You know, up until now I never thought that the Marvel Animated universe would be able to find its feet. I mean, yea, Ultimate Avengers 1 and 2 were interesting but were very straightforward without a whole lot of subtext or anything. And honestly Invincible Iron Man was a big letdown. So, with trepidation setting in my bones, I rented the recent Marvel Anime offering of Doctor Strange.
Unlike the other movies, I had little to no idea as to what Dr. Strange was about. I knew he was one of the oldest characters in the Marvel universe and that his big thing is magic. Maybe that is why I liked it more? I don't know. I knew the plot well enough after having played ultimate alliance to be able to guess what the outcome of the film will be as will most people who have seen a movie like this before. I think the biggest difference is the voice acting. The story itself is fun to sit through if you haven't ever read the comics, but it is like all the others very straightforward and an origin story. The real difference is the magic and how that ties into spirituality. Essentially the film tries to teach you that sometime you have to change who you are to fix your problems and that usually only good people are the ones who deserve power and not those who want it. In that sense, it has more of a bite and backbone to it than the previous films.
As for animation, it is beautifully done and there doesn't seem to be any real choppy segments or anything. I loved every bit of it, although there is still the occassionally painfully obvious CG animation segments which really are not being utilized properly since they don't mesh in with the animated backgrounds. I get the feeling that this could be done on purpose or maybe for lack of financial reasons and they don't care, but they should because it is always a disheartening and annoying experience.
Last is voice acting which I have to admit is quite good. Never once did I want to shoot myself or cut off my ears after having heard a ridiculous remark that reeks of Hollywood-talking-to-kids style. In fact, the dialogue was quite enjoyful despite the generic mysticism approach of answering questions in a vague style a la Karate Kid and other fine films.
Conclusion:
The film takes a very generic approach to telling the story of Doctor Strange. However, all the voice actors get behind it and do their job well. The animators and director show a love of exploring the new world of magic and what that might mean (vanishing swords rock!) and the best part is that this story more than the others does a better job of developing characters and creating an understanding and connection with them. I didn't know the tons of warriors who died or their names...but I felt like I did. And that is an accomplishment. My hats off to Jay Oliva and I hope that Marvel Animated continues to improve. They have a ways to go still before convincing me that Avengers Reborn is a good idea.
3.8 out of 5
Wannabe
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Fanatix Indie 2 Update
Alright, so after that switcharoony there, here are the current stats...
INDIE LEAGUE BO PTA TOP 5 IMDB
CASTLE
1 ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE 41 5 3 8.1
2 ACROSS THE UNIVERSE 45 3 6 6.8
3 DARJEELING LIMITED 22 3 0 7.2
4 SHOOT EM UP 39 1 4 6.4
5 THE NANNY DIARIES 66 4 8 6.1
6 RESURRECTING THE CHAMP 2.25 3 0 7.8
7 THE BRAVE ONE 65 4 7 6.5
8 THE INVASION 60 3 5 5.6
GoS
1 $STARDUST 9.2 0 2 8.4
2 THE KINGDOM 55 5 7 7
3 THE HEARTBREAK KID 125 6 11 7
4 IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH 31 3 5 7.7
5 THE 11TH HOUR 23 11 0 7.7
6 MICHAEL CLAYTON 37 4 4 7.4
7 RESIDENT EVIL EXTINCTION 41.5 4 6 6.3
8 IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON 3.1 6 0 8.1
WANNABE
1 SUPERBAD 55 2 6 6.7
2 $RUSH HOUR 3 49.1 2 5 7.4
3 3:10 TO YUMA 31 1 3 6.7
4 HIT MAN 51 6 7 7
5 THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING 16 0 0 4.2
6 30 DAYS OF NIGHT 22.5 3 5 5.5
7 HALLOWEEN 33 4 6 5.6
8 THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD 49 2 4 5.9
BO RANKINGS
CASTLE 340.25 3
GOS 324.8 2
WANNABE 306.6 1
PTA RANKINGS
GOS 39 3
CASTLE 26 2
WANNABE 20 1
TOP 5
WANNABE 36 3
GOS 35 2
CASTLE 33 1
IMDB
GOS 7.45 3
CASTLE 6.8125 2
WANNABE 6.125 1
BO PTA TOP IMDB TOTAL RANK
CASTLE 2 2 1 2 7 2
GOS 3 3 2 3 11 1
WANNABE 1 1 3 1 6 3
So GoS and Castle lead still for now... but the draw between Wannabe and Castle has shortened...remember that!
