Avengers: Age of Ultron

By all accounts, 2015 at the movie box office is the year of BIG MOVIES. Released in early April, Furious 7 zoomed past the $1 billion dollar mark already and was joined this week by Avengers: Age of Ultron, the next big thing in the Marvel franchise. The scary part for my nerdy self is there's still Mad Max, Jurassic World, Spectre, Mission: Impossible, Terminator, and of course, Star Wars to come in theaters. I loved Furious 7 and wouldn't you know it? I loved Avengers too.

In the Eastern European country of Sokovia, the Avengers -- Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Captain America (Chris Evans), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) -- are able to fight their way into a Hydra outpost to recover Loki's all-powerful scepter. Back at the Avengers base, Tony Stark wants to use this power for good, using the scepter's power to create a brand of artificial intelligence that could shield the world, to protect it from all threats. Nothing goes quite to plan though as the artificial intelligence uses its ridiculous amount of pressure, calling itself Ultron (voice of James Spader), and escapes across the world's technology intent on destroying the Avengers and ultimately ruling the world. Can this ultra-powerful tool and weapon be stopped? At what cost? Once again, it comes down to the Avengers putting their differences aside to pull off a seemingly impossible mission.

It's been three years since the first Avengers movie hit theaters and tore apart the box office, earning $1.5 billion worldwide. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is a franchise that continues to pile up the money, and typically, positive reviews. Fans love them -- for the most part -- and I include myself in that list. These Avengers movies have become the perfect blockbuster, huge, sprawling action adventures with a crazy cast and crazier action. Director Joss Whedon returns to helm this sequel, and even he admits the work that goes into making these movies (Read...the intense, soul-crushing PRESSURE) is brutally tough. Whedon even wrote this daunting screenplay. Potential world-ending villains, double-digit MAIN characters, countless quick, cameo appearances, and the high expectations of the franchise's countless fans, man, that is a TON of pressure.

So yeah, reviews were a little more mixed here than with the first flick. Sure, there are some flaws and hiccups along the way. None of those flaw/hiccups proves to be too big a problem simply because these movies are so damn fun. Like all the franchise entries, there is a certain formula to follow, but 'Ultron' is able to tweak that formula a bit. All the characters are there, the witty banter, the great villains, the world-shattering action. The F-U-N. The story doesn't always make a ton of sense, but it becomes an issue of...well, does it really matter? You sit back, eat some popcorn and go for the ride. It's a relatively long movie at 141 minutes, but it never feels long. Things are moving too fast and there's too many moving pieces for this money-raking sequel to actually slow down.

The biggest appeal for me with the Avengers flicks above the action or the villains or all the craziness is the ridiculous cast. These casts, my goodness, they're epic. With so many characters, we don't always get the depth/development/background you might want, but Whedon's script certainly goes for it. We continue to see the budding rivalry between Iron Man and Captain America, the budding lovey-dovey relationship between Bruce Banner and Black Widow, and I thought the coolest part, getting to know the most-human members of the Avengers, Hawkeye and a secret he's been holding onto and Black Widow and her past as an assassin trained by the KGB. There's so much to cover, a movie clocking in at 141 simply can't give too much character development. These are all characters capable of carrying a movie on their own -- and many of them have -- so when you combine them, it comes together pretty perfectly. There's almost too much talent for it NOT to work.

That cast, that ridiculous list of stars though, it simply isn't enough. Right? Right?!? We need more characters!!! James Spader is perfectly voice-cast as Ultron, the artificial intelligence hell-bent on destroying the world. Spader's voice is silky and smooth and droll and dripping with intimidation. Without ever appearing on-screen, Spader is a scene-stealer. Also joining him in the villains department are Aaron-Taylor Johnson and Elizabeth Olsen as the Twins, a Russian brother and sister with special powers, Pietro with super speed and Wanda with mental manipulation. Quite the interesting trio. Also appearing in smaller parts -- but necessary ones -- are Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury and Cobie Smulders as Maria Hill, Because of the behemoth that is the Marvel universe, there's also Don Cheadle, Anthony Mackie, Idris Elba, Hayley Atwell, Stellan Skarsgard, Thomas Kretschmann, and because that wasn't enough, more characters including Linda Cardellini, Claudia Kim, Andy Serkis, and an expanded role -- a very cool one -- for Paul Bettany as Jarvis.

This may come as a bit of sacrilege, but I thought the weakest part of this money-raking sequel is actually the action itself. Look, here's my thoughts. It looks great. It looks polished. It looks CRAZY at times, but you just know none of it is real. It is all CGI to the point you get lost in it. There's not as much emotional punch. Action movies have become so reliant on this stuff that is becomes a crippling crutch. I haven't seen it yet but Mad Max: Fury Road is getting ridiculously positive reviews because the action is real. They went out and filmed it and did the stunts. To a certain extent, the same for Furious 7. The action is great and shown on a huge, world-shattering scale, but it's almost too polished. The exception is the destruction-riddled finale, an incredibly put-together extended action sequence that is able to blend the CGI with the characters and their bonds (and some twists along the way) in an extravaganza of fights and stunts and destruction.

Yeah, there are issues. With this much going on, it would be near impossible for there not to be issues. But by the time you get to the scene where the Avengers -- and some surprising reinforcements -- dig their heels in for a last stand against Ultron's minions, with the fate of the world hanging in the balance, and it's all in slow motion...........oh man, fan boy moment! It's hard not to go along for the ride. It isn't perfect, and I liked the first Avengers more, but this is about as entertaining as anything you could ask for. Quite the daunting task taken on by Whedon and his script, but I'll call it booming, flawed gem of a success. Now onto other Marvel films....and there will be tons! The ending especially sets things up nicely for the next Captain America movie, set for release in 2016. Bring it on!

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015): *** 1/2 /****

Chef

So you know what's all the rage these days? Go figure, but it's....FOOD!!! I mean that statement semi-seriously though. From the ever-expanding and ever-popular Food Network with shows like Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives and Chopped to the Travel Channel with its reliance on food-based shows, FOOD...IS...EVERYWHERE. Cooking reality shows are even popping up on network TV. In other words, strike while the iron is hot. Here's 2014's Chef.

