Saturday, May 27, 2006
Review: X-Men - The Last Stand
WARNING: This review contains major spoilers, so if you're pregnant, under twelve or sensitive to that kind of thing, you might want to be careful.If I was to sum up Twentieth Century Fox’s X-Men: The Last Stand, I’d call it a low-rent remake of Return of the Jedi. It’s a big-budget bonanza designed to tie up the remaining threads of a trilogy, it strides to make epic emotional connections as the characters we’ve followed face their destiny, and it sacrifices a lot of good potential for drama to make way for big action spectacles.
The Last Stand essentially picks up where 2003’s X2 left off. Our characters are still very much feeling the effects of the death of team-mate Jean Grey - who sacrificed herself to save the gang at the climax of the last movie – especially Cyclops, who is understandably still having trouble coming to terms with his loss. But successful superhero movies don’t get by on emotional issues alone, so here comes the plot: a scientist, whose own son is a mutant, has discovered an antibody which ‘supresses the mutant X-gene.’ In effect, a cure.
The reaction to this news is somewhat mixed. Most of the mutants take offence to the fact that their kind is being labelled as a disease, some – like Rogue – are happy that they can now be rid of the affliction that has plagued them all their lives, and the more radical section led by Magneto decide it’s another step towards mutant extermination, and decide the best way forward is to launch a counterstrike. Thus, the X-Men must decide which faction to side with: humanity, or the Brotherhood of Mutants. It doesn’t help matters that Jean Grey has suddenly risen from her watery grave, and seems intent on giving anyone who crosses her path the emo stare. The last stand has begun.
X-Men 3 has had a pretty rough time during production, what with Bryan Singer leaving to take on Superman Returns for Warners and then Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake) coming in and almost immediately leaving, leaving the not exactly fan-favourite Brett Ratner (Rush Hour) to take the reigns. I admit that I was one of the ones against Ratner taking over, but now that I’ve seen the movie, I can’t say much is really his fault, at least as much as I know, anyway. It’s directed with a minimum of flair and just the right side of competence really, very much a point-and-click job. However, I think the best thing he’s done with the film is make it like Bryan Singer’s first two movies. Another director – possibly Vaughn – might have taken it upon himself to stamp his own style and imprint onto the film, and in the proceeds could have distanced it from the other films. In fact, claiming that Brett Ratner really has a style might be a bit too much, but he worked for this film.
However, that doesn’t mean the film is a huge success. I don’t think much of it is a success at all, but let me explain where I’m coming from. I am one of the people who grew up reading the X-Men, or rather mainly Wolverine, enjoyed the first movie and loved the second, both with reservations. They’re not perfect, but I don’t think they’re bad movies, and I think the second one is very good, and they did an interesting job of taking the X-Men into the real world, even if that did mean some changes, some for the better, some for the worse. However, one of the big things that makes X3 consistent with the first two films is that it performs a big injustice to Cyclops as a character. That’s the thing with these movies, Wolverine is the star. That’s not necessarily their fault, after all Wolverine has been a beloved character for a long time, and in the mainstream, probably the second most popular Marvel property behind Spider-Man. However, in the comics, Cyclops has always been the leader of the team and a big part of the success, which has unfortunately been ignored in the films.
I’m not sure who to blame for Cyclops in X3, to be honest. He was so underwritten in the first two movies, that it must have been tempting to do what they did with him because he seemed to not matter. On the other hand, what they did with him takes a large chunk of the power of Jean’s story away immediately. And if you’re going to finally use a character in a major way, the last part of a trilogy might be the place to do it. In any case, the bottom line is that Cyclops spends the first ten minutes or so of X3 pining for Jean, before travelling to Alkali Lake where he discovers she’s alive. Unfortunately, she then kills him. Ain’t love a bitch?
The thing is, he’s not even killed on-screen. They kiss, we see his skin go weird in the same way that people who touched Rogue does, and we cut away, leaving us to wonder what exactly happened until the scene where Wolverine finds his glasses. It’s a quite tender scene really, where Cyclops takes off his specs to have Jean suppress his optic blast, and showed the tragic potential of that relationship in relation to her own power. Then she kills him. Oh well.
In terms of the plot, the mutant cure that it centres around is a pretty good device. In essence, it’s seemingly created because the mayor from Batman Returns doesn’t like the fact that his son (the doe-eyed Angel) has wings. As a side note, for a character that’s being introduced in this film as one of the major new ones, he doesn’t get to do a lot, and has maybe ten minutes of screen time. But that’s neither here nor there. The prospect of a cure for mutancy is a powerful thematic device, because it allows us to immediately ask ourselves questions about how we would act if we were a mutant, or if we lived amongst mutants. If we lived our lives being persecuted, would we take this chance to be normal and live a normal life, or would we take offence at the prospect of being “cured”? Would we even take up arms over such a threat? Or, to use one of the X-Men as an example, if we were like Rogue, who cannot touch anyone without hurting them and has seen her once boyfriend moving on to pastures new i.e. Kitty Pryde, would we still want to be a mutant in the face of this cure?
It’s these kind of themes that made me respect the first two movies so much. I appreciate Wolverine and the gang in action as much as the next person, but these were movies that actually made you think about these kind of things happening, something that always put the X-Men apart for me. This comes into play again, concerning Professor Xavier, in a plot thread I’m not sure about. It starts with the opening sequence, where we see a young Xavier and Magneto visit a pre-teen Jean Grey. The sequence has been talked about a lot, and features brand new computer effects which allow Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen to play their younger selves, using some kind of weird process. It mostly works for the scene, but there’s something a little odd about it. It’s like seeing CGI people; the technology has got most of it down pat, but there’s something about them that makes it a little too perfect, and a little too eerie. Unfortunately, this makes the scene a tad distracting.
Xavier and Magneto are there to see Jean about coming to the school. She shows then her immense power, lifting all of the cars in her street, as well as various household objects (watch out for the obligatory Stan Lee cameo, true believers!). Fast forward to present day when Jean is found and taken back to Xavier’s, and we find out that Xavier installed “psychic barriers” in her mind to prevent her from accessing this power, which would make her more powerful than Xavier himself. Now, I’m in too minds about this thread. On one hand, I like it because it installs doubt in the previously perfect Xavier, and creates conflict, which is always good. On the other hand, it makes him seem like a dick, which takes away the power of his death scene, which we don’t really care about, half because it’s not really done that well, and half because we’ve completely lost faith in the character because of what he’s done to Jean.
Jean herself, that’s a different story together. In the comics, the ‘Phoenix’ entity came about because of some alien dealings after she died. In X3, it’s revealed that it’s always been in her subconscious, rather like the reinvention of Two Face in Batman: The Animated Series. Thus, when she awakes, this subconscious part takes over and she wreaks havoc. Well, havoc might be too strong a word, as she never really gets that far, which is probably the most disappointing facet of the movie. It’s almost reduced to a sub-plot, only really coming into focus during the end, where she’s dispatched by Wolverine in a very ordinary manner. The thing is, and this is where Return of the Jedi - and to some extent, Revenge of the Sith – comes into play, the whole Phoenix story very much leaves us wanting much more.
