find its groove till Thor arrived on Sakaar. At that point, everything slows down a bit and we spend some sizable time on a Jeff Goldblum-ruled, gladiatorial utopia, which is glorious. 

One of the film's other predicaments was simply some ill-timed humor. Serious moments aren't permitted to hold the expected weight or gravity because Waititi or one of the screen-writers thought it'd be funny to throw in a joke. I feel Waititi missed the mark on providing appropriately-timed comic relief to match the more serious situations. Instead of inserting jokes as a source of levity AFTER the event, Waititi chose to throw them straight in the midst of these situations. I think this film is the prime example of what most DC fans point to when they say they dislike the Marvel brand of humor. I think previously, these jokes were more subtly incorporated in appropriate situations as opposed to their overt inclusion here straight in the middle of an intense moment. 

In regards to action, Ragnarok is fairly low on that front when compared to the other Marvel-fare. The Thor-Hulk gladiator fight itself is enormously entertaining with a wealth of great moments, Hela invades Asgard in spectacular fashion, and the brewing third act showdown on Asgard has enough surprises and stunning spectacle to leave a favorable impression on viewers, but there simply aren't any other striking sequences in Ragnarok's arsenal. The film does however manage to make up for the lacking action in the technical arena.

Thor: Ragnarok is easily one of Marvel's most colorful films thus far with an array of splendid shots, wacky wardrobes, and some especially psychedelic sets tributing the considerably influential comic artist Jack Kirby. Mark Mothersbaugh also successfully composes one of Marvel's most diverse sounding film scores to date with both sweeping, grandiose themes and pulsating, electronic music to accompany the crazy cosmic side of things. The visual effects for the most part are also quite good, but there are a few noticeable inconsistencies (mainly some poor green-screening in moments), although casual viewers are unlikely to take notice of these insignificant imperfections. 

My only other significant issue lied with the characterization of Hela. Prior to seeing the film, I believed Marvel was overcoming their villain issue in their third phase, and I had high hopes that Hela would rise to the occasion and be one of the very best. While she certainly came across as intimidating thanks to Blanchett's performance and her demonstrations of power, Hela's motivations seemed to fall in line with simply feeling entitled to the throne of Asgard. Even though I understand her reasoning, I found it to be lacking and simply didn't deem her a compelling antagonist. There just wasn't enough to her character aside from the obligatory lust for power in my opinion.

One very welcome change however, was a better balance between Thor and Loki. Previously, I felt Hemsworth was always overshadowed by Hiddleston, but I feel Waititi managed to successfully tip the scales in Thor's favor without undercutting Loki. On that note, Chris Hemsworth feels much more in his element now that he can hang loose and make full use of his comedic abilities. I wouldn't call this his best outing as Thor, but it's certainly the most fun. By his side, Tom Hiddleston continues to demonstrate Loki's reputation as the God of Mischief throwing tricks into the mix left and right. The duo's dynamic is just as charged as it has been previously, so any viewers craving more of the trademark witty bickering between the two will be more than satisfied.

Don't discount the big green guy though, because Mark Ruffalo smashes onto the screen with two-pronged portrayal of Bruce Banner and the Hulk. This is a very different Hulk than the one we're used to seeing as he speaks and throws tantrums like a two year old, which actually makes sense considering he's been Hulk for two years and therefore the Hulk's intelligence would have developed as such. Drawing ample inspiration from the Planet Hulk storyline in the comics, Waititi brings the mystery of what happened to Hulk at the end of Age of Ultron to a satisfying resolution and positions Hulk as a standout supporting character in ways previously unthought of. Ruffalo's camaraderie with Thor as both Hulk and Banner is one of the elements that really energized the movie. Otherwise, his take on Banner is rather relaxed when compared to his performances in the last two Avengers films because the script simply doesn't demand much from him in terms of acting. 

Rounding out the Revengers roster is Tessa Thompson's Valkyrie, who stands out as an impressionable newcomer and one of the coolest female Marvel heroes yet! Thompson remains a talent to watch as she adds Ragnarok to her list of standout supporting roles by granting Valkyrie an air of confidence comparable to the swagger of Han Solo. She also has great chemistry with Hemsworth, and I was relieved to see that a romance wasn't imposed on the two characters just yet, but I imagine I'd be accepting of it later down the line. 

As for the Asgardians, most are dismissed fairly quickly with scarce screentime or none at all, but Idris Elba's Heimdall is given some more prominence in the plot and Elba rises to the occasion. Honestly, the only other one worth mentioning is Anthony Hopkins, who once again imparts ancient wisdom on our characters. I will say that the dangling plot-thread regarding his character's disappearance was resolved a little too quickly, but Hopkins' status as an actor carries through and grants Odin the necessary gravitas as per usual. 

Elsewhere, director Taika Waititi voices the rocky gladiator combatant Korg. This is the character responsible for one of the most egregiously ill-timed jokes, but apart from that particular moment, Korg was a welcome source of soft-spoken comedic relief who would probably feel right at home in Waititi's other work (namely Hunt for the Wilderpeople).

All the while, Jeff Goldblum is clearly having a blast playing the Grandmaster as an especially over-exaggerated version of himself. If you love Jeff Goldblum, you'll be immensely entertained by his character because he's wacky, weird, and just about level of eccentric in between. Oh, I would also be remised if I failed to mention the wealth of easter eggs, references, cameos, and two post credit scenes lurking within Waititi's crazy cosmic comedy. Keep your eyes peeled, as per usual, and you'll be well rewarded with a Stan Lee appearance and substantial surprises.

On the antagonistic front, Cate Blanchett really elevates Hela through her performance despite the fact her character is especially underwritten. Blanchett ensures Hela is an imposing character, but the writing behind her character simply lacked the depth I was desiring. Karl Urban, on the other hand, interjects Skurge with a relatable viewpoint and surprisingly stood out alongside the superb supporting cast in a memorable stint. 

Thor: Ragnarok successfully stimulates the franchise with a bolt of electricity that should satisfy any who were displeased with his previous entires, but falls prey to many of the common criticisms associated with Marvel productions in addition to some poor pacing. Thor: Ragnarok may easily be the best Thor film yet, but it's far from thundering alongside the top tier Marvel Cinematic Universe installments in my eyes.

Film Assessment: B-