Swiss Army Man - Film Review

Title: Swiss Army Man

Year: 2016

Director: Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert

Writers: Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert

Cast: Paul Dano, Daniel Radcliffe and Mary Elizabeth Winstead

We're gonna die. That's a thought. Everybody dies. I'm sorry if this makes me weird or you don't understand, but I wish I was dead again. - Manny

Most films are formulaic, not only in the way they are told, but in the way they are filmed. Whenever a film comes along that challenges that, I take my time to check it out. I think it is important to talk about films with something to say. Thus, there is Swiss Army Man. The film tells the story of Hank (Paul Dano), a man stranded in a deserted island who, while trying to commit suicide, finds a corpse on the shore who he eventually calls Manny (Daniel Radcliffe). What happens next, is one of the strangest trips a film has taken me to this year.

One part fun buddy movie, two parts introspective analysis of self-worth, loneliness and depression and ten parts what-in-the-actual-fuck crazy, the film ha a lot more to say than the crass, ridiculous comedy it pretends to be. Besides all the fart and dick jokes, which this film has a plethora of, the film is strangely life-affirming and sweet in the way it portrays its characters. Hank is a man with some serious emotional issues, and while he seems controlling and weird, at first, you end up rooting for them both by the end of the film.

I have to give a lot of credit to directors Dan Kwan and Daniel Scheinert for taking a chance on a script that is completely over the top and complex and layered. The two of them had just done shorts and television before getting their directorial debut with this film. The film is not only visual, but it also goes deep with its philosophy. The movie makes you question the reality in the film, you never really know what is going on, except that a suicidal man is trying to convince a corpse that life is worth living. Which, when you think about it, is very clever.

Credit also goes to Daniel Radcliffe and Paul Dano, especially Radcliffe. After making Harry Potter, he could have just phoned it in, but he has decided to make a bunch indie films he is passionate about. Radcliffe is more alive, as a dead person, than with most of what other actors with his money and fame have been doing for a while.

Even the music for this film was great and of a high quality.

Finally, this is not a film for everyone. I know some people will just not like it because it is crass and disgusting. But, if you can see further than that, you will probably appreciate what is a wholly original story that is deceptively smart with a good team behind it that deserves your support. if you are tired of sequelitis and remakeatitis, then you should go and check out Swiss Army Man. If nothing else, I'm sure you will not see anything else like it this year.

I will give this film 8 farting corpses out of 10. 

Man of Steel - The Superman movie we've all been waiting for?

The hype. Oh, the hype. I think there was too much. For a character with a track record like Superman, I have no clue how people expected so much from this movie. And that's exactly what happened. As we left the theater, nobody seemed to love Man of Steel. They liked it, but this crowd expected to be blown away. They were expecting the perfect superhero movie, and unfortunately this isn't it.

The fact that Christopher Nolan's name is somewhere in the credits made people's expectations skyrocket. And now that the Batman series is "done" DC needs to figure out where they go from here. I will say this though, if this movie was trying to be the first step into a Justice League movie, I didn't spot it. But enough banter, lets get to the actual movie.. (slight spoilers ahead)

The movie opens on Krypton where Jor-El is trying to convince the kryptonian leaders that the planet has no hope. General Zod walks in and attempts a coup, which leads to our first action scenes. The problem is that this is an obvious alien world, with alien terms for things, and absolutely nothing is explained to us. They reference something called 'the codex' and how it's the key to their salvation. Of course, we need to take this for certain even though we have no idea what this thing is... You know, it's totally alien to us. But no one explains anything here, so we just have to take their word that this codex thing is important.

For the most part the portion of the movie that takes place on Krypton is pretty, but quite forgettable. Obvious exposition, it's the type of exposition that gets regurgitated over and over again. Why do we need to hear Jor-El's consciousness explain to Clark step by step what happened when we just saw it happen ten minutes before? It feels like significant chunks of movie time are wasted recapping what happened earlier on. The plot isn't elaborate enough to merit this much explanation.

Being an "origin story" I'm surprised by how well the childhood/growth was handled. Through flashbacks they successfully stray away from having the first half of the movie being superkid doing mundane miracles. Unfortunately they flash back a bit too often, and it really breaks the tension at moments where you just want to see what happens next. Just when a huge confrontation is about to happen we hop back to a touching father/son moment that comes off cheesy because you're more interested in what's happening in the present.

