Fast Five (2011) and Thor (2011)

The last two films I've went to see are Fast Five (Justin Lin, 2011) and Thor (Kenneth Branagh, 2011). And while these two films couldn't be any more diametrically opposed stylistically and thematically, they are rather similar when it comes to examining them as postmodern pieces of work. Then I want to look at the quality of the films on a stand alone basis.
There are many traits to postmodern films. Films from this period tend to be high concept films, meaning they are easily pitched in a 25 word blitz. These films tend to be associated with other media such as television or radio. They often are remakes of previous films or sequels to previous films. They tend to have a built in audience or are easily marketed due to an existing tie in to some form of merchandise. Special effects and CGI are often more important than story. Films tend to use stars to sell tickets. And the most sought after of postmodern traits? The first week opening box office take. Capture that holy Grail and you almost ensure yourself future filmmaking business!
Looking at both of these films one can immediately see how they fit most if not all of these postmodern traits. Both were easily pitched to their respective studios. Fast Five's name alone tells you it is the fifth in a franchise. Thor is part of a bigger franchise launch involving other comic books. Thor also comes straight from another media, a vastly popular comic book. Fast Five has a bevy of stars in it, although no true A-list talent. Thor makes tremendous use of s/fx and CGI and while Fast Five doesn't, it does incorporate use of soundtrack as well as fast paced editing style in place of spectacular effects. And the opening weekend for both? Remarkable business!
So I've established that both are remarkable works of postmodern film. Yet for me, Fast Five works incredibly and Thor fails miserably. Here's why;
Both films are formulaic. The franchise for Fast Five has done a remarkable thing and captured an audience with a formula that works and leaves its audience craving more. That is movie magic! The narrative for the film isn't that inventive or innovative although they did give the story more meat for it's skeleton than previous attempts. But the creators of the film know what works. Toss in some fast cars, bumping soundtrack, scantily clad women and bring back previous version stars and voila! Instant hit. So this formula works. Yet with Thor, also formulaic, this plan backfires. Maybe it's cause the comic book genre is being crammed down our throats at every turn, or maybe it's cause they allow fans to dictate so much of what goes into a narrative (it's my current understanding that with Thor they were very faithful to the comic book, which if you haven't read would leave you wondering what the hell is going on) and so narrative content is dictated by pleasing the "true fans". But the formula used in Thor is tired, boring and left me wishing I had picked something else to go see.
Next, dealing with the films as franchises. I have two points here. First, can the films stand alone within the film world? Next, do the films properly whet your appetite for more? The longest running film franchise ever, during it's current reboot has left it's fan doing both and rather remarkably. When Daniel Craig took over as Bond and they did their best to make the Bond series more gritty, realistic and quite rather like the successful Bourne trilogy they answered both of the questions I previously asked. So, do Fast Five and Thor? Fast Five does so brilliantly again. As a stand alone film, one can walk into the local multiplex having never heard of The F and F franchise and completely enjoy Fast Five. By itself the film is solidly entertaining and any lingering narrative points from other films is easily explained and doesn't make you, as an audience member pause. And the lead in to the next installment is utterly captivating. Those fans that have seen the previous films are left wondering what the hell is Letty (Michelle Rodriguez) doing alive and also knowing that the next film will also have Eva Mendes! That's the way you leave the audience wanting more! Thor fails this miserably though maybe through no fault of the film itself. As a stand alone the film basically works since it takes so much time explaining the who everyone is and why they are acting the way they are but had they handed out a primer to the audience as they were being seated so much more would have made sense. And handing out a primer before a movie starts is not a good thing. As for the tie in to the next film, I understand that Marvel/Paramount is setting up future franchises but it has become utterly annoying. They have used the same basic tie in now with Iron Man and Thor. At this point, there is no way I will go see Captain America or The Avengers.
Both of these films also use current technology in helping to sell the films and again with Fast Five it worked and Thor, not so much. I saw Fast Five in IMAX and the notable IMAX shots were really well done, though I didn't understand repeating them at different angles and different times of the day. Honestly had they come up over the big statue of Jesus in Rio once more I might have gotten pissed. As for Thor, which I saw in 3D, it doesn't say much for the use of technology when I took off the glasses about 45 minutes into the film because a) they bothered me b) the film never once required me to use the glasses again after that and c)it's already a tired method to milk more money from the audience.
Both films do make slight social commentary. Fast Five shows what I believe to be a rising urban movement here in America. For decades our country has sprawled out further and further into the suburbs and I think that over the next several decades their will be a retraction of sorts as people return to cities. Fast Five showed us urban areas jammed packed in it's shots of Rio and while America most likely won't get that bad, urbanization will climb. More importantly to Fast Five is the role the anti-hero plays. The films narrative allows the criminals to escape justice over and over, the cops are made out to be frustrated and impotent. This is important because our society has become one in which the easy route is cherished and lauded and the fast and easy lifestyle is revered. Film is mimicking life and life reflects film. Thor places itself in an ongoing context of escapism. Our films are inundated now with fantasy and it allows audience to escape their lives. Watch for more rampant escapism in films forthcoming due to the nature of urbanization and the rise of antiheroism. To me it's fascinating that these two opposing films can have such a tie to each other, but that is another blog in itself.
Ultimately these films are just popcorn flicks, nothing more. They do reflect us as a society though and I feel it is important to note just how they reflect who and what we are and what we are becoming.