So I finally went to see THE DARK KNIGHT Friday evening, thus becoming the official last person on Earth to do so, I think. There have been about eleventy million reviews of it both in "legitimate" media as well as all over the comics blogosphere, most of which dissecting this film far better than I ever could, and reaching conclusions/drawing parallels that would have escaped me had I not read them beforehand.

So don't expect startling insights from me, that's all I'm saying. This is pretty much going to be a ramble, no Roger Ebert I.

Disclaimer aside, yeah- I had read much both positive and negative about this film, and it's been described as the best comic-book inspired film ever, as well as a completely bungled and ineffective sequel. Being aware of the consensus so far, and yes, I read spoilers, which did not spoil me all that much actually because I've been reading comics for a hundred goddamn years- I don't really agree with either stance; my reaction, typically, is in the middle somewhere. As I watched, I got caught up, and the film worked an effective disbelief suspension spell on me...so I guess that counts as a positive. I wasn't especially fired up for to see it, since frankly Batman Begins didn't exactly knock my socks off either. It had its strengths, and some good performances from its stellar cast (with one obvious exception), but it was big and ponderous and glum, and its jerry-rigged plot simply screamed out loud (in Ahnold voice) I AM A SERIOUS FILM! TAKE ME SERIOUSLY! I AM NOT LIKE BATMAN UND ROBIN! This is something that Dark Knight is guilty of as well, in spades. I don't want to see Bat-credit cards and Poison Ivy dancing in a pink gorilla suit, or corny jokes, but this fugging movie was oppressive. I didn't even care for the preview pics I saw; Batman was once again in that flat black Kevlar- looking almost like Dark Knight Iron Man. The Joker makeup was too radical; didn't care for the way it made Ledger look like a cadaver, plus the scars were (I thought) an unnecessary touch. Didn't help that every time I see scars like that on a fictional character, I think of a Sergio Aragones Mad or Plop! cartoon in which Tarzan jumps off a cliff into a river with a knife in his mouth, and emerges with his knife wedged halfway up his head next to his ears. Finding out that Two-Face was going to be shoehorned in there as well seemed to be creating a Spider-Man 3-style smorgasbord of super-villains. But as I said, most of my fears proved to be, if not ungrounded, at least not as bad as I had feared.

Yes, Ledger, who- appropriately enough, and contrary to the conventional wisdom that playing such an unhinged character must have scarred him mentally or something- plays the Joker with relish, using the cadaverous clown makeup to its full advantage, is stellar. He really should get an Oscar nom, and I'll be surprised if he doesn't. It would be a career-making performance, if only...well, you know. Based on what I'd seen from him in the past in films like Brothers Grimm and Knight's Tale, he was a good-not-great actor, likable enough but not especially memorable. He certainly seized the day this time, though. That scene with the Joker and Harvey Dent in the hospital towards the end was a bravura scene, one of several during the course of the film. Of course, that is in large part because the Joker was by far the most noticeable thing in the film. Aaron Eckhart (who impressed me a lot in Thank You For Smoking) was just as good in his role as Ledger, but it wasn't necessary for him to be as flamboyant until the end. Everybody else underplays- Christian Bale as the second banana whose name just happens to be in the title- or does it? Michael Caine, (especially) Gary Oldman, who can chew scenery with the best of them but remains curiously muted as James Gordon, Maggie Gyllenhal, who is less attractive than Katie Holmes but far more correct for the role than her miscast predecessor.

And yes, Bale's "Batman voice" is ludicrous. I think they should work on that in the sequel.

The story itself suffered from the compulsion to make each and every scene bigger better louder faster NOW, as so often is the case with today's modern summer blockbuster film. Fortunately, some thought seemed to go into many aspects of the story, not just how the Joker works, but the setpieces like the aforementioned hospital scene and its aftermath, and the haphazardly shot but no less exciting capture of the Joker. To its detriment, it piled on the hopelessness a bit too generously- not only could Batman not best the Joker except in abstract ways, the nonstop parade of misery and tension-filled situations such as the ferry boat scene towards the end just got oppressive. I know they were trying to be all down to earth and serious and shit, but whatever happened to adventure? The Pyrrhic victory Batman achieves at the end, while it certainly doesn't hamper the character, is very unsatisfying for the viewer. I know, I know, life isn't always satisfying. At least we were spared what I hate most of all, the pick-your-own-interpretation ambiguous ending. Actually, the closest thing to a thrilling adventure scene was the one which seemed most tacked-on: the far-fetched, but fast-paced and ultimately convincing forced extradition of the Chinese accountant/businessman/money launderer (it never was exactly clear how important this guy was supposed to be- at times he came across as like the head of the fricking Yakuza). If the film piled it on, at least the pile was consistently engaging. Despite my misgivings, my attention never wavered.

And I can certainly see the basis for all the post-9/11 symbolism many are trying to extrapolate from this picture; it seems to be obvious, and one has to stretch a little to not see parallels with Bush and the American response to terrorism and all that sort of thing. I honestly think that this stuff is a perhaps-intended byproduct of the script; I don't think the writers and director were trying to make it explicit but it doesn't hurt for publicity purposes if people see it in there. I have to take issue with the surveillance-by-Lucius Fox as Bush-wiretapping etc. interpretation; Fox isn't lingering on anyone in particular but is scanning a broad sweep- this doesn't seem like all that much of an invasion of privacy since no records were being kept. Maybe that is a political statement I don't want to make; I personally am opposed to wiretapping the public without proper channels being observed in any fashion or form.

Anyway, with these caveats, I can wholeheartedly recommend Dark Knight. It's not perfect, but it is a solidly crafted film (as far as I can tell) that is consistently entertaining, if you don't mind the gravely serious tone. It's definitely worth watching for Ledger's performance, and Eckhart's too for that matter. For every annoying thing, I found a good thing to balance it out and these days that's as good as one can hope for- even in a film that's as ultimately hopeless as this one. A-

Odds and ends:

Sometimes I think I should enable titles here; since I've started using Google Reader to read everyone's blogs (well, not everyone, but you know what I mean) it does make one's posts stand out a little bit more. Still, after five (almost six!) years, I'm kinda "what's the point" about it.

Holy gosh, I haven't posted here since Wednesday! I was doing better there for a while, but real life has been very busy lately and I haven't really had anything particularly pertinent to say about anything anyway. As always, I appreciate those who hang with me.

While I'm going on and on about me, did you know I had a Flickr account? Well, now you do. Believe me, it won't be as impressive as those by the likes of Kevin Church, Katie West or Zoetica Ebb, but recently I've had access to a good camera and have been moved to take a shot or three, and thought it would be a good place to put them. I am no photographer, and have no pretense towards being one, but many of these shots will be of a more personal nature (i.e., me, things and places around me and stuff that informs my personal life) so if you're curious, then by all means check it out. And leave a fricking comment, whydoncha- no one has done so yet. I won't get mad.

The Flickr account isn't in the sidebar yet; actually, lots of things aren't, and that's just sheer laziness on my part. I used to simply go in and edit the template, and in some ways that was quicker, but when I changed to this look, I started using the new tables or whatever you call them, and hate to mix and match. The new way of adding links is not all that much more difficult, but for some reason I kinda procrastinate about adding stuff using it, and that's why my link list is so incomplete. So honest, it's not because I don't like you if your link isn't included at right, it's just because I'm a lazy bastard. Chances are I follow you on Reader, and one of these days I'll get around to completing (or at least updating) the list. I hope.

It seems like much of the stuff I could be using for blog fodder, I'm posting on Twitter instead. I will do some linky stuff shortly; if you follow me on Twitter, some of this will be familiar (I hope) but bear with, please. If you're on that highly addictive messaging service, and you don't follow me, well please feel free to do so- I need all the followers I can get if I'm going to rule the world someday.