And about those father/son moments... There are way too many of them. I get that you've got Crowe and Costner as the father figures and each of them deserves proper screen time, but it really starts weighing the movie down at a certain point. Due to all the flashing back, there's a real lack of action here. He's not in the costume enough. He's not fighting enough. There's just way too much exposition.

Zod who?

The action scenes are brilliant though. While the camera gets a bit shaky for my taste, everything looks awesome. Destruction has rarely looked this impressive. The breakthrough character in these scenes is definitely Faora-Ul who kicks all sorts of ass. Seeing her zip around at super speed annihilating just about everyone and everything in sight is one of the coolest visuals I've seen in a while.

The final confrontation between Zod and Superman is as massive a battle as you'll ever see on the big screen. A fight scene that really delivers. The type of fight scene that makes me hopeful for a decent DBZ movie at some point. And yes, I did have to reference Goku in this article at leas once.

Performance wise there isn't really anything for me to gripe about. Henry Cavill wore the cape well; charming yet intimidating, it works. Kevin Costner may seem overly cheesy at times, but he's by no means unbearable. Zod was a fun villain for a first movie, and Michael Shannon did a good job being the villain who believes he's doing the right thing. Lois Lane wasn't as tough as she should have been, but they got the nosy intrepid reporter part right; and I love Amy Adams. But, as I said earlier, the breakout star of here is without a doubt Antje Traue as Faora-Ul; a real badass second villain was the spark those initial action scenes needed.

All in all, it's an enjoyable movie. It's just one of those movies where you just want to fast forward to the fight scenes, and unfortunately there aren't that many... The initial action sequence on Krypton is pretty, but it's really just filler. I've only seen it once, and I really get the feeling that my complaints would only intensify on a second viewing. While definitely better than Superman Returns and much more enjoyable than Smallville there is still plenty of room for improvement.


7/10

An Okay Day To Die Hard...

"I'm getting too old for this..."

Bruce Willis gets bored, you know? So he made another Die Hard movie. This time we see John McClane venture to Moscow (comedy gold already, right?) to find his son Jack, played by Spartacus' Jai Courtney, whom he hasn't heard from in years.

Assuming the worst (not kidding, the worst) of his son, good 'ol John wastes no time in finding trouble. This leads to the obligatory car chase, explosion scene, and hostage situation.

The problems start once you realize that the movie only really has two characters. Nobody else really needs a name. You've got John, and Jack. Everyone else is generic and kinda pointless. The movie centers around the banter between father and son, their attempts at comedy get a chuckle out of you every once in a while, but it often falls flat. John's one liners are also uninspired at best. His "I'm supposed to be on vacation" lines happen a couple of times too many, akin to Lethal Weapon's "I'm getting to old for this shit". Even the mandatory Yippee Ki-Yay moment feels phoned in.

Story wise, it isn't anything special. Bad attempts at plot twists don't really work because you only care about the two main characters, and even when it gets the chance to do something interesting the McClanes always seem to figure it all out surprisingly quickly, leading to more action instead of interesting storytelling. And honestly, that might not be a bad thing.

The action scenes are another story. Some of these segments are legitimately jaw dropping. The chase scene comes to mind, brutally over the top and quite entertaining. The stunt work is very well done, and the slow motion is used sparingly and it really works surprisingly well.

Ultimately a lack of memorable characters leads to nothing special. This is easily the weakest of the Die Hard films. That doesn't mean it's bad, just not good. There's no Hans Gruber to give you memorable bad guy lines, there's nothing to challenge running barefoot on broken glass. It just falls flat.

This probably won't be the last Die Hard. The way Hollywood works these days this will keep going. And of course, we'll watch them... We can only hope that they can once again find their charm and they stop with the ridiculous title puns.

Fine... The title puns can stay.

A Good Day To Die Hard... Who comes up with this shit?!


5.5/10

A review that breaks rules #1 and #2 - Fight Club

WARNING: Do not hold up to open flame.

Ah Fight Club, one of those movies that seemed to be the perfect storm of awesome when it arrived. These days I group it in there with Pulp Fiction as one of the cliche favorite guy movies, and it has become one of those movies you just have to see.

I honestly hadn't seen the movie in years, and I was recently told that it didn't hold up as well as I remembered (by Fefi), a thought that I refused to even consider. So I picked it up at Costco and made a night of it. And I must say, not only does it hold up, but it might be even more relevant now than it was in 99.