A chef with quite the following, quite the reputation in the culinary community, Carl Casper (Jon Favreau) has a solid job at a highly respected restaurant in Los Angeles. When he hears word that a respected food critic who backed him with a glowing review years ago is coming to the restaurant, Carl plans a unique, innovative menu that differs from the everyday menu. That's the plan at least. The owner insists otherwise, the critics rips apart the blase food, and Carl gets fired when he explodes at the critic a few days later, an explosion that goes viral. Now with no job and no money, Carl must figure out what's next for him. That viral video has all but doomed any jobs he could get, but his ex-wife (Sofia Vergara) brings up an idea she's brought up before only to get shot down. What if Carl got back to basics and opened up a food truck? The respected chef wants nothing to do with it at first but he also doesn't have a ton of other options...

More and more, I've found my mood is impacting my movie-going experience more than I thought. Now, a good movie is a good movie, but this very likable family comedy/drama hit all the right notes for me. Favreau wrote, directed and starred in this flick from last year that capitalizes on all the food buzz wherever you turn, assembling a familiar but always enjoyable screenplay, an impressive cast, and a feel-good story that's just missing too often when it comes to flicks hitting theaters every week. It isn't an instant classic, but I watched Chef and something resonated with me. Hopefully it does with you too, regardless of your feelings about food and eating.

I've always liked Jon Favreau dating back to his guest starring days on Friends to his directing the Iron Man flicks and a whole bunch of stuff in between. His Carl Casper character is definitely an interesting one, a once rising chef who's kinda leveled off through no fault of his own. A middle-aged man having a midlife crisis is nothing new in basically any form of film, television and literature, but like the film as a whole, there's an energy Favreau brings to the part. He's not perfect, trying to balance his career while still being a good father to his 10-year old son, Percy (a very impressive Emjay Anthony), who wants nothing more than to hang out with his dad. Sure, it can be a tad sugary sweet at times, but if you like the characters and are rooting for them, does it matter? Credit to Favreau though, keeping a lot of plates -- writing, directing, starring -- spinning and doing it well.

As for Favreau off-screen, his co-stars and fellow actors must like the guy. He put together quite the cast of big name stars, many of them agreeing to take a smaller part, extended cameos. But first, the bigger parts, the most essential ones. I loved John Leguizamo as Martin, Carl's longtime friend, fellow chef and a rising star in his own right. I've always been a Leguizamo fan but he just looks to be having a lot of fun and it shows throughout. Vergara too is excellent in toned down role from what we see on ABC's Modern Family. As Carl's ex-wife, she avoids any shrill ex stereotypes (thankfully), Vergara doing a fine job in the part.

Also look for Bobby Cannavale as Tony, Carl's sous chef, Scarlett Johansson as the restaurant hostess and quasi-girlfriend, Dustin Hoffman as the stuck in his ways restaurant owner, Oliver Platt as the food critic with a way with a dig, Amy Sedaris as an agent/publicist trying to help Carl, and an actor named Robert Downey Jr. as a possible business partner for Carl with a link to his past.

This isn't an out and out comedy. It's a family drama with a lot of laughs. I genuinely laughed out loud far more than I thought I would. 'Chef' has some fun early as Carl is introduced to the world of Twitter through Percy, through all sorts of social media that can be good and bad. That all adds a nice dimension to the story in its second half as Carl and Percy with some help from Martin open up a food truck in Miami and road trip it across America back to Los Angeles. It's cool to see a pleasant, nice, funny and very enjoyable movie that features a fun Latino and Cuban-themed soundtrack. Definitely one worth picking up. Just beware. I don't recommend watching this movie on an empty stomach. It's a delicious flick.

Chef (2014): *** 1/2 /****

Iron Man 3

Okay, so can everyone agree that Robert Downey Jr. was born to play Tony Stark, the coolest of the Avengers, Iron Man? No?!? What's wrong with you? The first movie, released in 2008, started up a superhero franchise that was fun and exciting and action-packed with lots of cool characters. The series is almost a perfect companion piece to Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy in all their cynicism and darkness. Now it's five years later and we've got our third flick for Downey, 2013's Iron Man 3. Will it be the last?

It's been several months since Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) helped the Avengers turn back Loki and his alien minions in New York City, but Tony is still struggling with what he saw and did. He hallucinates, can't sleep at night and exhibits all sorts of signs of PTSD. He may have found something to bring him out of his funk and in a big way. A mysterious terrorist dubbed the Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) is unleashing attacks all across the world, defying anyone to stop him. Governments can't stop him, countries just waiting to be attacked. Tony steps up to the plate, telling the Mandarin to come and find him. Iron Man will put an end to the worldwide tyranny. Tony gets more than he bargained for when an attack is unleashed on his coastal home. His life is torn apart and he is feared dead by everyone who knows him as well as international media outlets. Forced to work from the ground up, can Tony rebuild from the ashes to take down this new, seemingly unbeatable enemy?

Now heading into this third Iron Man installment -- this one from director Shane Black -- I was under the assumption that it would be the last of the series, excluding the Avengers sequels. Downey Jr. has said he won't continue with the Iron Man series, but he'll be there for the Avengers 2 and 3. Good news there! I went in here with mild expectations. I liked Iron Man 2, but on a second viewing liked it a little less. Reviews were fairly mixed for this third installment, but that didn't seem to matter. It is currently the fifth highest-grossing film of all-time. Woo, money! I came away disappointed with this one though and can't quite put a finger on it. It's entertaining enough if a little long. Self-indulgent? Sure, most superhero movies are. Something else is missing though. It's more than a little schizophrenic, wasting a deep cast and some really solid moments.

What's above questioning? Though the script doesn't know what to do with most of the characters, Downey Jr. steps up to the plate. This is Tony at his most human. He's been beaten down, and even though he helped the Avengers win in NYC, it took a physical and emotional toll on him. Once the Mandarin unleashes his debilitating attack, Tony/Iron Man almost has to start over. It's cool and refreshing to see this other side of a character you feel like we've gotten to know pretty well. What sets it apart is somewhere in Tony's head is the smarmy, smart-ass, ultra-billionaire Tony Stark we all know and love. This is a great character however you cut it. Black's script has its issues, its flaws from the get-go, but delving into a familiar character in a way we haven't seen before certainly makes it a worthy film.

