The Hangover Part 2 Review

If you are reading this review, you are likely already strongly considering going to see "The Hangover Part II." Being a fan of the "Hangover" series is much like being a fan of the "Jackass" series — you either are a fan or you are not, with very few people labeling themselves as being somewhere in-between. The biggest question you probably have is whether or not the second entry in the series compares favorably to the first. The answer is yes, but it's a yes with a very large asterisk.

To label the two as different films is being rather generous to "The Hangover Part II" because the plot of the film is essentially the same as the plot of the first movie. There are almost no notable differences in the plot, other than the action takes places in Bangkok instead of Las Vegas.

Justin Bartha, who reprises his role as Doug, is just as underused in this film as he was in the first "Hangover". It's a shame that the film's director, Todd Phillips, doesn't seem to feel any kind of need to use Bartha more, because he's a very talented comedic actor, as evidenced by the fact he essentially carries the "National Treasure" series by himself.

His character Doug, however, has not gone missing in this film and instead the missing member of the group is Teddy (Mason Lee, who is director Ang Lee's son) which is a problem since Stu (Ed Helms) is supposed to be getting married to Teddy's older sister, Lauren (Jamie Chung).

If you've seen the first "Hangover" film, then you know exactly what to expect. There are no real surprises and the structure of the film is almost the exact same as the structure of the first one — I won't spoil the specifics, but let's just say that I'm having a lot of trouble thinking up any events from "Part II" that don't have a clear parallel from the first film.

You might be asking yourself why you should go see this journey to Bangkok if you've already seen the first film and the answer is pretty simple: despite its similarities to the original "Hangover," "The Hangover Part II" is still really funny. I found myself laughing out loud during the film more than I do during most films because the jokes are surprisingly fresh for a plot that is surprisingly recycled.

Alan, for example, is masterfully reprised by Zack Galifianakis and he is hilarious to watch on screen. He's given most of the punch lines that the script has to offer, but he also really makes the most of them. It seems like Galifianakis was tailor-made for the "Hangover" series and he deserves credit for nailing pretty much every line he's given. Despite the fact that Helms' character is the only one that ever seems to show any kind of sanity, Galifiankis is undoubtedly the anchor that makes the series work. While that may be a carry-over from the first film, it still works here, so it's not a reason to fault the film.

Likewise, Ken Jeong shows up again and provides a lot of laughs during his second encounter with the "Wolf Pack." Director Todd Phillips wisely recognized the fact that Jeong was somewhat underused in the first film and really increased his presence in "Part II" and the film benefits from that.

The hilarious Rob Riggle, however, is sadly missing and hopefully that's because he's being saved for a larger role in the future of the series.

It is difficult to describe how funny this film is without giving away any of the jokes themselves, but "The Hangover Part II" is a worthy companion to the first film. It may quite possibly have found a place in cinematic history as one of the least original films of all time. Luckily, however, it's also one of the funniest films of the past decade or so, which is why I feel comfortable awarding the film four stars out of five.

I realize that four stars is the same amount that I gave Todd Phillips' previous directorial effort, "Due Date," but note the similarity in rankings is a compliment to both films — while "Due Date" was a nicely original, but occasionally unfunny journey away from "The Hangover" despite the similarities in the cast and crew, "The Hangover Part II" sacrificed originality to avoid any of the duller moments that held back "Due Date" from being a truly great comedy. Both films have strengths and weaknesses, the problem is that both go too far in one direction and are prevented from being truly great films.

If you go out and buy a ticket for "Part II", you may feel a little bit of deja vu when you're watching it, but I can't imagine that you'll feel disappointed after you've left the theater. You'll have laughed too hard to care about anything else.

