“Captain America: The First Avenger” is the story of Steve Rogers (Chris Evans), a young man who wanted nothing more than to fight alongside the brave soldiers in World War II against the Nazi onslaught. After being rejected repeatedly due to his frail physique, Steve volunteered for an experimental treatment that would transform him into a living, breathing super-soldier. Meanwhile, a Nazi scientist named Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) is attempting to harness power beyond anything this world has ever seen, and Captain America may be the only one strong enough to stop him.

After so many entertaining entries this summer ranging from Marvel’s “Thor” and “X-Men: First Class” to DC Comics’ “Green Lantern”, did the heroic summer end with a triumphant victory or a disappointing defeat?

The answer, as evidenced by the movie’s opening weekend box office victory over “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2”, combined with mostly positive reactions from critics, is that the summer of heroes definitely ends on a high note. And I for one wouldn’t have expected anything less from the star-spangled avenger.

Taking heavy cues from classic Hollywood escapism, the likes of which haven’t been seen in quite some time, the film embraces its more traditional atmosphere without being heavy-handed or cheesy in the process. Written by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader”) this film easily feels right at home in the ever-expanding pantheon of Marvel’s self-produced comic book movies, but with some noticeable differences in storytelling.

One of the big differences you’ll notice, aside from the aforementioned atmosphere, between this movie and the ones Marvel Studios has released prior (including this summer’s “Thor”), is that the story is much more serious-minded than the others. The majority of the previous films tied into this universe featured serious dramatic story arcs, but always with heavy doses of humor laced throughout to keep things sort of light-hearted.

That type of approach worked fine for those characters, and in the case of Thor it probably made his transition from comic book page to big screen that much easier to believe. However, for Captain America, a story filled with jokes, one-liners and sarcasm, even if they feel appropriate to the story, would have been completely wrong for the ever-stoic soldier and future leader of the Avengers.

Thankfully, the writers paid attention to this (most likely with some heavy hints from Marvel) and avoided those mistakes. While there is still the occasional joke, they are few and far between; leaving us with a movie that captures the essence of Captain America perfectly. Plus, having a little joke here and there is good to break up the potential monotony of the drama unfolding, I was just glad Cap wasn’t the one cracking wise.

Another major difference between this film and the others, is that here we are presented with a hero who always dreamed of doing nothing more than fighting for what’s right. In today’s comic book movie landscape I can’t think of any characters with this mindset. To me this was so refreshing because finally we get to see one of the few characters that’s doing precisely what he’s always wanted and sought after. As opposed to having the heroic mantle thrust upon him by circumstances (Iron Man or Spider-Man) or being born into it (Thor).

Now, to clarify I am a comic book fan so I already knew that Captain America was one of the few heroes that willingly accepted the heroic mantle placed before him. I just wasn’t sure if the movie would keep this aspect intact or change it to be more cookie-cutter and follow the tried-and-true recipe of so many of the other adaptations over the years.

Despite my foreknowledge of that particular character trait for Cap, I still found it a fresh approach to a genre that has so many similarities within origin stories. After all, there are only so many types of origins one can tell before you become repetitive.

One last difference with this film, that I shall touch upon briefly, is that this was a pure origin story from start to finish. With most other comic book films the origin portion of the character’s first movie comprises approximately half to two-thirds of the overall running time. This movie doesn’t finish Cap’s origins for this cinematic universe, meaning taking him from first becoming the hero to being ready for next summer’s “Avengers”, until the credits roll.

This was important because the other Marvel Studios movies featured stories set in the modern day; whereas, Captain America was created during World War II. So, for him to believably fit into the modern day landscape of 2012’s “Avengers” team-up film, the movie had the unenviable task of introducing the character and doing justice to his time in World War II. All the while, somehow bringing him up to the modern day setting we’ve become accustomed to with the other films. Not an easy set of tasks, but one that the writers and director Joe Johnston pulled off quite nicely.

Speaking of director Joe Johnston, I was personally a little skeptical when he was handed the reins to this key piece of the “Avengers” film puzzle. He’s a director that has been hit-and-miss with big budget franchises or franchise makers throughout his entire career.

Sure, he did an admirable job taking over for Steven Spielberg to helm “Jurassic Park 3”, but even so, the movie wasn’t as strong as its predecessors. Most recently he was responsible for what ended up being a snore-fest of a reintroduction to a classic movie monster with last year’s “The Wolfman”. But, after watching this film, I have to say that I don’t know if anyone else could have handled the movie any better.

Truth be told, whether you like or dislike some of the movies in Johnston’s filmography, one thing is for certain, he may have been preparing for this movie his entire career. With his work on the two movies I mentioned a moment ago, and his history with visual effects during the original “Star Wars” trilogy, all of that served to prepare him for the numerous action sequences and vast CGI work necessary for bringing such a character to life. But, perhaps the most pivotal point of preparation for him may have occurred during his directorial work on 1990’s “The Rocketeer”.

That film was by no means a financial success, and ultimately failed to kick-start a franchise for Disney. However, the movie’s perceived shortcomings were not a fault of the director in my opinion. Reason being, the film was actually quite entertaining, but the marketing done by Disney was poorly planned and failed to really sell audiences on the vast adventure awaiting them inside the theater. Despite all that, the film’s retro style, attitude, and timeframe are comparable to “Captain America: The First Avenger”, and may have been the key to Johnston’s success on this picture.

Speaking of the film’s success, much of the movie’s box office victory over the final “Harry Potter” installment could easily be laid upon the shoulders of its star, actor Chris Evans. Even though Chris had already become known to comic book fans for his spot-on portrayal of the Human Torch, I personally believe that it will be his performance here, and in the sequels to follow (including “Avengers”), that Chris will be remembered for in the eyes of comic book fans.

Chris’ portrayal is the perfect blend of idealism, strength, honesty, and authority that makes Captain America one of the purest heroes in comics and film. Now, it was a going concern among fans that perhaps Chris was miscast given his penchant for sarcasm. However, for Cap, Chris reportedly chose to remove several humorous lines of dialogue in order to stay true to the character. That choice was one that I personally appreciate, because it shows a respect for the source material; a trait which will always be pivotal to any comic book film’s success.

Fighting alongside Chris and serving as a potential love interest for Cap is actress Hayley Atwell (TV’s “The Pillars of the Earth”). Hayley brings a strong sense of authority to the role of Peggy Carter, but with a touch of vulnerability for being a woman amid a predominantly male setting (i.e. fighting in a war). Not to mention, a slight playfulness that belies the soldierly outward appearance and exposes a young woman who would at times like nothing more than to flirt with a guy, namely Steve Rogers/Captain America.

In the other major supporting roles are some terrific actors; such as, Tommy Lee Jones (“The Fugitive”), Stanley Tucci (“The Road to Perdition”), and rising star Dominic Cooper (“Mamma Mia!”). Each of these supporting players is responsible for the film’s few humorous bits, while still delivering very entertaining, solid performances.

As always veteran actors Tommy Lee Jones and Stanley Tucci elevate any project they appear in, but it is Dominic Cooper that surprises me the most. His portrayal as Howard Stark (Tony Stark’s father) is great, especially as he infuses shades of Robert Downey, Jr’s portrayal of Tony from the two “Iron Man” films. For me this nod to his future son’s personality further cemented the cohesive nature of these interlinked films that Marvel has been producing over the last few years.

Now, I mentioned that Captain America was a great hero and Chris Evans perfectly captured all of the qualities necessary to make him so; however, every hero is only as great as his villain. For this purpose, actor Hugo Weaving brings the supremely evil and despotic Johann Schmidt, also known as the Red Skull, to sadistic malevolent life.

When playing a character codenamed Red Skull, and one that has the physical qualities to inspire such a moniker, I think it could conceivably tempt an actor to sort of ham it up. Basically, go into a scene-chewing mode as the sneering bad guy who does everything evil just for kicks and all that’s missing is a handlebar mustache for him to twirl in his fingers. Thankfully, as with many other potential pratfalls that could have plagued this movie, this one was avoided as well.