The rest of the cast is loaded, however misused or underused. Gwyneth Paltrow returns as Pepper Potts, now in charge of Stark Industries and trying to work out her relationship with Tony as much as possible. She's given little to do for much of the movie, but gets her chance at the badass spotlight late. Don Cheadle is basically completely wasted as Rhodes, Tony's friend who's been tasked with piloting the Iron Patriot, the military's version of Iron Man. Jon Favreau returns as Happy, Tony's former bodyguard, but it's a background part here. Paul Bettany also returns and has some fun as the voice of Jarvis, Tony's robotics assistant. Young Ty Simpkins has a good part as Harley, a young boy who comes across Tony at his lowest.

Maybe the weakest part of 'Man 3' is in the Villain Department.The always solid Guy Pearce plays Aldrich Killian, a brilliant scientist who has developed the technology to manipulate human DNA and create super soldiers. Pearce is a good counter to Downey Jr., his cocky demeanor a worthy foe to Tony's similarly cocky attitude. Kingsley is a great addition to the franchise too as the underused Mandarin, a mysterious international terrorist with no qualms about death on massive levels. Rebecca Hall plays Maya Hansen, an engineer who worked with Aldrich in the past and is now caught in the middle between right and wrong. James Badge Dale is perfectly creepy as Savin, Aldrich's enhanced henchman. Two separate twists disappoint but for different reasons. One is really, truly stupid and messes with the whole tone of the movie while the other doesn't come as nearly a big a surprise as it had to be intended.

It's a superhero movie. The technology is supposed to be goofy and not in any way reality. Somewhere along the way, this one really disappointed me. Aldrich's super soldiers are a cool concept, seemingly indestructible killing machines brimming with dangerous amounts of energy in them. Maybe it's taken too far, maybe it's the relatively unexplained motives of all the bad guys (other than POWER and WORLD DOMINATION), or just the general excess of the finale, but I didn't go along with this movie as much as the previous two. The action-packed finale at a cargo shipping yard has about 50 automated Iron Man suits and Tony and Rhodey and Aldrich and Pepper and everything going on. It was just too much.

There were parts I liked, most of them dealing with Tony. The intro scene goes back to Bern in 1999 as we meet a younger but still cocky Tony, including a nice nod to the first Iron Man as we meet Shaun Toub's Ho Yinsen who we later meet in a cave with Tony in Afghanistan. Stark's monologue at the beginning and end is fitting, a man learning who he is and how he get there. Mostly, I felt like this was wasted potential. A somewhat disappointing conclusion to the trilogy (if it is the conclusion) but still worth watching for the always fun Robert Downey Jr.

Iron Man 3 (2013): ** 1/2 /****

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows

Even re-reading my review for 2009's Sherlock Holmes, I still can't quite put my finger on it. I liked the movie, but there were parts of it that just didn't work for me. It's a little schizophrenic, a lot nutty, and was missing that special element that turns a good movie into a very good one. So what's the difference then with its recent sequel, 2011's Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows? Heck if I know, but I liked it a lot.

It's 1891, and a series of bombings across France and Germany have Europe on edge with countries teetering on the brink of war. Everyone has their theories about the reasoning for the bombings. Terrorists? Anarchists? Assassins? Quirky and eccentric London detective Sherlock Holmes (Robert Downey Jr.) has been feverishly investigating the bombings and has come up with his own theory. A brilliant professor, Moriarty (Jared Harris), is Holmes' main suspect, but Holmes has no proof other than his own wild theories. With the help of his soon to be married loyal sidekick, Watson (Jude Law), Holmes goes about getting that evidence in a case that will have them traveling all over Europe and in all sorts of hijinks.

What's throwing me off here is a criminally simplistic issue. There is little difference overall between the 2009 film and this 2011 sequel. Director Guy Ritchie did a very capable job with the original as he does here. The two movies are almost identical lengths (129 to 128 minutes) and have the same look, feel and tone. All I can come up with is a somewhat more pointed feel to the proceedings. The action isn't so ridiculous. It isn't trying to be hysterically funny, just funny. The scope isn't IMMENSE. Even when a war among European countries looms, the point of view is on a personal level (i.e. Sherlock and Watson) and for me at least, more effective.

It is Guy Ritchie though, and it's got a certain charm and style unto itself. The look of the movie is great, 1890s Europe with its own unique look. It has a cluttered, busy look, but it works with the semi-schizo nature here. One of the best things going is Hans Zimmer's score. As needed, it's big and booming like a historical epic/period piece should be. The most memorable sample though is the main theme, or as I always think of it...Sherlock's theme which you can listen to HERE. It is the perfect quirky, eccentric theme for a quirky, eccentric hero. Yes, overall the script and story is too smart/clever for its own good at times with countless reveals of things we didn't know need to be revealed. Much more than the first movie though, I just had more fun watching this one.

That is no doubt easily chalked up to the continued success in casting. Robert Downey Jr. is one of my favorite actors, and he does a great job bringing Holmes to life. Again, this isn't the prim and proper Englishman. Downey's Holmes is quirky, eccentric, offbeat, brilliant, obsessively observant, and always one step ahead of his rivals. Law's Watson is the perfect sidekick; intelligent, smart and wise but in a way completely different from Holmes. The duo is basically the original Odd Couple. Holmes is upset that Watson is getting married (to Kelly Reilly from the original) and doesn't hide his feelings. Their friendship is basically a perfect match, the two longtime friends arguing like an old married couple. Noomi Rapace is wasted as Sim, a gypsy along for the ride with the duo. Harris is okay as the villain with Paul Anderson as his sharpshooting henchman. Rachel McAdams and Eddie Marsan briefly reprise their roles from the original with Stephen Fry playing Holmes' classier brother.

With a story that's all over the place and never really slows down, some set pieces stand out from the rest. The running gag of Holmes seeing and analyzing what's about to happen...and then doing exactly what he saw is used just the right amount. Not too little, not too much. A running chase/fight in a London casino with a Cossack assassin is impressive as is a chase and gunfight through a Moriarty-owned factory in France with some explosive results. The finale doesn't disappoint either as Holmes and Moriarty finally confront each other. End result? 'Shadows' knows when to tap the brakes where the original was more aggressively in your face. It makes all the difference.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows <---trailer (2011): ***/****

The Avengers

Since 2008's Iron Man, the Marvel Comics universe has been introduced to a worldwide audience via a series of films featuring an infamous list of heroes. With each passing movie, the audience would see little snippets of something bigger being hinted at, something else coming along down the road. We saw quick scenes of characters, usually post-credits, and the rumors drifted. Would all these superhero characters team up as they did in the Marvel comics, forming The Avengers (<---the comic)? You bet, and that's where 2012's The Avengers rides into town to open the summer blockbusters.