This is where the story should have gone into truly epic territory. The second movie was building up to it, still a relatively small film in a lot of areas, but you could see where it was going. This movie needed to have Jean going crazy, showing the “class 5 power” (as we’re told she has) really kicking the ass of everything in its path, as opposed to turning a few soldiers into dust and throwing a few things around. The movie just never raises itself to this level, even with Magneto storming Alcatraz. The final battle is some of the best material in the film, with some truly fun action scenes, but by the time Wolverine stabs Phoenix, you start to realize it’s all over very quickly and something is wrong.
Where I relate it to the aforementioned Star Wars movies, is with the themes of turning to that dark side, to coin a phrase (!), and then the overall redemption. Obviously, I’m not necessarily holding up Sith as a level of quality in this area, as it fumbled that whole bit rather badly, just as a guideline. What Jean needed to do is to go down that dark side like never before, and take the ultimate route of joining Magneto, before being the final person to stop him before he does his thing and tries to destroy mankind again, thus earning her redemption and creating that rather pesky thing called a character arc. When Logan kills Jean, we don’t feel pain, we don’t feel horrified, we don’t really feel surprised. It’s just another climax to an action sequence, and seems like a complete cop-out. A bit like Sith, really.
As opposed to the fumbling of the Phoenix, one of my favourite things about the film was Beast. Originally, I wasn’t sure at all about the look of the character, but seeing him as flesh and blood on screen, especially while fighting, was wonderful, and Kelsey Grammar brought a brilliant degree of class and humility to the role. It was a bit jarring to see his opening scene, where he is hanging upside down from his office ceiling, although it helped me realize that this is almost a literal adaptation of the animated series.
The Danger Room sequence was fun, and worked well to introduce the X-Men as a team, although I’m sure the scene was taken almost verbatim from the comics or the cartoon, as it seems very, very familiar. Not showing the Sentinels in proper form was a bit of a cop-out, but I suppose there’s only so much money they can throw at the screen, and I guess the Golden Gate Bridge sequence used a lot of that. That scene itself was fun, and a great idea, but never seemed to hit the right epic note. It almost seemed like taking an idea that was amazing in theory, but executing it with almost pedestrian competence, so it was more ‘Oh, that’s cool’ instead of ‘Holy shit!’
All the actors did reasonably well. McKellen and Stewart were the cornerstones as usual, along with Hugh Jackman, although I thought Wolverine in the film was written a bit too stereotypically, although perhaps not enough it seems because like in X2, it showed him crying! Sorry, fanboy moment. However, the worst actor in the film was Vinnie Jones. When he wasn’t speaking, he was fine. But as soon as that cockney accent came out of his mouth, my fiancée and I broke into uproarious laughter, especially during ‘I’m the Juggernaut, bitch!’
One thing that perplexed me was Mystique. This was a character who was used to great effect in the first two films, but was very quickly shifted out of the way, like Cyclops, quite unceremoniously. From the first two movies, you had the sense that she had such a dislike for humans and how they had treated her, and support for the mutant cause in general, that to see her betraying them just seemed completely out of character. I can see Magneto as a character who can betray someone easily and not think about it, but to see her do that as an act of revenge seemed petty, and not an act I would associate with her character.
The only other aspect I can really think about that really had an effect on me was the music, which was uniformly terrible. Not to go back to the last movie, but John Ottman’s score for X2 – particularly the main theme – was a highpoint in superhero movie scoring during a time when even people like Danny Elfman, creator of the legendary Batman '89 theme, couldn’t bring themselves to create appropriately great music for a character like Spider-Man. But the music here, the main themes, the incidental music, it was all absolutely terrible. I think people sometimes forget the effect a great piece of music can have (just watch the Superman Returns trailers without John Williams’ score and see how your view changes), and here, that effect is lost because of the complete direness of the music.
At the end of the day, I didn’t hate the film. I enjoyed it as an experience, but there were so many missteps in it that are impossible to ignore, whether it be the fault of the director, the screenwriter, the producer or whoever. As a dumb action movie, it’s a fun movie. As a more serious and character-driven film, it doesn’t work. The best way to approach this movie is to look for some good superhero action and some cool set-pieces. If you expect to care about the characters, you might want to look somewhere else. But if you just want to switch your brain off and watch Colossus throw a Wolverine fastball, this is the movie for you.
Enjoyment: 7
Quality: 5 Continue reading Review: X-Men - The Last Stand
News Round-Up: 5/27/06
The first picture from Miss Potter has been released, showing Renee Zellwegger now looking like a hamster in Victorian clothes and Ewen McGregor sporting a moustache. Miss Potter tells the story of "Finding Neverland" but with Beatrix Potter and less wanting to have sex with kids. Look forward to a deeply tepid Oscar campaign for this Dec 29th released film.
Source: USA Today
Be Kind, Rewind is the upcoming Jack Black/Michael Gondry film that could be the greatest and worst thing ever at the same time. What we know of the plot involves Jack Black having to act out old movies (The Lion King, Rush Hour, Back to the Future, and Robocop) on account of nuclear reactors, magnetic brains and an old lady who goes to a video shop. We can assume that either a: people still take drugs in Hollywood or b: we don't know enough about this film to judge anything yet. Anyway, today's news is that Danny Glover and Kirsten Dunst have been added to the cast. It would be hilarious if Danny would say 'I'm too old for this' at some point in the film and for Kirstin to say 'I'm too untalented for this' and then walk off the screen. Forever.Source: The Hollywood Reporter
Some guy called David Ross is going to make some film called The Babysitters. The only thing David Ross has done previously is write Lucky McKee's The Woods which has the honour of still not having been released. The Babysitters is about a group of teenage babysitters that set themselves up as a call girl ring. And with that, the Internet paid attention. Interestingly, The Woods is also about a lot of teenage girls (in a boarding school this time) thus proving that David Ross is a total perv and needs to make lots and lots of films.
Source: Variety
Finally, Sony wants Speilberg to direct the follow-up to The Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons, which apparently has exactly the same story as Code excpet this time someone is trying to kill the Pope. Spielberg made his name adapting trashy novel Jaws, and remember that Mario Puzo's "The Godfather" book is also a terrible piece of crap. In fact a lot of those 70's films that so defined a generation are based on trashy B-Movie staples - gangsters, cops'n'robbers, star warses - so the idea of making something transcendant out of something ass is not unprecendented. However, we should probably just read this story as 'Studio Wants Spielberg To Direct Film', because everyone wants Spielberg to direct everything. It is amazingly unlikely to happen. What would be amazingly cool to happen is if Henry Winkler directed it.Source: Sky News Continue reading News Round-Up: 5/27/06
Friday, May 26, 2006
Live! Featuring Deer Hunter Wannabes and Cuban Hotness
I feel unworthy. Here at TFL certain lines are obviously drawn when it comes to some news pieces. Mr. Brigden, The Barbarian of Bristol, obviously has all things Superman (which I briefly stole, and will probably get cleaved with an axe because of it) Star Wars, and Blade Runner straddled in his British bear-like grip. Mr. Clarke hates everything and you, and with George Merchan we have the customary, "SHE'S FUCKING HAWT!" posts and an encyclopedic database of actresses and their distracting poses. I'm handling a story involving Eva Mendes seems like a crime against higher powers, but for now you can stomach my attempt at humor and the awkward validatation of my heterosexuality.Now that that's out of the way, it seems Ms. Mendes, fresh off her "look at me, I'm hot and a plot device/love interest" role in Ghost Rider, is taking the lead role in a new movie entitled Live! The film's story revolves around a documentary crew lensing (lensing) the exploits of new president of programming (Mendes) who's creating a reality show with real live Russian Roulette. Why this or a live PPV event of death penalties hasn't actually been realized is beyond me.