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides Review

 Setting sail for another adventure on the high seas, Captain Jack Sparrow returns to cinemas in Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, the fourth film in Disney’s popular franchise. 
Borrowing elements from the Tim Powers novel On Stranger Tides, the fourth film in the Pirates series follows Captain Jack Sparrow on his quest to reach the Fountain of Youth.  
However, he isn’t the only one with his eyes set on the mythical fountain. On his journey, Jack will cross paths with naval fleets, a mysterious woman from his past, and the most infamous pirate of all, the fearsome Blackbeard.
Unlike the previous entries in the series, On Stranger Tides is directed by Rob Marshall, director of the film adaptation of Chicago. Bringing his new viewpoint to the franchise, Marshall manages to pull off an entertaining adventure movie that feels closer to the original Pirates film. 
Returning from the previous franchise entries are Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow and Geoffrey Rush as Hector Barbossa. Joining Depp and Rush are Vicky Cristina Barcelona’s Penélope Cruz as Angelica and Deadwood’s Ian McShane as Blackbeard. Overall, the cast delivers solid performances, but McShane’s heartless portrayal of Blackbeard is definitely the stand out.
Usually a high point of the films, the score from On Stranger Tides was surprisingly disappointing. As opposed to being unique and varied, much of the score was rehashed and recycled from the previous movies with completely original tracks feeling few and far apart.
However, there is much good to outweigh the bad as well. The visual effects, both computer and makeup, are worth mentioning. From the fearsome mermaids and the intimidating zombies to Blackbeard’s fire-breathing ship and a certain scene involving gravity defying water, the effects in the film were fantastic, even if they were used in some rather odd sequences.
Overall, the film surpasses the previous two entries in the series, but still can’t come close to hitting the quality of Curse of the Black Pearl. 
With a 7 out of 10, Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides is an entertaining popcorn movie that doesn’t pretend to be anything it isn’t.

Priest Review

'm a fan of many film genres and so, too, it would appear, is Priest's director, Scott Stewart. For Priest encompasses elements from sci-fi, western, vampire, horror, fantasy, revenge and post-apocalyptic movies, at times in a gloriously fun fashion and in its weaker parts, playing like a ‘best of' rehash from a truckload of movies from previous decades, including Blade Runner, Star Wars, The Matrix, Mad Max 2 and Blade 2.

Priest isn't afraid to aim high in its aspirations and deserves praise for doing so, with the backstory plastered over a bloody and enjoyable animated credits sequence, leading into the live action, high walled, dystopian city that now safely houses humanity after the vampire scourge threatened to take over.

The cityscapes and streets affectionately homage Ridley Scott's vision, while adding the big brother broadcast element seen in Equilibrium, with Christopher Plummer's sinister face (instead of Sean Pertwee's) adorning the sides of buildings, which are also branded by stylised cross insignias.

Indeed, Scott Stewart's film shares many similarities with Kurt Wimmer's: a fascistic state ruled by fear, guardians of the state capable of being a threat, a rebellious brooding British lead with a gruff American accent, even gun-fu (though the fight scenes never quite match Christian Bale's helmet smashing antics).

Sadly, though, as with the much underappreciated Daybreakers, no sooner have you admired and adjusted to the sights and sounds of this new future society, then the film quickly shifts to the much more budget-friendly, familiar climes of the desert wasteland, where the movie spends the majority of its all too brief eighty-eight minute runtime.

The always excellent Paul Bettany leads proceedings as the titular Priest, channelling parts of his rosary clutching psychosis from The Da Vinci Code, full of brood and conflict, on a mission to save his niece from the villainous clutches of former brother in arms, Karl Urban.

Urban clearly relishes every second of his drawling, vampire cowboy role (he's a huge fan of westerns) and is an actor I've been following since his breakthrough role as Eomer in The Two Towers. So more's the pity that his screen time seems to be far too short, as he's noticeable by his absence.

Bettany, under Stewart's guidance for the second time after Legion, proves to be a strangely apt action hero, throwing himself (literally in the film's better moments) into the fight scenes with an aggressive vigour. By his side is the fantastically named Cam Gigandet, who plays the young, trigger happy sheriff with the requisite amount of brash narrow mindedness. Though I have difficulty seeing him as a hero, after his less friendly roles in the likes of Never Back Down and The O.C.Here's hoping his Twilight followers watch Priest and appreciate vampires' true, cinematic nastiness.

Maggie Q also appears as a fellow priest, but suffers from having arguably the most clichéd character to flesh out. She's loved Bettany's Priest for years, but their faith and his devotion to a love he left behind has meant she's suffered in silence. But worse, she only has one brief action scene to shine in.

Even genre favourite Brad Dourif gets a few minutes of screen time, as a snake oil salesman, but is gone in the blink of an eye, with a potential part in the film's bigger plans never exploited.

In fact, the actors' roles summarise Priest's best and worst traits. It's solid, at times beautiful, but cliché-ridden and cut short. The film constantly seems to take two steps forward and one step back. When the two leads' first vampire fight hits, it incorporates some great violence, made more threatening by the humanoid familiars, then piles on the reasonable CGI beasties, and the mix works well. When the second encounter happens, it's just one big CGI beastie, which is in no way scary and the film falls flat.

