Movie Review: The Avengers

I generally don't go to the movie theater much, as it's too expensive and there's really not many good movies that are worth seeing nowadays. However, for my birthday, I went with my family and a small group of friends to see "The Avengers."


WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD


"The Avengers" takes place at some point after all the other movies (i.e. "The Hulk," "Iron Man," "Iron Man 2," "Thor," and "Captain America") have taken place. Thor's adopted brother Loki shows up at a S.H.I.E.L.D. base and steals the tesseract, also converting Erik Selvig and Hawkeye/ Clint Barton to serve him. Nick Fury then begins assembling Captain America, Tony Stark, Bruce Banner, and Black Widow to get the tesseract back. Thor ends up joining the team when he tries to convince Loki to stop his ambitions to rule over mankind. The Avengers team must learn to put up with each other and unite to bring down Loki and his alien army.


I must say that the movie was very, very enjoyable to watch. The characters were good and, generally speaking, portrayed very well. I'm still not fully into Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/ Hulk, and I wasn't overly impressed with the Black Widow's character either. I liked Hawkeye's brief cameo in "Thor," but he spent half of this movie as a bad guy and wasn't seen around much until the last battle in New York City. I did enjoy Chris Evans as Captain America, Chris Hemsworth as Thor, and Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man. What made the characters really memorable, to me, was their interactions with each other. The Avengers team all have their different personalities and abilities, which often set them at odds with each other but makes for good, realistic entertainment. Tom Hiddleston as Loki was also very good. Loki, since "Thor" the movie, has grown more darker and creepier, and the actor does an excellent job of pulling off a good, worthy villain.


The plot itself was good and pretty easy to follow, though I'm still trying to figure out Loki's motivations for his captivity (I'll probably understand it after a second viewing of the film or if I watch the movie with captions- I'm a bit shameful about my use of captions). Joss Whedon did an excellent job of making the film darker than "Iron Man" and "Thor" but adding plenty of humor to lighten it. Even though I'm only familiar with Whedon's work on "Firefly" and "Serenity," he has a good sense of humor and did an excellent job on directing as well as writing the screenplay. The visual effects were also very good, and plus, you get to see New York City destroyed for the billionth time in cinema history.


In conclusion, the movie was very enjoyable and definitely worth seeing in theater. I saw it a few days ago and am already itching to see it again. I will say, though, the plot and characters are easier to understand if you see the Avengers set-up movies like "Thor," "Captain America," "Hulk," and "Iron Man" ("Iron Man 2" didn't really add much to the story, except for the introduction of Black Widow, but that was about it). So, if you're a big Marvel fan or just looking for an enjoyable action-adventure movie, this one is for you.


I give the movie four out of a half stars.

Movie Review: The Hunger Games

I apologize for the lack of posts, but things have been dry writing-wise around here. Anyway... recently, I saw went and saw "The Hunger Games" with a friend, even though I'd never read the books before. I will give a review, but I also will talk about some issues concerning the books and movie that have been rather controversial in certain circles.

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

Set in a post-apocalyptic and dystopian North America in the future, the country of Panem (Latin word for "bread") is living under a totalitarian system. The Capitol controls the twelve districts with an iron fist, every year requiring each district to offer two tributes (one male, one female) between the ages of twelve and eighteen to fight in the annual "Hunger Games," a fight to the death among the children that is viewed as entertainment in the Capitol. The protagonist Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence, is living in poverty and struggles to keep her family from starving. When her little sister Primrose is chosen to be tribute, Katniss makes the brave sacrifice of taking her sister's place in the annual games, and she is joined by Peeta Mallark, a boy who once gave her bread. Katniss goes to the Capitol, where she is trained, witnesses the decadent lifestyle of the residents there, and must make herself appealing to the audience so that she can get sponsors for when the game happens. Finally, the day comes when Katniss and Peeta must go into the arena and fight for their lives.

I thought the movie was very well done. The acting was good, and the characters were memorable. Jennifer Lawrence was very convincing as Katniss Everdeen in showing her bravery and yet sometimes showing off her vulnerability. I liked her interactions with Gale, and I admit I wasn't quite bought with her whole relationship with Peeta (though as I understand it, her feelings were not entirely genuine because she was trying to save his life), though I may change my mind with a second viewing of the movie. The plot itself was easy to follow and understand, especially given the fact that the film is based off a book in the first-person perspective. There were, however, a few short scenes that were a bit tricky to understand, but I think if I read the books I might understand them and their placement a bit better.