Actor Hugo Weaving, who is no stranger to playing a major villain (he was Agent Smith in “The Matrix” trilogy), portrays Schmidt in a way that is obviously sinister, but without becoming an over-the-top caricature. This was vital to making his character more believable to audiences given his garish appearance and thirst for other-worldly power beyond belief.

What I mean is that his motives are deeply twisted and malevolent, he is a Nazi after all, but you see the sincerity in how deeply he believes in what he’s doing. That he’s not just doing these evil things just for the sake of doing them. He has a purpose and he believes it to be right. Thus, as a character he is much more believable, amidst all of the more outlandish elements surrounding him, including his own appearance. Again, just another aspect that was pivotal to making this film work.

After all that being said, as I mentioned earlier, the summer of superheroes definitely ended on a high note. Plus, with a movie this solidly entertaining, featuring a home-grown hero, to bring the season to a close is perfectly fitting.

So, as you have undoubtedly figured out by now, “Captain America: The First Avenger” is an excellent adventure film. And one that serves as a fun throwback to classic escapism from Hollywood’s past. The movie easily lives up to its Marvel Studios predecessors and firmly cements this hero from a bygone era’s place in this hyper-real cinematic universe that began back in 2008’s “Iron Man”.

“Captain America: The First Avenger” is rated PG-13 for violence and brief language.

Two years later, Spielberg and Bay did it again with the outstanding follow-up (although many would contest my usage of the word “outstanding” in regards to that film) “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”. Once more this franchise blew away box office expectations and elevated the aforementioned bar even higher.

Now, here we are in 2011, and like clockwork a third Transformers film has arrived in theaters under the guidance of the previously mentioned executive producer and director. So, does “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” have what it takes to surpass its predecessors or do these robots in disguise need to go back to Cybertron?

“Transformers: Dark of the Moon” begins a few years after the last film as Sam (Shia LaBeouf) has graduated college, has a new girlfriend (Rosie Huntington-Whitely), and is looking for a job. Meanwhile, the Autobots are still working alongside the U.S. government to protect the planet from future Decepticon attacks. However, the tide of war is about to change as the Decepticons are working to reassemble a recently discovered Cybertronian technology that could resurrect the long-dead planet of Cybertron and destroy the Earth in the process.

Regarding the question I asked a moment ago, whether or not this film has what it takes, the answer is an absolute “YES”, without a doubt! If you were one of the moviegoers that felt disappointed by the last installment, this newest entry will easily erase any lingering ill will you may still be harboring towards this franchise.

Written by Ehren Kruger (the only returning screenwriter from the previous film), this film boasts the biggest story, the craziest action and visual effects to feast your eyes upon, and stakes that feel higher than ever before. Plus, the story actually strikes a few surprising emotional chords that I didn’t expect; resulting in a movie that feels much more mature and grown up than the other installments.

The previous film, although I found to be enjoyable, many felt was inferior to the original by having a story that was overly convoluted and over-the-top. Personally, I disagree, but that was the major consensus, so I’m in the minority.

This newest movie boasts a much more streamlined plot that is more centralized and focused on a few major set pieces as opposed to the globe-trotting escapades of its predecessor. By taking this approach some might wonder if the final product seems scaled back by comparison.

The answer: yes and no.

In my opinion, the film feels easily as epic in scope as the previous one, in terms of the action on display and the threat being leveled by the Decepticons. But the main story does feel somewhat smaller, more inline with the original film. It sort of brings everything full circle, back to the basic concept of a young man thrust into an extraordinary situation.

Truth be told, I think this was the best approach for the movie. Reason being, since this is Bay’s supposed last go-round with the franchise; the film serves as a very nice bookend to the story that began four years ago with the original.

Another area that became a bit smaller is the cast of Transformers in the film. Unlike the last entry, where the number of robot characters increased dramatically; this time around, the core group of Transformers is relatively the same size as the original movie, just with some new faces.

This more concise core cast of Transformers is a wise choice as it provides audiences a chance to get to know who these various robots are and see more of their distinct personalities on display. Thus, allowing us viewers to develop an emotional investment in them, so that they actually become real characters to us and not just CGI creations.

While the robot cast may have downsized a bit, the human cast of characters the story focuses upon is much larger than ever before.

Leading the cast once again is Shia LaBeouf as Sam Witwicky. By now, Shia is undoubtedly as comfortable playing Sam as he is in his own skin. Such familiarity with a character could lead to boredom seeping into an actor’s performance, but not with Shia.

It’s clear that Shia has grown over the course of these films right along with his character, and this time around everything about his performance feels so much more relaxed, natural, and mature. That’s not to say that Shia’s wit has died down as a result, far from it in fact. His comedic timing seems better than ever, and his one-liners and sarcastic observations are much keener than previously seen.

Next to Shia, through much of the film, is a new leading lady, played by model turned actress Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. Some may miss former lead actress Megan Fox, whose departure from the film was highly publicized, but Rosie does a good job of stepping in as Shia’s new girlfriend Carly. And as surprising as this may seem, Rosie actually is a decent actress, delivering a much more consistent performance than Megan did in either of her two outings.

Other returning cast members fleshing out the familiar supporting roles are Josh Duhamel as Lt. Colonel Lennox, Tyrese Gibson as Epps, and John Turturro as former S7 agent, Seymour Simmons.

Each of these actors get their time to shine in this film, just as they did in the previous two, but their characters feel more naturally integrated into the story than ever before. For instance, this time around the military’s involvement seemed more logical due to the presence of Transformers on Earth no longer being kept secret.

As for Simmons, his involvement wasn’t pure coincidence as it was last time. With the Transformers operating openly in the public, inserting Simmons into the action felt like an obvious choice given his character’s obsession with the robots.

Speaking of John Turturro’s character, I thought the eccentric nature of Simmons really fit with his demoted status quo in the last film. However, now that he’s a filthy rich author due to his conspiracy theories and first-hand knowledge of the Transformers, his quirks are even better suited to the character.

Now some complain that John Turturro’s performance as Simmons has always threatened to derail these movies. Personally, I’ve always gotten a big kick out of his portrayal and feel that just like everything else in this film, he’s never been better.

Also, showing up in two brief cameo appearances are character actors, Julie White and Kevin Dunn, as Sam’s parents. I have enjoyed their characters every time they have appeared in the previous movies, and I was glad to see they were included yet again.

Once more we are given several hilarious one-liners, especially from Julie as Sam’s boundary-ignoring, borderline inappropriate mother. Sadly though, we were only given their two short appearances in the film. I for one would have enjoyed seeing more of them again, but honestly they wouldn’t have really fit into the story, so it was probably for the best.

Newcomers to the cast, aside from Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, are several high-profile, A-list actors and actresses ranging from John Malkovich (“Con Air”) and Frances McDormand (“Fargo”) to Alan Tudyk (“A Knight’s Tale”) and the increasingly popular Ken Jeong (“The Hangover”). While some of these characters had moments of seriousness, Frances McDormand’s character being the most serious-minded; for the most part, they all delivered great bits of levity amidst the robo-led apocalypse descending upon mankind.

Alongside the actors appearing on the screen were the talented voice-over actors breathing life into the CGI-created Transformers. Each voice-over cast member delivered excellent work and made their characters really feel alive to the audience. As always the sound of Peter Cullen as Optimus Prime continues to make those of us who grew up watching the 1980’s animated series feel like kids again.

Joining the voice-over cast is the legendary Leonard Nimoy (“Star Trek”) as the long-lost Autobot, Sentinel Prime. Leonard’s gravelly voice brought a sense of gravitas and authority that was vital to the portrayal of Optimus’ predecessor. Plus, the nod or two to Leonard’s history as Spock from “Star Trek” was a fun little easter egg for fans to look and listen for.

