Category Archives: Fantasy

When I heard they were making a fourth Pirates of the Caribbean movie, I winced. I didn’t think there was any way the filmmakers could recover from the debacle that was “At World’s End” – and considering that Keira Knightley and Orlando Bloom were being jettisoned from this installment, things didn’t look good for Captain Jack. (I’d also read the supposed source material – Tim Powers’ 1987 pirate novel “On Stranger Tides” – and was not impressed). Yet I still held out hope for the franchise…and I knew I’d be seeing it anyway, no matter how bad it was.

It seems that my faith has been rewarded. “On Stranger Tides,” while still not as good as the original, is vastly superior to both “Dead Man’s Chest” and “At World’s End.” Part four manages to recapture the zest of “Curse of the Black Pearl,” turning what could have been a disaster into a very serviceable summer adventure.

“On Stranger Tides” begins with Captain Jack Sparrow (Johnny Depp) escaping from royal custody in London. Shortly thereafter, he meets up with old flame Angelica (Penelope Cruz), hoping to assemble a crew to search for the Fountain of Youth. He is subsequently shanghaied and pressed into the service of Blackbeard (Ian McShane), Angelica’s father. A three-way race for the Fountain begins, as both British and Spanish forces pursue Blackbeard. In order for the Fountain’s ritual of immortality to properly work, however, several ingredients are required: the silver chalices of conquistador Ponce de Leon, and the tear of a mermaid. The quest for these elements – as well as for the Fountain itself – drives the plot.

It all sounds unbelievably hokey – and it certainly is. But the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise succeeds because of its sheer outrageousness…and its strongest moments come when it fully embraces its action-comedy tone. Many of the problems in the most recent installments (parts 2 and 3) stem from an unwillingness to accept the series’ inherent ridiculousness. These movies shouldn’t be taken seriously, and too much melodrama invariably leads to disastrous filmmaking. “On Stranger Tides” works because it tosses out so many of the plot elements that failed in parts 2 and 3. Gone are the constantly shifting allegiances, laughably overdone mythology, and gargantuan CGI set pieces. This fourth installment is a cleaner, smoother film that recaptures some of the charm of the original.

After somewhat disappointing performances in “Dead Man’s Chest” and “At World’s End,” Johnny Depp is back in fine fettle as Jack Sparrow. The addition of a love interest (Angelica) is a great help here – it allows Jack to display more roguish charm, rather than serve as an awkward third wheel to the Will/Elizabeth relationship. Depp and costar Cruz have strong chemistry, which makes their love-hate relationship an effective plot device. And while Ian McShane’s Blackbeard isn’t as strong a villain as Captain Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), he’s still a valid antagonist for Jack.

The worldview of the Pirates of the Caribbean films has always been somewhat problematic. The first several films of the series affirmed that both virtue and vice are fundamental aspects of the human condition (essentially, humans do not need salvation, but must simply come to terms with their own inner “pirates”). A strongly postmodern view of ethics (as purely situational) pervaded all three movies, especially “At World’s End.”

Notably, “On Stranger Tides” finally introduces a moral center for the series. The Christian faith of missionary Philip Swift (a former prisoner of Blackbeard) is portrayed in a remarkably positive light – his views on forgiveness, love, and compassion translate into praiseworthy actions. His Christianity isn’t mocked; rather, it’s treated with surprising graciousness and respect. Though Jack Sparrow and company are still “scoundrels to the core,” they don’t ridicule Philip’s convictions.

On a slightly different level, all four films in the series have reflected some aspect of an eternal theme: man’s struggle against death. While a Spanish commander proclaims boldly, “Only God can grant eternal life, not this pagan water,” none of the four films offer a clear perspective on this concept. While any sense of absolute truth is ambiguous at best, this element certainly does make for some interesting talking points.

Objectionable content is primarily found in the form of frequent double entendres (mostly between Jack and Angelica), some scantily clad mermaids, and a heaping helping of adventure violence. It earns its PG-13 rating, but isn’t any more objectionable than previous installments.

Should you see it?

If you (like me) have seen all three previous films, “On Stranger Tides” might just restore your faith in the franchise. It’s much more fun than the bloated, convoluted second and third installments, and it succeeds as a rousing summer action movie. If you’re looking for a deep, complex story with nuanced characters, “On Stranger Tides” probably isn’t your best bet.

But if ye’ve been waitin’ for a rollicking sea yarn, ye’ll find much to like here.

VERDICT: 7.5/10
A surprisingly strong fourth installment in the aging “Pirates” franchise.