Live! is being directed by Bill Guttentag; an Academy Award winner who seems to have made nothing but documentaries I've never been able to see. The premise, however, is enough to keep my eyes open. As is this:
Now that I have posted that picture it's impossible to refer to me as gay. It's like a magic spell. You can't do it.
Source: Production Weekly
Continue reading Live! Featuring Deer Hunter Wannabes and Cuban Hotness
Blade Running Towards Us!
Remember this? Well it appears someone was listening, as know-it-all media rag Variety (a little more reliable than the St. Olaf Trader) not only the confirmation of TWO new DVDs, but also an actual theatrical release of Ridley Scott's brand new cut of Blade Runner!
It appears that all the legal entanglements have been sorted, and Ridley will finally be able to deliver what he's been promising for a while: a brand-new version of the film that is true to his vision. Variety states that '"The restored "Director's Cut" will debut on homevid in September, and remain on sale for four months only, after which time it will be placed on moratorium. "Blade Runner: Final Cut" will arrive in 2007 for a limited 25th anniversary theatrical run, followed by a special edition DVD with the three previous versions offered as alternate viewing: Besides the original theatrical version and director's cut, the expanded international theatrical cut will be included. The set will also contain additional bonus materials.'
If you've seen the recent mammoth four-disc Kingdom of Heaven: Director's Cut, or the Gladiator Extended Edition, or the Black Hawk Down 3-Disc, or Legend Ultimate Edition, then you know how good the extras - as created by Charlie Di Laurizika and his maverick team - are going to be. We'll start to find out later this year.
Source: Variety Continue reading Blade Running Towards Us!
Taking The Woo Boat To China
I have a theory that we forgive foreign language films the most terrible cinematic crimes because we can't understand what they are saying. If the actors are bad or the dialogue terrible we let it go because we can only access them through the filter of subtitles. We don't have direct access to the acting so we have to project from that flat white text and the constant funny-talk towards an understanding of the performance. We have, in other words, to use our imaginations, and that tends to make everything better. We project the cool shit we want to think the films are about. And so we get to the almost mythical Hong Kong films of John Woo.Because those films are really fucking cheesy. Whenever people aren't shooting each other, the films tend towards melodrama, cliche and histrionic sentimentality which, if transplanted wholesale into a Hollywood action movie would be met with utter derision and possible accusations of homosexuality from the average Hollywood action movie fan. These 'broad' emotional strokes that Woo employs make a lot more sense when you read of his openly admitted inspiration from Golden Era Hollywood films - A period when 'naturalism' still meant 'nudie-films'.
Is it any wonder then, that when Woo came over to Hollywood and that filter of funny foriegn talk was removed, we scoffed at the cheese and non-sensical OTT-osity (word) of what he produced? He also got some terrible material given to him but his Hollywood product still feels very much like Woo product so I wouldn't be too quick to lay all the blame at the heartless round-eyes. His style and sensibilities, unfortunately, simply don't fit the current formula for western films, and the last 10 years have been mostly a disaster.
So, thankfully for everyone, Woo has been wooed back to Hong Kong. He's producing a love triangle drama which no-one will see and directing The Battle of Red Cliff, starring Chow Yun Fat, Andy Lau and Tony Leung (which is kind of like putting the young DeNiro and Pacino and Brando in a film together, and then having them shoot each other for two hours). Woo will be back to where he's a big fish again and can do what he wants, and we can all go back to hailing Woo as the autuer director of funny foreign talk classics and not just the director of some crummy Hollywood punchers.One final thing: every so often I see attempts to talk up Windtalkers as a misunderstood classic. This is wrong and you will stop it. I'll take Face-Off as a comedy but the rest of his western films can happily disappear into the bargain bin of Hollywood history. I'm serious. Just stop it.
Source: www.guardian.co.uk Continue reading Taking The Woo Boat To China
Thursday, May 25, 2006
In Today's WTF News: OMG Meriadoc Brandybuck?!
Lost action figures... are you f'realz?
Official press release from McFarlane Toys:
McFarlane Toys will soon give Lost's legions of fans something new to obsess over. A series of Lost action figures is scheduled to be released late fall, 2006, and is destined to populate office cubicles around the country.
McFarlane Toys' Lost Series 1 captures six fan-favorite characters from the series' first season: Jack, Kate, Locke, Hurley, Charlie and Shannon. Each 6-inch Lost figure will have a detailed base and photographic backdrop, capturing an episode-specific moment in the character's story. In addition, each package will include a detailed prop reproduction central to the character's story, enabling fans to "own" a piece of the show's mythology. For example, Kate's figure will be packaged with a reproduction of the toy airplane that plays so prominently into her backstory. More than just action figures, McFarlane's Lost figures will once again raise the bar for fans and for the industry.
We will also be releasing Lost deluxe boxed sets -- re-creating key moments between multiple characters, and small-scale dioramas -- replicating central locations such as the mysterious island and the infamous hatch.
I'm hoping for McFarlane Toys to bust out Desperate Housewives figures next.
Source: Collider.com
Continue reading In Today's WTF News: OMG Meriadoc Brandybuck?!
Trailer: My Super Ex-Girlfriend
*sigh*
The less said about My Super Ex-Girlfriend's trailer, the better. I'm only posting this because I love Uma Thurman. But goddamn, if I hear Fine Young Cannibals again, it'll be TOO fucking soon.
My Super Ex-Girlfriend, directed by Ivan "I haven't made a tolerable film since Kindergaten Cop and even that's really only 'cause of my gay love for Arnold" Reitman pummels theaters and movie-goers on July 21st.
Check out the trailer in MTV's annoying Flash format here, homegirl.
Source: MTV Continue reading Trailer: My Super Ex-Girlfriend
Iron Favreau
Jon Favreau is one of those directors who always try to keep their fingers in the film community (his Dinner for Five series is often some of the best TV I’ve seen) and particularly in the geek crowds. Along with Peter Jackson, Guillermo Del Toro, and Bryan Singer we have Favreau, who has always kind of been a lesser B version of the aforementioned filmmakers who don’t pretend the internet doesn’t exist. However, there hasn’t been a film to establish his ultimate credibility in the all too dangerous world of internet geekdom (where you can get overzealous Chuck Norris quotes 8 million times before someone says, “That joke is a bit old.”).But now that Marvel Comics has picked him up to direct their first film to be made in house, he might just have a chance to make everyone’s eyes turn with Iron Man. For starters, a few weeks ago he put up a MySpace area for discussion. The real news though is from MTV, where little bits of info has trickled out and enlightened us to what he might be going for.