For those not familiar with the Avengers' lineup, here goes, a refresher course in badass superheroes. The plot synopsis is next, but I wanted to start with a listing of these characters. The biggest and baddest? Well, I guess that's a personal choice, but I'm starting with Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Tony Stark in real life, a rich, eccentric playboy philanthropist. Joining him are Captain America (Chris Evans), a WWII hero come back to fight in 2012, Thor (Chris Hemsworth), an other-worldly Norse god, and the Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), scientist Bruce Banner post-gamma ray accident. Rounding out the group are two assassins and special agents, Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson), a brutally efficient expert in hand-to-hand combat, and Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), a pilot and marksman with bow and arrow. Good enough? That's just the start.

Director of espionage and intelligence agency S.H.I.E.L.D., Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) arrives at a remote secure facility in the desert as a time portal opens up and brings an unwelcome visitor. It is Loki (Tom Hiddleston), half-brother of Norse god, Thor, and he intends to wreak havoc on Earth. Loki steals the all-powerful Tesseract -- a pure, clean and unmeasurable source of energy -- and intends to use it to take over the planet. With nowhere to turn and no mortal, normal solution, Fury turns to the only individuals he can in a plan dubbed the Avengers Initiative, a collection of "freaks" all with unique, bizarre powers. With these different personalities and talents, can the group put their differences aside long enough to save the planet?

This is a summer blockbuster, definition of basically, director Joss Whedon's film raking in over $200 million its opening weekend alone, and that's just the United States. It is a big, big movie, but a good big movie, and that means everything. It clocks in at 143 minutes total and even without the most pointed of stories manages to be entertaining from start to finish. 'Avengers' is in no rush to get anywhere. It is a great popcorn movie. The action is great to watch, shot on a huge scale and using CGI but never that ridiculous-looking 'Oh, look, it's CGI' type reaction. Genuinely funny with a handful of legitimate laughs, full of action and great characters, this will not disappoint fans of the Iron Man movies, Hulk, or Thor. The Avengers very much so lives up to its admittedly rather high expectations.

A good script is one thing, and having the talent to execute it another thing entirely. The cast here are movie stars who can act, not just movie stars. The obvious star is Robert Downey Jr. as Iron Man/Tony Stark, bringing this character to life perfectly the same way he did in Iron Man 1 and 2. Amidst a sea of solid actors, he manages to stand out, delivering countless smarmy, smart-ass one-liners. I'm also a fan of Evans too, and he's in close second as Captain America in terms of memorable superheroes. None of that is to say the rest are disappointing. Ruffalo and Hemsworth are excellent in smaller parts, pieces of an ensemble. Johansson seems a little out of place, but watching her in a leather catsuit puts any of those questions to bed. Renner too doesn't have a ton to do, but as one of the rising stars in Hollywood, it's one more solid, worthwhile part.

Not enough? Along with the always reliable, always worth watching Samuel L. Jackson, Hiddleston is a great maniacal villain you love to hate, Clark Gregg runs with his chance at more screentime as SHIELD agent Coulson and never looks back, Cobie Smulders (How I Met Your Mother) plays another SHIELD agent, Stellan Skarsgard is the brilliant scientist duped into working for Loki, Harry Dean Stanton as a security guard who meets post-rage Hulk, and Powers Boothe has a quick part as a member of the World Security Council. Oh, can't forget about Gwyneth Paltrow's quick appearance as Pepper Potts, Tony's girlfriend. Not too bad of a cast, huh?

The action is impressive -- more on that later -- but what I liked most was the team aspect of the Avengers. Who's the leader? How will they work together? Can they? The script has countless scenes that throw them together in groups of two and three, five and six, and just lets them go. Yes, they're all different people, but they are in fact fighting together. Jackson's Fury has a great scene late when he has to convince the remaining Avengers to band together, the movie on the whole taking a turn for the dark side as push comes to shove. Their interactions -- both dramatic and humorous -- are a pleasure to watch. Then there's that little kid, primal thing that kicks in. A fight among Iron Man, Thor and Capt. America? Oh, hell yes! A brutal, knock-down fight between Thor and Hulk? Sign me up. The specialist, expert team aspect sounds obvious that it would work (and it does) but these characters clicking into place makes the movie particularly memorable.

Oh, by the way, there's crazy amounts of amazing action. I mentioned earlier watching CGI action gets old quickly, but that's not the case here. The CGI for one, looks real. Crazy thought, isn't it? The movie never goes long without a fight/action sequence, but the best is saved for last, Loki's minions unleashed through a universe portal on New York City, and all that stands in front of them is the Avengers. It goes on for most of 45 minutes but the time flies by. The whole movie does in that sense. Highly entertaining, funny and dramatic, memorable action, and a lineup sheet of some of the coolest superheroes and characters around. Go see this.

The Avengers <---trailer (2012): *** 1/2 /****

Air America

At some point over the last 15-20 years, both Robert Downey Jr. and Mel Gibson have had their fair share of "down" moments. The difference of course is that Downey has recovered from those moments, battling through drug addictions to become one of the most popular, bankable stars in Hollywood currently working today. One of the biggest stars of the 1980s and 1990s, Gibson has fallen on some hard times because of his off-screen antics, everything from an alcohol problem, brutal voice mails left for his kids' mother, and that whole not believing in the Holocaust thing.

When they teamed up for 1990's Air America though, they were both riding high. Downey Jr. was a rising star, and Gibson was the established star coming off the Lethal Weapon and Mad Max movies, among others. It is an oddity among Vietnam War films in that it has a comedic touch to it, something you wouldn't normally associate with such a dark time in American history. We're not talking obvious humor or even slapstick, just an odd attempt to be funny at times. It is based on a true story -- supposedly -- with some conspiracy theories and shady government dealings going on. I don't know. It could all be true, but mostly I'll recommend this movie for the cast.

