Thor: The Dark World

 

Expectations:
As "Phase 2" of Disney's never-ending Marvel overload continues, expectations for stand-alone, superhero movies have plummeted, because we know how great it is when all these guys get together. People used to get genuinely ecstatic about each and every superhero film, but, now, people are just waiting around for the next Avengers film. Personally, I have even more excitement for the new X-Men film, but most of my excitement can be attributed to the great mass of superheroes and great actors that will be featured in the film. However, for the moment, let's pretend that The Avengers never happened. What are my expectations for the Thor sequel, now?... Well... they are even lower! I'm sorry, but I didn't care for the first Thor film, and he was easily my least favorite Avenger. So, with that being said, my only motivation to see Thor: The Dark World was to avoid missing something crucial in the Marvel universe. Also, Loki is kinda the man...

Plot:
My least favorite part of this sequel was the insignificance of the bad guys, Malekith and Algrim. Of course, their existence meant the end of the earth, but their motivation and power came off as a bit ambiguous, in my opinion. Basically, it was as if they needed someone to take the evil attention away from Loki, but, in the end, it just fell flat. Aside from that, the plot wasn't too bad. However, two weeks after watching the film, it is kind of hard to remember many details. So, maybe it wasn't so great either. I do remember that I was impressed with the way that Loki's return to Asgard was dealt with, and the ending was much less abrupt, compared to the first Thor film. Additionally, I enjoyed the story surrounding Thor and Jane Foster, played by Chris Hemsworth and Natalie Portman, a lot more than in the first film. It wasn't quite as forced.

Characters:
Loki is easily Thor's saving grace, and there was no doubt that Tom Hiddleston carried The Dark World farther than any other character. Unfortunately for us, Loki is expected to be absent from the second Avengers, which will make it interesting to see how the development of a bad guy may engulf the second Captain America film, due out in April. Aside from Loki, mediocrity was the name of the Thor character game. Below are a few exceptions...

Negatives:
As I said before, the bad guys, played by Christopher Eccleston and Mr. Echo (I'm not going to try to type out his real name), were pretty much pointless, and I highly doubt that anyone truly enjoyed their presence in the film. Also, Erik Selvig, played by Stellan Skarsgard, continued to become less and less important in the grand scheme of the Thor storyline. To me, this reduction of importance is quite disappointing, as he was one of the few characters that I enjoyed in the first film. My final negative is the big man himself, Thor!, who is the stupidest and most awkward of all the Avengers, yet he manages to be the only thing that ties every super's story together. Regardless, I can't stand him! Seriously, if you took Chris Hemsworth and put him in Troy or Clash of the Titans, you would realize just how ridiculous this character turned out to be.

Positives:
Loki is the man! This film would have been more appropriately titled Loki: The Cooler Brother. I mean, is there any way that we can get Loki in The Avengers 2? I'll let you keep Thor, Joss! Just give me a little Loki. I predict a bright future for Tom Hiddleston, and I can't wait to see what's in store for him. As was the case with the first Thor film, I really enjoyed the character of Heimdall, played by Idris Elba. His wisdom and loyalty is a great accent to the various rebellious characters throughout Asgard, and I really wish he would find his way into an Avengers movie.

Conclusion:
In comparison to its preceding Phase 2 project, Iron Man 3, I would put Thor: The Dark World on exactly the same level. The film was better than Thor's last stand-alone film, just like Iron Man 3 was better than Iron Man 2, featured a lot of hearty laughing moment, just like Iron Man 3, and contributed very little to the overall, Avengers-based storyline (with what we know at this point), just like Iron Man 3. I don't know how everyone else feels, but, after seeing Iron Man 3 and Thor: The Dark World, I am afraid that these Marvel films are going to become a bit too generic. Don't get me wrong... I enjoyed the story, some of the acting, and, of course, I will go back to see Thor 3. However, as the movie wrapped up, I had that same underwhelming feeling that came after Iron Man 3. It was that same feeling you get after you watch any plot-twisting, action-filled, depth-lacking movie on the big screen. You know what I'm talking about! At this point, I just hope that The Avengers: Age of Ultron has something unique and exciting in store for Marvel fans. If not, Phase 2 may turn out to be the highest grossing and least exciting of the infinite future Marvel phases. I give Thor: The Dark World 3.12 out of 5 stars.

Friends With Benefits

Expectations:
All the talk going in to this movie was how it was exactly like No Strings Attached. Judging from the trailers of the two films, that is very true, but I have never seen No Strings Attached, giving me a clean slate to think upon during this movie. I really thought that the movie would be purely comedy. It's obvious that a love connection would spark between Mila and Justin at some point in the film, but I expected hilarity up until that point. I am not a huge fan of Mila Kunis, but she is 3,000 times funnier than Natalie Portman, hence my watching Friends With Benefits rather than No Strings Attached. Did I expect great things from this movie? No, hence my going to watch Captain America first. But I am always up for a good laugh.

Before I move on to the plot, I would like to let all readers know that my girlfriend was absolutely disgusted by the abbreviation FWB. She told me atleast three times, so I figured that everyone should know how awefully dumb it is to abbreviate movie titles.

Plot:
As is the case with most people, I go see a comedy for one reason... to laugh. For the first twenty minutes or so of Friends with Benefits, I didn't find myself doing much of this. Then, suddenly, the movie began to pick up in humor. But once the funny business was over, the plot became very serious. As I said before, the obvious love connection sparks, and mixed emotions get in the way. I am usually ok with the relationships in comedies, yet this one began to turn into more of a chick flick as time went on. Not only is there tension in the relationship between the main characters, but also Dylan (Justin Timberlake) has a rough family history and a sick dad. Now I don't know about you, but I don't want to see much emotion from a man in an R-rated comedy. Now that I have hated some, I do think that the approach was good and the idea brilliant. If they hadn't played up the comedy so so much in the trailers, I would have loved the family connections. This movie was actually thought up before No Strings Attached, so I will give them credit for turning this great idea into a film. The execution could have been better, the plot could have been less predictable, but the idea is genius.

Characters:
As I said before, I am not a huge fan of Mila Kunis. I am one of the biggest That 70's Show fans you could ever meet, and I believe she was the weak link in the greatest TV comedy of all time. With that being said, I was impressed by her performance in Friends with Benefits. I do think she really utilized Timberlake's talents to her advantage and made me laugh multiple times. Justin Timberlake really wasn't as funny as normal, mostly because he was held back by his family issues. I did think the chemistry between Kunis and Timberlake was obvious, and I would not be surprised if this relationship carried over into the real world.

Best Character: Dylan's dad, played by Richard Jenkins, was really a great character. I know I said that I wanted comedy, but he really did a good job of adding the drama that was desired by the filmmakers.

Worst Character: Shaun White, played by Shaun White, was completely useless. There was a really hilarious joke about him looking like a girl, but other than that I was baffled as to why he was in the film.

Conclusion:
Friends with Benefits was not exactly what I expected, but it was pretty good. I did laugh a good bit and also felt something for the characters, particularly Dylan. I have mixed emotions about the film. The plot was predicted by our waiter before watching the movie, which shows its depth. Even with the weakness of the plot, I do still love the idea, and my hat goes off to whoever thought to turn this into a movie. Friends with Benefits gets 2.46 out of 5 stars. However, I do want to reserve my rights to change my opinion on the film daily.