OK, since at odd times in the last five plus years this has, much of the time, been a TV/Movies/Music/Comics/Sports (not necessarily in that order) blog, here's a little about each:

Last night was the big two-hour grande finale of Avatar: The Last Airbender, and all things considered it was an appropriate sendoff to a series which has been often frustrating, but more often wonderfully imaginative and sometimes moving, in spite of everything. Of course, none of it turned out like I thought it would, which just further proves that I'm not so smart. While Nickelodeon, on the one hand, has seemed to do everything in its power to dumb the show down and drive away viewers via its scheduling, at least they did air the show in the first place, and I suppose they should get credit for that even though it seems like they never really understood what made it special in the first place, preferring the more conventional likes of Spongebob Squarepants and The Fairly OddParents, lively and entertaining cartoons but neither possessing or requiring the amount of depth and attention that Avatar needed. Nick just never really seemed to like the show, as if they were confused and intimidated by the attention it got from many critics and fans outside the preteen and tweenage demographic that is their purview. Anyway, last night's episode resolved many longstanding plot threads, but maddeningly left many dangling, even creating a couple of new ones. I have it on good authority that one reason was because "they didn't get the originally planned, full four seasons" and why? "...the film that canned the series early. Timing and all that.". This motion picture, set to be made by none other than that Happening guy M. Night Shyamalan, is to be a live action version, which would seem to be counter-intuitive to the appeal of the concept, at least as I relate to it, but you never know. MNS has a lot to prove after the lackluster box office of his previous film, and that may motivate him to excel- if he's got it in him. His last attempt at full-blown fantasy, The Lady in the Water, was a bizarre disaster. I will say this- it's going to be a little strange to not be anticipating the next episode; it's an odd feeling to know that the Nick series is now done. In a strange sort of way, I almost hope they don't show reruns all that much; it just won't seem fitting, somehow, to see the "Sozin's Comet" episodes come on on a Thursday afternoon, out of order with no buildup or context to speak of. I get the same feeling from seeing reruns of Justice League Unlimited, more on that later.

Other TV shows I've been spending some time on include The Middle Man, which is still enjoyable in fits and starts but the arch tone wears me out after a while. It wants to be a hip, quirky and lighthearted adventure story, and sometimes gets pretty close, but often it just tries too hard. Venture Bros. is still going strong, showing remarkable depth and complexity while remaining as absurd and fun as ever; if you're not watching this show, you really should be. Netflix or rent the first two seasons on DVD, and you can even get caught up with season three via adultswim.com. My NCIS viewing remains consistent, even though it's not really must-see TV anymore. Should be interesting to see what happens with the cast; looks like they're trying to break them up but that seems like a remarkably bad idea. I still watch the occasional Justice League Unlimited episode on Cartoon Network; while they seem to be perpetually stuck in episodes from late in the penultimate and the final season, many of those are highly watchable and have their share of classic moments, such as the Flash's super-speed dismantling of the Braniac-possessed Luthor, and Batman dodging one of Darkseid's Omega beams. I'm pretty much caught up with previous seasons of HBO's Entourage; new episodes begin in September. It's not exactly essential, but it has a great cast with good chemistry, and is often very funny. I started out watching AMC's Mad Men, and was quite enamored of it, but missed something like the third and fourth episodes, figured I'd be lost and decided to catch up via DVD in time for the season 2 premiere. Uh...didn't happen. There's still time, although I think the second season begins this week or next. I also kinda got interested in HBO's Big Love, about a polygamist and his attempts to live a normal (well, relatively speaking) life in the monogamous world, as well as the various situations that arise within his sect. It's got a good cast, too, with Bill Paxton as the lead and Harry Dean Stanton, Chloe Sevigny, and others in supporting roles. I rented the first DVD of season one, but never could really get the time to sit and watch it so I sent it back so I could get further down my Netflix queue. I'll get back to it someday. It's got a really nice intro, which features the Beach Boys' "God Only Knows"- you can see it right here. Anything else? Hm. Dirt's second season was a strike-truncated disappointment, and then it got canned, too bad. I find myself watching reruns of Two and a Half Men in the afternoons sometimes; it's surprisingly funny and nasty in equal measures, with a cast of pros playing the material well. The CW Saturday morning Spider-Man series overcame a tentative beginning to become a surprisingly good watch; the script is often witty and is often fast-paced and fun. I think that's it. Almost worthy of Tom the Dog, huh!

Movies? I've seen a few lately. Iron Man, Hellboy II of course; and I also caught a showing of WALL-E a couple of weeks ago. I wasn't as nuts for WALL-E as many were; it was entertaining and very well animated (I expect no less from Pixar) but I found myself second-guessing the science and logistics constantly. For example, the film expects me to believe that the former residents of Planet Earth, having evolved into still-somewhat-human blobs, could immediately begin to walk, and survive the turmoil on the ship in the movie's resolution, as well as rebuild their planet- I didn't think these people even had much in the way of bone in their legs, especially enough to support all the weight they had put on! And one tiny plant is enough to convince the ship that Earth is habitual again? What about the obviously-still-depleted ozone layer? The winds that were still coming up at regular intervals? Sure, we got a look at some more greenery as the film wound down, but color me skeptical. I've yet to go see Dark Knight; everybody and their uncle is praising it to high heaven, but I wasn't all that enamored of Batman Begins, not enough to drop six bucks towards seeing its sequel, no matter how good Heath Ledger may or may not be. I also viewed the new Watchmen trailer online; it's very impressive although it does kinda look like all the other recent comic-book based films lately; the Billy Corgan music was somewhat disconcerting as well. Just a little too 90's for a property that's still associated with the 80's in my mind. I think Ozymandias looks like a dork in that black domino mask; IIRC he spent most of the comics (which I haven't read in ages) without it. Yeah, I'm nitpicking. Recent Netflix rentals include Michael Clayton, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Black Snake Moan, Crank, and the Aqua Teen movie- the first was very good but marred somewhat by a contrived ending, the second was marvelous, the third was ludicrous but kept my attention, the fourth entertaining, and the last became too much to take after a while- 15 minute doses of absurdity can be fun; two hours of same was just too much, and I bailed on it. I plan on doing a proper movie post soon; stay tuned.

Comics? The usual suspects that I've been enjoying, and I hope you've been reading my reviews to know what I'm talking about. One which really grabbed me was Hellboy: The Crooked Man #1, the first chapter of what promises to be another excellent miniseries. Set in Appalachia in 1958, and dealing with witches and hillbillies, it shows Hellboy as almost peripheral to the events displaying a detachment that Ron Perlman couldn't begin to portray. Richard Corben is on art, and he's excellent; people forget, I think, that he was first and foremost a horror artist back in the day who used to sign his work "Gore". I'm a sucker for that backwoods supernatural stuff anyway; this reminded me a lot of Manly Wade Wellman's excellent tales of Silver John, aka John the Balladeer, who encountered various ghosts, witches, and demonic creatures as he wandered the hills with only a silver-stringed guitar and a little bit of experience in dealing with such matters. I don't know if any collections are available, but if so I give them my highest recommendation. Ah! Here's one- a bit pricey, but worth it I think if you can afford it. Also, thanks to Bully, I've been reading Blake Bell's new bio of Steve Ditko- fascinating stuff, and it reproduces a LOT of great art at a bigger-than-normal size...and the effect is somewhat breathtaking, especially if you revere Ditko's 60's work as much as I do. Of course, I'll write more about these, and the other comics I haven't reviewed yet, later this week. On a related note, here's info about some mighty sweet art books by a number of talented artists- here's a couple of samples:

Yep, that's Darwyn Cooke and Cam Stewart! Each of them has their own collection available. I really would like to get a copy of Stewart's The Apocalypstix, but I thought I was still on Oni's comp list so I didn't preorder. I haven't received anything from Oni in months now, so I guess that's no longer the case, and as a result I'm going to have to find a copy somewhere. Such is life.