It's 1968 in Laos, and the United States is officially not in that country at all....seriously, we weren't. Working for a company called Air America, American pilot Gene Ryack (Gibson) is several years into a job that has him dropping supplies, food, arms, materiel into Laos to help the locals fight the ever-present North Vietnamese. He is part of a small group of American pilots working for the company (CIA? Interesting...) who get a weird adrenaline rush from flying these highly dangerous missions.  A new pilot fresh from the U.S., Billy Covington (Downey Jr.), arrives in Laos to join the crew and immediately starts to question what's going on. Officially, none of these men are even in country because the government says they're not, but what's really going on? What are they actually shipping? A curious Billy wants to find out, and a weary Gene just wants to make some money.

A variation on the buddy picture, 'America' succeeds (or fails I guess, depending on your take) because of Gibson and Downey Jr. as the two leads. Besides both men dressing and having the look of someone from well...1990 and not 1968, they are an ideal ying and yang to work off each other. Gibson's Gene has thousands of hours flying under his belt with little to show for it. He has a little side business he hopes will prove lucrative while Billy is a bit of a thrill-junkie, an idealist at times and naive to what's really going on in Laos.  Not quite the Odd Couple, but close. Both actors are immensely talented which is on display here with characters and a story that isn't really anything new. You've seen characters like this before, and you'll see them again most likely. Gibson and Downey Jr. make it interesting in this light, comedic take on the Vietnam War.

Doesn't sound quite right, does it? A comedy about Vietnam? That description isn't completely fair, but director Roger Spottiswoode does keep 'America' at a certain light and happy level. While based in the Korean War, MASH satirizes Vietnam successfully, and that's the route to go. This isn't satirical, just a dig at a war and conflict that was and is hard to understand. The humor that does work is the out of left field, almost bizarre humor. Gene and co-pilot Tim Thomerson fight over crayons while they draw in a coloring book while Billy almost crashes in foggy weather. Gene, Billy and the American pilots go on a bender of sorts, playing mini-golf in the midst of  a war. Thomerson's Babo says when asked if they always go on benders like this "No, this is nighttime." There are some laughs here, but the story on the whole needed to go deeper and darker.

The potential for a story based in darker roots comes from the supporting cast and the very interesting parts they play. Burt Kwouk plays the Vietnamese warlord working with the Americans, ready to betray anyone for the right price. Nancy Travis is Corinne, an aid worker working at a refugee camp. Ken Jenkins and David Marshall Grant are perfectly cast as Major Lemond and his right hand man, CIA(?) officials running a drug operation with Kwouk and the American pilots. Lane Smith is very good as Davenport, a visiting U.S. senator looking for answers. Along with Thomerson, Art LaFleur, Ned Eisenberg, Marshall Bell and David Bowe round out the other American pilots. With so many characters, 'America' covers a lot of ground and from a ton of different perspectives. I felt like I got a good, detailed picture of a murky, shady situation. The picture just wasn't cynical enough. A hidden war with drug money supporting the effort is as dark as it gets, and 'America' doesn't truly capitalize on that darkness.

That is most evident in the ending, a finale that is too pleased with itself wrapping the story up nicely.  It goes for the generic happy ending that would have been better suited to so many other movies. But as I write this, I realize how negative this is all sounding. I did in fact, like this movie. It is a good story, no matter that it could have been better.  There is some crazy aerial footage from a variety of different planes, Thailand is an incredibly visual backdrop for the story, and a classic rock soundtrack from the late 1960s is never a bad thing. It's not a great movie overall, but I enjoyed it nonetheless.

Air America <---trailer (1990): ***/****   

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

Right up there with westerns, WWII, historical epics, and spaghetti westerns, I've reviewed my fair share of film noir movies over the last several years. At their height of the genre's popularity in the 1940s and 1950s, they were a breath of fresh air, dark (in terms of story and literally shot in dark alleys and smokey bars) and cynical, throwing audiences for a loop. They never really went away, they're just not around as much or as readily available now. Some recent entries are more quasi-noirs. Is that a word? Well, it is now. Like 2005's Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

One of the best and worst things a movie can have going for it (or working against it) is a deep, extensive knowledge of the movies that came before it, the predecessors who paved the way. The good? You pay homage while putting your own spin on those things. The bad? You get so wrapped up in paying homage and showing how smart your movie is it never ends up being a good movie. 'Kiss Bang' is of the good variety. It's a modern film noir with a darkly comedic vibe to it that features one of the best-written scripts I can remember from the last 10 years. Story is great (and funny to boot), the cast is perfect, and it never takes itself too seriously. That's a perfect 3-for-3 in my book. Bear with me though, this plot description could be a doozy.

A small-time crook in New York, Harry Lockhart (Robert Downey Jr.) stumbles into an acting gig through an odd set of circumstances and ends up in Los Angeles just a day after being shot in the arm in a botched robbery. In line to get an acting job as a private detective, Harry is set up with a real P.I. and consultant for Hollywood studios, Perry (Val Kilmer), to get to know the business. Riding with Perry on a job, Harry is witness to a murder as they find a dead girl in the trunk of a car driven into a lake. So as not to get pegged as the killers, Perry and Harry bail only to have the body show up in Harry's hotel room the next day. At the same time, Harry's long-time crush, Harmony (Michelle Monaghan), is back in the picture asking him for help when her younger sister shows up in Los Angeles, dead of an apparent suicide. He agrees to help her out, and wonders, is there any way the two seemingly unrelated crimes are connected in some way?

I should qualify that description in two ways. One, it is nowhere near as serious and darkly-toned as I made it out to be.  Two, that's a very basic, general description. Director/writer Shane Black is at the helms of one of the smartest, funniest movies I've seen in quite awhile. Naturally because this movie wasn't ridiculously popular in theaters, Black has since written one thing -- a short film -- and directed exactly zero projects. Meanwhile, hundreds of sequels, reboots and remakes (yeah, a long-awaited Footloose remake!) are hitting theaters every single week. As smart and funny as this movie is though, it's never an aggressive, 'hey, look at how funny we're being!' type of humor.  It reminded me in a lot of ways of the Coen Brothers' Burn After Reading, a movie that is funny in both smart and stupid humor.

The two leads -- Downey Jr. and Kilmer -- play variations on characters that were ingrained into the noir genre.  Downey's Harry is the small-time crook brought into something much bigger than he is. Where it differs is that he goes along with all the craziness, getting himself fully involved in it all.  Kilmer's Perry -- Gay Perry is his nickname because he's...well, because he's gay -- is the experienced professional, knowing the ins and outs of the business.  They're the characters you know and are well aware of ratcheted up a notch or two.  They keep the movie grounded as all the craziness unfolds all around them, and don't be confused. The story bounces off the walls at all times.  Throw in the lovely and very talented Ms. Monaghan to complete the triangle of lead characters, and you've got a winner.