"We're set to come out in the summer of '08, and we'll start shooting in January."
Sounds like a good enough time frame to get things started and sorted out, and certainly isn’t the death trap of time that the X movies were. One for one Favreau.
"The alcoholism doesn't come into play until later on in the story of Iron Man," he said. "[The comic] started off in the '60s, where it was about him as a successful manufacturer who developed this suit. Then, later, it spins off into that story about him fighting against himself. I think we're going to lay the groundwork for it, but the first one's going to explore him taking on this alter ego of Iron Man, and developing the suit, and what happens politically within the Stark Corporation."
Thank god. Tony Stark’s alcoholism was one of those two dimensional quirks that were added to make him seem more “real,” but unlike other characters it just felt tacked on since Tony was never really that fleshed out to begin with. Parker had his love problems, Captain America struggled with his patriotism, and Tony Stark drank one too many Zimas. I salute you Favreau.
"We're gonna have it take place in the present day, but there will be an origin story that has the old, gray Iron Man suit; eventually it will progress into more of the modern look," Favreau said. "That's the fun of doing the first one."
Ah, shit.
Origin stories at this point are the most boring thing you can do for a comic character for the first movie. Everyone knows what to expect, they’re usually hard to handle without a certain clumsiness to it, and they waste the prospects of what could be a good first movie instead of a mediocre one. Could be worse, I guess. He could take most of those MySpace suggestions seriously.
And plus the myriad of “TOM CRU1S3 4 STRK!!1!!!” can finally stop:
Mentioning an eventual "Iron Man 2," Favreau said that actor playing Tony Stark for his franchise is unlikely to be a major star (Tom Cruise was briefly attached to the role years ago). Instead, the director hopes to announce his discovery of a relative unknown from the Brandon Routh ("Superman Returns") mold later this year.
Besides being an origin story I’m definitely looking forward to what Favreau will bring to the table for this film. It sounds like he’s focusing more on the fun than the drab “superheroes are real” approach, and that’s always a plus.
Source: MTV Continue reading Iron Favreau
From Krunk Beats To Gentle Twangs
Craig Brewer's Hustle & Flow was an absolutely marvelous film. I saw it for the first time a couple of months ago, and it would've easily cracked my Top 10 for 2005. It's a film that plays with an old and familiar formula (underdog fights trials and tribulations, makes it in the end, audience feels good), but it's a perfect example of how inspired execution can help elevate a film above and beyond its formulaic trappings. Also, it helps when you've got Terrence Howard delivering an absolutely powerhouse performance.So with that said, Brewer has really become a director to follow. And for his new project, it seems like we'll be following him back to Tennessee.
Brewer's sticking with Paramount for his next project, Maggie Lynn, a country-music drama that he'll both write and direct.
"Maggie Lynn follows a woman who gets her heart broken and achieves a sense of self-worth by returning home to Tennessee, where she teams with her older brother to play country music in honkytonks."
Brewer's next film to hit theaters will be the Blues drama Black Snake Moan, starring Samuel L. Jackson, Christina Ricci, and Justin Timberlake.
Hip Hop... Blues... Country... though word is apparently a bit mixed on Black Snake Moan, it's obvious that Brewer is trying to make a statement about not only the music in the South, but about the people there, their way of life, and how it revolves around sounds so intrinsic to that part of the country. It'll be interesting to see who he gets aboard Maggie Lynn.
Till then, if you haven't seen Hustle & Flow yet, do it. You'll have a smile on your face and you'll be downloading the soundtrack in a heartbeat.
Source: Variety Continue reading From Krunk Beats To Gentle Twangs
Before the Devil Knows You Worked With Michael Jackson
I’ve only seen two Sidney Lumet films, unfortunately. I saw 12 Angry Men quite some time ago when I was much younger. It was one of those films that made me want to see more movies until I became a glutton of cinema. I saw The Wiz when I was even younger, and apparently I liked it a lot as a kid. It was the only other time I remember seeing Michael Jackson in another role besides being in Moonwalker, which to this day simply fascinates me with its content. You can’t even explain it, you just have to watch it in complete awe as a glorious and sticky emerald light bathes you with shame. And Joe Pesci.I’ve also been looking forward to Find Me Guilty, which apparently is rather praised because Vin Diesel was finally able to actually act. If Lumet was a linchpin in giving Diesel a chance to display his acting chops, he deserves a gold plated diaper edition of The Pacifier.
All this cumulates to making me a bit excited about him pulling Ethan Hawke out of the little slump he’s been in since Before Sunset with his new film Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. The film revolves around a heist that two brothers hatch on their parent’s jewelry store that turns horribly wrong. Supposedly it’s to be in the vein of a thriller, but I have a feeling it will turn out rather well regardless of what obscure and broad genre people might put it in. Joining Hawke is the bulbous minion of Tim Burton, Albert Finney, and Marisa Tomei (are we still angry at her for winning a Oscar? My Cousin Vinny did have Joe Pesci in it!).
Shooting for the film begins June 19th in New York City. If for some reason they stop by northeast Ohio I’ll take some creepy pictures of Marisa Tomei for you.
And just to round this out to three mentions:
Joe Pesci.
Source: Dark Horizons Continue reading Before the Devil Knows You Worked With Michael Jackson
Ledger & Williams: Tangled Up In Dylan
You may not have had the class or simply the opportunity to see Brokeback Mountain (or admit that you loved it, butt sex and all), but if you did, you witnessed two of Hollywood's most competent young actors playing a very confused, "marriage-by-numbers" couple torn apart by the vile scourge of homersexuality. I'm talking about Heath Ledger and Michelle Williams (my feelings about the acting skills of Brokeback's other pair, Jake Gyllenhaal and Anne Hathaway, will remain unspoken for now), who gossip fiends already know have also become intimately acquainted in the real world.
Apparently they enjoy working together, because both have signed on to Todd Haynes' upcoming Bob Dylan movie, I'm Not There. The two are joined by a bevy of big-time actors, including Richard Gere, Cate Blanchett, Christian Bale and Julianne Moore. Ledger takes the place of Colin Farrell, who had to drop out of the production because Dylan just didn't get laid enough, one might presume. Heath is slated to play one of seven incarnations of Dylan over the span the legendary rocker's life. I have no idea how that will work out in the film, because I only know of two Dylans, the folkie and the post-folkie. Even stranger, according to IMDB actress Charlotte Gainsbourg (21 Grams, Jane Eyre) will be playing a Dylan as well. Somehow, after seeing a picture of Gainsbourg, the idea is not that hard to accept. Williams will play a model in the film. Not a major stretch for a woman of Williams' abilities or gorgeous physical attributes, but I imagine the role is not as flimsy as it sounds.
If we're lucky, the performance scenes will be tastefully handled. I can take one or two Bob Dylan impersonations. Seven might be like a giant rolling stone to the neck.