Of course, with these films all of the cast and crew’s hard work would be for naught if it wasn’t for the outstanding visual effects work. As with the previous two movies, the bar for CGI in film has been raised once more. The realism on display when bringing the two warring factions of Transformers to life continues to be astounding. Not to mention, the final hour alone, when the war really comes to a crescendo, makes the whole movie worth watching.

So after all that, I leave you with this final thought. If you are one of the numerous fans who lost interest in this franchise after the perceived horror that was “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen”, then this latest installment will erase that pain and make you remember what it’s like to be a kid again.

And in the end, just like its predecessors, “Transformers: Dark of the Moon” is the epitome of what a summer blockbuster is supposed to be and proud of it.

“Transformers: Dark of the Moon” is rated PG-13 for violence and language.

“Green Lantern” follows a test pilot named Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds) as he inadvertently finds himself chosen to become a member of the elite, intergalactic police force known as the Green Lantern Corps. As Hal learns the ropes and begins to understand the scope of his new responsibilities, a mysterious and powerful enemy known as Parallax has set its sights upon Earth. Now, with the aid of his one-time love Carol Ferris (Blake Lively), Hal must find the courage to overcome his fears and insecurities and unleash the power of will before Parallax and his accomplice, Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard), tear our world apart.

“In brightest day, in blackest night; no evil shall escape my sight. Let those who worship evil’s might, beware my power, Green Lantern’s light!” Those words form the pledge by which every single member of the Green Lantern Corps live their lives. It’s not a pledge the characters in this film take lightly, by any means. So, does the film adaptation do justice in bringing this character, all of his supporting cast (both alien and human), and the pledge by which they live and breathe, to cinematic life?

If you ask me to answer that question, I would say…yes, for the most part. Are there issues with the film as an adaptation or as just a movie? To an extent, yes there is, but the good and accurate portions (in relation to the comic book) far outweigh the few bits that are incorrect or need work.

Written by Greg Berlanti (TV’s “No Ordinary Family”) and Marc Guggenheim (TV’s “FlashForward”) the story for “Green Lantern” is a combination of a character-driven drama and an origin tale. Plus, the story boasts a hefty dose of science-fiction, moments of humor, and the rekindling of a romance, not bad for a character’s first foray to the big screen.

In blending all of those elements together the writers did an impressive job of striking a relative balance between each of them. Thus, leaving audiences with an end result that is a thoroughly entertaining first installment in what will hopefully continue on to become another successful superhero franchise.

As I mentioned earlier, more often than not, the film works very well. The scenes set on Oa were both visually stunning and fanboy dreams come to life. I mean come on, anyone that has read a Green Lantern comic has got to admit that it was great to see so many members of the esteemed Corps up on the big screen. The action scenes were also very energetic and well choreographed and the intermixing of live-action with CGI was relatively seamless (at least 95% of the time).

As for the drama unfolding within the story, most of it was gleamed from Geoff Johns’ superior retelling of Green Lantern’s origin during a comic book story arc known as Secret Origin. The movie does an admirable job of conveying the inner turmoil that had consumed Hal for much of his life. Plus, the scenes shared between Hal and Carol were very nice moments that offered a quiet respite from the more sci-fi oriented aspects of the story.

Now, I will admit that there were parts of the film that didn’t work as well as they should have. Chief among these issues is the handling of the film’s primary villain, Parallax.

For the most part, I didn’t mind the film’s take on Parallax, because in the comics he’s never really been given an origin tale. So, the fact that the writers, with the blessing of Geoff Johns (who served as a consultant on the film), combined the Parallax character with a fallen Guardian, although not canon, it did make sense to me.

Of course, some may cry foul at that departure from the comics, but for me it wasn’t much of an issue. The bigger problem with the character was in his appearance.

Never has Parallax appeared in the comics as a cloud-like entity (à la Galactus from “Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer”). While at various points within the film the character’s face does somewhat resemble his comic book counterpart, more often than not, it looked nothing like him. However, since the goal was apparently to make the character a villain of more substance rather than merely a spirit entity, this departure while not my favorite choice, didn’t ruin the movie, but it did bring it down a little bit.

Some other very minor gripes surround a few of the CGI sequences that appeared more rushed in order to get the film completed on time. And in some instances some of the scenes of Hal on Earth interacting with Carol or various other characters would occasionally feel oddly edited. As if there were bits of information either omitted from earlier in the scene or from elsewhere in the film.

Now, a major issue that some critics are citing with this film is that many of the actors and actresses in this movie are woefully miscast. If you ask me, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

First off, Ryan Reynolds (“The Proposal”) as Hal Jordan turned out to be a spot-on choice for the role. I’ll admit that at first I was skeptical of Ryan’s casting. Reason being was aside from having the proper physical appearance his typically sarcastic demeanor didn’t seem to fit the character. However, aside from a few brief moments early on in the film, Ryan’s trademark sarcasm was kept in check.

I think that in casting Ryan Reynolds DC and Warner Bros. made a wise decision by going with a lead actor that has star power, is young enough to build a franchise around, and has the acting chops to help the audience relate to the character and accept the more outlandish aspects of the material. Personally, I think that Ryan was a great choice in the end, and despite my misgivings early on, he ultimately wound up impressing me in the role.

Alongside Ryan as Carol Ferris, a love interest for Hal, is actress Blake Lively (“The Town”). Blake is yet another casting choice that many took issue with by saying that she never convincingly conveys the authority her character possesses and that she lacks any true acting ability.

Again, I disagree as I felt that Blake was very good as Carol. She brought strength and determination to the role. And, any perceived limitations with her character are due to the fact that her role wasn’t as fleshed out as Hal’s, but that’s where a sequel can come in to play.

Serving as one of the film’s villains (the one that is flesh and blood) is actor Peter Sarsgaard (“Flightplan”) as Hector Hammond. In the comics Hector has always been very creepy and stalker-ish towards women, and as odd as this is to say, Peter really nailed this aspect of the character perfectly.

As Hector, Peter played the part in two distinct ways. The first was as a very meek and subservient individual, who was always too weak to speak out or defend himself or his ideas. Then after his chance encounter with Parallax he embraces his newfound power and lords it over everyone he can. All the while he is trying to woo Carol Ferris, albeit in the creepiest manner possible.

Now, a big gripe by many a critic, and even some comic book fans, is that the various alien members of the Green Lantern Corps show up as little more than over-glorified cameos. Honestly, this to me made sense given that this film was about Hal Jordan’s journey to become a Green Lantern, and not the collective Corps at large. However, Warner Bros.’ marketing department (whether instructed to or not) showcased the various other members of the Corps to such a degree that most expected to see a lot more of them in the movie.

However, what’s done is done, and despite their cameo status, the various alien members of the Corps that were featured were all terrific adaptations of their comic book counterparts. Whether they were completely computer generated (for example Tomar-Re and Kilowog) or an actor with heavy amounts of make-up and prosthetics applied (Sinestro), each were convincing, living breathing versions of some of the more renowned members of the Corps come to life.

Comprising the main three members we are introduced to in the film are three very talented actors. First is Mark Strong (“Robin Hood”) as Sinestro, one of the leading and most revered members of the Corps. Mark perfectly conveyed Sinestro’s contempt for new recruits into the Corps. Plus, showcasing his indomitable inner strength and determination to be the best there is at what he does is Sinestro through and through.

Along with Mark Strong, are actors Geoffrey Rush (“The King’s Speech”) and Michael Clarke Duncan (“The Green Mile”) providing the voices for Tomar-Re and Kilowog respectively. Both Geoffrey and Michael were spot-on in their vocal renditions of the characters, especially Michael whose booming bass voice perfectly complimented Kilowog’s impressive stature.

Well, I suppose I’ve gone on about this movie long enough, and so I leave you with one last thought: despite what most of the critics have said about the film, “Green Lantern” is truly an entertaining piece of summer superhero movie fun and is easy to follow and understand even if you’re not familiar with the character.

Not to mention, those aforementioned critics, most of them admit they’ve never read the comic book on which this film is based. Which is obvious given that much of their complaining is in regards to aspects of the film that are completely accurate to the source material. So, in that respect, I wouldn’t put too much stock in their opinions of this movie.