Wannabe
INDIE LEAGUE BO PTA TOP 5 IMDB
CASTLE
1 ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE 41 5 3 8.1
2 ACROSS THE UNIVERSE 45 3 6 6.8
3 DARJEELING LIMITED 22 3 0 7.2
4 SHOOT EM UP 39 1 4 6.4
5 THE NANNY DIARIES 66 4 8 6.1
6 RESURRECTING THE CHAMP 2.25 3 0 7.8
7 THE BRAVE ONE 65 4 7 6.5
8 THE INVASION 60 3 5 5.6
GoS
1 $STARDUST 9.2 0 2 8.4
2 THE KINGDOM 55 5 7 7
3 THE HEARTBREAK KID 125 6 11 7
4 IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH 31 3 5 7.7
5 THE 11TH HOUR 23 11 0 7.7
6 MICHAEL CLAYTON 37 4 4 7.4
7 RESIDENT EVIL EXTINCTION 41.5 4 6 6.3
8 IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON 3.1 6 0 8.1
WANNABE
1 SUPERBAD 55 2 6 6.7
2 $RUSH HOUR 3 49.1 2 5 7.4
3 3:10 TO YUMA 31 1 3 6.7
4 HIT MAN 51 6 7 7
5 THE SEEKER: THE DARK IS RISING 16 0 0 4.2
6 30 DAYS OF NIGHT 22.5 3 5 5.5
7 HALLOWEEN 33 4 6 5.6
8 THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD 49 2 4 5.9
BO RANKINGS
CASTLE 340.25 3
GOS 324.8 2
WANNABE 306.6 1
PTA RANKINGS
GOS 39 3
CASTLE 26 2
WANNABE 20 1
TOP 5
WANNABE 36 3
GOS 35 2
CASTLE 33 1
IMDB
GOS 7.45 3
CASTLE 6.8125 2
WANNABE 6.125 1
BO PTA TOP IMDB TOTAL RANK
CASTLE 2 2 1 2 7 2
GOS 3 3 2 3 11 1
WANNABE 1 1 3 1 6 3
So GoS and Castle lead still for now... but the draw between Wannabe and Castle has shortened...remember that!
Wannabe
Fun Factoid of August
Well, I decided this week to possibly do a great factoid on the much maligned and hated Uwe Boll. A director known in the US for directing drivel films usually. I was counting the # of his films on IMDB's bottom 100 list (4 by the way), when I came across a much better and funnier fun factoid. After having read the feedback concerning the movie in question, I feel perfectly at ease asking everyone to rush to their nearest Blockbuster or logon to Netflix and rent the next great masterpiece of bad, this day and age's Plan 9 from Outer Space...Anus Magilicutty!!!! Seriously, that's the name of the movie and apparently it was 99% unscripted, which ALWAYS goes well with new people on camera where every flaw is magnified. The name alone makes me want to see this sure to be terrible film and then couple it with bad improv and I am there in a heartbeat. IF someone sees this movie, please, Please, PLEASE write a review for it and send it to me to post. also, if you want to let me borrow the film, I won't mind. :) I hope this brightens your day, I know it did mine. And for all my friends, don't be surprised if I just start using a new descriptive phrase for you....What a ridiculous friggin title. Uwe Boll may be bad but this is why he isn't THAT bad.
Wannabe
Wannabe
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
To have and to have not...
The light glistens from a stopping bus, but the cloaked man at the stop stays seated on the bench; his eyes lowered with only the tip of his nose poking out from under his wide brimmed fedora. His bone white hands grip the brown and worn suitcase a little too tightly and his feet twitch, as if waiting for something or one to kick. He waits. The bus pulls away and fades into the scratchy wet night. The twitches stop and the man raises his eyes, good eyes, cruel eyes, to see the cloaked man across the street. Without a sound, he follows him down the street and around the corner to a rundown mangy bar called Samuel's, the Bezt place on Urth for a Brew.