Music? I haven't really picked up anything new lately- mostly it's just finding old stuff that I haven't heard in ages or haven't heard at all here and there on the Interwub. Dennis Wilson's Pacific Ocean Blue came out before I got interested in the Beach Boys; having made up for lost time since then (1977) it was inevitable that I would get around to it eventually, even though to be honest I wasn't crazy about the songs Dennis had on 70's Boys LPs like Carl and the Passions. Much to my surprise, it sounds nothing like those cuts at all; it's consistently tuneful and clever, and Wilson uses his croaking vocal to his advantage a la Tom Waits or hoarse Harry Nilsson circa Pussy Cats. I also have obtained XTC's Wasp Star (Apple Venus Vol. 2), now eight years old- better late than never and well worth the wait, the only question being why the hell did I wait so long?!? Also, the two most recent issues from Lindsey Buckingham and Fleetwood Mac, Under the Skin and Say You Will; Skin is stripped-down but tuneful, Will is overlong, and suffers from being in actuality a Buckingham/Nicks album with Fleetwood and McVie as the rhythm section and Christine McVie barely present except for a few lost-in-the-mix felt-but-not-heard backing vocals, but there are some very good cuts by both singer/songwriters. Been also listening a lot to Rosebud, the self-titled debut, and only release by, a contingent of LA musicians from 1971 that came out on Reprise and featuring Judy Henske and Jerry Yester, who as a couple released the noteworthy Farewell Aldebaran a yer or so earlier. I had heard one cut on a Warner/Reprise Loss Leader, a lovely tune called "Lullabye II (Summer Carol)", previously and was very interested in hearing the rest of this hard-to-find release. Never did find it on vinyl. It's OK, if unremarkable, kinda-country-pop-rock stuff and so far the aforementioned track is the standout. I fully intend to give it time to grow on me. Otherwise, it's been a panoply of stuff; I listen to several CDs on average every day of every week.

Boy, this is a long post, huh!

Sports? Beseball season has been pretty good so far; my White Sox are hanging in there in first place, managing somehow to hold off the Twins and Tigers in the AL Central, with smoke and mirrors, seemingly, sometimes. I think they have what it takes to win that division, and even make it to the Series if they can stay focused. My beloved Atlanta Falcons are just trying to regroup and rebuild after one of the worst NFL seasons ever with a new coach, who strikes me as somewhat vanilla but if he can get this team tougher and playing smarter, then I'm all for it, and a new rookie quarterback who probably won't see action right away, plus a new feature running back who was impressive in the backup role in San Diego, but is unproven as in the feature role over the course of a season. They've lost a ton of other players on both sides of the ball, as cleaning house was the order of the day in ATL. Hate to say it, but a 6-10 season would be a minor miracle. That said, I think they'll be at least competitive- their division isn't the strongest. The University of Kentucky is gearing up for a new football season with high hopes, and of course basketball isn't far from anybody's mind in Lexington, even in September.

One more thing- by all means, check out the "Items of Interest" box in the sidebar there at right; it's where I select other blog posts that I run across in Google Reader and want to share. I think most of them will be of interest to a lot of you!

OK, now I'll wind this up and get on with the rest of my Sunday. Thanks for reading, if you've made it this far, and stay tuned for more later!

I'll never forget the first time I read a Hellboy graphic novel- it was 1994, and I had purchased the trade paperback of Seeds of Destruction, which I had been eyeballing for some time. I don't exactly recall why I hadn't been buying the single issues- while I was not yet a fan, I was intrigued at how Mignola's style had shifted from the stylized-but-Frazetta-inspired work that had graced the pages of Rocket Raccoon, on through the Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser adaptations for Marvel/Epic, and getting progressively more streamlined in the adaptation of Bram Stoker's Dracula for Topps Comics. Guess perhaps I was reluctant to take a shot on an unknown character, perhaps I just overlooked them on the racks- unimaginable now, but that was before Mignola became MIGNOLA. Anyway, when my comics shop got in the trade, I took a shot and dropped the fifteen or so bucks, and took it home after work one Friday evening. Of course, this being 1994, I had to watch the new episode of X-Files first, but when I finally settled in, after the kids went to bed, I gave it a read. And boy, was I hooked. I loved this character- aside from Mignola's dynamic art, he had created a character that was gruff and no-nonsense, but also capable and very charismatic. I liked this demon guy and the world he inhabited, as presented to us by Mignola and (at first) John Byrne; it spoke to my love of pulp-style adventure as well as supernatural folklore, and I couldn't wait to read more. Since then, I haven't missed a series, even buying a few of the not-bad but not-always-satisfying prose novels, as well as the B.P.R.D. spinoffs, and nearly all of them have been at least entertaining, in different degrees, and some have been among the best comics I've ever read.

So of course, when the character made the transition to film, I was right there when the first Hellboy movie made its debut in 2004 (gosh, it doesn't seem that long ago!), and my reaction was, to be kind, mixed. As with its predecessor, HELLBOY II: THE GOLDEN ARMY is a solid action picture with an exceptional visual panache, courtesy of its imaginative director. Also, as with its predecessor, my biggest problem is in its depiction of the lead. The Hellboy of the comics, the one I like, and have followed for over a decade now, is not the same character that is on the big screen- and while I understand that concessions have to be made and streamlining is inevitable, the Hellboy I like isn't as surly, rude, and childish as the scriptwriters and Ron Perlman make him seem. In the books, HB is respected by everyone in the Bureau, here, he's a pain in the ass as much as anything, making him a lovable lug, I guess, but one wonders why it's necessary. I dislike the whole "secret government agency" angle; it's always been my understanding that the BPRD is an above-ground agency that goes out of its way to avoid the spotlight. How can Hellboy be "the World's Greatest Paranormal Investigator" if he's relegated to urban legend status, as he's supposed to be in the movie? I didn't like that they trotted out, yet again, the dog-tired X-Men-inspired "unthinking, uncaring humanity hates us because we're freaks" trope. Focus groups and corporate decision-makers may think so, but NONE of this is necessary in order to tell a good Hellboy story. Just isn't.

More than anything, though, I absolutely despise the Hell-boyfriend/Liz Sherman girlfriend subplot that the movies are saddled with; in the comics, this is not an issue. I know, I know- mainstream audiences, always perceived to be a hard sell on movies of this nature, pretty much require some sort of romance or romantic interest for the lead. But to me, the HB/Liz romance is contrivance of the most obvious and unnecessary sort- it demeans both characters, and gives these films a "chick-flick", for lack of a better term, dimension that just grates. And I won't spoil, but there's a development in this romance which I am not looking forward to seeing developed.

Other characters get spotlights- the HB/Abe friendship gets better treatment, and the whole Barry Manilow scene is cutesy but charming, injecting a little needed humor. Fine. Abe's characterization is pretty consistent with not only the previous film but the books as well; that's mostly because he doesn't really have a personality to speak of in either. He's a persnickety, prim and proper fella, who's as refined and cultured as HB is crude and rude, we get it. At least in the comics Mignola gives him a spooky sort of detached nobility, but that doesn't come across in the movie because he's Robin to HB's Batman here. His romance, such as it was, with the Elven Princess was handled well, but really wasn't developed. Of course, this is not surprising because we only have so much film to work with. Selma Blair is still a natural as Liz Sherman, as good here as she was in the previous film; unfortunately, she isn't given much to do except act pissed off most of the time...she does it very well, I must say. Johann Krauss, the "ghost in the bag" of the comics, makes his first appearance; at first I was a little offput by his portrayal but the more I thought about it, I began to like it- in the B.P.R.D. stories, he just kinda gets added to the team because he is part of the spirit world and was necessary in that function. But in the film, he's brought in to ride herd over the HB/Liz/Abe trio, at first overbearing and priggish but eventually fitting in with the team. The ghost effects and his containment suit looked great. Another reason Krauss is added is as help for Jeffery Tambor's Tom Manning character; as the director of the team, he of course butts heads with Hellboy, and is usually played for laughs, as only Tambor can do- no one does weak-willed blowhards better. Still, it bothered me because I thought HB and Manning came to a kind of understanding in the first film, even bonding a bit over the "wood matches for cigars" thing. In the sequel, we're back to antagonism- and while Manning's character often has it coming, it's as if the first film's events are conveniently forgotten.