“Green Lantern” is rated PG-13 for violence and language.

Personally, I enjoyed both of those films (as did many audiences based on their box office receipts), although I do recognize their flaws. To those critics and even some fans that were displeased with the aforementioned last two installment into the franchise, a new entry has come along to right those proverbial wrongs. That film is the critically acclaimed “X-Men: First Class” from director Matthew Vaughn (“Layer Cake”), with Bryan Singer serving as a producer this time around.

“X-Men: First Class” explores the friendship between Professor Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Erik Lehnsherr (Michael Fassbender). Set in the early 1960’s, the two one-time friends and veritable leaders of the mutant race, join forces with the CIA to discover and train new mutants in the use of their powers. However, when a dangerous mutant named Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon) sets into motion events that could lead to nuclear war; Charles, Erik and their team of mutant recruits must band together to save mankind.

When this film was initially announced I was excited because at the time Bryan Singer was attached to direct. However, shortly thereafter Singer was forced to drop out due to scheduling conflicts, and eventually director Matthew Vaughn was hired to take over the reins.

It was upon this revelation that my excitement for the prequel began to wane because Matthew Vaughn had already balked at the chance to direct an X-Men feature with “X-Men: The Last Stand”. Thus, my confidence in him wasn’t exactly solid. That was before I watched his surprisingly entertaining, tongue planted firmly in cheek, comic book adaptation “Kick-@$$”.

After seeing the aforementioned film, my concern for the X-Men franchise was quickly dissipating. My thought was so long as Matthew Vaughn, and company, remained relatively faithful to the material, plus made every attempt possible to ensure this is the best in the series; then the future of the franchise would be in good hands.

So, let me say that I for one can attest that “X-Men: First Class” not only delivered the goods, but surpassed almost every one of my expectations. If you are one of the fans or critics or general moviegoers that were disappointed to some degree with any of the previous films, then this movie should easily renew your faith in the franchise.

Written by Ashley Miller and Zack Stentz (“Thor”) the story for “X-Men: First Class” is jam-packed with history for not only the franchise, but even some actual world history to boot (albeit with a comic book slant). Not to mention terrific character beats (especially for the primary cast members); plus, taking considerable care to not trample too much upon the continuity that had been established by the previous films in the series.

Admittedly there were some minor contradictions between this film and the rest of the series; however, they can be forgiven or explained away in later sequels. So I digress.

On top of all that the film boasts some very entertaining action and visual effects set pieces that are some of the best this series has ever had to offer. From the scenes of the various young mutants training to harness their abilities to the film’s climactic moments, the visual spectacle on display is well worth the price of admission.

As always the best scripts, action, visual effects, and directors and crew members are all for naught if the cast can’t step up to deliver the goods too. And this cast delivered with great ease and nearly flawless execution.

Leading the cast are two very talented actors: one is the more recognizable James McAvoy (“Wanted”) portraying Charles Xavier, and the other is the soon to be recognizable, due to this role, Michael Fassbender (“300”).

At the onset of this film you can forget some of your preconceived notions for the character of Charles Xavier that you may have gleamed from comics or the movies. Here we are introduced to a version of the character that’s willing to be somewhat ethically loose with his powers. For example, he is not above using his telepathic abilities to hit on women in bars and such.

Now, I understand that some could be turned off by this take on the character in his younger years, and therefore attempt to write off the film in the process. However, actor James McAvoy manages to portray this time in Xavier’s life with such charm and personality that you can’t help but be drawn in by him.

And when the character begins to embrace his destiny as a potential future leader of mutants, McAvoy naturally shifts gears with the character. Over the course of his story arc James begins tempering the more spirited side to Xavier with an over-bearing sense of responsibility and a strong ethical moral code that we all know from the original trilogy.

As for the future Magneto, actor Michael Fassbender portrays this younger Erik Lehnsherr with much more volatility than we’ve ever seen from the character. However, with that temperament, we also see an underlying sadness that is constantly at odds with his intense anger and aggression.

When we see those flashes of sadness come to the surface of Erik, Michael truly excels at playing them off with genuine surprise and bewilderment from the character. Seeing these moments of vulnerability seep into the role was a fresh approach to Erik that we had not seen previously.

Plus, witnessing the transition of Erik from a man consumed by vengeance and lacking any real sense of direction to a man with a mission and purpose in life was extremely satisfying and intriguing to watch.

Separately both James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender were great, but their shared scenes are simply excellent. The natural rapport the two share onscreen perfectly conveys the brotherly relationship the characters once shared in the comics.

Honestly, if the Academy was willing to take a chance on another comic book property for a potential award nomination (beyond the visual and sound effects categories), then this film and its two lead actors could easily snag a nod. Of course, this most likely will not happen, but the fact that they could be considered worthy is a testament to the quality of this movie.

Alongside the two leads are a plethora of actors and actresses delivering very solid turns, even if their characters aren’t given as much to do as the aforementioned. The two biggest standouts from the supporting cast of young mutants are Mystique and Beast, played by Jennifer Lawrence (“Winter’s Bone”) and Nicholas Hoult (“Clash of the Titans”).

These two young talents deliver strong performances, and provide a different perspective on the events of the film than that of the leads. For me, I was pleasantly surprised by the fact that the movie spent as much time as it did showcasing the viewpoint of the “students”; especially, since the driving force of the film was the early years of Charles and Erik.

On the villainous side of things, we have Kevin Bacon (“Hollow Man”) and January Jones (TV’s “Mad Men”), portraying Sebastian Shaw and his femme fatale, Emma Frost respectively.

Between the two, Kevin gave the stronger performance, not to mention having more to do within the story. His portrayal of Sebastian Shaw was an interesting blend of a charismatic, suave, and sophisticated business man, mixed with a cold and calculating killer, devoid of any vestige of humanity.

To his credit, Kevin could have played the role over-the-top, which seems to be the temptation for so many actors when playing characters with a clear messiah complex, but he didn’t. Instead, he opted to play things more subdued and both the character and the film benefited.

Now, a moment ago, when I said that Kevin’s performance was the stronger of the two, that wasn’t to say that January Jones didn’t deliver on her end. On the contrary, January did a good job portraying Emma, a character whose beauty belies the cold-hearted mutant she truly is.

Some have complained that January seemed too emotionless and detached, but that’s the way her character should be, so her portrayal would be accurate. It’s just so many times critics aren’t aware of the source material (I know I’m guilty of this too), and judge based solely on what they see whether that’s the way the character is supposed to be or not.

So, in the end, with all the terrific performances, excellent storytelling, and great visual effects and action sequences, “X-Men: First Class” is an outstanding movie! Serving as a perfect introduction to those who may be unfamiliar with the film franchise or its comic book source material, but also providing longtime fans another excellent entry into the franchise that easily erases any ill-will garnered from the last two installments.

“X-Men: First Class” is rated PG-13 for violence and language.

After an impulsive act of violence jeopardizes the sanctity of Asgard, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) is stripped of his power and banished, by his father, Odin (Anthony Hopkins), to Earth. There he encounters the lovely Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), and realizes that there is more to life than glorious battles alongside his fellow Asgardians. With Thor out of the way, his step-brother Loki puts into motion a plan that threatens to destroy all Thor holds dear in Asgard and on Earth. With time running out Thor must prove to be worthy of the power he wielded and once more command the fury of the storm.

Of all the comic book characters that Marvel has either already adapted for feature films or have announced plans to do so, Thor seemed the most audacious as he is hardly one of their most recognizable comic staples to the general public. Not to mention, the choice of Kenneth Branagh, an actor and director known for his Shakespearean background, didn’t seem an ideal fit for bringing the mystical realm of Asgard to life on the big screen.