It might sound odd, but in some ways Brad Pitt is like Jack Nicholson. Just stop yelling for a second and I'll tell you why... Every time each of them plays a sociopath or a crazy person it really just makes a movie a million times better. Siously, think about it. If  Fight Club was made in the 70's Nicholson would totally play Tyler Durden. But this is a comparison for a whole other post.

I wasn't kidding earlier when I called Fight Club a perfect storm. The story, the music, the acting, the cast. It all just fits.

Without spoiling the story (this might be tricky), Fight Club is without a doubt one of the biggest and most elaborate mindfucks I've seen in a movie. The type of mindfuck that just totally changes your view on the plot altogether when you see it again. And, to me, that's what makes this movie so great. You can re-watch it and find a new point in the story that just makes you think about how fucked up what you're watching actually is. If you haven't seen the movie, this paragraph makes no sense at all, but it just needs to be said.

The cast is as close to flawless as you're going to get. These roles feel like they were made for these people. Even the smaller parts are just perfectly cast. Meat Loaf as Bob immediately comes to mind as one of the most hilarious yet sad things I think I've ever seen. And seeing it after a couple of years, it's quite shocking how many people are actually in there; I mean, I had an honest "Holy crap, it's Jared Leto" moment.

The main character, played by Ed Norton, awkwardly enough has no name. Seriously. And this is done brilliantly to the point where I had to go all the way to IMDB just to check if his name was ever mentioned. It's not like in other films, where main characters remain nameless and that's 'their thing', in this case it just adds to the character; when he starts out he is the most unimportant man in the universe. And without giving much away, he does acquire a name (not his), and it just goes along with his transformation in the story, which is just really well done.

I mean, look at this sack of shit. He doesn't deserve a name.

His counter part (hint hint) is Tyler Durden, the pinnacle of bad-assery, of course played by Brad Pitt. Durden seems to take it upon himself to fix Norton, and of course hijinks ensue (to say the least). And as cool as Tyler Durden seems, it doesn't take a genius to see that something is off about him. Their friendship starts innocently enough, but it escalates rather quickly when they start beating the shit and piss out of each other.

It takes massive balls to wear shit like this.

The plot starts getting seriously twisted when a love triangle ensues between our two main characters and Marla, played by the always spectacular Helena Bonham Carter. Marla is without a doubt the most damaged woman in existence, and it feels weird because I'm just oddly attracted to her. This girl has issues that would drive most people insane, and that fact is made abundantly clear many times during the story. But what makes it interesting is that as fucked up as she is, it is made even more obvious that Norton's character is truly the fucked up one in their relationship. They play off each other brilliantly, and it just builds interesting characters.

She's so fucked up. I love her.

On top of all that, we have the soundtrack, which just helps suck the viewer into this experience. The Dust Brothers put together a score that just blends perfectly with the images. The drum loops at time are disorienting, but I think that's the idea. You need to be disoriented to go through what Norton goes through, and it's done in a way where you don't even notice it's happening until it's too late. It's rare to see music compliment an image this well, instead of being two stand alone expressions.

The only bad thing I can say about this movie is that the twist isn't all that original. It's been done. But it's not about the twist. It's about the message. And when you look at the bare bones of the message, it's quite cheesy. But since it's delivered in such an awesome way, you just end up walking away from this movie a different person. In this day and age, this movie just hits deep with most people. We all have our issues, and most people don't handle them properly.

So, why is Fight Club so awesome? It's a lot of things. But most of all, it has style. This is one of those movies that knows how awesome it is and it dares you not to like it. It's become quite the cult classic, and rightfully so. It carries a powerful message, and it delivers it without rubbing your face in shit. And I like that.

9/10

Marvel meets Mad Men: A First Class Review

When I first heard that X-Men: First Class was being made I was more than a bit skeptical. After Origins: Wolverine and Last Stand to say I was a bit down on X-Men movies would be like saying Rebecca Black got a lukewarm reaction.

People started getting riled up about this when production pictures started hitting the net. But that's just stupid. Every superhero movie these days is going to look great in pictures, with the massive budgets thrown into these movies making them look pretty is the least they could do.

It wasn't until I saw the first trailer that I took notice to how unique the visual style of the movie was. Mainly set in 1962 the movie uses the 60's style to some extent, yet at the same time it ups the grittiness of it all by not playing up the era to an Austin Powers type level.