OK, that's enough bitching about characterization. Script-wise, this is actually fine- the dialogue is very good, and while I disagree with how some of the characters are portrayed and a couple of the plot wrinkled come across as quite random, they interact well and the action setpieces blend in well with the downtimes in between. It moves at a brisk pace, rarely drags, and there's dramatic tension in all the right places. Of course, the ideas, such as the Troll Market, the pasture in Ireland that hides the entrance to where the Golden Army is hidden, the clever tying in of the calcium-devouring "tooth fairies", are all very Mignolaesque, and I'm sure reflects his input. In fact, this whole "Fairie kingdom declares war on humankind rather than fade away" is something that's been kinda simmering on the backburner in the comics; there have been countless scenes of the shadowy fen folk standing in the shadows and lamenting their eventual extinction- it fits right in to the whole mythos, both page and screen. There weren't too many instances where I was bugged by scientific impossibilities; This is a SPOILER, highlight to read: I did wonder why Hellboy gave the crown to Liz at the end to melt with her heat; you'd think that the amount of heat necessary to do such a thing would have incinerated Abe and burned up Krauss' containment suit. I would think it would have made more sense to have HB just crush the crown in his big stone hand, and probably more fitting as well.

And the visuals- well, if you've seen Pan's Labrynth, you know what Del Toro's imagination (and that of his effects crews) is capable of. The aforementioned Troll Market (made me wish for a big-screen adaptation of Neverwhere), the battle with the plant elemental (reminded me of Swamp Thing, it did) and its surprisingly lovely aftermath, the scene in the Irish countryside (brightly lit, a stunning contrast from the rest of the darkly lit film settings) in which the gateway to the Golden Army's "barracks" reveals itself, reminiscent of the "rock-biter" in the otherwise heinous Neverending Story- all pulled off with aplomb.

Anyway, I guess I'm in the minority in my reaction to these films; most seem to be content with this calculated-for-maximum-appeal Hellboy and his friends. And really, this is not a deal-breaker for me either. The pros of the Hellboy movies so far outweigh the cons, and I can tell you that if you're on the fence, and aren't too attached to the comics version, you'll have a great time at The Golden Army. me, I'm attached and still came away enjoying it. It's a lean, mean, imaginative action film/monster movie, and I'm glad that we live in a time that such material can be given the presentation that would have been unthinkable in Hollywood as far back as 1993, when the character saw print for the first time. I hope that if and when we get another sequel, this will always be the case.

I don't really know what else to add to the almost universal praise I've seen all over not only the Blogosphere, but in "real" media as well, for IRON MAN. Practically everybody has responded very positively to its sharp mix of drama, politics, action-adventure and plain old geekery, and I certainly won't deviate from the throng this time.

For decades, I've lamented the scripting on the various attempts to bring superheroes to the big screen- too often, it seemed like the scriptwriters and filmmakers simply had no respect for the source material, thinking that they had to play it broadly, for laughs, or at least with a wink to the audience as if to say "Hey c'mon- we're not fanboy nerds...we couldn't possibly take this seriously, and we're sure you don't either". Thing is, though, as time went by more and more people- "fanboy nerds" in many cases- coming up through the ranks said- "Wait- we do take it seriously and we want to do it right!" The Spider-Man films were a step in the right direction, although as if to overcompensate for the lack of smirk we got a lot of sodden drama. The latest Batman film had a down-to-earth tone as well, although casting and scripting problems plagued it. The Ghost Rider film tried (a little too hard) to be a fast-paced trash-cinema romp, and almost succeeded, with a 60-40 stupid to cool ratio. Although the Fantastic Four and Superman films were steps backwards (although in my opinion the FF flicks had their moments), there was a sense that eventually, someone would get it right. Throw enough crap at the wall, and some of it's bound to stick eventually, no?

Against all odds, Iron Man is that film. It's got just about anything you could want in this sort of film- intelligent, spot-on casting, a script that is fast-paced, with a nice balance of drama and action, and just the right amount of humor to keep it from devolving into a Hulk-like torpor. There are even some subtle (and not-so) shots at the military-industrial complex, timely these days. Robert Downey, Jr. delivers his most memorable turn since Chaplin oh so long ago, able to veer from cynical to sarcastic to idealistic and sincere at the drop of a hat and dominating practically every scene he's in, but not to the detriment of the other actors, who get room to shine as well. I was afraid at first that he was going to be too glib, too shallow in his depiction of Tony Stark, but he soon got in a groove and stayed there for the duration. I'm fairly certain he won't get an Oscar nomination, but he sure as hell ought to be at least considered. Gwyneth Paltrow brings a lot of subtlety to a character which was never really developed all that much in the comics, or at least not when I've read them. I've not always liked her in films before (she was all wrong in Sky Captain, just to name one) but here she's a great foil for Downey's Stark. Jeff Bridges is solid as always in the role of the bad guy; he underplays so well that when he does finally snap at the end, it's surprising. Terrence Howard, normally a fine actor, isn't given much to do as Stark's military buddy Rhodey, but he does have a few nice scenes and a memorable line or two. Cast and script aside, you also can never underestimate the glamour and appeal of the tech- it's one of the reasons that last year's Transformers did so well, all the cool robots and how real effects technology can make them these days- it adds to the verisimilitude and convinces us that this world we're seeing can happen. I also appreciated the lack of turgid melodrama which many scriptwriters think they have to infuse scripts of this sort with- it practically ruined the last Spider-Man film, to name one example.

Of course, you probably know by now that you should sit through the (really long) credits to see the little fanboy-servicing coda at the end; it points to the direction that Marvel Films, if not necessarily the Iron Man franchise, might go. It also points out how much of a template the Millar/Hitch/Neary Ultimates series are for how the House that Jack Built wants their properties to be portrayed. And as someone who used to watch the old 60's semi-animated Marvel Super-Heroes cartoons back in the day, it was great to hear the swanky, ring-a-ding-ding IM theme song referenced not once, but twice.

Of course, I can nitpick; I thought the choice of comparatively recent, comics-wise anyway, Iron Man villain Obidiah Stane was an odd one. If I may slip into comics-geek talk for a minute, perhaps it's just that name that bugs me; it's as if Stane's creator Dennis O'Neil (who, to me, seemed to completely lose his mojo when he left DC for Marvel) was just trying to come up with names by looking through a list of some sort, and "Stane" was chosen because it's pronounced the same as "stain" and that word's connotation. I'd be willing to bet that there's no one in the world with that surname. Anyway, don't get me wrong, I suppose the writers thought they should go with as realistic a character as they could, to maintain the tone of the film. And believe me, I don't think the likes of the Unicorn or the Melter would have been a better choice. Bridges is able to invest him with enough charisma to make him work, because he's just that good, but the character is still lackluster, even in that Iron Monger armor. I'm betting that in a sequel, we could get a really nicely done Mandarin, especially if they refer to the recent Enter the Mandarin miniseries. I also have a hard time believing that as soon as Stark returned to civilization after escaping his captors, he wouldn't simply have the shrapnel removed rather than create a brand-new, upgraded power source for his chest device. And how deep exactly is that conduit that said device fits in? It looks deep enough to be sticking out his back, especially in the scenes in which he asks Pepper to adjust the wire down in there. But really, I find it hard to believe that the medical technology and surgeons someone like Stark would have access to couldn't remove that stuff and free him from having to wear that snazzy little night-light. Of course, that thing drives the plot, so we can't have that...but still. Obviously, I'm in the minority of people who even have a problem with this. Also, it's a bit of a stretch for me to believe that under those conditions (even though, I know, he had a lot of his tech there at that insurgent camp) Stark could rig a suit of armor that would be as impervious to harm as it is, achieve flight, and enable him to survive a drop of several hundred feet. Sure, sure, suspension of disbelief- and believe me, this film makes it easy.