However, after viewing this outstanding summer blockbuster, I must say that Marvel’s bold choices paid off brilliantly. Not only is Thor fast-becoming a household name, but Kenneth Branagh proved to be a truly inspired choice for director. No doubt thanks to his Shakespearean roots, Branagh successfully envisioned a nearly perfect blend of the fantastic elements of Asgard, with the realism (or hyperrealism) that has been established in Marvel Studios’ previous film releases with which this movie is connected.

Written by the writing duo of Ashley Miller and Zack Stenz (“X-Men: First Class”), alongside Don Payne (“Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer”), and based on a story from comic book and film scribe J. Michael Stracyznski (“Changeling”) and Mark Protosevich (“I Am Legend”), the story for “Thor” is epic in scope (much larger than most first-attempt comic book adaptations ever dare), featuring incredible action, unforgettable characters, with plenty of drama, intensity, a budding romance, and even some comedy to boot.

Another apparent stroke of genius for this film was the casting, which was spot-on in nearly every instance. Leading the assemblage of characters is relative newcomer (to our shores anyway) Chris Hemsworth as the thunderer himself, Thor. Chris portrays Thor with such bravado, arrogance, and a seemingly unshakable desire for battle that exactly matches his early comic book days.

It is also worth mentioning that upon Thor’s exile to Earth, Chris slowly brings out a softer side to the demoted god of thunder. Naturally conveying Thor’s gradual embracing of humility and an understanding that violence isn’t always the best solution.

With these two distinct sides to the character, we are left with a very well-rounded and believable hero of mythic proportions that feels much more real than I had ever expected.

Alongside, Thor is his step-brother Loki played to absolute perfection by Tom Hiddleston (“The Gathering Storm”). Loki has always been portrayed as a villainous character that went from harmless mischief to ultimately succumbing to his darker side due to his growing contempt for Thor.

In the film, Tom plays Loki as mischievous, but not completely evil (at least not yet). His actions though malicious in nature at times, are laced with an underlying desire for approval from those around him. In my opinion, this more deep-seeded emotional drive behind Loki’s actions allowed for the character to be much more relatable and intriguing to the audience.

Rounding out the primary characters featured in this film is actress Natalie Portman (“Black Swan”) as Jane Foster. Some have criticized Natalie’s role as being merely the damsel-in-distress. Or that she portrayed the character as head-over-heels in love with a man she’s barely just met, rather than a mature woman with an infatuation. Personally, I disagree on both counts.

I felt that Natalie’s role was decently fleshed out, albeit not as much as some of the other main characters, but that’s where a sequel can come in handy. After all, this was really Thor’s movie, and it was pivotal to not only this film, but the impending “Avengers” that audiences really come to know and understand him (which seems obvious to me). So, in that regard, some side characters were left slightly short-handed in the story department, but I never felt she was there merely for the damsel role or to be just eye candy.

As for the relationship between Thor and Jane, I felt it was handled naturally as both characters showed they liked each other and that it was merely an infatuation at the moment. Neither played it anything beyond that, as some other critics have stated. As for how Jane acted around Thor; Natalie played her as clearly with a new crush, and it felt very believable. To see the relationship as anything else is reading too much into it at this point.

But I digress. I must mention that there is a plethora of supporting roles in this film, several of which merit a mention, but to do so for each of them would take quite some time. So, let me be succinct by saying that almost every single one of the supporting players delivers great performances.

Each of the supporting cast members brought something different to strengthen the creative process of moviemaking. Plus, in several instances some of them provided brief moments of much-needed levity to break up the intensity and drama unfolding within the story.

Those supporting cast members that are clearly worthy of mentioning due to their importance to the story and/or excellent work in the film are: Kat Dennings (“Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist”) as Jane’s college assistant Darcy (and a major source of the aforementioned levity), Ray Stevenson (“Punisher: War Zone”) as Volstagg, a member of Asgard’s esteemed Warriors Three, and Idris Elba (“The Losers”) as Heimdall, guardian of the Bifrost Bridge.

Lastly, two pivotal roles in the film that don’t receive a ton of screen time, yet were incredibly vital, are the roles of Odin and SHIELD agent Coulson, played by Sir Anthony Hopkins (“The Silence of the Lambs”) and Clark Gregg (“Iron Man 2”) respectively.

Sir Anthony Hopkins was the ideal choice to play Odin, Thor’s father and Lord of Asgard. Anthony always elevates any project he’s involved in due to his incredible acting prowess, his almost regal demeanor, and the respect that he clearly commands from those around him. For Odin, Anthony brought all of these qualities to bear, and crafted a performance that is worthy of the king of the god-like Asgardians.

Actor Clark Gregg, whose character Agent Coulson, has become a staple of Marvel’s feature films, once again steals almost every scene in which he appears. Clark’s portrayal of Coulson is so entertaining to watch because in one scene he will appear affable and potentially a push-over, but then he will establish himself as an authority figure with a quiet strength to back it up.

It is this dichotomy within Agent Coulson that has allowed this potentially one-dimensional character to have such staying power. Plus, he has grown, developed, and become even more interesting every time we meet him in these films.

Now, beyond having a terrific story, director and cast, the film also boasted some truly spectacular visual effects sequences. From Asgard’s majestic golden spires to the subtly multi-colored Bifrost Bridge (or Rainbow Bridge as it is sometimes referred) to the menacing Frost Giants, every supernatural or fantastical aspect of this film was rendered with such detail and precision that it literally blew away all of my expectations. Every frame looked as if it had been pulled directly from the comic book into amazing reality.

This movie featured Hollywood movie magic at its finest, and the quality on display played a significant role in the believability of the film. Bravo to all involved in the creation of the picture-perfect imagery that blended seamlessly with the live actors and physical sets and backgrounds.

So, if you haven’t figured it out by now, “Thor” is an incredibly entertaining blockbuster film and a terrific way to kick off the summer movie season. Even for those moviegoers that aren’t aware of the particulars for this character, I believe there is still plenty for you to enjoy in this film. This movie is definitely a must-see.

“Thor” is rated PG-13 for violence.

“Underworld” follows Selene (Kate Beckinsale), a vampire who is a member of an elite group of lycan hunters known as “Death Dealers”. As the centuries-old blood feud between the two races rages on, Selene and her fellow vampires believe that the lycans’ days are numbered. However, when an unsuspecting human (Scott Speedman) becomes the focal point of the conflict; everything Selene believes about the war, her heritage, and her mission may change forever.

Upon its release “Underworld” presented audiences with a new take on vampires and lycans (typically known as werewolves). Long gone are the days of Bela Lugosi’s undeniably iconic “Dracula” or Lon Chaney, Jr’s “The Wolf Man”. Now, we are presented with vampires decked out in sleek, leather outfits, packing modern-day weaponry and martial arts influenced fighting styles. Plus, lycans that have never looked as menacing or believable as they do in this film.

Not to mention, the lycans’ transformations (a nearly seamless blend of CGI and practical effects) are some of the best committed to film to this day. One thing is for sure, these are supernatural beings and monsters for the new, post-“Matrix” generation of moviegoers.

Written by Danny McBride (“Underworld: Rise of the Lycan”) the film wastes little time jumping into both the main crux of the story (i.e. the specifics of the two races, the war, and so on) and the fast-paced, hard-hitting action sequences. For the most part the story does a terrific job in balancing the plot with the action, interspersed with brief tidbits of the history between the two races. However, at times the plot feels a little too rushed in order to keep the momentum going, resulting in some uneven, almost jumbled aspects to the story.

That being said, in the end those moments are overshadowed by the fact that Danny McBride did an excellent job of crafting a story that introduced us to a complicated war between supernatural beings. While the director, Len Wiseman (“Live Free or Die Hard”) skillfully guided the story to cinematic life complete with style, an eerie atmosphere that blended the familiar with the supernatural, and a terrifically cast group of actors and actresses.

Speaking of the cast, let’s begin with actress Kate Beckinsale (“Pearl Harbor”) as the leather-clad vampire Selene. Kate’s performance was generally stoic and emotionless, which makes sense given she is portraying a member of the so-called undead. However, there were some brief glimpses of newfound emotions boiling to the surface and Kate’s handling of Selene’s bewilderment to the aforementioned was completely natural and effortless.