Inside the two men quickly find a table off in a corner, for security reasons for themselves and everyone else as well. Only after taking off their coats in the dark do they exchange pleasantries. Since they agreed to nicknames before meeting in case anyone overheard, only the titles of Castle and Wannabe are occassionally overheard by the far too nosey waiter, Jim, who takes their orders. Once Jim leaves, Wannabe places the briefcase on the table and passes it over to Castle. Castle opens it and takes out several documents. He scans them over for the fine print, glances back at Wannabe, and says "So it's how we agreed?"
"To the letter."
"Perfect."
Without another word, he quietly signs the documents. One for himself and one for Wannabe and before the waiter can return with their food, the two men get up, shake once, grab their jackets and leave the bar in different directions. In the end, everyone gets what they want, except maybe Jim who has to pay for their drinks out of his paycheck and GoS who finds out the next day in the paper that Castle and Wannabe have teamed up to trade some films.
Castle has traded Halloween for the Brave One and Penelope for Resurrecting the Champ.
Wannabe has traded King of Kong: A fistful of Quarters for Halloween.
Wannabe
Inside the two men quickly find a table off in a corner, for security reasons for themselves and everyone else as well. Only after taking off their coats in the dark do they exchange pleasantries. Since they agreed to nicknames before meeting in case anyone overheard, only the titles of Castle and Wannabe are occassionally overheard by the far too nosey waiter, Jim, who takes their orders. Once Jim leaves, Wannabe places the briefcase on the table and passes it over to Castle. Castle opens it and takes out several documents. He scans them over for the fine print, glances back at Wannabe, and says "So it's how we agreed?"
"To the letter."
"Perfect."
Without another word, he quietly signs the documents. One for himself and one for Wannabe and before the waiter can return with their food, the two men get up, shake once, grab their jackets and leave the bar in different directions. In the end, everyone gets what they want, except maybe Jim who has to pay for their drinks out of his paycheck and GoS who finds out the next day in the paper that Castle and Wannabe have teamed up to trade some films.
Castle has traded Halloween for the Brave One and Penelope for Resurrecting the Champ.
Wannabe has traded King of Kong: A fistful of Quarters for Halloween.
Wannabe
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Fanatix Indie League 2: Week 1
Alright gentlemen. NOw that Willo is off in Africa God knows what, here's how the first week breakdown begins...with your souls!
INDIE LEAGUE BO PTA TOP 5 IMDB
CASTLE
1 ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE 41 5 3 8.1
2 ACROSS THE UNIVERSE 45 3 6 6.8
3 DARJEELING LIMITED 22 3 0 7.2
4 SHOOT EM UP 39 1 4 6.4
5 THE NANNY DIARIES 66 4 8 6.1
6 PENELOPE 11.1 2 0 7.5
7 HALLOWEEN 33 4 6 5.6
8 THE INVASION 60 3 5 5.6
GoS
1 $STARDUST 9.2 0 2 8.4
2 THE KINGDOM 55 5 7 7
3 THE HEARTBREAK KID 125 6 11 7
4 IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH 31 3 5 7.7
5 THE 11TH HOUR 23 11 0 7.7
6 MICHAEL CLAYTON 37 4 4 7.4
7 RESIDENT EVIL EXTINCTION 41.5 4 6 6.3
8 IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON 3.1 6 0 8.1
WANNABE
1 SUPERBAD 55 2 6 6.7
2 $RUSH HOUR 3 49.1 2 5 7.4
3 3:10 TO YUMA 31 1 3 6.7
4 HIT MAN 51 6 7 7
5 THE DARK IS RISING 16 0 0 4.2
6 30 DAYS OF NIGHT 22.5 3 5 5.5
7 KING OF KONG:A FISTFUL OF QUARTERS 1.1 0 0 6.9
8 THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD 49 2 4 5.9
BO RANKINGS
GOS 324.8 3
CASTLE 317.1 2
WANNABE 274.7 1
PTA RANKINGS
GOS 39 3
CASTLE 25 2
WANNABE 16 1
TOP 5
GOS 35 3
CASTLE 32 2
WANNABE 30 1
IMDB
GOS 7.45 3
CASTLE 6.6625 2
WANNABE 6.2875 1
BO PTA TOP IMDB TOTAL RANK
CASTLE 2 2 2 2 8 2
GOS 3 3 3 3 12 1
WANNABE 1 1 1 1 4 3
Although the game has started and I have am definately far behind, I must say thet the first weekend brushoff was not so bad. Stardust did poor BO despite its strong IMDB standing and even though Rush Hour 3 isn't supposed to be that great it didn't get a terrible IMDB and managed to rack some good BO and TOP 5 and even a couple of PTA to start things off right. And with my comedy Superbad coming out this week, I expect to be cleaning up for a while to start off this competition. Tell me if you want to change because you don't wanna take me on...I'll understand. :)
Peace!