Now a few warnings for interested moviegoers. First, be prepared to cry. I got teary-eyed in a few scenes, and in one of them my eyes were so blurry that I couldn't even see the movie screen. And I generally don't cry a lot in movies, but it ultimately depends on the moviegoer. Second, if movies with a lot of jolting, frenzied scenes cause seizures, migraines, or anything like that in you, I would hold back on seeing it on the big screen. There are a few scenes that are blurry, very fast-paced, and, I admit, a bit tricky to watch on the big screen. If this is a problem for you, wait until the movie comes out on DVD and see it then.

Now to talk about the violence in the film. As I understand it, the books were violent, but the movie actually tones it down. A good percentage of the violence was done off-screen, which I personally liked because it left such things up to the imagination and also because it increased the shock value. However, even though most of the violence is not shown, I would be very cautious in showing it to children and younger teens. The movie is very intense, largely because of its premise of kids killing each other, and I would leave it up to parents to decide whether or not to let their children see it because the story is not for the faint of heart.

"The Hunger Games" series and the movie recently have come under fire for its violence and for the fact that the series is targeted towards teenagers. However, I disagree with the view that the story glorifies violence. If that were the case, I believe the movie would have been more violent and Katniss would have actually killed people and not acted only in self-defense. Instead, watching the movie, I found themes of government control, a decadent culture centered around personal entertainment, sacrifice, and even regard for life.

In the end, I really enjoyed "The Hunger Games" and am looking forward to seeing it again. I am also hoping to start reading the book series very soon.

I give it four and a half stars.

Movie Review: Contagion

Last weekend, my mom, who is the resident science expert in the house, and myself decided to watch this thriller.

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

"Contagion" takes place over a period of a few months in the world. It begins with Gwyneth Paltrov's character Beth Emhoff returning home from a trip to Hong Kong... and bringing with her an unknown illness. Beth and her son both succumb to the disease quickly, leaving behind Beth's husband Mitch (played by Matt Damon) and their daughter. The CDC and WHO, meanwhile, are realizing what is going on and that they have a potential epidemic on their hands. The CDC works to calm the frightened population down, impose quarantine on certain cities, and try to find a cure for the disease while the WHO sends Dr. Orantes (played by Marion Cotillard) to track down the disease's origin. As things degenerate into chaos, a conspiracy theorist blogger Alan Krumwiede (played by Jude Law) claims that the CDC and government are conspiring and that the cure for the disease is a homeopathic remedy called forsythia.

Despite the movie having several characters and several plots going on at the same time, the movie made sense and was not confusing. The plot was set at a good pace and kept you engaged, wondering what was going to happen next. I thought, however, that the movie tied up a little too nicely and that everything seemed to be resolved too quickly given the tense situation with the epidemic and the time-frame of its spread. Some of the characters might not have been entirely memorable, but I thought the actors nonetheless did a decent job.

One big issue I had with the film was its propaganda. It was pro-government control in how the CDC and WHO were portrayed (except towards the end when Dr. Orantes learns that they tricked a village of Chinese people), and it was pro-vaccines, which I have personal issue with. Another issue is the portrayal of Jude Law's character, that people who are anti-vaccines and pro-homeopathic remedies are scumbags looking to make money off of desperate people. Even though I am certain there are people like Krumwiede out there, I took personal offense because I far prefer homeopathic remedies over what are generally considered to be safe cures for diseases and I'm generally skeptical of the medical industry to begin with.

Despite its faults, "Contagion" was a genuinely entertaining movie. Not amazing or something to watch over and over again, but definitely something to watch every once in a while for a good thriller about an epidemic.

I give it four out of five stars.

Movie Review: Sherlock Holmes- Game of Shadows

Over Christmas weekend, I went out with some friends to see "Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows," sequel to Guy Ritchie's "Sherlock Holmes."