Throwing all that talent together is one thing, but will they work well together?  A resounding 'yes' is the answer here.  Harry is the high-wire, fast-talking crook, and the movie's narrator (one of the funniest, most honest and blunt narrations you'll ever see/hear). Perry is easily agitated by Harry's antics but never shows it. Kilmer delivers his lines so deadpan it takes a second for them to land. When they do, they produce big laughs. Even taken out of context with no knowledge of the movie, the quotes are funny. Give them a read HERE. Add in Monaghan's Harmony (an aspiring actress) and her genuine frustration with Harry and worry about her sister, and you've got this oddly perfect setting and casting. Also look for Corbin Bernsen as a Hollywood big-wig, Larry Miller as Harry's agent, Dash Mihok and Rockmond Dunbar as two thugs tailing Harry, and Shannyn Sossamon as a mysterious girl involved with all of the above.

I don't know how to classify this movie though as I try to wrap things up. The IMDB page has 'action, comedy, and crime' listed, and all three are legitimate descriptions.  A modern film noir doesn't even do it justice, it just happened to be the thing that came to mind.  It is all those things, and it's much more.  Imagine a typical film noir with some action, throw in a touch of romance and even romantic comedy -- gasp! -- with plenty of genuinely funny laughs (smart humor and physical humor), and you've got this movie. It probably should be an awful movie because all those things together just shouldn't gel at all.  But it does, and we get to watch it all come together in one of the most underrated movies of the last 20 years.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang <---trailer (2005): ****/****

Due Date

If there was ever a mantra to live by in Hollywood, it's to strike when the iron is hot because you just don't know how long that iron is going to stay hot. The director of comedies Old School (a near classic) and more average flicks like Road Trip, School for Scoundrels and Starsky and Hutch, Todd Phillips hit the jackpot two years ago with the surprise success of 2009's The Hangover. One of the hotter directors around, Phillips followed up his hit with 2010's Due Date, a comedy for adults in a similar vein to his previous flicks.

Where Phillips is one of hotter comedic directors around, comedian turned star Zach Galifianakis is one of the most popular comedic actors around, thanks in great part to his hilarious role in Phillips' The Hangover. The director-actor combo teams up here again, and the results are equally as entertaining.  Galifianakis has been around in the spotlight since the late 1990s, starring in movies and TV shows while also making a name for himself as a comedian.  Given his chance to shine, he hit it out of the park in Hangover, and continues that trend with Due Date.

Traveling on business, architect Peter Highman (Robert Downey Jr.) is trying to get from Atlanta to Los Angeles so he can be there for the birth of his firstborn child with wife, Sarah (Michelle Monaghan). Her C-section is scheduled for several days away so Peter has plenty of time...at first. Thanks to an incident on the plane with fellow passenger, Ethan Tremblay (Galifianakis), Peter is taken off the flight and placed on a no-fly list.  So now what would have taken a few hours is going to take him a few days to get home. Making his situation even worse, he's lost his wallet with any sort of ID, money, or credit card. His one option to get home? Drive with Ethan who was able to rent a car for his trip to L.A. where he intends to make it big as an actor. Desperate to get home on time, Peter decides to go along, having no idea what awaits him on the open road with Ethan.

Sound familiar? It should. It's called Planes, Trains and Automobiles from 1987 starring Steve Martin and John Candy. Due Date isn't a remake of any sort, instead just using a similar storyline. It certainly has more in your face humor than P, T and A, and things have been changed enough to make the movie interesting thankfully.  The humor is easy, put two complete opposites together in a situation completely out of their control and sit back, let the hi-jinx and shenanigans commence.  It's traveling across the country. Has a cross country trip ever gone smoothly in the history of time? It's almost fated not to end well.  This is a genuinely funny flick though, partially because everyone can appreciate the hell that is traveling long distances.

What surprised me some was the mean-spirited nature of Due Date, much of that coming from Downey Jr. as Peter, a high strung father to be.  A character in a movie does not have to be easy to like, that's a given, but for lack of a better description, Peter is an asshole.  He seems to revel in it too.  He realizes he has anger management issues and has agreed to work on the problem for his wife, but let's say that Ethan brings out the worst in him.  The humor of course comes from this jackass of a man who is not likable in the least. You come to like him -- to a point -- but watching him lose his mind one interaction at a time is great. Downer Jr. is a great comedic actor, and he doesn't disappoint, going through ups and downs, lefts and rights around every corner on this trip from hell.

As good as he is though, this is Galifianakis' movie.  He gets all the great lines and ends up delivering some easily quotable one-liners for the audience. His Ethan is a spin on The Hangover's Alan, a little less crazy but with all the eccentricities and oddities still present.  He manages to make this character creepy, innocent, crazy at times, naive, innocent, frightfully slow at other times, an eccentric, and a man with no boundaries. Through it all though, Galifianakis makes Ethan a character, and one you like in spite of all his weird, little quirks.  It's his line delivery, his general cluelessness at what's going on around him, his physical mannerisms, everything adds up to make this great character.

While Downey Jr. and Galifianakis dominate the screen and don't disappoint, Due Date has a handful of cameos that play well off its two stars.  Former Wu Tang Clan member RZA plays a racially paranoid airport security screener, Jamie Foxx is Darryl, Peter's long-time friend who helps him out in Texas (sort of), Juliette Lewis is great as Heidi, a drug dealer in Birmingham Ethan goes to see, Danny McBride as an Iraq vet with a secret, and Phillips favorite Matt Walsh as a TSA agent. None of these parts are in the movie for more than five or six minutes, but they all make the most of their screentime.

The humor is all over the place here, ranging from good to bad.  Some of the gross-out humor -- Ethan's dog Sonny masturbates while Ethan does -- doesn't work as well as some of the more subtle laughs.  Downey Jr. and Galifianakis play off each other so well that their conversations are sublimely perfect, especially an acting challenge Peter gives to Ethan in a gas station bathroom that ends with a surprisingly real, touching moment. The physical humor doesn't disappoint either, especially some highway craziness that includes a breakout from Mexico. Yes, you read that right. A breakout from Mexico. Sure, it's crazy, but like the rest of the movie, just go along with it.