Also, seeing a female vampire doing a majority of the action was an interesting change of pace for this type of film, but a welcome one at that. Kate handled herself in the action sequences in such a strong, confident manner that she quickly solidified her character as one not to be messed with.

Actor Scott Speedman (“Dark Blue”) was good in the role of Michael, the human that the lycans are focused upon. However, I did find that occasionally his acting felt a little forced. Perhaps he was over-rehearsed so that the scenes couldn’t flow naturally for him. Even so, acting wise I don’t believe he is up to par with some of the other, more accomplished cast members.

Of course, the fact that a vampire/werewolf movie actually has acting that was good enough to set standards for the entire cast is surprising in itself (at least in my estimation). That alone should indicate that this film is not just another one of your typical, run-of-the-mill monster films where the acting is the last thing on anyone’s mind. This film’s cast actually seemed to take pride in getting their characters right and making them interesting to the audience, while still holding true to the archetypes being portrayed.

Speaking of those cast members that set the aforementioned acting bar; aside from Kate Beckinsale, we have the two talented actors chosen to play the respective leaders of the two races, actors Bill Nighy and Michael Sheen.

As the vampire king, Viktor, veteran actor Bill Nighy (“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”) commands both respect and fear with his portrayal that was at times endearing, but could then be utterly cold, calculating and undeniably evil. His layered performance elevated the character of Viktor from being just another one-dimensional despot to a complicated being that was very real despite his supernatural disposition.

The ever-reliable actor Michael Sheen (“Frost/Nixon”) as Lucian, leader of the lycans, brought a quiet strength to the role that belied the ferocity lurking just beneath the surface. His performance was laced with such subtle malevolence, so that whenever his character would snap and unleash the inner beast it was almost startling; despite the fact you knew it had to happen at some point.

With such generally strong performances, fast-paced action and stunts, and solid storytelling, “Underworld” is without a doubt an excellent monster movie in every sense. The film successfully brings a centuries-old war between supernatural beings to life in a way that is interesting and above all, entertaining.

“Underworld” is rated R for violence and language.

“Underworld: Rise of the Lycans” chronicles the rise to power of Lucian (Michael Sheen), the first lycan in existence. Discovered by the vampire king, Viktor (Bill Nighy), Lucian at first serves as one of the loyal protectors of the vampires’ realm. However, over time Lucian’s loyalties begin to waver as he yearns to be free and to no longer be treated as a slave. Joined by his lover, Viktor’s own daughter Sonja (Rhona Mitra), Lucian embarks on a daring plan to free all enslaved lycans, and if necessary, wage war upon their vampire overlords.

Prior to the “Star Wars” saga no one had really heard of a prequel. Nowadays, if a franchise proves popular and a backstory is semi-introduced in an installment, don’t be surprised if a prequel soon arrives on the scene. The odd thing for me in regards to prequels is that by definition they are created as afterthoughts to the original film and could be potentially weaker than their predecessors.

Sure, the basic story for any given prequel may have existed in someone’s head during the filming of the original movie, but it wasn’t deemed strong enough to kick-start a franchise on its own. For example: I’m relatively confident that everyone could agree that had “Star Wars – Episode I: The Phantom Menace” been the first “Star Wars” movie to be released to theaters, George Lucas would have been hard-pressed to continue his series amidst all the negative feedback from critics and many fans alike. So, by starting in the middle of the story (“Star Wars – Episode IV: A New Hope”), with an arguably richer narrative, the franchise exploded and has become the phenomenon we all know and love today.

The same can be said for this film, “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans”, written by Danny McBride (the only returning writer from the previous two films) and the writing duo of Dirk Blackman and Howard McCain (“Outlander”).

Is this a good movie on its own? Yes. Would it have found as big of an audience had it been released prior to “Underworld”? Most likely not, because the basis for its story was so narrow that it would have been a niche movie for a specific, undoubtedly smaller audience.

The reason being is that the story is essentially a history lesson on the war between vampires and lycans. When people go to see a movie involving vampires and/or lycans they want to see them either embroiled in battle with each other or humanity. By and large, the movie going public would most likely not be interested in an origin tale for a fictional war between fictional monsters. Unless they’ve already seen the war in action and would like to know more, thus the entire reason this film exists in the first place. But, I digress.

When this film was initially announced as a prequel, I had hoped that Kate Beckinsale would once again reprise her role as the vampire Selene from the first two films. However, at the time Kate was not interested in returning to the series, so actress Rhona Mitra (“Doomsday”) stepped in portraying a new character, Sonja. Although, anyone who has seen these films can attest, clearly Sonja was nothing more than a slightly tweaked Selene. The writers basically took Selene, changed her name and her heritage just a tad, but beyond that kept everything else about the character intact.

Even so, actress Rhona Mitra did a good job with the character. She brought out the same caring and protective side of Sonja as Kate had done with Selene. But the main difference between the two was that Rhona had to imbue Sonja with a very distinct rebellious nature that was constantly at odds with her father and her noble status within the vampire world. Also, Sonja seemed to possess a much more violent nature than her modern day counterpart, most likely a result of not only her upbringing as Viktor’s daughter, but also the environment of the Dark Ages in which she lived. After all, those were rough times by any measure.

Alongside Rhona we have two returning cast members from the previous films, Bill Nighy and Michael Sheen. As this film is subtitled “Rise of the Lycans”, obviously Michael Sheen’s character of Lucian is granted the lion’s share of the story here. That being said, this prequel film is as much Viktor’s story as it is Lucian’s, so veteran actor Bill Nighy is given ample time as well. For both characters I found it interesting to see new sides to them or at the very least seeing specific attributes or character traits previously seen in the other films, receive further examination.

With Bill Nighy’s performance as Viktor we see even more of the paternal side to this otherwise cold, calculating and undeniably cruel vampire king. We had seen this side to him before in regards to Selene in the previous films, but here we see more glimpses of that side of him as we see his relationship with his very own daughter unfold. Now, this character won’t win any awards for Father of the Year by any means, but he did have several touching moments where a softer side was evident, and Bill played these quieter moments to perfection.

As Lucian, Michael Sheen was also allowed to show a much softer side to his character, one that was caring, protective, and yearning for nothing more than to be free and live a happy, content life. However, through various acts of cruelty either directly or indirectly aimed at him by his vampire overlords, we see Lucian slowly lose himself to his anger, until he is ultimately consumed by it. At this point, we see Michael step into the version of Lucian we had grown accustomed to, which proved to be just as entertaining as ever.

Surprisingly though, there were moments where Michael portrayed Lucian as being almost ashamed of his true nature, and that he would willingly give up his birthright to be normal. I don’t know if this aspect of the character was written into the script, but I definitely saw glimpses of an internal struggle within Lucian, and found that it made the character all the more intriguing and relatable to the audience.

Lastly, I did have one noteworthy complaint regarding this film, which was that several times the werewolves and lycans looked horribly rendered. I know the budget was lower than that of “Underworld: Evolution”, but it was higher than the original film, and in both instances I thought the effects used for the wolves (lycan or werewolf) were quite good. Granted, I haven’t seen those movies in a little while, but I do plan to watch them again soon, so perhaps I will change my opinion of them at that point.

Still whatever the cause, whether the budget prohibited better quality output or if time constraints hindered the process, the wolves looked out of place much of the time. To the point where there were a few instances that I thought they were utilizing stop-motion animation rather than computer-generated or practical on-set effects (costumes). Although I truly doubt that stop-motion was implemented, that just illustrates how poorly executed some of these sequences looked to me.

All that being said, “Underworld: Rise of the Lycans” is an entertaining history lesson regarding the war between the vampires and lycans depicted in the “Underworld” films. However, the film clearly assumes that the viewer has some prior knowledge of the goings on within the series, and as such does not devote much time in trying to educate newcomers to the saga.