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

"Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows" takes place at some point after its predecessor. It begins with Holmes believing that seemingly unconnected crimes are actually the work of college professor James Moriarty, who has something sinister up his sleeve. While out celebrating Watson's wedding that will take place the next day, Holmes meets up with a Gypsy girl named Simza who is somehow connected to Moriarty through her anarchist brother. Holmes, dragging along Watson who worries about his new bride, and Simza journey to Paris, Germany, and Switzerland as they try to stop Moriarty and his evil scheme.

One problem I had with the first "Sherlock Holmes" was that the plot was sort of scatter-brained and did not seem to be very smooth. In this movie, the plot was even worse, and it was difficult to understand. I did not understand Holmes' reasons for the move to each place and how he came to his conclusions about Moriarty. Much like the first one, certain scenes would be repeated to show that Holmes was really working something else and that something else was going on that will actually change the outcome; this time, however, it felt more like a cop-out and did not flow smoothly with the plot or the rest of the story. The movie also seemed too long. I was expecting it to be over by the time that the characters got to the train, but, no, it kept going on. I also noticed that my sister, who was in the party, frequently looked at her cell phone clock and which indicated that she too was bored with the movie.

Even though the plot of the first movie was scatterbrained, it was enjoyable because of the character interactions and their witty dialogue. This movie, however, fell flat. Holmes and Watson were no longer entertaining or bouncing off of each other. Holmes also looked jealous for most of the movie, jealous that Watson was getting married, and it led to some rather awkward scenes, which I'll mention later. The characters themselves were dull and nothing special. Holmes was eccentric, but it was not truly memorable or funny like it had been in the first movie. Watson looked more like he was tagging along rather than actually helping his friend. I was excited when I heard that Jared Harris would be playing Moriarty because I had liked him on "Fringe," but his character here was dull and nothing really memorable, which is a shame because he can act so much better.

Another problem I had with the movie was the content. The first movie was relatively clean, with no language and no sex/ sexual references (except for the very brief scene with Holmes and the pillow), but this one was different. There were several awkward scenes between Holmes and Watson that almost came across as being semi-homosexual, such as when they're wrestling in the train car after Holmes throws Watson's new bride Mary into the river. The scene where Holmes' brother Mycroft is nude was totally unnecessary and in bad taste. The scene of Holmes dressed like a woman was obviously done for laughs, but the way it was handled only served to worsen already-awkward scenes between Holmes and Watson.

Perhaps it was because the writers wanted to redeem the plot, but the content of the movie was uncalled for and looked as if it was added more for laughs. Another thing that was added that could have been left out were the number of slow-motion scenes. Some of the scenes looked more like they were trying to explain how Holmes thinks (which the first movie used), but here they were used in over-abundance and became annoying. In particular, the scene where the Germans are firing on Watson, Holmes, and Sim was slow-motion for most of the time, and it made me want things to speed up so that the scene would just end. These things were likely added to make the audience forget about the slow, convoluted plot, but they only served to worsen, not redeem, the movie.

I was disappointed in "Sherlock Holmes: Game of Shadows." I had expected something similar to the first movie, but it ended up being worse than the first, not improving on the first's issues and adding extra and unnecessary special effects and crude innuendo to distract the audience.

I give it two stars out of five.

CD review: "Celtic Christmas" by Orla Fallon

In honor of the Christmas holiday, I will give a review of Orla Fallon's "A Celtic Christmas." She released the album and DVD last year, but the holiday passed before I had a chance to review it.

"Joy to the World"

Orla starts off her album with this joyful rendition of the popular Christmas carol, accompanied by a choir and by a background fiddler. I got to give her credit for singing the entire hymn and not leaving stanzas out. This currently is my favorite version of the song, and it's a good start to the album.

"I Saw Three Ships"

Orla continues being upbeat with this Christmas song. Accompanied by a flute and some percussion, she adds a cheerful playfulness, and you can hear her smiling as she sings. This is another one of my favorites from the album.

"Do You Hear What I Hear"

Orla becomes more subdued though no less powerful as she sings this song. She is accompanied by her harp and by former Celtic Woman Meav. This song is stunning, and it is nice to hear Meav singing again since her departure from CW in 2007. This is another favorite from the album.

"It Came upon a Midnight Clear- The First Noel"

This song is divided between the two popular Christmas hymns. The first half is slower but beautiful, reminding me of "The Mermaid" from Orla's debut album except for the background orchestra. There is an interlude with the pipes, and then the song changes key for "The First Noel." The second half is also pretty, even though Orla only sings the first stanza and the chorus. The entire song is very pretty and flows much more smoothly than the combinations on Orla's "Winter, Fire, and Snow" album.