I may nitpick, but really- none of this was a major detriment to my appreciation of this hugely enjoyable film. Who'da thunk that Iron Man, of all of Marvel's multitude of licensed properties, would get a showcase like this. Almost gives ya hope for Ant-Man, doesn't it?

Even as I reluctantly add to the media blitz, I just want to say: "My City Screams". How pretentious. Eisner was many things in his Spirit stories, but he was NEVER pretentious.

Way to present your junk there, Ozzy!

Every comics blogger in the world, and on a few other planets as well probably, will be linking to these advance pics from the upcoming Watchmen film, so why should I be any different- especially since I'm trying to maintain a semi-regular posting schedule around here. I like Rorshach's, but that's mostly because he's not wearing a Batman and Robin-style plastic-looking monstrosity suit. The Comedian isn't bad, either, mostly (again) because of the lack of rubber. Oh well, we will see what we will see.



Comics reviews coming soon- as soon as work and illness will permit.

Prepare yourselves, mortals, for JOHNNY B's FEARLESS OSCAR PREDICTIONS!

Yes, for the first time in a long time (unless I did it over on the LJ- I forget), I am, without a net (or Frankie, for that matter, tee hee), determined to predict the winner of each Academy Award. Of course, we all know that there are many fine films not represented here (Zodiac? Hello!), but these are the choices we are stuck with and it is incumbent upon us all to make do as best we would-be Criswells can do.

Un disclaimér: Since I am of modest means and tied down with many bills and responsibilities, as since the nearest multi-screen cinema to me is run by people who think the likes of Hope Floats and The Bucket List are hightoned filmmaking, it should come as no surprise to you that I have not seen a great many of the cited films below. So this will not be a list of the films I think should win, but a list of the films I think will win, since I do keep up with writing about films as much as the average pop culture aficionado. I will also post my typically witty and erudite commentary after each. And now, before I use up my daily ration of italicized words, here goes nothing.

BEST PICTURE

Atonement: Hey, I saw the trailer! Looks like the kind of film the Academy loves to reward. Also looks like the kind of film that I struggle to stay awake during. I might try to watch it on cable someday.

Michael Clayton: I like Clooney, and Tilda Swinton up to a point, and I have this in my Netflix queue. And why haven't you friended me yet? Click the link in the still-a-work-in-progress linkbar at right. Anyway, I haven't seen this yet because I've been busy watching every season DVD of Entourage (that's available- what the hell is the holdup on season 4?), and since I'm a man of limited means, (see above) I only subscribe to the one disc at a time option. So blame Vincent Chase and Ari Gold. And E, don't forget E. Anyway, this one has a shot, because I hear it has an actual honest to goodness ending, something many of the films on this list lack.

No Country for Old Men: Ah, yes. No Country, aka 3/4 of a classic film. OK, OK, I've mellowed a bit in my stance about how annoyed I was at the non-climax of this film. I can even accept and understand why the author chose to structure it that way. All things considered, this is the best Coen Bros. film since O Brother, make no mistake. But that non-resolution still grates, even after all this enlightenment. This one seems to be the favorite, but I'm not so sure.

There Will Be Blood: I may try to drive down to Bowling Green, 40 miles southwest, and see this tomorrow- I've been meaning to do it for weeks now, but these days, with 3 dollar gas, a frivolous 80-mile round trip is not something lightly undertaken. Anyways, this one looks like it will be outstanding, although I understand it has ending issues as well. Daniel Day-Lewis is a hell of an actor, and I want to see it for him if nothing else. I don't know- there's a nagging feeling I have about this that it won't win the Oscar (TM).

Juno: The trailer I saw, months ago, made this look like it would be clever, witty, and somewhat heartwarming. This will most likely be a Netflixer. Its subject matter and its non-epic status make it a dark horse for me, though. Another hunch.

WINNER: The cynic in me screams Atonement, but the pragmatic, dispassionate observer in me keeps thinking it will be No Country for Old Men, which will make both of us happy because we are big Coen fans, even though they've been pissing us off for about six years now.

BEST DIRECTOR

Julian Schnabel (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly)
Jason Reitman (Juno)
Tony Gilroy (Michael Clayton
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen (No Country for Old Men)
Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood)

WINNER: I think this race comes down to the Coens and Anderson, with Schnabel as a dark horse. The other two films seem to me like they could have been directed by anybody more competent that Uwe Boll. Anyway, it seems like the Academy likes to fuck with people, and create these little headscratching situations, so I predict that Paul Thomas Anderson will win for There Will Be Blood, even though the Coens will have directed the Best Picture. This award will be presented first, though, so I claim the right to reverse these picks if the Coens win Best Director.

BEST ACTOR

George Clooney (Michael Clayton)
Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood)
Johnny Depp (Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street)
Tommy Lee Jones (In the Valley of Elah)
Viggo Mortensen (Eastern Promises)

WINNER:Of these, I've seen Depp and Mortensen's performances (Eastern Promises: another film which coulda/shoulda been nominated for Best Picture), and while Depp was pretty darn good, even singing, as was Mortensen- neither of them have a English policeman in the Russian Mafia's, or a Todd's Barbershop's Patron's chance. That leaves Jones, whom I'm sure gave the standard Tommy Lee Jones Performance®™, usually always worthy of consideration; Clooney, who usually always gives solid, likable, relaxed (even when he's experiencing deep emotional turmoil a la Syriana) perfs; and Day-Lewis, who is an "Act-or's Ac-tor". I'm picking Day-Lewis.

BEST ACTRESS

Cate Blanchett (Elizabeth: The Golden Age)
Julie Christie (Away From Her)
Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose)
Ellen Page (Juno)
Laura Linney (The Savages)

WINNER: I have seen none of these films, although I have La Vie Netflixed. I have a hunch, however, that Julie Christie will win- because it's been a while since we've heard anything from her, and she's playing someone with Alzheimers', things the Academy seems to always recognize, and on top of that she's looking pretty damn good these days for a woman her age.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Casey Affleck (The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford)
Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men)
Philip Seymour Hoffman (Charlie Wilson's War)
Hal Holbrook (Into the Wild)
Tom Wilkinson (Michael Clayton)

WINNER: Wait- how the hell did someone or something from Robert Ford get nominated? Does the Academy know about this? (I kid- that one looks interesting and is Netflix queued/Entourage cockblocked even as we speak) Anyways, despite the presence of Hoffmann, I believe that Bardem will take the statue, because his role as Chigurh generated the most buzz out of all these. Watch out for Holbrook- he might get a sympathy vote because he's probably not long for this world.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Cate Blanchett (I'm Not There)
Ruby Dee (American Gangster
Saoirse Ronan (Atonement)
Amy Ryan (Gone Baby Gone)
Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton)

WINNER: For the record, I don't think Blanchett looks very damn much like 1965-era Bob Dylan at all, except for the curly wig. I might think different if I see the film, but judging by my previous experience with director Todd Haynes, I probably won't for quite some time. I keep seeing "Sandra" when I see "Ruby" Dee because I'm an idiot. I haven't seen Gangster, except for one clip with Dee, and she was good but I'm dubious. Moving on, nobody wants to have to pronounce Ronan's name more than once. Swinton, by the scenes I've seen (ooh, alliteration!), should probably win this but I'll bet Blanchett gets it because the Academy likes to reward stunt casting.

