Captain America (2011): derivative and superficial fluff featuring Hollywood notions of nationality

After enjoying Avengers more than I thought I would, I’ve been swept up in the recent superhero movie craze and finally got round to giving Captain America a shot.  I thought it was interesting in places but disappointing in others, enjoyable overall but not worth a re-watch too soon.

I liked the character Dr Abraham Erskine.  A great German scientist, he fled Nazi Germany and used his talent to help the Americans – as many Germans did at the time.  It’s good that Hollywood has made an effort to overtly represent the greatly under-represented Nazi-era German people who wholly disagreed with Hitler’s philosophy.  Hollywood itself is dotted with Germany-based talent who fled the constraints of the Nazi state for the free world: Fritz Lang, Peter Lorre, F.W. Murnau, Billy Wilder, Marlene Dietrich and Paul Henreid to name but a few.

Having visited Berlin recently, taking in the history, one of the most profound realisations I experienced was the sheer amount of guilt and responsibility which still weighs down on the ordinary people of Germany to this day due to the shameful and violent past inflicted on their national identity by a select group of twisted people who held power.  I think the Emmy-winning documentary Inheritance best portrays this phenomenon.  It tells the story of Monika Hertwig, by all accounts an ordinary German woman, who struggles to come to terms with the legacy of evil left by her father, Amon Goeth, one of the most infamously ruthless Nazi commandants (notably portrayed by Ralph Fiennes in Steven Spielberg’s Schindler’s List).

In Captain America the villain, Red Skull, isn’t particularly threatening, despite being played by the legendary Hugo Weaving (The Matrix, V for Vendetta, Lord of the Rings) and apparently surpassing the evil of modern history’s most despicable villains, the Nazis.  In spite of this and the fact he’s harnessed the infinite power of Marvel’s favourite MacGuffin, the Tesseract, he’s consistently put down by the Allied forces.  He never presents any real challenge – more an ominous air of ‘you better be frightened, this guy’s worse than Hitler’.  This works for the enduring America-as-hero-terror-as-villain myth which Hollywood (and indeed US politicians) love to propagate, but it just seems that the war is too easily won here.

Howard Stark could’ve been a much more pivotal character in this film, and should’ve been in my opinion.  I mean, come on, it’s Iron Man’s dad we’re talking about here.  The man left a hell of a legacy and this should’ve been milked to the fullest.  I think the writers missed a trick here.

The scene near the end of Captain America where the plane is going down is clearly derivative of the incredible opening sequence of the classic A Matter of Life and Death (1946). So much so, it’s almost as if the character Peggy Carter was manufactured to fit this bill.  In A Matter of Life and Death, a British bomber pilot contemplates mortality before jumping out of his flaming aircraft without a parachute.  He speaks to an American ground-control officer and there is an inexplicable but undeniable attraction between the two as if they’ve just fallen in love.  In Captain America, the nationalities are switched, but the situation is almost exactly the same.  Captain America is plummeting towards earth in an aircraft to stop it crashing into New York City, while speaking to Peggy Carter, a British military officer who’s almost an exact match to Kim Hunter’s June in A Matter of Life and Death.  The fact that Peggy is British and working for the most secretive project in the US military is never explained – the only explanation is that her character is superficial and merely exists to satisfy a crude attempt to pay homage to that famous scene and/or shamelessly replicate its emotive genius.

Going on the theme of national identities, the relationship between Peggy Carter and Captain America could be seen as analogous of Britain and America’s historic alliance throughout the modern era and the present day.  As an extenstion of this analogy, the group of POW’s rescued from Red Skull’s lair who become Captain America’s personal henchmen could be regarded as American alliances (if my memory serves me correctly, I believe this group consists of a Frenchman, Englishman, American and an American of Japanese descent).

A mixed bag of surprisingly impotent villains, interesting representations of the German national identity, derivative filmmaking and missed opportunities make Captain America ultimately not as effective as its big blockbuster brother, Avengers, but still fairly enjoyable.

 

Avengers (2012): Hollywood doing what Hollywood does best - blockbusters

 

Avengers is an entertaining, action-packed, big-budget summer blockbuster encapsulating a massive series of superhero franchises from Marvel.  I’m not generally a fan of popcorn movies, but Hollywood have pulled out all the stops here and made a genuinely likable, easy-going piece of universal entertainment.