The movie's mood carries itself rather seriously. Kind of like the first X-Men movie, just not as dark. Ironically enough the best way to look at this movie is by comparing it to the AMC show Mad Men, which also stars January Jones (shwing) who plays Emma Frost.

I mostly agree with the cast selections, especially the adult roles. James McAvoy does a good job with Prof. X, but it's obvious that the show stealers are Michael Fassbender as Magneto and Kevin Bacon as Sebastian Shaw. That's right, finally a good outing for X-Men villains. I'm not saying Ian McKellen didn't do a good job in the first three movies, I just think the Magneto character was misused in those movies. In FC, he shows why he is considered one of the most bad ass villains in comic book history.

-Insert MCR meme joke here-

Kevin Bacon does a great job as one of the great, yet underrated villains in the Marvel universe. I can honestly say that every time that Shaw is on screen he really does command a certain amount of fear/respect. The sharp contrast between mutants just learning to control their powers and Shaw, who constantly shocks them with his abilities is very well used to build him up as a villain.

Plus, he does it with style.

 The other characters seem to fall under these three, and with good reason. January Jones, while fun to look at, plays the exact same character as she does in Mad Men. She plays the hot bitchy blonde pretty well.

I also thought that Jennifer Laurence was slightly underutilized as Mystique. She seemed rather prominent at the beginning, just to slowly fade into the background bit by bit. I did like how they switched up her history to pair her up with Xavier. Most die hards might be angry at the switch up, but I believe that Mystique's history is ambiguous enough to make the change believable.

There are other slight changes to the comic book canon. But they are barely noticeable. Yeah, they switch up Havoc and Cyclops' ages, making Havoc older. But really, who cares? It's just a minor detail.

That leads me to one of my slight problems with it. Some of the cast looks way too young. And this is me nitpicking. But if I was in Charles Xavier's shoes, and I was told to assemble a team of mutants to fight a real bunch of badasses. I sure as hell wouldn't chose a bunch of kids like he did. Banshee and Havok looked like fifteen year olds, and they were going up against the likes of Azazel, who looked totally awesome and kicked all sorts of ass.

"I have to fight him?! But I'm only twelve!"

The movie also feels like Mad Men because it ties in directly into a historical event, something that Mad Men has done repeatedly during it's run. But unlike Mad Men, our characters aren't just innocent bystanders to history, they're there as it happens, turning the Cuban Missile Crisis into somewhat of a conspiracy mid movie.

The one thing that really pissed me off about the movie is a certain cameo which I will not spoil for those who haven't seen it yet. It was just unnecessary, which I guess is what makes it a cameo... But it just pissed me off nonetheless.

It is a very new direction for X-Men movies, a fun new direction. First Class is visually appealing and oddly enough, historically intriguing. As rumors for a sequel start to stir I can only say that it is a rare occasion when a movie franchise has two seemingly limitless pools of material from which to draw ideas from. In this case they have both, historical events from the sixties to the present, and the entire X-Men universe. The possibilities are endless, and from what we've seen already, they could be spectacular.

8/10

Requested Reviews: Bronson

Bronson is a 2009 film based on and around important events in Michael Gordon Peterson, aka Charles Bronson's life. Bronson, constantly refereed to as the "most violent prisoner in Britain", is played by Tom Hardy who is virtually unrecognizable, he truly did throw himself into this role and visibly transformed himself into this character.

I'll be totally honest, I had no idea who Charles Bronson was before watching this. But, like any half decent bullshitter, I went to Wikipedia to pad out this review. At first glance all I can say is that Charlie Bronson is one of the most interesting stories I've ever seen. This man is 58 years old today- yes, he's alive- and he's spent over thirty years of his life in prison, most of that time in solitary confinement. But the interesting part of this man's life is that as far as I've seen, and I've been reading for a while now, he's in jail mostly for being a dick.

Seriously, I've been researching for hours, and Charlie Bronson has never killed anyone. Sure, he's beaten the living piss out of a lot of people, kidnapped a couple of guards, but never really committed that one huge offense that defines a criminal's career. But enough about real life stuff, lets get to the movie.

I must say, for my first requested review, this sure was a nice surprise. It really is a great movie, mostly because it's almost a one man show, fuck it, it is a one man show. Hardy really does make this character watchable. He really appeals to that dark humor in all of us (or maybe just in me) and makes a truly monstrous character quite funny with simple expressions, only to switch it on you seconds later and make him equally as terrifying with the same ease of expression.