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE FILM

Persepolis
Ratatouille
Surf's Up

WINNER: While I believe that Persepolis, which I still haven't seen yet and most likely won't until its release on DVD because I live in Bumfuck, Kentucky and can't afford to drive to Louisville just to see a film, will be the most enduring of the two nominees (I think that Surf's Up is there just out of courtesy to some producer or somesuch), the Academy will most likely give the statue to Brad Bird (who will always have my undying gratitude for The Incredibles, a flick I just can't get enough of) and Ratatouille, which may deserve it, I don't know. It's in the queue. Blame Drama and Turtle.


And that's all I'm callin'. I don't care (and I suspect you don't either unless you're in the industry or are going to school to try and be) about the "Best Sound Mixing" and "Best Original Score"-type categories.

So there you have it! We will see what we will see!

Someone over at the film_stills LJ community posted a clutch of screencaps from Persepolis, and I realized something. I've seen the trailer, and a handful of images in reviews and what have you, and the art style kept reminding me of something, but I just couldn't quite put my finger on it. Until now.

Persepolis:















The Critic:
















This was another in an ongoing series of "things that occurred to me". You may now resume normal activity.

I haven't read the books, nor I haven't seen the film, but I am becoming utterly fascinated with Persepolis. No doubt you've already seen these links via Tom and Journalista, but in case you haven't, I'd just like to pass on the word that the redoubtable M.E. Russell has a great illustrated interview as only he can do, as well as an even longer text Q & A with creator Marjane Satrapi.

I think you should read it! But be warned- if you are inclined to have tender sensibilities about politics and abortion rights, you might not find it to your liking.

Via Cartoon Brew, I found this story about an interesting-looking animated project called SITA SINGS THE BLUES. By clicking on the preceding link, you can access a trailer, which I did my very best to post for you but it didn't work. So you'll have to settle for the above picture until you visit the site.

According to the Brew-meisters, creator Nina Paley needs to create a 35mm print of it, or it will premiere on video, which would be a shame I suppose. So if you, like me, think this looks cool and can contribute, please do by all means!

Of course, given the appalling news about the snubbing of Persepolis, which looks wonderful from the trailer, it may be just as well...

Doesn't this screencap from Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer look just like something Kirby would have drawn, say, in the late 60's in a scene in which the FF might have visited some sort of disco while on a night on the town?

Well it does to me.

Cap taken from the film_stills LJ community, in which I've been known to post myself upon occasion.

JOHNNY B HEART THE MOVIES: 2007



In the past, I've done "best of" lists about movies, music, etc., but the last couple of years I've kinda let that go by the wayside as I haven't really been spending a lot of money to catch current films when they are released; it's more common for me to see a film on DVD than in theatres. But yesterday I was looking around on Wikipedia for something, and happened across a "2007 in movies" page, and was surprised to note that I have, as it turns out, seen several films that came out in the previous year- mostly on DVD, but I've seen them just the same. And I thought I'd share my impressions with you.

Code Name: The Cleaner: Good one to start on, huh- these are in chronological order, so that's the way the ball bounces. Sat and watched this on cable one afternoon when there was nothing else on and I was too lazy to turn off the TV and do something. It's just a silly, stupid contrived spy-movie vehicle for comic actor Cedric the Entertainer, who really is very good in supporting roles but just isn't leading man material. Lucy Liu provides eye candy, but it's not enough.

Alpha Dog: Bleak treatment of what is supposed to be a true story, mostly notable for the fine turn done by Justin Timberlake as a conflicted teen who ends up as accomplice in murder. I got caught up in it, but I don't really have any desire to see it again ever. I watched it with my son, who was visiting, and I thanked him for not turning out like these kids did...

Smokin' Aces: This was hugely entertaining for a while, but got too clever for its own good in the last 30 minutes or so with a headache-inducing conclusion. Still, lots to like, mostly a good cast in offbeat roles. If they ever do a 100 Bullets movie, I hope it looks like this.

Zodiac: Outstanding film, a tad long perhaps but wonderfully acted and completely involving until the unresolved ending, which is frustrating, but hey- they didn't solve the real case on which this is based either so whaddaya expect? Shame on the moviegoing public for not making this a bigger hit. Guess it was that ending.

Grindhouse: Death Proof: I still haven't seen Planet Terror, so the jury is still out on Grindhouse as a whole, but I thought this was awfully pointless and self-indulgent. The wild-ass ending redeems it somewhat, but QT, I think, forgot that setting out to make a grindhouse classic on purpose is something that the Andy Milligans and H.G. Lewises of the world never did...and I would think he'd know better than that.

Spider-Man 3: Too much soap opera, too many villains. They could have made a good movie with the Sandman (and really, the Sandman parts work best) or Venom, but having them both together and icing it with that weepy, tiresome Peter Loves Mary Jane subplot just made for an overlong, noisy, crowded film that was nowhere near as much fun as its predecessors. I know it's contrary to the Way of the American Blockbuster Movie, but sometimes less really is more.

Shrek the Third: Many slagged this one as unnecessary, but really, even though it was kinda by-the-numbers (especially at the end) I enjoyed it as much as 2, and it wasn't a whole lot worse than the first one either, for that matter. It's no landmark of cinema, but it was mostly clever, entertaining and didn't seem to go on forever. Could have been a whole lot worse.

Knocked Up: Now THIS one took me by surprise in a good way- I was expecting a dumb smirkfest, but it's really quite perceptive, with very good performances by the leads and naturalistic dialogue. Of course, there's a fair share of fratboy and geek humor, but it's never mean spirited. I didn't think I'd like this one when a friend loaned it to me, but damned if it might not be one of the best films I saw this past year.

Ocean's Thirteen: If you like the Ocean's films, and I have so far, then you'll probably like this too- Clooney and Co. have a great rapport onscreen. But the payoff in this one was a little too routine for my tastes and that was a letdown.

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer: I could sit and nitpick this, like I'm sure most of you reading this, but at the end of the day I came away liking this OK, better than Spider-Man 3, anyway. I think, all things considered, the Four are well cast, and they play off each other well. I still have some reservations about Jessica Alba as Sue- she just looks too much like your garden variety bimbo. I say this as someone who grew up with Lee and Kirby's Invisible Girl- her portrayal may play better to non-initiates and those whose memory of the FF in comics doesn't go back much farther than Byrne. Anyway- I thought Doom was more of a credible menace, liked the CGI Silver Surfer even though I never heard Larry Fishburne's voice in my head for all these years when I've read Silver Surfer comics, and even kinda liked Unca Stan's obligatory cameo. I wonder if Unca Jack would have made an appearance in one of these if he'd lived. The big reveal of Galactus was a ripoff. Altogether not a great flick, but no disaster either, and it went down smooth.

Transformers: This one surprised me a little, too. I was prepared to ignore it completely (Transformers, the 80's toys and cartoons, were more my son's thing) until a chance viewing, walking by the electronics department of Walmart, of the scene in the desert in which the Army or Marines or somebody battles this huge robotic scorpion- it was a blast, and I thought that this might be a good, turn-your-brain-off action flick, and maybe I should Netflix it- which I did, and I was right...that's exactly what it is. Fortunately, the script didn't ignore the humans too much and benefited from some good turns by some experienced scene chewers like John Tuturro (of all people). Not bad, for what it is.

Stardust: I've always blown hot and cold over the work of Neil Gaiman- while his work in general isn't exactly innovative, and his writing voice is precious and mannered, he excels at seizing upon a central idea or theme- Underground cities in London, a family of demigods that represent human nature- and then expanding these central ideas brilliantly. When Stardust the 4-issue limited series came out, it was after he had finished up his mostly outstanding Sandman series, and I was curious about how he would follow it up. Frankly, the first issue bored me. As a result, I didn't buy the next three and was mostly unfamiliar with everything but the basic premise, and I think that helped me enjoy this as much as I did, which was quite a bit actually. It's an imaginatively presented, sweeping adventure with a little humor, not excessive but enough to keep it light (even though it sometimes veers too close to Princess Bride territory), and an appealing cast, although Claire Danes, though attractive, is a little too lumpish to be a really entrancing ethereal starperson. If Terry Gilliam had had half the budget and studio interference that Matthew Vaughn was given, Brothers Grimm would have been a masterpiece, so I guess we've come that far at least.