Wannabe
INDIE LEAGUE BO PTA TOP 5 IMDB
CASTLE
1 ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE 41 5 3 8.1
2 ACROSS THE UNIVERSE 45 3 6 6.8
3 DARJEELING LIMITED 22 3 0 7.2
4 SHOOT EM UP 39 1 4 6.4
5 THE NANNY DIARIES 66 4 8 6.1
6 PENELOPE 11.1 2 0 7.5
7 HALLOWEEN 33 4 6 5.6
8 THE INVASION 60 3 5 5.6
GoS
1 $STARDUST 9.2 0 2 8.4
2 THE KINGDOM 55 5 7 7
3 THE HEARTBREAK KID 125 6 11 7
4 IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH 31 3 5 7.7
5 THE 11TH HOUR 23 11 0 7.7
6 MICHAEL CLAYTON 37 4 4 7.4
7 RESIDENT EVIL EXTINCTION 41.5 4 6 6.3
8 IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON 3.1 6 0 8.1
WANNABE
1 SUPERBAD 55 2 6 6.7
2 $RUSH HOUR 3 49.1 2 5 7.4
3 3:10 TO YUMA 31 1 3 6.7
4 HIT MAN 51 6 7 7
5 THE DARK IS RISING 16 0 0 4.2
6 30 DAYS OF NIGHT 22.5 3 5 5.5
7 KING OF KONG:A FISTFUL OF QUARTERS 1.1 0 0 6.9
8 THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD 49 2 4 5.9
BO RANKINGS
GOS 324.8 3
CASTLE 317.1 2
WANNABE 274.7 1
PTA RANKINGS
GOS 39 3
CASTLE 25 2
WANNABE 16 1
TOP 5
GOS 35 3
CASTLE 32 2
WANNABE 30 1
IMDB
GOS 7.45 3
CASTLE 6.6625 2
WANNABE 6.2875 1
BO PTA TOP IMDB TOTAL RANK
CASTLE 2 2 2 2 8 2
GOS 3 3 3 3 12 1
WANNABE 1 1 1 1 4 3
Although the game has started and I have am definately far behind, I must say thet the first weekend brushoff was not so bad. Stardust did poor BO despite its strong IMDB standing and even though Rush Hour 3 isn't supposed to be that great it didn't get a terrible IMDB and managed to rack some good BO and TOP 5 and even a couple of PTA to start things off right. And with my comedy Superbad coming out this week, I expect to be cleaning up for a while to start off this competition. Tell me if you want to change because you don't wanna take me on...I'll understand. :)
Peace!
Wannabe
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Stardust
'Good Gaiman, Good'
So as you may or may not know, there is a little heralded fantasy film currently in theaters titled Stardust and based off of the novel of the same name written by Neil Gaiman. If you didn't know, then it is your lucky day for me to tell you about it and express a wish for you to go see it. Many comparisons for the film have dubbed it a ripoff of Princess Bride or some other such nonsense. Honestly, I would feel refresed with a Princess Bride knockoff right now with all the Harry and literary fantasy look alikes. The moniker of Princess Bride is only true in terms of tone. This fantasy film unlike many others combines several of the same elements as Princess Bride, mostly humor and the themes of love and acceptance. Since it is a Neil Gaiman property you can believe that there is some excellent ideas thrown about and what on the surface appears to be your typical romantic fantasy tale, instead becomes a tale of how what makes a person who they are isn't their status or royalty or looks. The movie is directed by Matthew Vaughn who directed Layer Cake and was one point attached to X-Men 3. I hear now though that he might be attached to an upcoming Thor movie which after having seen this film should be amazing, since it is obvious that he has a great imagination that is necessary for fantasy and knows how to communicate his ideas and characters to the actors perfectly. None of the characters in this film are boring, even the ones that are typically straight forward parts. I'm not saying that some do better than others, just that all of the actors are entertaining and amusing in their own fashion. Considering the scope and scale of this adventure, I believe Vaughn did an extremely good job in bringing the vision to life. However, and this is the killer, either on Gaiman's side or on Vaughn's...sometimes the pacing is too slow. It starts slow and I noticed several times when the picture should have been cut slightly sooner, which is not a good thing to notice. However, considering the genre-breaking work he is handling, it is hard to blame Vaughn for not being completely sure how to handle the editing. I hear that Across the Universe is sharing some similar woes currently in its test screenings. Besides the slow moving moments though, this film is a real gem.