There's an abundance of recent films that have openly invited comparisons tocomputer games, but it's one I normally tend to shrug off. (I even liked Battle: Los Angeles, despite similar criticism.) Yet, Priest really did have that fault, made more noticeable after a good start to the action.

I never understand why bigger monsters seem to be seen as a bigger threat. If you're dealing with vampires, the biggest danger isn't being swallowed by a big monster. It's the fear of infection or being torn and devoured piece by piece. By way of comparison, just look at Paul W S Anderson's Resident Evil. Instead of guns versus zombies, there was a pointless Cube rip-off. I wonder how much of a coincidence it is, with both films released by Screen Gems, that the early promise of originality mixed with potential horror violence, give way to PG-13/12A tailoring, and therefore, cash-friendly stability.

If the above issues are a matter of taste and opinion, then there's one major flaw in Priest that is absolutely irrefutable: the dialogue. I can deal with clichéd and broadly drawn characters. They're par for the course in this kind of movie, as are the odd spoken clangers. (I'll confess here to even warming to Bill Pullman's speech from Independence Day. Oh, yes.) But, my god, every other line in Priest is a near indigestible rock.

Things get so bad that you can start to predict every one-liner, to near spoof-level heights. There's a drinking game to be had with every clichéd utterance and movie reference (there are characters called Hicks and Uncle Owen, a black-hooded Bettany races across the desert on a speeding bike like a biblical Darth Maul), which will end with even the most hardened drinker in an unconscious mess.

Against the contrivances, there's still much to enjoy, with the production design (including all manner of futuristic guns, gadgets and bikes) and Christopher Young's superbly rousing score being standouts, while Stewart's direction and composition really does excel at times. I thoroughly enjoyed his debut feature, Legion, for dealing out a solid B-movie fix, setting about its familiar business with a wry sense of humour, a humour that the all too dour-faced Priest would have been utterly lifted by.

I should also mention the 3D, for the sake of completion, which seemed passable, but unnecessary, especially when the heavy 3D glasses made my nose hurt and distracted me from what was happening on screen, as I shifted them about.

Still, if Priest spawns into the franchise it would love to be, then I'd be more than happy to sit through more, and I'll no doubt watch Priest again on Blu-ray at home, with some almost requisite beer.

With an increased budget and runtime, more intimate horror-based action and a complete dialogue overhaul, Scott Stewart could really deliver on all fronts. But for now, it's much fairer to compare Priest to the similar work by his peers (including Wimmer's Ultraviolet), than any involving electric sheep.

Bridesmaids Review

In most weddings, the bride garners the undivided attention of the audience.

For this particular occasion, however, Kristen Wiig steals the bouquet and runs with it. Both a co-writer and star of the film, Wiig takes viewers on a hilarious journey to the altar in “Bridesmaids.”

After Annie’s (Wiig) best friend, Lillian (SNL alum Maya Rudolph), asks her to be her maid of honor, chaos ensues. Out to steal the best friend role is the manipulative trophy wife Helen (Rose Byrne), who tries throwing a myriad of bridal luncheons and bachelorette parties. The movie follows Annie as she attempts to fulfill her duties in the midst of her life spiraling down around her.

From the opening scene onwards, Wiig steals the audience’s attention. Her performance is complemented by an array of interesting cast characters from bridesmaids to sex partners (Jon Hamm) to roommates.

The comfort between the actresses is easily seen in the banter between Rudolph and Wiig in the opening scenes – it is one of the better chemistries seen in recent comedies.

Rounding off the bridal party are three hilarious contributors: the sweet Becca, the mother of three foul-mouthed boys in Rita, and the tomboy in Megan (Melissa McCarthy). McCarthy’s character could have easily been the brunt of stereotypical lesbian jokes, but the writers avoid this pitfall well, giving each character their own dialogue to shine.

Like Producer Judd Apatow’s other comedies, “Knocked Up” and “The 40 Year Old Virgin,” this comedy has depth and draws the audience in to root for Annie in a sea of impossibility. While the film is highly lauded for its female cast, it is anything but a chick flick. This R-rated comedy can be enjoyed by women and men alike thanks to great dialogue, hilarious sight gags, and Wiig’s ability to make any moment funny or heartfelt.

“Bridesmaids” puts a spin on wedding-related antics like few others – the role of bridesmaid will hardly be looked at the same way again.

