ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE Is a Vampire Movie You Can Sink Your Teeth Into

ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE Review:

- A Jim Jarmusch-directed vampire movie? Not something I ever expected to see ... which is exactly what makes this one such a unique and fascinating film. It is about vampires, yes, but it's still unmistakably Jarmusch. That means long, lingering shots, a methodical and hypnotic pace, and a slice-of-life perspective that's less about plot, and more about simply immersing us in the world of these characters. A slice-of-life vampire flick - have we ever seen *that* before? ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE is like Before Sunrise, if the title was taken to mean something only slightly different. This is a film centered around conversation, observation, and little moments that add up to something that is, ultimately, pretty mesmerizing. It probably shouldn't work ... but with some self-aware humor, an absolutely fantastic cast, and a dark rock n' roll vibe that sucks you in and never loses its groove, this feels like a definitive take on vampires - taking its place in the cannon of all-time-great bloodsucker movies.

I'm guessing a lot of people will be curious about this one due to its leading-man turn from perpetual Marvel movie badguy Tom Hiddleston. I'm a fan of Hiddleston's great work as Loki in Thor and The Avengers, but his work here cemented him, to me, as a 100% real-deal movie star. He pretty much just owns every frame that he appears in, turning in a transfixing, commanding, morbidly funny performance as reclusive vampire rock-star Adam. Again, what makes the character work so well is that even though Adam is dark and brooding, Hiddleston plays him with a slight wink, allowing the film to sort of have fun with Adam's relentless gloominess. I will also add to the chorus of people who, after seeing this film, came away convinced that Hiddleston might just need to play the lead in the eventual Sandman movie, as his character here seems like a definite riff on Neil Gaiman's Morpheus (and in fact, there's a very heavy Sandman vibe to the entire film). Much like The Sandman, Adam has been around for centuries - often in the company of great artists and inventors, from Byron to Tesla. Adam laments the state of the modern world - living in Detroit, content to be an undead creature in a dying city. He spends his nights working on music, which he records and releases anonymously. His isolated house is filled with old books, old instruments, old machinery - that he jury-rigs to power his home, allowing him to stay off the grid. He has an arrangement with a doctor at a local hospital, whom he pays in exchange for regular vials of blood, without which he'd starve.

Adam is married to Eve (clearly, no subtlety in Jarmusch's character names), played in similarly gripping fashion by Tilda Swindon. Eve is much older than Adam, but still seems to find wonder in the world, whereas he tends to wallow in misery. When the movie starts, Eve is spending time in Tangier, hanging out with her friend and fellow vamp Marlowe (John Hurt). However, when Eve decides to go to Detroit to be with her husband again, she has to contend with an Adam who seems all but defeated by the burden of his immortality. What's interesting is how Eve again inspires Adam to look at the world with fresh eyes, and how the bond between the two continues to flourish even as time marches on.

The heart of the film lies in the small scenes between Adam and Eve. As the two visit old haunts, discuss politics, music, and art, and just generally hang out, there's a great back-and-forth rhythm to their dialogue. This isn't rapid-fire banter, but instead a sort of stark, hypnotic shorthand between two (very) old friends. As the film goes on, there's no explosive plot development that suddenly changes everything, but instead, a series of seemingly small events that all seem to portend a shift in the long lives of these two characters. The first major disruption is the arrival of Eve's wild-child sister, Ava (Mia Wasikowska), whose erratic behavior quickly screws up Adam's carefully-constructed life. Things continue to spiral from there, and soon Adam is forced to make some major decisions about his future.

The movie doesn't have a large cast, but aside from Hiddleston and Swindon (like I said, both phenomenal), the film is filled out by top-notch supporting players. Wasikowska is playing very against-type as Ava, but she absolutely nails the sort of walking-embodiment-of-chaos that the character represents. John Hurt is excellent as the aged vampire Marlowe - who, we learn, was in fact the brains behind Shakespeare's works, but who, like Adam, had to toil in anonymity so as not to reveal his true nature. Anton Yelchin is unrecognizable - but quite good and very amusing - as Ian, a stoned-out rocker who makes a living as Adam's assistant, paid to keep mum about his boss' secret life. Finally, Jeffrey Wright makes the most of his few scenes as Adam's blood-providing associate, a nervous doctor who can only sort of shake his head in bemusement at the insane situation he's found himself in.