As for actors, there is one real reason to see this movie, Robert De Niro. Not because he does an excellent job, in fact he might have been one of the worse believable ones in the cast, but because seeing him play that type of character is a real treat for fans of De Niro whom have probably never seen him in such a light. The other real reason to see this film is Michelle Pfeiffer as Lamia. After all the years she is still crazy hot and yet I have never seen her in a bad role. Why doesn't she do more work? I bet its because Hollywood is absolutely nuts, although no where near as nuts as her puberty making role in this film. Another great one to look for is the affable and excellently acted protagonist played by Charlie Cox. Seriously, this guy is good and has a future. He's probably a jerk in real life or something but I would never know from this film. Claire Danes is okay but pales compared to her other majorly famous love role as Juliet, which I'm sure she's tired of being linked to. but think about this, the film is so amazing that it even has Ian McKellan as a narrator...a narrator! Seriously, this film rocks and is a good addition to the fantasy canon that I must one day own.
4,5 out of 5
So as you may or may not know, there is a little heralded fantasy film currently in theaters titled Stardust and based off of the novel of the same name written by Neil Gaiman. If you didn't know, then it is your lucky day for me to tell you about it and express a wish for you to go see it. Many comparisons for the film have dubbed it a ripoff of Princess Bride or some other such nonsense. Honestly, I would feel refresed with a Princess Bride knockoff right now with all the Harry and literary fantasy look alikes. The moniker of Princess Bride is only true in terms of tone. This fantasy film unlike many others combines several of the same elements as Princess Bride, mostly humor and the themes of love and acceptance. Since it is a Neil Gaiman property you can believe that there is some excellent ideas thrown about and what on the surface appears to be your typical romantic fantasy tale, instead becomes a tale of how what makes a person who they are isn't their status or royalty or looks. The movie is directed by Matthew Vaughn who directed Layer Cake and was one point attached to X-Men 3. I hear now though that he might be attached to an upcoming Thor movie which after having seen this film should be amazing, since it is obvious that he has a great imagination that is necessary for fantasy and knows how to communicate his ideas and characters to the actors perfectly. None of the characters in this film are boring, even the ones that are typically straight forward parts. I'm not saying that some do better than others, just that all of the actors are entertaining and amusing in their own fashion. Considering the scope and scale of this adventure, I believe Vaughn did an extremely good job in bringing the vision to life. However, and this is the killer, either on Gaiman's side or on Vaughn's...sometimes the pacing is too slow. It starts slow and I noticed several times when the picture should have been cut slightly sooner, which is not a good thing to notice. However, considering the genre-breaking work he is handling, it is hard to blame Vaughn for not being completely sure how to handle the editing. I hear that Across the Universe is sharing some similar woes currently in its test screenings. Besides the slow moving moments though, this film is a real gem.
As for actors, there is one real reason to see this movie, Robert De Niro. Not because he does an excellent job, in fact he might have been one of the worse believable ones in the cast, but because seeing him play that type of character is a real treat for fans of De Niro whom have probably never seen him in such a light. The other real reason to see this film is Michelle Pfeiffer as Lamia. After all the years she is still crazy hot and yet I have never seen her in a bad role. Why doesn't she do more work? I bet its because Hollywood is absolutely nuts, although no where near as nuts as her puberty making role in this film. Another great one to look for is the affable and excellently acted protagonist played by Charlie Cox. Seriously, this guy is good and has a future. He's probably a jerk in real life or something but I would never know from this film. Claire Danes is okay but pales compared to her other majorly famous love role as Juliet, which I'm sure she's tired of being linked to. but think about this, the film is so amazing that it even has Ian McKellan as a narrator...a narrator! Seriously, this film rocks and is a good addition to the fantasy canon that I must one day own.
4,5 out of 5
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Superman Returns
'Supes Returns with a Vengeance!'