Jumping the Broom Review

Salim Akil's feature directorial debut, "Jumping the Broom," is a predictable, yet funny and endearing, comedy about the clash of two families from different socioeconomic backgrounds coming together for a wedding. As expected, their emotions are high and drama ensues. 

After a string of relationships going nowhere, Sabrina (Paula Patton) makes a deal with God that she will save herself if He sends her the right guy. Bam! She crashes into Jason (Laz Alonso)—literally. She runs into him with her car, and they are swept into a whirlwind romance. Before she even meets his mother, Pam (Loretta Devine), the couple is getting married. The families finally get to meet on the weekend of the wedding at Sabrina's family's home on Martha's Vineyard, and neither family is happy about it.

The humor in the film is frequently based on familiar characters and situations, but the screenplay by Elizabeth Hunter and Arlene Gibbs gives nearly each of the characters in the large cast a story arc of his or her own, which allows character development and prevents them from dissolving in to one-dimensional stereotypes. Sabrina's family is the wealthy high-class type, while Jason's family represents the lower class. 

At the heart of the drama is the secret Sabrina's mother, Claudine (Angela Bassett), is keeping from her, which threatens to destroy the wedding. At first glance, Claudine is a snobby ice queen. But, as the story progresses, Bassett infuses her with a vulnerability and tenderness that makes her sympathetic. Pam—Jason's religious mother who is ironically in anger management classes—could easily have been a one-note character, bogged down with the one-liners; but, from the start, Devine brings the character to life, imbuing her with emotion and love to keep her well-rounded. Both actors establish their characters as flawed but clearly motivated by love for their children.

Patton and Alonso turn in respectable performances, but despite that the story centers on their characters, the draw is the cast surrounding them. The stellar supporting actors elevate the material, creating authentic characters that make the tale believable despite all the drama going on. 

Brian Stokes Mitchell's stoic father of Sabrina soon transforms into a loving, hard-working man who is able to persuade his wife to accept Jason. Mike Epps takes the sleazy character of Jason's uncle and gives him heart, making him the voice of reason when Pam threatens to destroy everything. Julie Bowen turns in a hilarious performance as the wedding coordinator, leaving a solid impression in a short amount of screen time. And Tasha Smith's portrayal of Pam's best friend is fun and authentic.

The multiple storylines combined with the comical characters keep the film moving. Despite the lack of clear connections between the two main plotlines—the families coming together and the family secret—the cast is fun to watch and manages to bring laughter and tears.

Genre: Comedy
Written by: Elizabeth Hunter and Arlene Gibbs
Directed by: Salim Akil
Starring: Angela Bassett, Paula Patton, Laz Alonso, Loretta Devine, Meagan Good, Tasha Smith, Julie Bowen, Romeo Miller, DeRay Davis, Valarie Pettiford, Mike Epps.

Something Borrowed Review

Something Borrowed is based on a 2005 work of chick literature by Emily Giffin. It was directed with extraordinary impersonality by Luke Greenfield (Rob Schneider’s The Animal), and produced by Hilary Swank in collaboration, apparently, with the restaurant Shake Shack—one of the lifestyle brands prominently featured in this tale of love and betrayal among New York City’s young and affluent.

Rachel White (Ginnifer Goodwin) is a successful single gal, though her face in repose is a frown, with creases starting to show at the corners. As the film begins, she walks into her own dirty 30th birthday party, thrown by her lifelong best friend, Darcy (Kate Hudson). Among the guests are Darcy’s groom-to-be, Dex (Colin Egglesfield), and Ethan (John Krasinski), the comic-relief platonic pal.

Normally, Rachel’s the schoolmarm and Darcy’s blond and having more fun, but something is askew tonight. Maybe it’s Rachel’s shock at starting a fourth decade, maybe it’s Dex’s pre-wedding jitters, maybe it’s the way Darcy leaves Rachel with the fond slur “I just hate your shoes so much” as she stumbles home early—but Rachel and Dex go for a nightcap together, and wake up in the same bed.

In addition to giving them a guilty secret to conceal, this act shakes loose an avalanche of flashbacks. Before Darcy got Dex, he was Rachel’s study-buddy at NYU Law, and it seems their flirty friendship stopped just shy of a hook-up six years prior, when Rachel stepped aside for Darcy, as we’re told she always has. Ethan’s given the job of explicating that friendship dynamic to Rachel—and the viewer. Goodwin’s an appealing wallflower, and Hudson shows flashes of blithe, funny egotism, but they lack moments together that illustrate Darcy’s feminine gamesmanship in action. From the opening birthday-party scene, in which Darcy narrates a slideshow introducing the cast of characters, it’s clear that Something Borrowed finds it easier to tell us about relationships than to show us them under way.