"Little Drummer Boy"

Against the background of a guitar and a drumbeat, Orla sings this as a duet with Vince Gill. This song is not one of my personal favorites, as I'm not a fan of Gill's vocals and the two voices seemed unevenly matched for a duet. Then there is that odd little section in the middle where there are extra lyrics that aren't from the original song, and it seems thrown-in there.

"Silent Night"

This song starts off strong, with Orla singing the first stanza in Gaelic. Then David Archuleta sings the first stanza in English by himself. Then the two combine, with Orla in Gaelic and Archuleta in English; I personally am not fond of this, as it sounds messy. I again think the duet is very uneven. Their "Pat-a-Pan" is a little better, even though that version is not on the CD.

"A Soulin'"

I am not familiar with this Christmas song, but I personally find this version very annoying. I skip it every time I listen to the album.

"Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas"

This song sort of reminds me of Orla's earlier "The First Noel." It's pretty though not one of my favorites on the album.

"Bells of Christmas"

If you listened to Orla's "Winter, Fire, and Snow" album, you will recognize this song from that album. Except there are a few differences between the two versions. This song is pretty, but I prefer listening to the original version.

"Away in a Manger"

Orla sings this version acapella with Irish choral group Anuna providing the background vocals. It is pretty, though I personally prefer the version Orla did with Celtic Woman.

"Emmanuel"

Orla sings this acapella again, just like she did on "Winter, Fire, and Snow." I am 80% sure that this is the exact same version that she released on that other album; in that aspect, it almost doesn't fit with the rest of the album's ethereal sound.

Compared to "Winter, Fire, and Snow," this album is vastly improved though not perfect. Orla puts much more passion into her singing, and this sounds more like her enjoying herself, which was not the case in the other album. The album started off strong with its first four pieces, but after that the songs were either ok or not as good as original versions. Except for her song with Meav, I was not impressed with Orla's other duets, as the vocals seemed unevenly matched and did not flow together very well.

The album was ok and not one of my favorite Christmas albums. There are some strong songs, but the others are either hit-or-miss for me.

I give the album three stars out of five.

CD Review: "Anamceol" by Deirdre Shannon

In the spring of this year, former Celtic Woman member Deirdre Shannon released her second solo CD titled "Anamceol." She celebrated this release by offering a special deal of an autographed copy of the CD. I ordered the CD but unfortunately, for whatever reason, mine was not autographed. Nonetheless, the CD was worth it on its own.

"Follow the Heron"

This stunning song is about the coming of spring and the departure of winter. The lyrics are rich in their description, and Deirdre's voice soars as she sings them. This song is an excellent start to the album and one of my personal favorites.

"John O'Dreams"

This song is about John O'Dreams, a mythological Irish figure who has some connection to death (the insert in the CD explains it better). The dark lyrics are offset in a somewhat odd way by the more up-beat tune. Nonetheless, it is a pretty and catchy song.

"Maid of Culmore"

After the previous two pieces being more powerful, Deirdre becomes more subdued here, though she loses none of her emotion. This song is about a beautiful girl from Culmore who captures the heart of a man but leaves him heart-broken when she sails to America, causing him to go after her.

"Bonny Blue-Eyed Nancy"

This romantic song is about a young man who loves the beautiful Nancy, who is considered too low for him, but he remains loyal to her. Deirdre sings this beautiful song with tenderness and passion.

"Gartan Mother's Lullaby"

This Irish lullaby, which Orla Fallon fans will recognize from her debut album, is beautifully sung by Deirdre. The song is subdued and lovely, one of the highlights of the album. The background noise of water helps to give the song a very soothing atmosphere.

"Silent O Moyle"

Fans of Meav will recognize this song from her "Silver Sea" album. Deirdre sings this lament, accompanied by the piano, and she puts great emotion into it. No offense to Meav or to Anuna, but this version is my favorite.

"Siobhan Ni Dhuibhir"

I have only heard Clannad cover this song on their debut 1973 album. Deirdre sings this in Gaelic, accompanied by a strumming guitar and background strings. It does have an odd feel to it, a Gaelic song being accompanied by a small orchestra. It isn't a bad song, but it is not one of my personal favorites.