The movie's visuals are constantly striking. Jarmusch's camera moves deliberately through the dark ruins of Detroit, as well as through the narrow, ancient corridors of Tangier. Both cities reflect on our main characters: Detroit lies in apocalyptic ruin, a dead city, like our dead vampires. Tangier is old and timeless - it too, reflects an aspect of Adam and Eve. Jarmusch's visuals, matched with the film's droning goth-rock score, often create a sort of hypnosis. In a way, ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE is just one big drug movie - except here, the drug isn't booze, or heroin, or cocaine ... but blood. Much of the movie is about the need to feed - and Jarmusch takes us down the proverbial rabbit hole as Adam, Eve, and Ava fight and indulge their compulsive urges. Stylistically, the movie is almost a throwback in some ways. I suppose its whole gothy aesthetic comes off as very 90's - certainly a flashback of sorts to the decade of The Sandman, The Crow, Kurt Cobain, Nine Inch Nails, and Marilyn Manson. But hey, if that particular aesthetic floats your boat, you'll be in goth heaven. The movie is replete with pale-faced, English-accented rock n' roll vampires hanging out in dank clubs and brooding to the sounds of industrial guitar chords. It's like Jarmusch is on one big nostalgia kick for the pre-Twilight days when vampires were portrayed as punk-rock misfits as opposed to sparkly teen idols. Again, it would all be sort of funny, except the movie fully acknowledges the inherent absurdity of all of this.

For all of its sly nods and self-aware winks, however, I came away struck by just how oddly profound the movie ultimately is. This is a film that is relatively small in scale, but that has a ton to say about the human condition and the world we live in. While the film might seem ambling at times, it really comes together in the end in a way that brings everything full-circle. This is a movie about finding art and beauty and love in an often bleak and dark world, and about recognizing and embracing the rays of light that shine through in the darkness. The vampires in ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE have seen a lot of bad stuff go down through the years, and their very blood-sucking existence is one of violence and addiction. And yet, they are sort of like the world's oldest cultural critics - appearing in the various corners of the world and seeking out the great thinkers, the great musicians, and the great innovators of various ages. Guess immortality has its perks.

And so, the film becomes an unlikely source of inspiration - an ode to art and music and literature and appreciating all of the things that humans are capable of. The vampires in the film condescendingly refer to humans as "zombies," (they are, after all, the walking dead ...), but they also can't help but be drawn to the exceptional people and things in the world - past and present. Jarmusch's film is knowingly over-the-top at times, slyly funny, clever, and darkly hypnotic. It's a thought-provoking, captivating walk on the wild side.

My Grade: A-

THOR: THE DARK WORLD Is Cosmic Craziness That Ushers In Marvel's "Phase 2" Era

THOR: THE DARK WORLD Review:

- And now we get to the fun part. I mean, let's face it, we all love superheroes, but I could live without another origin story anytime soon. Especially when said origins tend to be told in such a by-the-book, cut-and-paste manner on the big-screen. But man, Marvel seems to have a lot of ambition these days. They've moved firmly into "Phase 2" of their Marvel Cinematic Universe plan, and they are going boldly into the fringes and not looking back. THOR: THE DARK WORLD has a lot of the familiar elements that have made Marvel movies so popular and accessible: the light and bouncy tone, the mix of epic action with liberal doses of humor, the blending of fantastic fantasy with street-level authenticity. In short, the Marvel movies are emulating the formula that made Marvel comics so successful back in their Stan Lee-written heyday. But now, we're getting to the Jack Kirby of it all. The larger-than-life stuff, the cosmic stuff, the flat-out weird stuff. The kind of stuff that, until now, has still largely been confined to the pages of comic books - a format blissfully unconstrained by budgetary concerns and delightfully conducive to the sorts of mind-melting ideas that emanated from the mind of Kirby, Jim Starlin, Walt Simonson, and the other iconic writer/artists who made superhero comics into cosmic space-opera on an epic scale. So yes, THOR: THE DARK WORLD has quippy dialogue, inventive action, and a much better-developed romance between its leads than we got in Part 1. But I have to confess, what endeared it to me so much was that, above all else, it seemed to be about big and weird and cosmic ideas in a way that most live-action superhero movies have not yet dared to approach.

