Thor

Yes!  I got to the theater again!  On opening day!  Yay!
Ahem.  Moving on.  The short review is that Thor was a pretty good but certainly
not great film.  There was no point during the movie that I felt like there was
something just utterly ridiculous going on (given the premise of course), a
handful of things that were enjoyable but at the end of the credits, it left
with me a bit hollow.  Not that there was anything in particular, just a sense
that the movie could have been…deeper.  Before I chase down that rabbit trail,
let’s talk about the movie itself.
First, the good.  The thing that most impressed me about the movie was the
acting.  Chris Hemsworth did a great job playing Thor, pulling off the arrogant
uber-powerful Thor at the beginning and the humbled really-tough-human in the
middle and the humble uber-powerful Thor at the end.  Chronologically, the
lesson learning was a bit on the quick side but Hemsworth makes it believable.
Tom Hiddleston also does a great job playing Loki.  Combined with his
sympathetic performance the dialogue makes you wonder at his true motivations,
even until the end of the movie.  The only thing that’s absolutely clear is that
he really, really doesn’t like Thor and will do most anything to kill him.  For
the most part everyone else does a good job filling out their roles, with the
standouts being the characters of Heimdal and Agent Caulson.  Neither have large
roles but both are necessary to the story.  Finally, there was a brief and
highly superfluous cameo by Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye.  Basically, he was just
there as an Easter egg for us comic nerds but if his brief performance is any
indication, we are in for a real treat when comes back next year for the
Avengers.  Renner brings a quiet intensity to the screen that not many can
match.
The story is quite straightforward and is done well, going back and forth
between Asgard and New Mexico without feeling either choppy or forced, a real
testament to the screen writers, director, and editors.  It is basically the
story of how Thor grows up, moving from powerful and arrogant princeling to a
wiser and humbler man worth of being king.  As you can tell from the trailer,
the transformation takes place on earth after being banished for starting a war
(a war we see curiously little of).  While on earth, Thor learns humility,
respect for others and self-sacrifice.  Like I said, it happens pretty quickly
but to be fair, he’s helped along by the trauma of no longer being worthy to
wield his hammer and Loki who came and told a series of lies that would drive
anyone to introspection.

We also see the further development of SHIELD as a force to be reckoned with as
it quickly shows up and sets up shop around the hammer, which of course no one
but someone worthy can wield.  Not to mention the after-credits scene where we
find that SHIELD has well…I won’t spoil it, although my fellow nerds are already
quite aware of what I’m talking about.
Now, for the bad.  First, Natalie Portman.  Her giggles and generally girly-ness
seem a bit forced.  Not that she has a lot to do but she probably hasn’t had as
bad a performance since Revenge of the Sith.  There was also a little too-much
goofy-ness with “Lady Sif and the Warriors Three,” especially when they show up
on Earth.  It isn’t Jar-Jar bad or even close but it grates a bit.  Also, the
costumes look…strange.  Not just out of place but fake.  Which brings me to the
aesthetic of Asgard.  It seemed overly produced to the point of looking fake.
Now, to be fair, I think the director was trying to make it look set apart, like
it really is a higher, heavenly realm as opposed to just a really classy
medieval castle.  I just don’t care for the way he did.  That said, this is
really just a matter of taste.
Moving on, Thor was so powerful that it was hard to really care about him most
of the time.  At the beginning in the battle with the Frost Giants, he pretty
much single-handedly takes out an army without hardly breaking a sweat.  And at
the end, when the Destroyer shows up it pretty much makes mince-meat of Thor’s
buddies before getting completely trashed by Thor (after he gets his hammer
back).  The point is that Sif and the others simply are nowhere near Thor’s
league.  Kind of like staking up Bruce Lee against a really tough ten-year-old.

There was one significant misstep by the director and that was the inclusion of
a date at the beginning.  If I remember right, it was 967 AD when the war
between the Frost Giants and Asgardians was raging on Earth.  The big problem
here is that Thor and Loki were only babies at the time.  This raises obvious
problems with the chronology of the legends of the Norse gods.  I may have seen
it wrong and the date may have been B.C. but even then, I think it was a mistake
to put a time stamp on the Asgardian past.  It potentially raises a lot of
questions about their nature, most notably how they age.

Finally, there was just something missing.  This is the way I feel about all of
the Marvel Studios movies.  They are enjoyable movies but the only reason anyone
will be talking about them ten years from now is that they will still be making
sequels.  I’m not sure exactly what it is, unless it’s the fact that (as a
friend pointed out) they maybe trying to do too much.  A little action, a
littler comedy, a little romance, a little drama, etc.  Basically, trying to
catch every single demographic in one movie, and in the process sacrificing the
core of the story.  As he and I discussed, this is a problem of a lot of movies
today and likely accounts for why so many movies, especially remakes, reboots
and sequels ultimately feel flat.  The studios are just trying to hit all the
check marks while forgetting that their primary job is to tell a good story.
Something to think about.

The Expendables

Okay, by now everyone knows what a mess that movie was.  And let's face it, no one really expected Oscar bait, just a fun bunch of nostalgic action-packed goodness.  But it failed on that score as well.  Stallone was simply trying to do too much with too many names in one movie. 
So, what were some of the specific problems?  One - There was little to know background for any of the characters.  Why are thy together?  Why should I care about them at all?  Each character got a little moment of "development" at some point during the movie (Coutre's little thing about his ear and therapist, Ludgren's drug problem, Statham's girlfriend, etc.) but it was always little more than a sound bite.  Two - Too much setup before things really got going.  Three - Too much quick editing during the big finale.  I understand why, there were a lot of big names that needed screen time but it was still somewhat distracting.  Four - Jet Li was done wrong.  He was portrayed largely as a whiny little wimp.  Five - CG blood.  Enough said. 
Now, with all of those problems, I still generally enjoyed the movie.  Part of the reason is that I didn't see it until it was out on Netflix so I was well prepared for its various problems.  Another part is that did enjoy what action there was as well as the humor.  Finally, I also saw and appreciated some of what Stallone was trying to get at with his movie.  What's that?  Stallone, trying to say something?  With this movie?  In a word, yes.
See, if you've watched carefully over the last few years since he has returned to the Catholic Church, he has been trying to say something with his movies.  Rocky Balboa pretty much wore its message(s) on its sleeve and Rambo 4 from what I understand (since I haven't seen it) seems to be at least in part about Rambo finding some sort of peace and redemption.  While beating the snot out of a bunch of thugs. 
With this one, Stallone seems to be largely getting at the importance of relationships.  This is represented by the friendship between the various members of the Expendables as well as between Christmas and his girlfriend.  There were also intimations as to the damage done to a person's psyche by living a self-centered life of violence.  The first hint of this was Gunnar's drug problem and Ross' comment "The life got to him.  It'll get to us all eventually." The real lynch-pin for all of this was Micky Rourke's character of Tool, specifically his speech about turning his back on someone who was about to commit suicide and how that has haunted him ever since.  The moral, if all you see is the pain, the despair, "the blood and the mud" your heart will harden and it will die.  The only cure is to give yourself to some cause outside of yourself, Ross's case the woman they met on the island. 
So, there was some good stuff going on in the Expendables, just not enough.  Hopefully, Stallone fixes a lot of these problems with the second one.  Yes, it's already in the works with likely even more action stars of days gone by.