For the rest of the summer, spent between Manhattan and the Southampton rental, Rachel and Dex carry on and off, hesitating to drop the bomb on Darcy. Dex’s other big roadblock in breaking off the wedding are his stereotyped WASP parents, a neurasthenic mother and disapproving father who says things like, “It’s not the kind of people we are”; wants to buy the newlyweds a Westchester manor; and presumably quashed Dex’s dreams of being a teacher—because he is having a career crisis on top of everything else. (A Happy Ending showing Dex’s first day at some Bronx P.S. would be welcome.)

In other romantic complications, Ethan is followed to Southampton by a hopeful, puppyish old fling, played by Ashley Williams—a chewtoy for Krasinski, whose comedy always seems to require someone to cut. Still, Ethan’s a more appealing bachelor than Dex. Egglesfield has fine genes, but he’s a limited actor playing a character that requires a vulnerability in order for us to forgive his frequent caddishness and constipated decisionmaking. Egglesfield can’t transcend his guy-who-just-cut-you-off-in-his-convertible air; misting up over his family troubles, he registers as schemingly sensitive, looking to take advantage of any sympathy that comes his way.

The Something Borrowedis, of course, the premise, embellished from a 1997 Julia Robertsvehicle, My Best Friend’s Wedding. Befitting a demographically precise movie about second-chance nostalgia, Borrowed raids young professionals’ Clinton-era pop-culture memories. Dex’s wildman pal, played by Steve Howey, resembles Mark McGrath, the middlebrow go-to “bad boy” in 1998. At one point, Rachel goes to check out a “ ’90s cover band” for the wedding, and we’re treated to meaningful renditions of Third Eye Blindstandards; later, Goodwin and Hudson perform a Salt-N-Pepa dance number, rehearsed to perfection in distant youth. (This is the one moment they actually seem like symbiotic BFFs.)

The poster, featuring colorful little boxes with headshots of the stars, is nearly the same lazy design used to promote the superb, humane comedy How Do You Know last year—a disturbing example of insensate Hollywood selling its best and worst in the same package. If not the worst, this is at least the most dissembling. It’s no coincidence that Something Borrowed features lawyer protagonists; while making a pretense of being a comedy of modern sexual ethics, the movie never asks a hard question without an answer prepared in advance.

Thor Review

Despite Marvel and Paramount's best marketing efforts to convince otherwise, Kenneth Branagh'sThor is a perfectly satisfactory piece of popcorn entertainment. It is cheerfully silly and openly operatic, but played out with absolute conviction. It is no great landmark in the realm of comic book films, but it is easily the best of the Marvel-financed films thus far released. It has larger-than-life action with human-scale emotions, and Branagh directs with an unexpected confidence that seeps through the finished product. It is no great piece of art nor defining statement of our times, but its good-natured pomp makes its obvious flaws almost endearing.

A token amount of plot: Young Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is about to be crowned king of Asgard when the pesky Frost Giants attempt an act of robbery/murder with world-threatening implications. King Odin (Anthony Hopkins) wants to deal with the matter in a diplomatic fashion, but the headstrong and angry Thor insists on violent retribution, with action that threatens full-scale war. Enraged that he nearly put a petulant would-be child on the crown, Odin banishes Thor to the distant planet known as Earth, with the implicit instructions that he not be allowed to return until he earns his birthright by learning of his humility. Stuck on Earth with no powers, he immediately has a run-in with three traveling scientists (Natalie Portman, Kat Dennings and Stellan Skarsgard) and attracts the attention of Shield (once again personified by Clark Gregg). As Thor acquits himself to a human life and finds himself falling for Dr. Jane Foster (Portman), Odin's other son, Loki puts himself on the throne and sets some most unpleasant plans into motion. Can Thor win back his throne and defeat his brother's machinations? Considering that The Avengers is coming out next year, I'm guessing the answer is some variation on 'yes'.

First off, unlike the heavily-tinkered-with Iron Man 2, Thor remains a mostly stand-alone adventure. There are a few references to Tony Stark and Bruce Banner, and Greg Clark once again hints at a larger universe, but the film is first-and-foremost a character journey for Thor himself. Even with a second act that has perhaps a bit too much Shield material (which could have been better spent developing the undercooked romance between Thor and Jane), this feels more like its own film with its own beginning, middle, and end. Even a brief cameo in the second act feels somewhat organic, even though it was in fact added at the last moment. As a result, while the film has few plot twists, I was indeed surprised by a couple climactic story turns.