All that said, I don't want to act like this movie is the second coming of superhero movies. It's still got a couple of issues that, ultimately, keep it a step behind the best Marvel movies like The Avengers and (in my opinion) Captain America. But before I dive into what doesn't work, let me talk about what does ...

First and foremost - Chris Hemsworth. Before the first Thor was released, I think I and many others wondered how the character could translate to screen without seeming like a big, goofy joke. I think about 80% of the answer to that question lies with Hemsworth. He pretty much is Thor, and not only that, but he's slowly but surely been developing as an actor (case in point: his excellent turn in this year's Ron Howard film, Rush). His Thor is larger-than-life and Olympian, but also believably human. And he glides rather effortlessly between charged-up superhero action, Shakespearean melodrama, self-deprecating comedy, and more earthbound romance.

Not far behind Hemsworth in the "Franchise MVP" category is Tom Hiddleston as Loki. You couldn't have THOR without Hemsworth, but THOR would be a lot less awesome without Hiddleston, who simply kills it in this sequel. If anything, you're left wishing that the movie didn't take so long to get Loki involved in the story. Here's the thing about Hiddleston - Marvel movies, and superhero movies in general - have had their share of stars-playing-villains who still, at the end of the day, felt like movie stars playing comic book villains. Hiddleston, to an even greater extent than Hemsworth, pretty much IS Loki in these films, and that full-scale transformation is even more pronounced here than in Part 1. The guy seethes with such otherworldly villainy that he alone helps you buy into THE DARK WORLD's general cosmic craziness. Hiddleston sells it because he's so darn believable as Loki that he, in turn, lends a credibility by osmosis to all of the other gods and monsters in the film. I never would have expected this, but Thor vs. Loki is now the best hero/villain rivalry in the entire Marvel MCU.

Overall, I think THE DARK WORLD makes better use of its supporting cast than the first film did. Natalie Portman gets a larger and more filled-out role here as Jane Foster. She's much more pivotal to the story than before, and her rleationship with Thor is less the annoying schoolgirl crush of Part 1, and more of a genuine-seeming affection that puts her on more equal footing with the God of Thunder. Sir Anthony Hopkins is once again a lot of fun as Odin, and Rene Russo actually gets some substantive (and, surprisingly kick-ass) moments as Thor's mom Frigga. Meanwhile, Jamie Alexander makes the most of warrior-woman Sif's limited dialogue - in only a few key scenes, she establishes an "it's complicated" status with Thor that lends the character an air of tragic bad-romance. And as for everyone's favorite broke girl, Kat Dennings - she seems less annoying and more funny than in the first movie, working well as genuine comic relief. Stellan Skarsgård is also quite funny this go-round as nutty professor Erik. While it's a shame he doesn't get more dramatic moments (given the actor's chops) it's still fun to see him rant and rave like a crazy person and share a great moment with Stan Lee (appearing in his now-customary cameo, True Believers). Finally, I'll mention the great Idris Elba as Heimdall. It seems odd to have such a fantastic actor in such a minor role, but hey, Elba makes Heimdell super badass in his brief appearances.

One note on Portman though. Look, I'm a huge fan - she kills it in movies like Black Swan and is a top-notch actress. But one thing about Portman ... I just don't know if she's at her best in these types of comic-booky roles. Her default mode of acting is super-serious and intense. That works well in a dark drama like Black Swan, or even in a comedy that makes fun of her seriousness, like Your Highness. But she doesn't necessarily nail the sort of slightly self-aware quippiness needed to knock it out of the park in a Marvel movie like Thor. And so, as in the first film (and as in other pulpy sci-fi fare like Star Wars), she feels a bit wooden here. Like I said, Jane Foster is written better and has more to do than in Part 1. But if I had to point to one actor who just feels a bit out-of-place amid the epic comic book hamminess of Hemsworth, Hiddleston, Hopkins, etc., it'd be her.