The movie's mood follows Bronson's character. Since he's almost always on screen the film just feels unpredictable. And it fits. You expect Bronson to snap on anyone and/or everyone at any moment, and it really does create a special tension that makes the movie feel like something different.

Then we have the music, which was a real highlight for me. It almost feels like it's coming from Bronson's mind itself. Again, the silly synth music goes along with some pretty gruesome scenes, and it just helps the viewer see how little Bronson really cares about what he's doing, almost like he's playing around.

Interesting enough, the movie itself doesn't seem to go in a particular direction. It almost seems to pride itself on getting the viewer to position himself against, or for Bronson. I find this odd, because usually in a biopic like this one you can easily tell if the movie is in favor or against the character being described. This just feels like Bronson being Bronson, and it feels real enough that you can't imagine the person being any other way. It might be a bit more outlandish but the closest thing to a portrayal like this, to me, might be Val Kilmer's portrayal of Jim Morrison in the sense where at the end of the movie it's just hard to tell the two character's apart simply because the actor becomes how you imagine the person.

All in all, it really is a great movie. And if you're doubting that Tom Hardy can pull off a villain role in a Christopher Nolan directed Batman film, you should really watch this movie. It will reassure you, and actually get you pumped for his portrayal of Bane. I actually see him as that character now more than ever.

8.5/10

Spotlight: Cannes Film Festival 2011

It’s that time of the year again when the best of the best of foreign cinema battle it out in order to be crowned with the Palme D’Or. The Cannes Film Festival is one if not the most prestigious of any festivals (and there are many) in the world. So for this feature I decided to put a spotlight on the movies that are In Competition during this years edition of the festival. It began on the 11th of May and will be done on the 22nd but even though the results will be out before I finish with all the films, I don’t care. Most of these movies are must sees for anyone who likes cinema that is challenging and interesting. If you don’t like subtitles, this is not for you. Let’s get on with it then!

The first movie I will spotlight is Takashi Miike’s Ichimei (or Hara-Kiri: Death of a Samurai).



Ichimei is Takeshi Miike’s remake of the samurai classic of the 60s, Masaki Kobayashi’s Hara-Kiri. The tale tells of a samurai looking to commit ritual murder (or hara-kiri) in the house of a local feudal lord. Once there, he is told the story of another samurai who had sought to die an honorable death as well and his sadistic fate. It turns out that this other samurai wasn’t just another samurai, which drives our main character to seek revenge against the feudal lord.



The reason I’m excited about this remake is that it is Takeshi Miike finally getting some recognition for his fantastic, oft times disturbing, and push-the-boundaries direction style. Miike has been incredibly prolific having directed 14 movies in the last 5 years. He has also directed some of the most disturbing movies I’ve ever seen… Visitor Q and Ichi the Killer. Although he has moved away from the low budget ultra violent stuff that gave him a cult following, he has become a more mature and interesting director as the years pass. Anyways, this is probably the first movie that caught my eye out of all the ones in competition. We’ll see what’s next and soon we’ll see who wins the Palme D’Or.

Matt Lucas scares the hell outta me... 'Bridesmaids' Review

Kristen Wiig is not only funny, but pretty darn hot if you ask me. She plays Annie, a down on her luck woman who just lost her bakery, has some creepy ass roommates (played by the ever disturbing Matt Lucas and the now forever disturbing Rebel Wilson) and sleeps around with a guy that is a total douchehog (Jon Hamm from Madmen fame in full on dick mode). Annie finds out that her best friend Lillian (Maya Rudolph) is getting married and has become her maid of honor. Of course, everything goes wrong for Annie and that is where hilarity ensues. I don't want to give too much away so I'll just tell you what I thought.

I didn't know much about the movie before going to see it. I had no idea Wiig (and Annie Mumolo) wrote it herself and that they wanted to take that Superbad and The Hangover style and translate it so that women could relate. Wiig is a witty writer, and I was quite impressed with the way I felt towards the characters. I think the characters and the witty dialogue were what made this movie a hilarious comedy in a year with so many sub-par comedy movies.