Across the Universe: I love the visual innovation of director Julie Taymor, and of course you all know how much I revere the music of the Beatles, so someone was gonna have to try really hard to get me to dislike this. But sometimes great expectations can lead to bitter disappointment- fortunately, that was not the case. While the script was kinda cliched and obvious, the visuals and imaginative staging and from time to time some of the vocal performances even transcended it. So far, this is my favorite film of last year.

No Country For Old Men: Then again, sometimes great expectations actually do end up leading to colossal disappointment. Sadly, that was the case here. For a good 120 minutes or so, I was excited by the best Coen Bros. flick I've seen since O Brother, Where Art Thou?. Dialogue was outstanding, performances were great, and the direction was excellent. Atmosphere, marvelous. Some of the scenes were Hitchcockian in the tension they delivered. I was absolutely caught up in the cat-and-mouse game between Llewellyn Moss and Chigur, and was anticipating the resolution...

...and beware of spoilers here, those who may be reading and haven't seen it...

...which never came.

Like an ADD-stricken kid, the Coens suddenly dropped it and walked away! We were set up for what surely was going to be the final confrontation in the El Paso hotel. But suddenly, we get Tommy Lee Jones arriving too late at the scene of a shootout which forced us to assume that it hadn't gone well, and shifted the focus to Jones' conflicted and ineffectual character. By not giving us some sort of resolution to what had been established as the backbone of the film, I felt as if a bait-and-switch had been pulled on me, and the longer I sat there the madder I got.

I don't know. The more I think about it, the more I think the theatre must have left out a reel or something. I almost turned to the other five people in there with me and asked them if they felt the same way I did about it. I haven't seen this brought up in any of the reviews or blog posts I've read, either- and I'm 99.9% sure I didn't nod off or something, so I'm just confused and saddened.

I get that the Coens were all about setting up Chigur as some sort of inhuman monster, and thematically dealing with choices we all have to make and the inevitability of death and probably a dozen other things that those more perceptive than I have picked up on...but all I know is that they really fucked up what I thought was, as I said, the backbone of the film, and I just can't wrap my head around that.

I think I'll have to sit down and watch it again when it comes out on DVD, and see if I perceive it any differently. I'm not optimistic. As compromised and bad as The Ladykillers was, at least they followed up on what they promised.



And that's my look at the films of 2007 that I've seen, so far. I'll be getting Eastern Promises today or tomorrow, and I might add it if I get the chance.

Over at X-Ray Spex, Will Pfiefer is blogging about his favorite horror/fright/supernatural/you know films, and today's is a longtime favorite of mine as well: 1941's The Devil and Daniel Webster. You should go read what he wrote, but I thought it would be cool to post the trailer for the movie, which I found on the YouTube.

----------------
Now playing: Iris Dement - When Love Was Young
via FoxyTunes

"No WAY that was a Grizzly bear."

One of the best things about the NFL season starting again is that it also means there will be new weekly TUESDAY MORNING QUARTERBACK columns by Gregg Easterbrook. But Mr. Easterbrook is a well-rounded individual, a man after my own heart as it were, and doesn't limit his writing to sports alone. He also takes occasion to opine on politics, science, TV and films- and in today's column, he writes a paragraph about the Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer movie (which I still haven't seen...), and it's quite amusing:

Many moments in the flick made no sense even if you're willing to accept superpowers. For instance, Sue Storm looks at star charts and announces that a planet orbiting Rigel was destroyed eight days after the Surfer appeared there. Rigel is 800 light years away -- the Surfer would have had to visit that system eight centuries ago for the light to be reaching Earth now. Mr. Fantastic's flying car traveled from Manhattan to Siberia in about 15 minutes. Even assuming super-rapid acceleration and braking, that would have required a speed of about 30,000 mph -- escape velocity for leaving this planet. But though capable of 30,000 miles per hour, Mr. Fantastic's flying car has no canopies! The Four's heads would not have stayed on, let alone their hair. My favorite moment of the movie: as the crawl announces "BLACK FOREST, GERMANY," our hero The Thing encounters a grizzly bear. Grizzlies are found only in North America. Maybe the bear was a Kodiak -- the scene was brief -- but you can guess the only place Kodiaks are found. Even brown bear, once indigenous to the Schwarzwald, have for generations been unknown there, although they are being reintroduced in Italy and Switzerland. See this Der Spiegel article about the national sensation caused in 2005 when a brown bear was spotted in a forest near the German border.

He also goes on to comment about the recent SF film Sunshine as well. Go HERE for the complete column.

Of course, the above is copyright ESPN or Easterbrook or both.

I finally got to see 3/4 of Superman Returns last night. I say 3/4 because just after the big Supes-rescues-Lois-and-Cyclops scene, I got an important phone call that I had to take and it lasted just long enough for me to see the final scenes. Hey, it was money and bid'ness, OK?

Anyway.

Did anybody out there hate this film as much as I did?

"Huh-WHA? Hate, you say? But JB!"

No, I hated it. Hated it even as I was watching it. Hated it for the fact that they chose to recreate the production values and simpleminded, lowest-common-denominator-aimed script of the 1979 film, even as they laded on the 2007 CGI. Hated the fact that they had a lead actor playing Superman, the Iconic Man of Steel, that looked like he could have been sharing that apartment with Derek Zoolander, he was so pouty and clueless. I don't know what YOUR ideal Superman looks like, but that ain't mine. Oh, his performance was decent enough, considering that all he did was ape Christopher Reeve (another wooden prettyboy actor who grew into the role, thankfully). I know Smallville is all the rage among those who don't know better or don't care one way or the other, and I know that finding an actor with the proper physique and acting skills is hard to do. But at least the cat that plays Clark Kent in Smallville is supposed to be playing a young Superman, so his lack of build isn't such an issue. But this is supposed to be ADULT CLARK KENT! Five years after the 1979 film- FIVE YEARS! He barely looks older than Jimmy Olsen!

Crap. I don't have the time or the critical vocabulary to lay into this movie properly. But I'll do what I can.

Yeah, there were one or two decent effects-heavy setpieces, none of which eclipsed Dick Lester's in Superman II. And while I'm bitching, what the hell is up with this revisionist history that claims that Lester somehow ruined II when he took it over from Richard Donner, necessitating that money-grab "Director's Cut" that came out last year? Hell, as far as I'm concerned II is the best of the lot; not as ridiculous as its two successors and unburdened with the campiness of the second half of the first one. Maybe it's just because Lester directed Hard Day's Night and I'll always cut him slack because of it, but while II had its silly scripted moments as well, it was directed just fine.

Kate Bosworth? As Lois Lane? Now Bosworth is very attractive, and can even act a little, as she proves here; but the only examples of more egregious miscasting in comics-based films I can think of offhand are Katie Holmes, overmatched in Batman Begins, and of course Halle Berry in that wretched Catwoman film. She is fine, she just isn't Lois Lane, or at least the Lois Lane that exists outside some clueless producer's mind.

"Kevin Spacey!" You say. "Kevin Spacey! One of the finest actors in recent memory! SURELY he avoids your scorn, JB!" Yeah, well, OK. Spacey knows how to underplay and be menacing, and he does that real well here. Half the time he seems to be self-consciously channeling Gene Hackman, but he does manage to exude a nerdy, Keyser Soze-sort of malevolence the other half. I'll give Spacey a pass, he does the best with what he had to work with. And what he had was a dumb, tired rehash of the first flick's "beachfront property" scheme, dovetailed into the only slightly less-tired "I hate and want to kill Superman because he's an alien" trope. Why, oh WHY do Hollywood screenwriters want to make Luthor into a buffoon? Do they not want him to somehow send the wrong message to the kiddies and impressionable idiots out there, who could possibly think that Luthor has more charisma and is cooler than their wooden, lifeless Superman? They ALWAYS have to saddle him with a doofy sidekick (thanklessly played by ol' Kumar, Kal Penn) and a ditzy Miss Tessmacher-type "moll" (again, thanklessly played by Parker Posey, who is SO much better than this crap), and make bald jokes with all the wigs, and hit every single note that has been hit in the character's three other big screen appearances. Sigh. I will say that I got a chuckle to his annoyed reaction when Lois teased him about being out of the public eye for so long. And in all fairness, to have Lex find the Fortress of Solitude, steal the crystals, and make mischief was a decent idea. But it wasn't THAT good of an idea.