There’s not much of a plot, it’s really all about the characters and action.  At just over two hours already, it would be impractical and a different kind of film to introduce deep emotional complexity in every character – and that’s not the purpose of this flick.  It’s all about entertaining action and great characters. 

I haven’t seen the Captain America film but I will definitely watch it now - lines like “it seems to be powered by some sort of electricity” typify his quirky old-fashioned style.  Hollywood being the booming voice of patriotic America, Avengers isn’t subtle about making a Hitler analogy of the villain, Loki, when Captain America confronts him: “You know, the last time I was in Germany and saw a man standing above everybody else, we ended up disagreeing."  This sort of America-laying-it-on-thick sentiment perfectly suits the tone of this larger-than-life blockbuster: an export to the world from a Hollywood puffing up its chest and waving the stars and stripes.

The casting of the characters is spot on too.  Obviously Iron Man, Thor and Captain America were cast for their individual films beforehand, with the idea of a larger franchise in mind, but the newcomers are good too.  Considered one of the most attractive young women in the limelight at the moment, Scarlett Johansson gives Black Widow as much psychological mystique as sexuality – ticking the box for blockbuster eye-candy and feminist-friendly heroine.  As I’ve pointed out before, I really rate Mark Ruffalo, and his Hulk is widely accepted as having blown Eric Bana and Edward Norton’s efforts out of the water - as well as being the first to actually ‘be’ the green rage-monster through motion-capture.  Rufallo’s generally laid-back and slightly introverted demeanour (The Kids Are Alright, Shutter Island) lends itself perfectly to the Hulk’s alter-ego and galvanises the epic rage of ‘the other guy’. Tom Hiddleston provides a despicable villain in the form of demi-god Loki, brother of Thor, with wicked piercing eyes and a spitting thespian vernacular.

The main enjoyment of the film comes from the way the characters bounce of each other.  The chemistry is excruciating between certain characters and hilarious between others.  Captain America and Iron Man are quite similar in that they are both strong egos, both full of conviction.  Instead of trying to pretend they’re quite different, Joss Whedon and Zak Penn realise this and pit them against each other, creating a great conflict of personalities (which is later neatly overcome, of course).  The banter between the titan Hulk and demi-god Thor is typified by the moment Hulk punches Thor for fun.  Thor goes flying out of shot but we know he’s OK and we know it’s just a bit of tomfoolery between mighty superheroes.

One thing I didn’t get about the film is the unexplained tension between Hawkeye and Black Widow.  There’s an implied history between the two characters, although there’s no solid proof in the movie that this is romantic.  I can’t help but think that the producers tried to foster a superficial bond between these two characters in order to  generate more interest around them as they’re less well-recognised than the other heroes.

A uniquely good thing about Avengers and the rest of the recent Marvel superhero franchise is that they’re not afraid to use humour.  The relationship between the fanboy Agent Phil and Captain America (with the trading cards), the guy playing a computer game on the ship, the bit Hulk calls Loki a “puny God”, Captain America’s “Hulk: smash” line - are just a few memorable examples.  These gags are consistent and well-placed, keeping the tone of the film light despite its apocalyptic action.  A captivating mix of action, comedy, drama and sexuality is what the blockbuster audiences want, and that’s what Avengers provides.

Aesthetics-wise, while the CGI and VFX are overdone (of course they are it’s a superhero blockbuster) they aren’t utterly superfluous.  That is to say, while the film does feature gargantuan floating alien creatures snaking through the skies of Manhattan, it’s short and sweet and usually plays a part in the plot.  It’s not all guns and explosions for the sake of it; the action is well-balanced with  dialogue and  a progressing plot. 

I particularly  liked how Whedon handled the scenes in space with Loki and ‘The Other’.  They’re  done in an abstract and surreal style using close-ups and impressionistic aesthetic rather than a explicit theatrical feel.  This not only conjures a mystical atmosphere but ensures the identity of ‘The Other’ (rumoured as Thanos) is relatively obscure, thus creating excitement among speculative fans and, on a pragmatic note, means things like the final design of Thanos and his realm can remain open to alteration until the next Avengers film goes into production (which could take years).