Due Date <---trailer (2010): ***/****

Iron Man 2

The Empire Strikes Back, The Godfather 2, The Dark Knight, Temple of Doom, all sequels and 2nd in a trilogy that's better than the original.  Okay, not Temple of Doom, but the others still count. Is that the expectation though or the exceptions to the rule? In the age of milking a franchise cash cow for everything it's worth, the biggest blockbusters of the last 10-15 years have been sequels, often of superhero movies.  One that surprised several years back with its popularity and success at the box office was Iron Man, but unfortunately 2010's Iron Man 2 just can't live up to the raised expectations.

When it comes to superhero movies, I fall somewhere in between.  Yes, I like them, but I didn't grow up reading comic books by the hundreds, and I especially don't know the superhero universes where everything has already been set in stone so that a franchise must follow it to the letter.  The problem with any successful franchise though is what to do after the first big success.  You can't just duplicate the first movie. You have to do everything bigger and better.  Director and supporting player Jon Favreau follows that idea by throwing everything into a script that never decides what to focus on and suffers because of it.  Too much going on, too many characters, lack of any development with those characters, and surprisingly enough for a summer blockbuster, not enough action.

Six months since revealing that he is in fact Iron Man, Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has basically wiped out any sort of worldwide conflict. In doing so though he has the U.S. government and the Department of Defense on his tail to give up the Iron Man so that it can be a controlled commodity instead of one man's all-powerful weapon.  That's the least of Tony's problems though as the use of the Iron Man outfit is slowly killing him with possibly a year to live.  He turns over control of Stark Industries to secretary and girlfriend Pepper Potts (Gwyneth Paltrow) and starts to live things up. It's hard to be the best though and rival weapons contractor Justin Hammer (Sam Rockwell) is using the talents of a pissed off Russian physicist Ivan Vanko (Mickey Rourke) to create his own deadlier version of the Iron Man.

Now regardless of how this cast was utilized or underutilized, I can say that without a doubt this is one of the best casts ever put together for a summer blockbuster.  Downer Jr. again cements himself as one of Hollywood's best actors here playing cocky, narcissistic, downright arrogant Tony Stark who somehow is still lovable.  Paltrow isn't used as well here as the first one and seems like more of an afterthought than anything.  Indie star Rockwell and rejuvenated Rourke are great choices to play the villains even though they're both underused, especially a scene-stealing Rourke.  Then don't forget Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D, Don Cheadle stepping in for Terrence Howard as Colonel Rhodes (an upgrade from the 1st movie), and Scarlett Johansson as Natalie Rushman (Black Widow, member of Shield).

Can you have too much of a good thing though?  That cast is downright impressive, but other than Downey Jr. none of them are given a ton to do.  They're introduced into the storyline, fade out, and then reappear later as needed.  And from someone who is definitely looking forward to The Avengers movie, that whole subplot feels like it's being shoved down our throats as viewers.  But that's the problem with the whole movie for me.  There is a ton going on, and then nothing at all at the same time.  For almost 90 minutes, nothing happens other than Tony moping around.  Favreau has all these great elements and can't peg down what he wants to do with it.  The first Iron Man certainly had some slower moving segments too, but here they're just more noticeable.  At 124 minutes, this is a movie that could have been cut by 15 or 20 minutes and been a sleeker, more compact finished product.

Now to counter 90 minutes of basically nothingness, everything is thrown in the last 30 minutes, by far the best part of the movie and one of the better finales in an action movie around.  Stark and Rhodes -- both outfitted in Iron Man outfits -- go toe-to-toe with Ivan's army of drone Iron Men in an epic showdown that never overdoes it with the CGI.  It is an action scene where everything is visible and never moves too fast, keeping you interested even knowing we're watching computerized robots beat the crap out of each other.  Add in Johansson in a skintight leather outfit (to be fair, every movie needs that) kicking ass against endless nameless security guards, and you've got quite a finale.

I can't put my finger on it, but something was missing from this sequel.  It lacks a certain energy the first one had and never truly finds it's footing.  It tries to one-up the original while sticking to its origins but can't find that all-important middle ground.  Downey Jr again is solid, Cheadle is an upgrade, Johansson is beyond gorgeous as the eye candy, Rourke and Rockwell are above average talents, and the action-packed finale is a whopper.  But for whatever reason, it doesn't add up.  Worth watching, but I was disappointed here.

Iron Man 2 <---trailer (2010): ** 1/2 /****

Sherlock Holmes

Never one to pull punches with his movies, it was not surprising to hear that director Guy Ritchie's take on famed and loved literary character Sherlock Holmes was going to veer slightly from the classic image of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's character. The somewhat accepted version of Holmes is a rather stately gentleman who is an expert in using little clues to solve much bigger mysteries. He is well-dressed, well-spoken and highly intelligent. Enter Richie who takes Holmes and does a complete 180 with him, most of the time for the better in the recently released Sherlock Holmes.

The casting choice for Holmes could be seen as an odd one -- American actor Robert Downey Jr. -- but that's the least of the movie's troubles. I shouldn't say that, it sounds too negative, but the movie does have it's flaws. Downey Jr. takes Ritchie's idea and runs with it, transforming the renowned detective into a scruffy brawler who is nonetheless a highly observant, highly intelligent individual who is as likely to throw a punch and down some booze as he is to solve a case. To say the least, Downey Jr. makes him an eccentric and to the movie's benefit.

Working with his sidekick and roomate (more on that later) Dr. Watson (Jude Law), London detective Sherlock Holmes prevents a serial killer, Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong), from killing his sixth female victim in an exciting opening sequence. Blackwood is imprisoned and hung some three months later with Watson pronouncing him dead at the scene. It's not long though before the police come in search of Holmes' help. Blackwood has apparently risen from the dead and looks to keep a promise he made to Holmes; he'll continue to terrorize London and then later England, the U.S. and the entire world. Not a believer in black magic in the least, Holmes goes about solving the mystery which gets murkier when a woman from his past, Irene Adler (Rachel McAdams), gets involved.