"Down by the Sally Gardens"

This song has been covered by so many Irish artists that after a while most versions tend to sound alike. This is not the case with Deirdre's cover. Much like Orla Fallon's version, Deirdre sings this with the piano and background orchestra, but she makes the song sound very atmospheric and beautiful without sounding busy or overdone.

"Lass of Glenshee"

The only version of this song I am familiar with is the one that Anuna did with former Celtic Woman Meav. Deirdre sings this romantic song, accompanied by a guitar. I prefer this version more than Anuna's because Deirdre actually sings loud enough to be heard.

"Crucan Na Bpaiste"

I have never heard this song before, but it is based off of a poem that Brendan Graham (writer of "You Raise Me Up" and "The Voice", both made popular by CW) wrote. The Gaelic song is a mother's lament for her dead child. Deirdre sings this with such tender emotion that is heart-wrenching when you hear her. This one of my favorite songs from the album.

"Song for Ireland"

Deirdre ends the album with a tender reflection on her home country of Ireland. It is pretty though not one of my favorites.

Compared to Deirdre's first album, I like this one much better. Firstly, because Deirdre stays much closer to her Irish- Celtic roots. Every single song on this album is Irish or Scottish, and I enjoyed how she picked more remote songs, not sticking to the popular ones that people associate with Irish music. Secondly, Deirdre's first album came across to me as being more pop. This album feels more like a contemporary take on Celtic music; even though some aspects remind one of pop, everything still feels distinctly Irish. If I have a complaint about the album, it's that some of the songs sound alike after a while. On her debut album, Deirdre had the upbeat "I Know My Love" and "Gathering Mushrooms," but this album only has "John O'Dreams." I would have liked more upbeat songs to offset the more subdued, quiet pieces.

Otherwise, "Anamceol" is a beautiful album. Instead of going on a pop route to entice American fans, Deirdre remains true to her Irish roots. Out of all of Celtic Woman's members over the past several years, her voice has not changed or gone sour, and she has continued singing truly Irish music. If you are looking for a beautiful Celtic album with emotion and power without it sounding sappy or overdone, this is the album for you.

I give it four out of five stars.

Movie Review: The King's Speech

Given my fondness for movies about British royalty, I recently watched "The King's Speech" with Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush.

WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD

"The King's Speech" is set in the 1930's England and tells the story of George the Sixth, also known as "Bertie." Bertie is the son of King George the Fifth and brother of the future King Edward, and he has speech problems, which lead to teasing within his own family. Bertie gives up hope of ever being able to talk normally, but his devoted wife Elizabeth seeks the help of Lionel Logue, an unorthodox Australian therapist, to work with her husband. As time goes on, Bertie develops a friendship with Logue, but he becomes terrified at the prospect of him becoming king with his father's death and his brother's abdication.

The story itself flows smoothly and, from what I have read, looks pretty historically accurate. The plot is interesting and keeps you engaged as it moves from different events throughout the 1930's, from a failed speech to Edward and Wallis Simpson's affair to Bertie's first big speech. The plot itself sounds like a typical inspirational story that is more fluff than anything else. What truly sets this apart is the witty dialogue and the characters.

The characters were well-written, and the actors did an excellent job portraying them. Colin Firth played Bertie, and he truly showed off Bertie's quick temper, his devotion to his family and his country, and his own fears regarding the possibility of him ruling; he also does a convincing job as a stammerer. Helena Bonham Carter, unlike her usual eccentric movie roles, plays Bertie's wife Elizabeth and pulls off the elegant, polite character well. Geoffrey Rush plays the witty Lionel Logue and does this very well; his character is quite memorable and likable. There are various other characters throughout the movie, but they all add to the story.

The costumes and sets looked realistic, and the movie itself felt like it was indeed set in the 1930's of England.

The movie is rated R, but it only has that rating because during a therapy session, Bertie starts yelling profanities, as he discovers he never stammers when he swears. This scene is not very long and is largely played for humor, but the great amounts of language in the short scene give it its R-rating.

I truly enjoyed watching "The King's Speech." It truly was an enjoyable and interesting movie.

I give it 4 and 1/2 stars out of five.