Normalized Score: 4.6

I’ve always been a fan of Norse mythology. As many great writers have recognized for generations (Tolkien and Lewis among them) there’s something fundamentally compelling about the Norse mythological ethos: gods and monsters locked in an epic, virtually unending struggle which will result in total destruction. The Norse deities fight not for their own gain, but rather for the dream of a new world to come. As Christianity spread throughout Scandinavia, a unique cultural melding occurred: pagans familiar with themes of sacrifice and resurrection found the Christian faith particularly resonant, and later myths reflect these influences.

Going into “Thor,” the latest big-budget, CGI-laden blockbuster from Marvel Studios, I wasn’t sure what to expect. I wasn’t familiar with Thor as a comic-book character, and hoped that some of the rich mythology underlying Thor’s origins would make its way onto the big screen. I was very pleasantly surprised: not only does “Thor” work as an exciting summer movie, it contains a surprisingly deep and complex story.

The film begins in Asgard, land of the gods (much like Mount Olympus). Impetuous Thor (Chris Hemsworth) prepares to take up the crown of his aging father Odin (a fantastic Anthony Hopkins). It is a time of peace and prosperity for the residents of Asgard: the evil jotuns (demonic-looking frost giants) have been quiet for many years, ensuring relative tranquility for the Asgardians. However, Thor’s jealous brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) envies Thor’s imminent accession to the throne. He subtly channels Thor’s militant brashness into antagonism against the frost giants, leading to a brutal battle on the ice world of Jotunheim. Infuriated that his son has reignited the ancient war, Odin banishes Thor to Earth and strips him of his magical hammer (the source of his power).

Enter Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) and her crew of scientific researchers. They discover Thor after his expulsion from Asgard, and (through a series of very funny scenes) teach him how to behave in 21st-century Earth culture. The group soon learns that Thor’s hammer has fallen into the keeping of S.H.I.E.L.D., a mysterious paramilitary organization with a particular interest in superheroes. As if that weren’t enough, still-vengeful Loki unleashes the Destroyer (a colossal, fire-spewing automaton) to dispatch the powerless Thor on Earth. From then on, the film builds to a thunderous climax that does justice to its mythological source material.

In the hands of anyone less skilled than director Kenneth Branagh, “Thor” might very well have been a disaster. This is the kind of story that depends on outstanding execution, and Branagh fully delivers. Deftly interweaving modernity with mythology (and incorporating Christian themes into the mix), “Thor” soars high above its less sophisticated Marvel siblings. The computer effects – while pervasive – are not garish or out of place. Asgard looks like a real (albeit mythological) city…unlike the bling-filled version of Mount Olympus offered up in last year’s “Clash of the Titans.” Battles with the frost giants feel appropriately intense and concussive. And the climactic duel between Thor and Loki – fought on a rainbow bridge under a star-filled sky – is simply astounding.

The actors also shine in their roles – especially Hiddleston, who portrays Loki. Loki succeeds as a nuanced character, not a myopically evil monster. Although misguided, his actions are understandable, and his motivations are complex. He inspires both anger and genuine pity – a difficult feat indeed for a summer movie supervillain. Leads Hemsworth and Portman are also effective in their roles, and, as expected, Hopkins brings immense gravitas to his role as Odin.

Perhaps the most fascinating element of “Thor,” however – and the one that surprised me the most – is the complexity of its worldview. Throughout the film, I found myself noticing a variety of Christian parallels. Though the film doesn’t work perfectly as an allegory (Thor is cast out of heaven through his own misguided ambition, and endures humiliation on his own account) themes of humble submission, divine justice, sacrifice, and resurrection pervade the movie. I was glad to see that these elements of Norse mythology had also been incorporated into the film – and even though the movie isn’t intended as an apologetic device, it’s rare that a secular, big-budget movie depicts Christian themes in a positive light.

(It is also worth noting here that the film’s seeming “paganism” is really nothing of the sort. Although it does employ Norse gods and goddesses, they are treated more as super-powered alien beings than as “deities” to be worshiped by humans. Sci-fi writer Arthur C. Clarke’s famous quote that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” is even mentioned, removing any problematic spiritual veneer from the film.)

Objectionable content comes down, in a nutshell, to violence. I’m honestly surprised the film earned a PG-13 rating – there’s no innuendo and virtually no profanity, and the combat scenes are heavily stylized. While some of the monsters could be frightening to younger viewers, “Thor” contains nothing seriously objectionable for teenage viewers.

Overall, “Thor” is a fun, thrilling summer blockbuster that should be required viewing for any fans of superhero films. Those not partial to effects-heavy, combat-filled movies won’t enjoy “Thor”…but those who enjoy their action flicks loud and explosive will find much to like here. What’s more, it contains some interesting elements for discussion that elevate it above its less-intelligent brethren. Definitely recommended.

VERDICT: 9/10
It’s not “Citizen Kane,” but “Thor” shines as one of the best superhero movies since “The Dark Knight.”

Normalized Score: 7.9