Source: Dark Horizons Continue reading Ledger & Williams: Tangled Up In Dylan
Superman Returns Round-Up
When I saw the first trailer for Superman Returns, there were a lot of things I liked. Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor is over the top fun on a nuclear level. A lot of the effects look very well done save for one or two, but I can see a lot of the same feeling of enjoyment I had watching Spider-Man web slinging with watching Superman fly, even if some CGI was a bit undercooked. There was something missing, for one it seemed they were quieting Routh a bit. But the first trailer really didn’t have the feeling I was looking for.That said, this international trailer really gets me excited.
The music, the tone, the dialogue, it all seems just about the best fit a Superman movie could have. Kate Bosworth always worried me, and I found myself wishing Natalie Portman was in her role for a long while, but a lot of the little bits of the trailer seem to suggest otherwise. Routh was also a worry, and though he looked the part (albeit, a little more boyish than I hoped) his credits never suggested he could handle the acting. A few moments in the trailer seems to show promise, but doesn’t really prove my worry away just yet.
Besides that the trailer is just very well made and reflects a movie that might be on par with Spider-Man 2 and X2 in the top superhero films realm.
Along with the international trailer there are four TV spots and the new poster that has popped up recently. I really like the poster, and you can click the image of it above for a bigger version. One of the TV spots has horrible music that kills the whole feel, but the others range from okay to pretty good.
Source: Dave's Trailer Page, AICN Continue reading Superman Returns Round-Up
The Descent - The Best Chick Flick Since Foxfire!
If you haven't seen Writer/Director Neil Marshall's breakthrough action-horror feature Dog Soldiers, stop reading now and go watch it. The rest of this story will be waiting for you later.
Back? Okay, now that we're all on the same page (that was some bloody, fun werewolf shit, wasn't it?), Marshall's latest scarefest, The Descent, which has come and gone in other, more civilized countries already, is finally getting a proper theatrical release in the U.S. this August. The ever-vigilant folks over at JoBlo.com have offered an exclusive look at the stateside poster for this "creepy, wet things in caves" shudder-inducer.
The movie is actually pretty good, and quite scary in a visceral, pull-no-punches kind of way. It's refreshing to see a horror movie with an all-female cast (except for a few opening scenes) that doesn't turn overly sappy or stupid. This isn't a typical scream queen throwaway, by any means. But it does have a lot of athletic babes running around in claustrophobic spaces. Even though I bought an import DVD of it months ago, I'll be going to the theater to see this. Check out the rather amazing poster by clicking the pic above.
Source: JoBlo.com Continue reading The Descent - The Best Chick Flick Since Foxfire!
I Am Incredibly Gay For Leonard Cohen
A new concert film/biography of Leonard Cohen is being released on June 21st, going up against Adam Sandler's new 'comedy' 'film' Click for your entertainment dollars. The Fake Life recommends that you see I'm Your Man instead of Click or, if the inevitable limited release means it is not playing in your town, pulling out your fingernails with pliers. If you live near to Adam Sandler, try pulling out his fingernails with pliers.
The film consists of performances from several tribute concerts by many of the coolest artists today like Nick 'I am awesome' Cave, Antony 'and the Johnsons' Hegarty, Martha 'I have an annoying brother' Wainwright and Rufus 'I am annoying' Wainwright (my version of 'Chelsea Hotel' is much better than yous, bitch) and finishes with Leonard singing with, bizarrely, U2. Inbetween are interviews from lots of people saying how great Leonard is and Leornard being drily self-deprecating about himself. At the moment we have no idea if the performances will be complete or annoyingly cut-up, if the interviews will be blandly fawning (musicians, like actors, have a habit of having nothing to say without a script/lyric sheet) or if the overall tone will be nothing more than a pr exercise. What we do know is that the only reason this film exists is because Lenny's old accountant stole all his money while he was in a monestary and he needs some cash for his wine.
What I have noticed is that, even if these concert films aren't really that much more than TV specials, they are still immensely enjoyable to watch in the cinema. In the Shadows of Motown - about the backing band for all those great Motown hits - is hardly great cinema and includes some borderline awful 'dramatic recreations', but the music sounds awesome on those big cinema sound systems and it gives you a warm feeling to just see a bunch of people obviously enjoying playing with each other - especially compared to the slightly hysterical hollering of the latest summer spectacle playing on the next screen.One of the main reasons I've heard against listening to this man is that he is just too depressing. I've heard people who will quite happily listen to Nirvana, heavy metal and the turgid nihilism of gangster rap complain that Leonard Cohen is too miserable. You terrible fools. He's actually the greatest living comedian, functioning at such a high level that he's never once got a laugh. Witness these lyrics from 'The Future':
"Destroy another fetus now, We don't like children anyhow, I've seen the future, baby: it is murder."
If you don't think that shit's funny, feel free to go watch Click.
Here's the trailer:
http://www.apple.com/trailers/lions_gate/leonardcohenimyourman/
Source: Apple Continue reading I Am Incredibly Gay For Leonard Cohen
The 6th Element
I like Luc Besson. I like that he went from creating stylishly arty movies (Big Blue and Subway) to creating stylishly kicky euro-action movies (The Transporter) that are actually entertaining. Adding the suffix 'Euro-' to anything has usually been a sign of tedious clumsy dreck. There are interesting and culturally important reasons for this, involving the differences of heritage and language over such small distances but fuck that, Luc's directed another film.
Angel-A is not an attempt to jump James Cameron's guns, nor does it apparently involve sweaty men punching each other until their clothes fall off but is, in fact, a French-language contemporary black and white comedy about a loser who saves a girl from drowning. Finding this news exciting may depend on how much you enjoyed Chris Tucker in The Fifth Element and, I'll admit, I've never really watched Luc's films for the subtle and elegant character comedy. Maybe it will be as charming as Amelie. Maybe the mid-point twist involving the secret past of the girl will involve her being a space alien who likes wearing no clothes. Maybe it's just another foreign language film that no one over here will watch.I hope it will be great, but I will bet more people will watch his kiddie cartoon Arthur and the Minimoys than ever watch this. Sony Classics has picked this up for distribution in the US so God-And-The-French fearing people will be able to avoid this hopefully before the end of the year.
Here's the homepage with trailer:
http://www.angel-a-lefilm.com/
Source: Variety Continue reading The 6th Element
The Vig Is Good
Try as you may, but it's honestly a bit tough not going a bit gay for The Vig™, especially after such wickedly great turns in The Lord of the Rings, Hidalgo, and especially last year's A History of Violence. But fans of his (Vigans?) have known this fact for a long time.Now, fresh off of filming as the titular character in the Spanish film Alatriste, Mortensen will next do what every great King of Men would do.
Become a Nazi.
Production Weekly is reporting that Mortensen will be playing a German professor in the big screen adaptation of CP Taylor's award-winning stage play, Good.
"Good centers on a German professor in Frankfurt during the 1930s who allows himself to be seduced into the Nazi party. As he spirals down the vortex of the Reich, he rationalizes everything -- his betrayal of his family and his Jewish friend as well as the morality he used to teach."