Just so I'm not completely negative all the time, I will go on record as saying that of all the company, Frank Langella's performance as Perry White was as good as any of them, including Spacey.

I won't even go into all the Jesus Christ Posing that the scriptwriters and director saw fit to jam in; I have my blood pressure to think of. Not to mention the whole Superman's kid thing.

I could rant on and on, but I'll spare you. Who knows, I might see the 15-30 minutes of the movie I missed when I got my phone call, a light will switch on (or a candle, as the case may be) in my head, and I'll reconsider. And maybe I've been spoiled by the vastly superior Superman: The Animated Series, still the gold standard for depicting the Man of Steel and his friends and foes as far as I'm concerned. But damn- for all the money they spent, and the pre-sold audience they had, to make such a pretentious, sodden, dull, dimwitted, noisy motion picture like this is almost unconscionable.

Say what you will about Marvel's filmed output- and I understand Spider-Man III has its share of head-scratching scripting and pretensions too- between this and the watchable-in-spite-of-itself Batman Begins, it's time for an old DC guy like me to admit that right now, Marvel is making the superior motion picture product by far. There's no reason why a Batman or Superman film couldn't be at least as entertaining, even in a "big dumb fun" way, as I'm hearing that Ghost Rider or Fantastic Four 2 are. But they have just GOT to look beyond 1979 and 1990 as starting points, and remember that they're trying to be entertaining without being moronic. I believe that it can be done- just look at Spider-Man 2.

Cripes, did I hate this movie. Not to put too fine a point on it.

An often interesting film commentary site called Film•ick has a look at Grant Morrison's first draft of a script to the WE3 movie. Check it out! The author of the post says, and I quote: ...I've been lucky enough to read a copy. Luckier still, it's amazing. It's even better than the source material. In fact, this is the single best unproduced script I have ever read. Yep. And I really mean it.


Hope the Hollywood stink bosses don't screw it up.

It's four AM and thanks to a combination of restless pets, falling asleep in the living room only to wake an hour later (I have difficulty going back to sleep when I'm awakened abruptly), and two movies on TCM I wanted to see, here I am.

The movies? I Bury the Living, a pretty cool 50's horror flick (with no monsters!) that starred Richard (Paladin, Have Gun Will Travel) Boone as the head of a cemetery committee. In his office at the cemetery, there's a big honkin' map (see pic above) which shows all the plots, and which features a system by which white pins are placed in plots belonging to living people, and black pins are placed in plots that are, shall we say, permanently occupied. By chance, he discovers that by placing a black pin in the plot of a living person, that person soon dies, and vice versa! Needless to say, this becomes a distressing situation, though never fear- it's not quite what it seems. Shot on a modest budget complete with day-for-night scenes, and saddled with a script that you wish was just a little sharper, it nevertheless evokes a nicely morbid mood and is very engrossing. Features Theo (Rance Mohammitz, 200 Motels, later Warner/Reprise artist) Bikel adopting a dreadful approximation of a Scottish brogue as the graveyard's caretaker. Bikel's music has never really been my cup o'tea, but I just think it's cool that he used to be on WBR, and got listed often on those $2 Loss Leaders they used to sell. Anyway, I first saw it back in 1973 or '74 on Channel 4 Nashville's Creature Features, so there's also that nice nostalgia buzz as well.

The second flick was new to me- I'd heard of it, but never had the opportunity to view it before. It says Dead Men Walk was made in 1943, but it looks like it could have been made 15 years earlier- everything looked cheap, creaky and dated...and this gave it a creepy mood that a bigger budget wouldn't have been able to approach. Funny how that works. Walk is pretty much a no-frills horror movie made in the waning days of the 30's horror boom- George Zucco, usually seen as a priest of the Mummy or a mad doctor or whatnot stars as twin brothers, one an upstanding doctor in a small town and the other a Satanist who is killed by his brother (for reasons unknown, it happened before the events of the film) but comes back to life as a vampire and swears vengeance on his twin, as well as his daughter. It pretty much proceeds in tried-and-true Dracula fashion after that, as Evil George, aided by hunchbacked assistant Zolar (Dwight Frye, who died not long after this as made), puts the bite on the daughter and intends to make her his thrall. There's a pretty good synopsis at the IMDb link above, including a mention of the creepy monologue at the beginning of the movie featuring the superimposed, lowlighted face of uncredited Forrest Taylor, which sets a suitably eerie tone. The rest of the movie doesn't quite live up, but it had a certain surreal atmosphere and was well worth viewing, especially if you're, oh, unable to sleep like your humble correspondent!

In other news from hither and yon, I see where Brad Delp, singer for the sporadic 70's group Boston, has died. Much to my surprise, I see where many around the Blogosphere are mourning his passing, but I won't join them. Nothing against Delp, who was a fine person I'm sure, and yes, it's sad that he died...but I could never stand that band's music, so I don't quite have the same attachment that many do. To me, it was always grotesquely slick, intermittently tuneful (yes, even catchy, but that doesn't equate good) edge-free corporate rock (in fact, one of the first of the corporate rock bands) that always served as fuel for numerous rage-filled "X can't get arrested in America or on the charts, but frigging BOSTON and the like are HUGE" diatribes. I saw Boston in 1976, part of a triple bill that also featured Manfred Mann's Earth Band (touring on "Blinded by the Light", and the main reason I was there) and pre-Steve Perry Journey, and I wish I could say that I remember it vividly but I don't, and that's only partly because of casual drug abuse. I wasn't impressed then, and it didn't get any better as that debut album and its followup became ubitiquous on radio and in my friends' record collections. So I'm sorry for the loss of the man, but I'm not inclined to mourn the memory of the group.

Back to TV, I watched two episodes of 30 Rock Thursday evening, because I'd read a lot of positive word of mouth by a lot of people whose opinions I respect. And what did I think? Well, I was disappointed. The humor was a lot broader and more farcical than I expected, often just plain ol' silly as opposed to witty or clever. I will say this, though- Alec Baldwin is indeed very good, often eliciting more chuckles by simply reacting to the insanity than contributing, and the first episode, which featured Nathan Lane as a scam-running long-lost brother, got really good when a booze-swilling and loud-mouthed Molly Shannon, of all people, joined in as one of a group of his siblings. Biggest annoyance was Tracy Morgan's "Tracy Jordan", whose eccentric character is supposed to be "wacky" or "edgy", I suppose, but just struck me as "goofy" and "irritating" and made me want to channel surf until his scenes were over. And honestly, I didn't really find many reasons to empathize, sympathize, relate to, like, or even root for, Tina Fey's Liz Lemon character- who seems to be the center around which the show revolves. Maybe I just didn't screen the right episodes, who knows, but she never seemed to have a consistent stance, an internal logic, in her portrayal- manic, petty one time, warm and approachable another, scatterbrained and silly another, and so on. And this is coming from someone who likes Dirt, where nobody is likeable. Oh well, it was enjoyable enough, and I'll probably watch it again next week, if it airs. I think it's got a hiatus coming up. We'll see.

It's now 5 AM, I'm actually yawning a little, and things seem to have settled down so I think I'll stop now and try to get some shuteye. Good morning to ye.


Cross-posted from the LJ.