So Portman's Jane Foster is sort of a mixed bag, but overall, it does feel like this movie is much more chock full of substantial female characters than the previous film, and as compared to most Marvel movies. Less substantial, however, is the movie's big bad - the dark elf (yes, you heard me) named Malekith, played by Christopher Eccleston (unrecognizable behind transformative makeup/costuming). Malekith is a visually-cool villain - a monstrous, otherdimensional creature who leads an army of raygun-wielding evil warriors that look like Kirby drawings come to life. Awesome in concept, for sure. But the problem with Malekith is that he's just sort of there. We know that his realm was destroyed thanks to a magical MacGuffin known as the Aether, and that he now seeks to reclaim the Aether and use it to cause major destruction (to further complicate things, the Aether has been absorbed into Jane's body, making her invulnerable, but also slowly killing her). The thing with Malekith is that all he really needs is an extra scene or two to really sell his appetite for cosmic destruction. And I've heard that these scenes may exist, but were cut for time - in which case I'd be very eager to see them as originally shot. Because, hey, sometimes having an evil dark elf who just wants to %$&@ $%&# up is fine ... 'nuff said (to quote Stan The Man). But just a little something to make this dude pop as a character would have gone a long way.

Luckily, there's more than enough conflict and intrigue between Thor and Loki - who must forge an uneasy alliance to take on Malekith - to make up for Malekith's lack of personality. Hemsworth and Hiddleston are the engine that makes the movie go, and, by having him in the background for much of the film, THE DARK WORLD builds him up into that much of a greater (and cooler) potential threat.

Where THOR gets sloppy is in its plotting. There are a metric ton of cool ideas in this movie, but a lot of it feels sort of fast and loose. I talked about Malekith being sort of a nebulous character, and about the Aether being your typical sci-fi movie MacGuffin. But there are lots of other things that stand out as feeling not-fully-thought-out. One example I'll toss out there: the use of Loki's (admittedly cool) illusion-creating powers. While this ability leads to some cool moments, it also feels overused - to the point where something happens, and then you immediately expect it to be revealed as an illusion. Another example is a cliffhanger-y element of the ending that is sorta cool, yet also feels like a bit of a cheat. Who knows if and when the how's and why's of the reveal will be explained, but I was left with a bit of a feeling of the movie not quite playing fair with us. Overall, THE DARK WORLD packs in so many characters and plot points that it's no wonder it elicits the occasional "huh?". The fast pace is a blessing and a curse - giving the film a sugar-rush sensibility, but also a feeling of giving potentially great moments and scenes short shrift.

At times though, there were moments that truly wowed me. A viking-like Asgardian funeral scene - rife with eye-popping imagery and looking like a fantasy painting brought to life - may actually be my favorite scene of the film. Conversely, the final battle between Thor and Malekith's forces is pretty imaginative - with Portal-esque location-warping hurtling Thor and his adversary from place to place in a flurry of action-packed, dizzying jumps. Director Alan Taylor does a great job with the action, infusing the CGI f/x-fests with a degree of old-school fantasy feel, with moments that evoke the iconography of classic 80's fantasy films. Whereas the first film sometimes felt flat visually, this one has much more comic book grandeur, and the fantasy worlds of Asgard, etc. seem full of life and fully-realized.

The movie perhaps feels a little more disjointed than it should thanks to some oddly-placed post-credits scenes, with one in particular feeling like it should have simply been the last few minutes of the movie. But the other post-credits scene - a prelude to Guardians of the Galaxy, of sorts - left me giddy from its sheer cosmic weirdness. This scene helped reinforce the sentiment I expressed at the beginning of the review - that Marvel's "Phase 2" was ushering in an era of full-on Kirby comic-book weirdness, an era in which the kinds of things that fans thought they'd never see outside of the comics are actually materializing on screen. Now, I don't just say that from the fanboy perspective of "look, an obscure character from the comics is appearing!" I'm not even enough of a Marvel geek to be able to say that credibly. But I do say it from the perspective of a fan who's been growing weary with superhero films - adapted from stories that tend towards the weird and out-there - becoming increasingly cookie-cutter and generic and bland. What I love about these stories is the imagination, the weirdness, the colorfulness, the subversiveness, and the idea that anything can happen. For Lee, Kirby, Shooter, Simonson, and the like - there were never any limits. The universe itself was the canvass. And to see these movies get to that point, embracing all this stuff (I'm still traumatized from the second Fantastic Four movie's "cloud" Galactus) ... it's incredibly cool.

So yeah, THOR: THE DARK WORLD's got flaws, and it feels overstuffed at times, and its main villain is undercooked. But its got an infectious sense of fun that won me over. The more I thought about it, the more I liked it, flaws and all. If this is the beginning of the new anything-goes, post-Avengers era of Marvel movies, then hell, alls I can say is "excelsior."

My Grade: B+