Viggo has a knack for playing characters that are very internal. Psychological. Fucked up. He's great at it. And watching this guy go at it is really something awesome to watch if you appreciate good acting. And from the sounds of it, he'd be perfect for this sort of role.
Mortensen will next be seen in the aforementioned Alatriste, which hits the US this December. Shooting on Good is scheduled to begin on location in Potsdam and Berlin in 2007. We hope to have our very own Shane Yaroch visit the set.
Source: Production Weekly Continue reading The Vig Is Good
Summer Preview 2006 - Part 4
X-Men: The Last StandThe Cast? Patrick Stewart, Hugh Jackman, Ian McKellan, Kelsey Grammar, Vinnie Jones, Angry Youths in Bondage Gear
What's It About? The premise for the film seems like we’re actually hearing a boardroom pitch of a hundred ideas.
“There’s a cure to mutantness. And then Phoenix comes back…but Dark. And Magneto is fucking furious. So are all the swarthy asian mutant raver kids. Oh and JUGGERNAUT…man, is he mad. And then there’s Angel and Beast who do stuff. And more Colossus, but let’s make sure he doesn’t look too good…it might distract the audience from this kickass narrative!”
Then studio exec Tom Rothman says, “OMFG@!1”
Will It Suck? I believe X3 is cryptically referenced in one of Nostradamus’ quatraints as one of the signs of the apocalypse.
“The Singer hath fled into the sky…
A Rat encroaches on the children…
Legions of crows squawk to the heavens
Purple monkey dishwasher.”
Pretty chilling stuff. Nostradmus clearly was talking about fan favorite, Bryan Singer’s, departure from the House That Xavier Built and onwards (upwards remains to be seen) to the House That Jor-El Built. Hastily, the studio set fan not-so favorite Brett Ratner to take the helm and guide the third ship of mega-franchise cash right into their coffers.
I guess I’m in the minority in that I don’t think there was a lot at stake. The X-Men movies got progressively better but I’d rate them as "really-not-that-good" and "better-with-a-couple-moments-of-great" respectively. These were studio product from the get-go. I don’t think Singer had as much creative control as he should have. I mean, they’re both kind of hung on the same Lightshow Device kind of plot. The characters barely resemble their 4-color counterparts and seem more like the workings of people who’ve never opened an X-Men comic in their life. All in all, in comparison to their peers (Spider-Man, Batman) the X-Men films seem like a colossal (haha!) waste of opportunity.
And I’m not expecting much different from the third. Again, scroll up and read the premise.
But there is always a bright side: Spidey 3 in 2007!
Nacho LibreThe Cast? Jables, Ana de la Reguera (painfully HOTT and in nun gear, too...eat my chair), Peter Stormare (?!?!), and some midgets.
What's It About? LUCHADORES!
Will It Suck? I'm willing to bet my mystical third testicle it shall not. What could possibly suck? Jack Black naked manboobs? No. Rasslin' with colorful costumed midgets? Certainly never, you sourpuss. Mexicans? The fulcrum of classless comedy for eons.
Let go of your hatred (and sense of decorum) and laugh at man getting bit in balls by midget. You'll find peace there.
Clerks 2The Cast? Rosario Dawson, Rosario Dawson, Rosario Dawson, Kevin Smith, and Your Mom.
What's It About? According to the internet, it's about Smith going back to the well of good will and flogging his only successful material to pinch a hit off before he goes to Director Phantom Zone. But who listens to the internet? Besides you.
Officially, Dante and Randal find themselves flipping burgers at a fast food joint. Rosario Dawson ensues.
From what I can gather Smith seems to be making an actual sequel here. One that furthers the story of the characters from the first film and (GASP!) commenting on where they are 10 years down the road.
Will It Suck? I'm envisioning Smith standing at home plate, bat slung on his shoulders...pointing out between Clerks and Chasing Amy. If he can keep it honest, profane, and (important) FUNNY...swing away, Lunchbox.
And Rosario Dawson is in it.
What does the rest of the TFL crew have to say?
Charlie Brigden
X-Men 3: Liked the first movie, loved the second. Haven't seen anything from this one that makes me think it'll be anywhere near as good, in fact, some of it looks extraordinarily bad. But who knows?
Nacho Libre: If Jack Black were Wonder Woman, I'd make him have my babies.
Clerks 2: Smith can be brilliant if he wants to. I hope this is more Clerks/Amy than Mallrats/J&SB.
Andrew Clarke
X-Men 3: Like Alien Resurrection, this will be a comedy. Unlike...
Nacho Libre: ...which will probably play to the worst of Jack Black's instincts.
Clerks 2: I found 'Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back' funny, so I may watch that again.
Bill Nolen
X-Men 3: I can't work up much excitement for this franchise. Someone has compared this series to a pumped-up, big-budget version of Nightbreed, an idea that I can't get out of my head (and I don't care that the X-Men comics came first). I want a pumped-up, big-budget REMAKE of Nightbreed starring Hugh Jackman as Peloquin, Ian McKellen as Lylesberg and Eric Bana as Boone. Do it now!
Nacho Libre: I smell Oscar material. Or toasted cumino. What was the last good comedy about some aspect of Mexican culture? The Three Amigos? It's time for another, and I hope this is it, I guess. I'll pay for it.
Clerks 2: The first one was groundbreaking. Too bad Kevin Smith has been wallowing in mediocrity ever since. Read my text-lips, Geek Admiral Smith. I blame you for Ben Affleck, and I don't need this movie.
Carlton Stevens
X-Men 3: At its worst, this film will probably be really boring. At its best, it will probably be really loud and pretty. I don't have the optimism Andrew has about it being a comedy, because Ratner has never been that kind. I used to put hope in it because of McKellan and Stewart, but I realized that every film Brett Ratner has made I've been really bored or annoyed. I'm one of those people who really wish Singer would have stayed on, because as much fun as Superman Returns looks, I'd take one last really good X film over it any day.
Nacho Libre: I really have a not so good sense of humor when it comes to films, I guess. All the ones I find funny probably weren't made to be funny (Transporter 2, but that's debatable on whether it was intentionally that funny) and all the intentional comedies usually annoy the hell out of me (Old School, Napoleon Dynamite). That said, Jack Black is only really funny when he plays a complete asshole or insane, and judging from the trailers he looks to be playing neither. I haven't paid to see a comedy in theaters since The Nutty Professor II: The Klumps (horrible note to leave off on, I know) so I'm not starting now.
Clerks 2: Jesus, Smith. What...what the hell is this? I liked Chasing Amy but you got to stop repeating the circle that you seem to keep riding on, otherwise you'll turn into a very bland comedic version of Michael Bay. And the geeky lines in the trailer feel forced and embarrassing instead of kind of genuine and amusing. I'm not turning over 7 dollars for a retread of geek culture shenanigans and your wife's tits.
George Merchan
X-Men 3: Will I pay $10 for silver screen mediocrity? Wouldn't be the first time.