Therefore, I would have to say that as far as prequels go, aimed solely at fans of the series (which is precisely what it is), the film is very good. But, by definition a prequel would now become the first in a series (despite its later release), so in serving as a jumping-on point for newcomers, the film suffers from lack of context in regards to why we should care about these particular characters and their plight. Plus, the cameo at the end of the film featuring Selene would be pointless and a source of confusion to anyone not familiar with the series’ characters.

So, in my opinion, if you have never seen the “Underworld” films, despite the fact that this is a prequel, I would recommend watching at least the original film first. Then, it’s up to you whether or not to continue in the order the films were released by watching the sequel or go back to this one for your history lesson.

“Underworld: Rise of the Lycans” is rated R for violence, brief language, and brief sexuality.

“Faster” is the story of a man known as Driver (Dwayne Johnson), who upon being released from prison after serving ten years for a bank robbery instantly embarks upon a killing spree. However, these murders though seemingly random at first, are soon revealed to be linked to a tragic event ten years ago when Driver’s older brother was murdered before his very eyes. Now, the only thing standing between Driver and those responsible for his pain is a burnt out cop (Billy Bob Thornton) and his temporary partner (Carla Gugino), and an assassin (Oliver Jackson-Cohen) hired to kill him.

Prior to watching this film I was anxious to see it simply for the fact that Dwayne Johnson is back in his action element. No more of the cutesy, kid-friendly fare that he’d been saddled with by Disney for the last few years. However, when watching the movie unfold, my feelings toward the film were fast becoming muddled by the proceedings.

Sure, Dwayne was kicking butt and taking names in a way harkening back to the hard-hitting action flicks of the eighties and nineties (or even last year’s “The Expendables” for that matter), which was fun for a little while. However, the movie quickly started feeling like the action was the only thing attempting to hold everything together.

The problem was that the story was unbelievably thin, to the point of being nearly non-existent in fact. Just to be clear, this is not to say that I was expecting Oscar caliber storytelling by any means. I just think that there should have been enough going on to at least carry the movie and keep my attention for the 90 minute duration. Apparently, these “lofty” expectations were too high for this film, and I found myself becoming bored after approximately twenty minutes.

To make matters worse, the film’s action scenes were surprisingly repetitive after the first two or three kills. Sure, there were a couple that broke up the monotony, but for the most part Driver dispatches his deadly brand of revenge/justice in the same expedient manner every time. At first this callous and swift approach was startling and unexpected, but soon I was wishing for some variety and more excitement.

With this sort of bare-bones approach combined with the repetitive nature of the action sequences, I should have known the story written by Tony Gayton (“Murder By Numbers”) and Joe Gayton (“Bulletproof”) was going to be weak from the get-go. However, I tried to keep an open mind and just enjoy it for the brainless entertainment that it was, but even that wasn’t enough to save this movie.

Now, as I’ve mentioned already, the main star in this lackluster actioner is Dwayne Johnson. For an actor making his return to his roots (so to speak) this would seem the ideal role; after all, there’s not much for him to do other than be violent.

The problem with this is that Dwayne has proven in previous films that he has acting chops and can bring much more to a character besides hulking mass. To me, while I had hoped this film would cement his return to action hero status, which it did in some respects, it also felt like a step backwards as the role seemed like a walk in the park that could have gone to a lesser talent.

Alongside Dwayne is another actor who was wasted in the role literally and figuratively (his character’s an addict) is Billy Bob Thornton (“Monster’s Ball”). While I’m no fan of Billy Bob’s by any means, I do recognize that he is a very good actor all the same. But his role here is clichéd and boring, and it appears that Billy Bob felt the same way, because I thought he was really phoning in his performance every step of the way.

Lastly, actress Carla Gugino (“Sin City”) and actor Oliver Jackson-Cohen (“Going the Distance”) attempt to bring more to their painfully stereotypical roles of the female detective desperate to prove herself and an assassin that doesn’t enjoy his work, respectively. However, as with their fellow cookie-cutter cut-out characters portrayed by Dwayne and Billy Bob, these two were given characters with nothing more than unoriginality to work with. So, no matter how hard they tried; their efforts were never enough to overcome the drivel on display.

Now, while on the topic of the cast, I have a couple of thoughts as to why they all signed on to this ill-fated project.

I’m sure the appeal to work on what could have been a very successful action film, especially one that would hardly be considered taxing on their dramatic talents, would be enticing for any actor or actress looking for an easy payday. But the least these cast members could have done was make sure the material was worthy of their attention, which it clearly was not.

In closing, as you have no doubt surmised, this movie was an utter disappointment. The only bright point for the film is the fact that Dwayne Johnson was back in his element. “Faster” is filled with missed opportunities, unoriginality, repetition, and above all, boredom.

“Faster” is rated R for violence, language, and brief drug use.

“Salt” chronicles the espionage powder keg that explodes when CIA agent Evelyn Salt (Angelina Jolie) is accused of being a double agent for Russia tasked with assassinating the President of the United States. With her loyalty in question, her career in jeopardy, and the life she’s known being turned on its ear; Salt will do whatever it takes to clear her name, reclaim her life, and prevent an international incident from occurring before time runs out.

Let me start by saying this: leave it to Angelina Jolie to be the first woman to successfully infiltrate this predominantly male headlined sub-genre of film. Not only that, but with her acting prowess, determination and physicality, be able to convincingly portray a character that can stand toe-to-toe with Bond and Bourne. Of course, this shouldn’t be that surprising given that Angelina has proven time and again through various roles that there is not a single genre in which she cannot find success.

As the character of Evelyn Salt, Angelina is truly run through a veritable gauntlet of physical and emotional tests. In one scene she can be scaling the side of a very tall building (a stunt she performed herself) or witnessing a horrible act as she tries to remain stoic, but a subtly quivering lip belies her inner turmoil. Or desperately trying to convince those around her of the truth; no matter what the scene calls for Angelina always delivers to perfection.

I don’t think there are too many other actresses out there, if any, that could have believably pulled off such a demanding role that is rife with intensity, duplicity, drama, and action. Sure several actresses could have handled some of the facets of the character, but all of them? In this I believe Angelina stands alone, and that is why I believe her to be probably the best, and certainly the most versatile, actress of her generation.

An interesting side note for the character is that originally Tom Cruise (“Mission: Impossible”) was attached to the role, but reportedly dropped out to film the romantic action comedy “Knight and Day”. Thus, prompting the role to be rewritten from a male to a female, supposedly with Angelina in mind from then on.

Anyway, alongside Angelina are two very talented actors in the primary supporting roles, Liev Schreiber (“X-Men Origins: Wolverine”) and Chiwetel Ejiofor (“Four Brothers”).

Liev plays a fellow CIA agent of Salt’s named Ted Winter, and is the only person at the agency who seems to believe that she is innocent of the accusations against her. Liev’s character is a mixture of the typical no-nonsense agent, but with a healthy sense of humor and a protective, brotherly relationship with Salt. Aside from those character traits, Liev also imbues the character with charm and an underlying sense that he will do whatever it takes to protect Salt whether she’s innocent or guilty.

All together Liev’s performance makes his character much more memorable than one would expect from such a role. Plus, the early scenes between him and Salt bantering back and forth are enjoyable to watch.

As for Chiwetel Ejiofor, he plays a government operative named Peabody who unlike Winter is not inclined to simply believe in Salt’s innocence, despite her years of service to the red, white, and blue. For the most part, Ejiofor plays the role by the book as the clichéd government stooge that is blind to anything except the evidence on display. Even with this fairly one-dimensional character, Chiwetel still manages to make his scenes pop, thanks entirely to his charismatic disposition.

One more bit of casting I would like to discuss before moving on, and this one in particular struck me as odd when watching this film. Why, oh why did Andre Braugher (“Fantastic 4: Rise of the Silver Surfer”) sign on to the most thankless role of Secretary of Defense? With an actor of his caliber and credibility, one would expect that he signed on for the role due to it being such a good character. However, he’s given nothing to do other than run around in one scene and hand phones to people, all the while saying only a sentence of dialogue.