As an action picture, the film unfortunately peaks right at the beginning. The first-act battle, Thor and his friends versus the Ice Giants, is a whopper of a curtain raiser. It starts out as one of those overly-edited, shot-too-tight battle scenes but slowly expands its scope and fluidity. It also shows these mighty warriors at the peak of their abilities right off the bat, which a refreshing change of pace from the standard origin story cliche. But the rest of the action, while not unimpressive, fails to equal the scale and scope of that initial conflict. Even the finale, which puts Thor and Loki against each other on the visually dazzling rainbow bridge, is brief and perfunctory. Compared to the action we've already seen in films such as Sucker Punch, Thirteen Assassins, and Fast Five,Thor doesn't quite get as epic as it perhaps should have.

Fortunately, the picture works as a character piece. Pretty much every actor treats this, appropriately enough, like Shakespeare. Hemsworth takes this gift of a role and runs with it, delivering a star-making turn that makes us sympathize with Thor's initial recklessness and yet still believe his lightning-fast transition into a better person (the 'rock bottom' moment is potent enough to make us buy Thor's instant humility). Anthony Hopkins once again shows that he is at his best in pulp fiction entertainments, delivering a passionate piece of performance art. Portman is looser than usual here, as she openly swoons over the studly and charming would-be warrior god while remaining steadfastly committed to her research. I didn't buy their relationship as anything more than a brief flirtation, but most 'great love' stories in genre films fail that test.

Skarsgard is basically around to provide exposition (although I imagine he'll be a character who hops around the Marvel universe ala Greg Clark) and Kat Dennings is purely charming comic relief (on a prurient note: long-haired Dennings + nerd glasses = 'winning'). Tom Hiddleston steals the picture, as his thoughtful and compelling villain makes the film work as an emotional fable. While Loki is indeed sinister, his motivations are reasonable and his feelings are genuine. Like Willem Dafoe in the first Spider-Man film, he brings everyones' game up a notch and his big dramatic scenes with Hopkins and Hemsworth are the highlights of the picture. Alas, most of the rest of the cast is used for background scenery. Rene Russo returns from retirement (as Thor and Loki's mother) for only a single scene and a few lines here and there. Idris Elba has fun as the guardian of the rainbow bridge teleportation device, but his screentime is painfully brief.

The technical aspects of the film are a mixed bag. Branagh's infamous Dutch-angles are so ever-present that I half-expected William Dozier to break in and announce that The Penguin had just robbed a bank. The special effects are not exactly what you would call photo-real, but their obviousness frankly adds to the film's goofy charm (the shots of Thor and company flying through the inter-dimensional portals are just plain neat). The 3D is invisible, which is arguably a good thing as it also doesn't seem to darken the image all that much. 3D qualms aside, it is a film worth seeing in IMAX if one is so inclined. There are genuine leaps in logic (Loki is very smart except when he is very stupid) and some real head-scratchers. Norse mythology is acknowledged in the picture, yet no one suspects that trickster-god guy of being, I dunno, tricky? It's the same logic that has the Autobots SHOCKED when they get betrayed by the DECEPTicons.

But these obvious issues (especially the needless Shield material) didn't bother me as much as one would expect. Maybe it's because I have no hard fandom of Thor, so I was only expecting a piece of colorful and larger-than-life entertainment starring actors I happen to enjoy. Maybe it's becauseThor is a far humbler picture than the arrogant and entitled Iron Man films or the patronizingly dumbed-down Incredible Hulk (aww, did Ang Lee make you think too much?). And Thor is quite a bit of family-friendly fun (the PG-13 rating is a joke, this is PG material all the way), and its gee-whiz innocence allows you to overlook its narrative issues.

It doesn't quite score as an action film and not every element works. But the raw emotionalism of Tom Hiddleston and Chris Hemsworth raise the picture above its obvious flaws. The scale and opulence of the Asgard material balances well with the quirkier Earthbound middle act. Kenneth Branagh's Thor is not a patch on the best films of the comic book genre (X2: X-Men United, The Dark Knight, Superman, Spider-Man), but it is a genuinely enjoyable adventure. For this casual observer of the world of Asgard, that's enough for now.

Grade: B