Nacho Libre: Holy shit! How could you not want to see this? Jack Black + Mexican = JAJAJAJAJA! And yes, Katanga is absolutely right. Ana de la Reguera is teh hott.
Clerks 2: Will Silent Bob pull a Linklater and deliver his Before Sunset? All signs are pointing to an emphatic NO. But surprises are always welcome.
Shane Yaroch
I FIND THE RACISM IN THESE FILMS TO BE SEVERELY LACKING. Continue reading Summer Preview 2006 - Part 4
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Re-Review: Batman Begins
Batman Begins will always stay very much in my mind, although not in the ways I wish it did. Mainly, it was the movie I saw on the first date I had with my fiance, so obviously that sits in my mind. But secondly, and more relative to the subject at hand, it will go down in the same way that Roberto Baggio's spot kick in the USA 94 World Cup did: a surprising miss.
I've just rewatched it for the first time since the theater, and strangely, while some things I didn't like before have grown on me, other things I did like seem more problematic. I'm not sure how to start, really. It was a movie that never really grabbed me with its advertising, and I was looking forward to it purely because I'm a fan of Christopher Nolan, and it had a cast with great potential. However, for me, that potential was never anywhere near realised.
Ironically, one of the things that I really disliked before - the third act - seemed a lot better this time. Maybe better is the wrong word, as it's still very clumsy, but I enjoyed it more. It allowed me to somewhat forget about the stuff that was bugging me, and just let me soak in the film, as it were. However, it was more in a leave-your-brain-at-home action movie style, so maybe that's not so good, at least for a Batman flick. Either that or I have lofty ideals that are too high.
Now, where to start? I might as well start at the beginning. I suppose it has to be mentioned, the film flies by quite fast, and for that reason, so much of it seems so brief. We're barely five minutes in before Liam Neeson's pseudo-Qui-Gon is explaining to Bruce all about his fears and his brand of justice, using lots of heavy dialogue that sounds, like Jim Kelly once said, like it's straight out of a comic book. I think this is more David Goyer than Nolan, but the dialogue is full of meaningful tones as if every line is trying to say something really powerful, but just sounds totally written. In a way, it fits with the frequent artificiality of the film, but as a film itself, it just doesn't gel.As you'll know (you have seen this, right?), the first act is littered with flashbacks. Flashbacks that almost seem arbitrary. We see Bruce fall down the pit in the film's opening dream sequence (dream, flashback, it's kind of the same), we see him and his father, and we see the infamous and foreboding night at the opera that leads to his parents' death. One nitpick I have comes from this, the fact that they leave out the back entrance. Is Gotham that bad that you'd rather walk into a dark and dank alley than maybe leave through the front, which is at least guaranteed to be a bit more of a public place?
When his parents die, again, it all seems so brief. There's no impact, no sense of loss. Sure, we see them die, we see the actor making the pained face expression, but as far as we're concerned, we've just seen two people die in Commando. I don't want to presume about Christopher Nolan's life, and whether he's actually experienced the loss of someone in the first person, but from my viewpoint, this movie doesn't convey that sense of loss, of utter hopelessness. Maybe I'm criticising it too much for that, but as someone who has, it just seems weak. To back up with an example, I'll throw up The Fellowship of the Ring. The scene of Gandalf's death in Moria. In essence, that scene has the right tone to it. Of course, we've been with Gandalf since the start of the film, so there's bound to be a different effect on the audience anyway, but Frodo's response, even Aragorn's response, and the scene on the rocks afterwards. We're not given time to sense the grief, the pain, the loss, and as a result, it doesn't register.
From a dramatic standpoint, the film picks itself up when Wayne is thrown upon the League of Shadows. The fight scenes are well done, and the way it's put together structurally gives a good sense that you're seeing the seeds of what Wayne will become. And again, we flashback to Wayne meeting Katie Holmes at the trial. There's one line just before it between Christian Bale and Michael Caine that almost sums up what this film is trying to do, where Caine's Alfred says 'Will you be returning to Princeton?' Of course, it sounds like an innocence piece of dialogue, but it feels so clumsy, like it's saying "Look, we're in the real world!" which follows with Nolan's insistence in taking Gotham into the world of semi-heightened reality, which as a personal preference, doesn't work with me. The DC comics have always been on a kind of alternate plane, where Metropolis is an alternate Manhattan and Gotham is an alternate Chicago, or Boston. Grounded in a sense of reality, but built upon with a very well constructed fantasy. It would have been less glaring to say 'Will you be returning to Metropolis U?'
The scenes at the trial and around it are well-realized, but unfortunately are unbalanced by the complete lack of chemistry between Bale and Holmes. Again, the dialogue sounds forced and written (especially the 'it's what we do that defines us' spiel), and Holmes' character seems almost shoehorned in to satiate the female demographic and give the film a slight romance aspect. It doesn't work, and the scene would have played much better, especially emotionally, if it was Bruce and Alfred in that car.
So we flip back, and Bruce refuses to execute someone, which leads to him burning down Ra's Al Ghul's place. The scene is well-done, although again it suffers from the same dialogue issues (you almost get the sense Goyer is setting up so many of these lines so they can be repeated later in the film with more meaning, and it's overkill) but overall, it's one of the better scenes. After that, Bruce returns to Gotham to start his crusade, and again, the film starts to go in places that turn me off like naked pictures of Zelda Rubenstein.
It's almost like this section of the film is one of those EPK-type shows where they have a behind-the-scenes of a film and show you all the high-tech gadgetry and wizardry used to make the film. 'The Secrets of Batman Begins!' Here we see Bruce, along with Morgan Freeman's Yoda and Q wrapped into one, as he gathers what he needs to become the Dark Knight, which involves ordering mass parts from China? It's all material that isn't needed, and could have almost been explained away with a line such as:
INT. WAYNE BUILDING - BASEMENT
Bruce walks into the huge warehouse. Lucius Fox sits at a desk, working on some contraption. He's surrounded by boxes, and strange objects covered in tarpaulins.
BRUCE
What's all this stuff?
FOX
Surplus from lost military contracts, prototypes that never went into production.
BRUCE
Can I have a look?
FOX
Take it. After all, it's yours.
What's all this stuff?
FOX
Surplus from lost military contracts, prototypes that never went into production.
BRUCE
Can I have a look?
FOX
Take it. After all, it's yours.
End scene.
At the end of the day, they spend more time worrying about how he creates the ears than the loss of his parents, and for me, that's not a good thing. I'm sure it would work in some other film, but with Batman, at least for me, it's always been about the mystery of the character. He's always been a myth, and the fact that he has these amazing gadgets and the world's coolest car are things that are taken for granted because of the myth. It's not different to Boba Fett. Cool cat who people know little about, but if you maybe for example made him some clone of a bounty hunter along with a million other people, it would destroy the mystery of the character. Hey, wait a second...