Sherlock Holmes received somewhat mixed reviews but is still raking in the cash in theaters. I love going to the movies and was excited to see this one, but still came away like I had missed something. It was a movie I wanted to love but only ended up liking it. Thinking back on it, I can't even figure out why which confuses me even more. Maybe it was the audience I saw it with, but the humourous elements fell short. There were some chuckles here and there but never any laugh out loud moments. Making Holmes a brawler works in two early scenes as he explains in voiceover how he'll win the battle through slow-motion and then does it in the matter of a second or two. But with the exception of the finale, the action seems oddly out of place and even slows the movie down.

The casting is not surprisingly the best part of the movie. Downey Jr. has another successful franchise on his hands if he wants it (yeah, yeah, the ending leaves the door wide open for a sequel) and breathes life into a character that might have been rather stuffy with another actor. Playing loyal Watson, Jude Law matches Downey step for step and scene for scene. His Watson is the straight man to Holmes' antics, but he's also an ally -- sometimes unwillingly so -- in Holmes' adventures. As for the roommate thing, I'm still trying to decide if Ritchie tried to make the two characters come off as gay. There's obviously a bromance going on here with Holmes and Watson bickering like an old married couple, especially now that Watson is engaged. Their relationship is played for laughs and works nicely, providing some of the movie's best moments and many of those already mentioned chuckles.

Rounding out the lead trio, Rachel McAdams handles herself well as Irene Adler, a female version of Holmes, an ass-kicking con woman who's duped Sherlock at least twice. It's not the best-written part and she disappears for extended segments in the 1st hour, but McAdams makes the most of it. One other fault that comes to mind is the lack of a strong villain. Strong's Blackwood just isn't given enough development, and the explanations in the end for his other-worldly abilities take his character down another notch. As an intellectual, he's a perfect foe for Holmes but the part feels underwritten. Eddie Marsan has a good part as a London inspector, Robert Maillet plays an enormous thug who keeps crossing paths with Holmes and Watson, and Kelly Reilly is Mary, Watson's fiance who must fight with Holmes for his affection.

I'm definitely going to have to think some more about this one because it has all the elements of what could have been a really exciting, very professional movie. Composer Hans Zimmer assembled an atypical score that works nicely, including a catchy theme for Holmes. The cast is very reliable and the story is interesting enough, but something just didn't click for me. I'd still recommend seeing it, but it's not a very strong recommendation. I liked this movie, but I wanted to love it.

Sherlock Holmes <----trailer (2009): ** 1/2 /****

Iron Man

Here's a novel concept for you. When casting an action movie, a superhero movie, don't just pick the biggest, burliest actor around and hand him a script full of ridiculous one-liners. In the last few years, the big budget action flick has gone down a different route, cast some of the best actors in Hollywood and give them a starring role, actors like Christian Bale, Edward Norton, and Robert Downey Jr.

For one, it's fun to see these actors in roles that aren't so buttoned-down and right out of a purely dramatic product. I'm all for the Oscar winners, but seeing a movie and being entertained can be enjoyable too. The changing trend though isn't just to cast a big name actor and let the thing go. The two most recent Batman movies come to mind as examples of then filling out a supporting cast that equals the star power, like Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman, Heath Ledger, Cillian Murphy and on and on. Following this formula is 2008's Iron Man, one of the best superhero movies out there.

Born with a brilliant mind and the resources to build quite a life for himself, Tony Stark (Downey Jr.) has everything in life; money, cars, women, huge houses and a generally ridiculously over the top lifestyle. As head of Stark Industries -- the world's biggest weapons manufacturer -- Tony puts his skills in engineering and innovation to good use, creating all sorts of new weaponry that hopefully can bring peace to the world. Demonstrating one of his weapons in Afghanistan for U.S. armed forces, Starks' convoy is ambushed and he's captured by a terrorist group dubbed the 'Ten Rings' led by the power-hungry Raza (Faran Tahir).

Kept as a prisoner in a mountain cave, Stark is forced into building the very weapon he was demonstrating for the terrorists. But with some help from another prisoner, Yinsen (a small but memorable part for Shaun Toub), Stark builds a complicated suit of iron with weapons and hydraulics that helps him escape, but not before he sees piles of Stark Industries weapons in the caves. Returning to the states, Stark builds another suit, even more complicated, and goes about righting wrongs that his company has done with help from a close friend and army contact, Col. James Rhodes (Terrence Howard). What's worse, all the evidence points to his partner, Obadiah Stane (Jeff Bridges), as the one selling the weapons.

For a long list of reasons that would take two or three posts, I really enjoyed this movie from start to finish. The top reason is by far Downey Jr. as Tony Stark in an inspired bit of casting. Over his career, Downey has had his fair of struggles with drugs and police, but he's always been a great actor which he shows off here. He somehow makes Stark a likable fellow with a perfect blend of humor, toughness and genuine sympathy. Topping it off, Downey seems to be enjoying himself and doesn't take himself too seriously. His introduction to flying is one of the movie's best scenes (about seven minutes into this clip which continues into Part 7) and just keeps on building.

Anyone who's read any of my reviews of newer movies knows that CGI is one my biggest pet peeves in action movies...when it's handled poorly and overused. Not so here as the CGI elements blend seamlessly into the story like this scene with Iron Man tangling with two fighter jets. The ending gets a little crazy but it's never too much. The action in general is fast-paced but coherent, and overall not overdone. For a 126-minute long movie, there isn't a ton of action to begin with. Large chunks of the story are spent on Stark developing and creating his suit, and they're great chunks of the story that bring the character to life.

The supporting cast is mostly three roles, Bridges' Stane (the obvious villain), Howard's Rhodes, and Gwyneth Paltrow as Pepper Potts, a woman who basically tries to keep Stark's crazy life as controlled as possible. Paltrow hadn't been in a big budget movie since 2004 as she started a family with Coldplay's Chris Martin, but it's great to see her back with a good role. She's got chemistry with Downey but also holds her ground with him. Bridges revels in the bad guy role, and Howard is a good second banana as Rhodes. Howard has been in the news for basically having his part recast without him knowing it which is a shame because as much as I like Don Cheadle, Howard was a good fit.

Every so often a movie surprises you, and this one qualifies for me. Great casting, some phenomenal action sequences and across the board a hugely entertaining movie. I knew little to nothing about the character from comic books and still loved it. Also, stick around for a post-credits scene at the end of the movie with Samuel L. Jackson making an appearance. You won't be disappointed. And more good news, Iron Man 2 due out in May 2010. Count me in.

Iron Man <----trailer (2008): *** 1/2 /****