Seriously, this is a role that should have been handled by some no-name actor or even someone like Cuba Gooding, Jr. who has been relegated to the realm of Direct-to-DVD. Wasting the talent of Andre Braugher on a role such as this is completely mind-boggling and somewhat insulting to his long-lasting career. But, overall this was a minor issue and I digress.

Of course the cast would be nothing without the script written by Kurt Wimmer (“A Perfect Getaway”), who has proven yet again to be a terrific storyteller. Loaded with twists and turns, gripping action set pieces, and engaging drama, the story for “Salt” is entertaining from start to finish.

Understandably with a movie like this one has to be careful in how much is revealed, because the risk of spoiling is incredibly high. So, the only other thing I will say about this film’s story is this: at the end of the movie, I guarantee you will be left begging for more.

Now I would be remiss if I didn’t also mention the other major contributor to this movie’s success, director Phillip Noyce (“Clear and Present Danger”). With a movie so jam-packed with fast-paced, hard-hitting action scenes one would expect the movie to have been directed by someone more oriented with the action genre. Not to say that Phillip Noyce is unfamiliar with action scenes, it’s just his films aren’t generally so heavy in this area. Even so, he directs the pulse-pounding action with as sure a hand as he does during the quieter, more dramatic moments.

Also, Noyce’s excellent directing and pacing of the film ensured that the story was provided plenty of breathing room to unfold naturally; that way it wouldn’t seem as if the story was there to serve the action rather than the other way around. And the use of flashbacks, which can backfire for some films, was perfect for providing character development and context, while breaking up the monotony of linear storytelling. It’s no wonder why Phillip Noyce is heralded as a master of the espionage thriller.

All in all, “Salt” is a thoroughly entertaining movie, filled to the brim with excitement and intrigue. This film and its star, Angelina Jolie, prove that they belong in the pantheon of spy thrillers and hopefully we haven’t seen the last of Evelyn Salt.

“Salt” is rated PG-13 for violence and language.

Then in 2006, he re-emerged as a talented dramatic actor in his excellent portrayal of the late George Reeves in “Hollywoodland”. To which he followed up with his surprisingly brilliant big screen directorial debut with “Gone Baby Gone”. Since that time, Ben has chosen his projects with much more care, and his most recent directing and acting effort is the stellar heist film, “The Town”.

“The Town” is the story of a crew of bank robbers that are as close as brothers and led by the increasingly reluctant Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck). Despite their numerous successful heists, Doug has grown tired of “the life”, and having fallen for a young woman named Claire (Rebecca Hall) he now has a reason to walk away from not only crime, but his “brothers” and the only city he’s ever known. However, the more Doug tries to break away, the harder his best friend Jimmy (Jeremy Renner) pulls to keep him around for the proverbial “one last job”; all the while a seasoned FBI agent (Jon Hamm) is closing in on the crew and time is running out.

With so many heist films having been released over the years it’s undoubtedly become difficult for any writer to craft a story that can be considered fresh within this sub-genre. However, the approach this movie takes by allowing the viewer a fly-on-the-wall perspective for every step of the crime gave it a more original feel. Of course, having a solid script and top-notch acting didn’t hurt either.

The screenplay written by Peter Craig (first-time screenwriter) and the writing duo behind “Gone Baby Gone”, Ben Affleck and Aaron Stockard, is the perfect blend of intensity, drama, action, and even a little bit of romance. Each facet of this film’s story works flawlessly together to create one of the strongest entries into the heist film sub-genre in quite some time.

The story for the entire film was perfectly paced to allow for plenty of character development, along with a natural increase in intensity and/or anxiety prior to the heists. Nothing about the film seemed rushed in order to get to the next job, and the intensity (or anxiety, depending) of each character was shared by the audience throughout the film. Truth be told, drawing an audience in to a movie to such a degree is something that not every film manages to accomplish and to do so is an achievement unto itself.

Guiding the story is director Ben Affleck, who was pulling triple duty on this film serving as co-writer, star, and director. With his directorial work here and in his previous film, “Gone Baby Gone”, Ben is shaping up to become one of the best directors of his time. Some have even gone on to say that he could be the next Clint Eastwood (in terms of directing), and with that statement I would have to agree.

Ben has now shown that he clearly knows how to execute intense dramatic pieces, and even some well orchestrated action sequences as well. Also, his ability to get top-notch performances from his fellow actors is a testament to how respected he is as a director, despite his past as a media lightning rod.

From Ben’s previous film and now to “The Town” one can clearly see his incredible talent as a filmmaker, and I for one look forward to seeing what he directs next.

While on the subject of Ben Affleck, let’s discuss his performance, along with his costars while we’re at it. Leading the ensemble cast, as I’ve already mentioned, is Ben Affleck, and his performance here is one of his best. Actually, it is probably his absolute best so far, narrowly beating out his terrific job in “Hollywoodland”.

As Doug MacRay, Ben displays a decidedly darker edge, necessary to lead a crew of thieves, but also a surprisingly gentle nature that values life above all. Whether it is the lives of his fellow crew members or their victims, Doug will go to great lengths to plan his heists with every life taken into account.

On the opposite side of that coin is Jeremy Renner’s character and Doug’s best friend, Jimmy. Jeremy who is no stranger to an excellent performance (see him in “The Hurt Locker” for further evidence) truly earned his Academy Award nomination with his fiercely malevolent portrayal. In this role, Jeremy is almost unrecognizable from his Boston accent to his physical appearance to his downright evil nature, this character is as much of a departure from his role in the aforementioned as one can possibly get, and he excels in it at every turn.

In the other primary supporting roles we find even more incredible performances, including one I found to be very surprising. First off, is actor Jon Hamm who has found himself with an incredible surge in his career with a terrific performance in this film coupled with his continued success on AMC’s “Mad Men”. I find myself perplexed by the fact that Jon hasn’t been more prominent in feature films prior to this one, a problem that I believe will likely be remedied from now on.

As the lead FBI agent tracking Doug and his crew, Jon exudes authority and strength every step of the way, and an intensity that reveals a man consumed by his work. Jon had moments in the film where he could have played the role more over-the-top and borderline maniacal in his quest for justice, but Jon played everything believably and never once made a moment feel forced.

Serving as Ben’s love interest is actress Rebecca Hall (“Frost/Nixon”) who is not the most recognizable of actresses out there, but soon could be with performances like this one. Her performance was incredibly raw in its emotional punch, yet with an inner strength that belied her character’s troubled life.

As the most surprising cast member in terms of performance is actress Blake Lively (TV’s “Gossip Girl”) as Doug’s off-and-on “friend with benefits”. Blake’s performance as a drug addicted, possibly abused, single mother is unexpectedly profound given that I always felt she seemed like just another pretty face that couldn’t act for anything. I now stand corrected, and if her future performances carry as much weight as this one then she will definitely be one to watch.

Lastly, are two always amazing and top-notch character actors that only appear for a short time in this film, Chris Cooper (“The Bourne Identity”) and Pete Postlethwaite (“Inception”). Despite their lack of screen time, both actors make the absolute most of there scenes and deliver terrific performances as well. Typically when actors of their caliber are placed in such small roles, I would have felt disappointed that their talents were used for so little. However, in this film, I think their brief appearances were appropriately limited and served the movie perfectly.

Sadly, the ever-reliable Pete Postlethwaite passed away a month or so ago, but at least he got to appear in two of the best films of 2010, “Inception” and of course, “The Town”. He was never the most well-known of actors, at least not by name, but whenever you would see him in a movie you would always recognize him and know that his would be a performance to watch.

In the end, boasting incredible performances from the entire cast and a terrific story, “The Town” is a taut, intense heist thriller that is expertly handled from start to finish courtesy of director, co-writer, and star Ben Affleck. This movie was essentially the shot of adrenaline that was needed to reinvigorate this increasingly generic sub-genre of cinema.

“The Town” is rated R for violence, language, drug references, and sexuality.