And with this, we have some of the supporting characters introduced, such as Jim Gordon, Carmine Falcone, and Jonathan Crane. Gordon probably fares as well as any of the characters bar Alfred; he seems to have some pretty good dialogue, and while there are some clunkers ('I gotta get me one of those'), he pulls the part off very well. Falcone and Crane are another matter. With Crane, I simply feel Cillian Murphy is the wrong actor. Don't get me wrong, he's a good actor, he just seems a tad young for the part, and his method here doesn't work with the character, especially when handling Goyer's dialogue (the 'Bat-Man' line, 'Dr. Crane isn't here right now...) which seems to get especially ludicrous when dealing with Crane. I do like the Scarecrow mask though, and the fear effects are very well done.
Falcone almost seems like he's in a parody of a gangster movie. Tom Wilkinson is an exceptional actor, but he never comes across as anything more than a caricature. There's a scene where Wayne goes into a bar owned by Falcone and speaks to him, and Falcone makes a big speech about being able to kill him despite the bar being full of Gotham's law. The way it's done just sends it into comedy, and Falcone is reduced to this bumbling stereotype as opposed to a man who rules Gotham under a shadow of fear.
However, that is still the funniest thing in the film, despite a whole host of lines designed to make you laugh, but just make you cringe. For example, the scene where the Batmobile is being chased, and a cop radios another cop to say it's coming his way. Cop #2 says 'what does it look like?', we see a shadow scream past and he says 'Nevermind,' taking this movie from serious territory into the realm of Smokey and the Bandit 3. The chase itself seems so artificial, whether it's down to the way it's shot or the effects, but it reminds me of the space fighting scenes in the Star Wars prequels, where there's supposed to be this amazing sense of speed and excitement, but something got lost in the translation. Certain parties will shoot me for this, but Tim Burton's Batmobile chases were more exciting.
And the artificiality of so much of the film kills it. There's a scene where we see the water pipes are bursting in the narrows, and we're given a helicopter shot of the city, and the narrows seem almost pasted in next to the rest of the city, and that's how the film's Gotham feels. And because of that, we're never comfortable with our surroundings and we never really believe in this world. And it doesn't get any better once Bale becomes Batman. Don't get me wrong, there are some great scenes where Bats is taking people out, and what I didn't like in the theater seemed smoother this time, and worked with his movement. But as soon as you hear that voice, it all goes to shit. I don't want to presume what it would actually be like to have to be Batman, and to have to make a fake voice. I'd probably sound worse than Bale. But then I don't have millions of people to satisfy. I think Kevin Conroy has it right in the animated series, where it's a more gravelly and deeper version of Bruce Wayne's normal voice, with the right sense of menace and seriousness. Bale's, well, I'm sorry but it just doesn't work at all. And again, that kills the film. How can you believe in Batman when you snigger or cringe every time he opens his mouth? It's sad, because Christian Bale is an absolutely amazing actor, and I always thought he'd be a good choice.
The next fatal mistake the film makes is something Tim Burton did in the first film. As Ra's Al Ghul appears in Gotham, Neeson gives an excellent speech about the history of the League of Shadows, how they've spent their time razing places such as Rome and London to the ground to fight decadence and corruption, which conjures up all these amazing images in your mind, and then essentially says, 'Oh yeah, we indirectly helped kill your parents too,' once again inextricably linking their death to the major villain of the film, which not only comes across as a weak twist, but changes what Batman is about, at least to me. It doesn't matter who killed Bruce's parents, it's irrelevant. What matters is what Bruce chose to become because of it, not focusing his anger on one aspect of crime, but all aspects. It turns it into personal vengeance, as opposed to the completely open war on crime Batman wages, and just seems an insulting thread made to make us care more the final battle between the two.And the final battle, well, it's something people have talked about a lot. A lot of people have mentioned the fact that Ra's Al Ghul dies, and how this is linked to the whole thematic aspect of Bruce not being an executioner. Bruce says 'I'm not going to kill you, but I'm not going to save you.' That, well, seems a little off to me. A better way of saying it is 'I won't kill you, but I'll happily see you go up in flames.' I remember the end of A Death in the Family, where the Joker is presumed dead but Batman is determined to find his body to bring him to justice, and ends up with Superman holding him back from searching the ocean. That's Batman to me. Letting someone die when you can just as easily swing away and escape it isn't, and personally, puts him more on the side of the dark than the light, and I just can't accept it.
And with a quick coda, and a mention of the Joker, the film ends, and I'm left to ponder why. Christopher Nolan is a wonderful filmmaker. David Goyer... should stick to writing comic books. Bale, Caine et al are wonderful actors. But where everything had so much potential, so much fell short. I'm not sure what I would do if I had the choice to make it. I'd cut out all of the 'making Batman' stuff, I'd excise the Holmes character completely and replace her with Harvey Dent (not the kissing scenes, of course), and I'd spend a lot more time on the death of Bruce's parents. Up until now, only one example of Batman on film has been able to do that successfully, and that was the animated film Mask of the Phantasm, and even that didn't spend a whole lot of time.
Despite this, I'm hopeful of the future. Christopher Nolan's brother - Jonathan - is on writing duties, and having written Memento and also now having gotten past the initial origin story, I'm thinking they might be more successful this time around. I hope so. Because the Dark Knight deserves better. Continue reading Re-Review: Batman Begins
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Trailer: Ghost Rider
Nic Cage + bad hairpiece + the director of Daredevil + the hot Eva Mendes = THIS
So Mark Steven Johnson already has one of the worst comic book films ever to atone for under his belt. And from the looks of it, Ghost Rider is going to only add to man's sinful nature.
And what are the apparent problems aside from Nic Cage's Hairclub for Men mockery? I think the most glaring issue is that the trailer made me laugh. A lot. Mainly because of the overly serious tone it carried (a problem, among many, that made Daredevil a hilariously bad piece of smoldering shit). Granted, it's a trailer, and the magic of editing can do wonderous and mysterious things, but if it's at all any indication of the final product, you too will laugh come next February...
Wait, February? Way to have faith in your film, Sony!
Source: Apple Continue reading Trailer: Ghost Rider
Sunday, May 21, 2006
Southland Troubles - Update!
Update: The AICN crew was handed a completely opposite take on the Richard Kelly black comedy recently. TFL's not typically the type to post or link to reader reviews, but news has been slow this week. So read this, bastardos! -- GeorgeEver since the cult smash that was Donnie Darko, writer-director Richard Kelly has been hot shit in the 'wood. He co-wrote the underrated Tony Scott action-comedy Domino, and is currently working with Eli Roth on his latest flick The Box. However, all is not well in Kelly-land, at least according to the French.
UK movie magazine Empire have just brought word back from the Cannes Film Festival where Kelly's latest movie - Southland Tales - is premiering. However, if you're going to go by what Empire say, you might as well take in a different tale. Empire say it's 'an overambitious muddle of a satire,' and even worse, explaining that even with a re-edit before its release later this year, 'it's hard to see just what can be salvaged.' Hard words.
Having looked forward to this film, despite not being the world's biggest fan of Donnie Darko (sure, it's a good film, but I don't see it worthy of the worship it gets), this comes as a big disappointment, if true. And it may be, according to the majorly negative buzz from other critics at the festival. If so, this will be another duff project for The Rock, who has the charisma to be a star but seems to be picking his projects incredibly badly, althoug