I also have to applaud the effort of making this movie into the female version of the movies I mention above. In a genre that has been male oriented forever, they managed to take the things that made those two movies above great and made it their own. Let me make this clear, this is not a subtle romantic comedy. If you go to the movies expecting that, you will be sorely disappointed. This is not the Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. You see women doing the visual gags that we always see guys doing (throwing up and shitting in all the wrong places). The movie has its gross parts, that's for sure. This is not the Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants.

The characters are what really endeared me to the film. There's the bride who is trapped between two worlds, the best friend who is broke and on the dumps, the hot and rich socialite, the MILF, the cute prude and the crass and slightly off her rocker fat girl. All of them play off of each other very well.

I was so pleasantly surprised by the movie that I went to check out what other stuff the director had done in his career and I was glad that I didn't know much about the movie because the last thing Paul Feig had done was Unaccompanied Minors, which quite frankly stunk.

The one thing that I was afraid of during the movie was the romance between Wiig's Annie and Chris O'Dowd's Rhodes. It seemed a little bit too forced at first, but then after they got a little bit more time together on screen, it sort of all worked. Give it a shot. If you don't find Annie incredibly endearing then I don't know what I could say to convince you.

Matt Lucas: "Hi, roomie!"
You: "AAAAAHHHHHH"

Before I forget, I have to give props to Judd Apatow. He has consistently produced some of the best comedy movies of the last decade. The guy just has the nose for what people like in comedy movies.

In closing, this movie is hilarious and people should go out and watch it as much as they watched The Hangover. Forget that its all girls. This movie is the real deal. You won't be disappointed.

8 out of 10

4 things that could have made Thor better.

Now I know what you're saying... "It was a good movie!" And I agree. I quite enjoyed it. But as a fan, there's always that one little thing, that wasted opportunity that just ticked me off (notice I didn't say 'piss me off' because, again, I liked the movie).

So, with that said...
Let the nitpicking begin!


1- We needed more of:
Yes, there were couple of characters that needed more screen time, whether it be because they needed more of a build, or simply because they were just screen stealers.

The prime example here is obviously Loki. I'm not complaining about what he did, or how he was portrayed. We just needed more of him. Maybe an extra visit to Thor on Earth or something, just to drive the "I'm a dick" point home. This becomes an even bigger issue when you think that Loki is the rumored villain for the upcoming Avengers flick.

Then we have the case of Heimdall, who really just steals every scene he's in. A great blend of writing and performance (and an awesome giant fucking sword) kept you hoping he'd just show up again just for a second.

Honorable mention: That asian guy with the raspy voice. He was just fun to watch. And he sounded funny.

2- We needed less of:
Natalie Portman. That's right, the Jane Foster character is totally forgettable. This can be blamed on the Hollywood-ness of it all. To these people, the romance needs to be there almost as bad as the shirtless scene. In all honesty, all the character did was make googly eyes at Thor the whole movie. I would have much preferred to see more of Kat Dennings, at least she had some humor to her.

3- A better post-credits thingy:
I might be stingy with that one, just to keep it spoiler-less.
Marvel movies in recent years have become famous for making people sit through the credits. But on this occasion I was slightly disappointed. Not that it was bad. But it just wasn't up to the standards that recent Marvel flicks have set. Iron Man still sticks out as the best post-credits scene, and as much as a tie-in as this must be to the Avengers plot, this is still the weakest.

4- It needed one more song...
And here is where I get to rage... Because even if it was during the end credits, we got to hear Black Sabbath's Iron Man during Iron Man... And it was awesome. Everyone in the theater was rocking out as the credits started. It was just a great way to close off a great movie. I would have even thrown it in when he was wearing the suit for the first time, just for the hell of it.

Now we fast forward to Thor, and I'm thinking to myself... "What awesome song are we going to get to pump us up in the movie?" I said it jokingly, because I knew what I wanted. It had to be there, there's no way it isn't.

Halfway through it we get Walk by the Foo Fighters. And I will admit, it brought a smile to my face. You all know I love that band. But that's not what I was waiting for. I expected it during the end credits. And then, they gave me Walk again.

Now, I ask you, my readers... If Iron Man had Iron Man... Shouldn't Thor have God Of Thunder by Kiss?! Just listen to it...

We would have been pumped! I feel Marvel has done me an injustice. I might even say that I wrote this whole article just to get to that point. Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley should feel robbed of their birthright.

Fine, I might be pushing it a bit (just a bit!). But it really would have been great. Maybe in the sequel.

One last thing... *pats self on back for not making one single Asgard joke*. Ok, I'm good.