Have you ever eaten an imitation of something, such as say crab or tofu meant to be chicken and found it to be delicious but not quite right? Unfortunately the same can be said of Singer's recent attempt to make a worthy sequel to the second film of the old-school Christopher Reeves Superman movies by Richard Donner. Singer cut his teeth directing big time comic book movies by creating the X-Men franchise from scratch. So, let's just say I've been wanting to see this film for a while now but things like IMDB's current 6.9 rating have kept it from the top of my list. Now, since the last gloriously rich colors have faded from the screen, I would like to go in depth on why IMDB has that score and where Singer messed up. However, I would first like to point out the amazing job stylistically and directorially Singer achieved with this film. Then to finish, I would like to discuss the stupidity of studio politics that screwed with this film and the X-Men franchise and the possibility of future Superman movies.
The first question about any Superman movie set in the same continuity as the Donner films is can the actor playing Superman/Clark Kent do it right? HELL YEA HE CAN. I never thought I would see the charming acting style of Reeves done so well again after his death, but man, Brandon Routh has the look and the fumbling Kent down perfectly. Although there is something slightly...slightly too perfect about his appearance as Superman and too lacking. Reeves eyes used to sparkle even as Superman and you had the sense that he laughed with them. Routh seems to have not picked up on the laughing trait of Superman but everything else is played up nicely. Also, Routh's Superman becomes much more believable and interesting as the movie begins, he just starts a little awkward which is fair since he is a newbie to Hollywood and he has just been asked to fill one of the most iconic roles in history in the same style as the most iconic actor to have played him. Great job sir! Speaking of superman, another thing I appreciated about this film was that the writing and Singer intentionally play up the Christian undertones and the Christ motif throughout in a manner that isn't mindnumbingly Matrix. I don't know, I had nver noticed the parallels until maybe a year or two before the film came out when I dove back into graphic literature and I am happy to see that it is given more prominence so that the world can understand why Superman survives and is needed as an icon. Other great things involve the sets and the feel of the film and even the angles. Singer has a couple of shots that are obviously his own but because he developed an organic palette of angles and shts based off the ones Donner would have used in the old films, not even the angles Singer creates on his own feel outside the realm of possibility and fit in nicely with the rest of the film. Everything looks like it came from the Donner days of the films and feel slightly 40-50 years older. I have to say though, that I am not so sure I am a fan of the use of modern day materials such as cell phones and laptop computers...as a design aesthetic it just doesn't sit well with me and occassionally felt like potential advertising.
Other things I appreciate include the great actor choices from Parker Posey as Kitty to Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor. Parker plays Kitty very straight and she eeks out as much as she can given the script. I have to admit that with Kevin's Lex I sort of missed the more old talky-jokey Luthor of Gene Hackman days. However, there are moments such as when he is begging Lois Lane to tell him something that you can see that Spacey saw the old films and easily stole the craziness and attitude of Hackman. He was merely building on it. Spacey's Luthor spent five years in jail and had to bag an old lady to come back and he holds all of that against Supes, so it makes more sense for him to be less jokey and more about cool calculating evil business, and Spacey knows how I like it. The other two big happy castings for me are James Marsden as Lois Lane's fiance and Sam Huntigton as Jimmy Olson. Marsden's character comes off as a good guy with some concerns, which makes sense now that he is engaged to Lois who once had a thing with a man who could move buildings and shoot heat rays from his eyes. He's Superman right? I'm sure Marsden's character is constantly asking just how Super is Superman? Superbig?...anyhow, Marsden never dips into the jealous evil boyfriend territory and even makes you like him if you are rooting for Supes and Lois to get back together. I never knew what was so great about his as Cyclops, but now that I can see his eyes, it makes all the difference. Also, Sam Huntigton as Jimmy Olson is perfect. His nice kid but constantly turning up short when he needs things to work luck is perfectly displayed in Worthington's expressions. I once wondered who Worthington was when I heard he got picked up for a big part in an upcoming movie, now I know and I approve. He's got real skill and I look forward to more of him. Unfortunately the character I got to know the least and remember from the old films the worst is Frank Langella's character. In this film he plays him as a nice news boss who knows how to handle his staff to make sure they get the real "selling" news. He is good, but there doesn't seem to be much to go on.
Lastly, what I love concerning this film is most of the script. Almost every character has dialogue that sounds like it could have come from the actors of the Donner films and that it was therefore a continuance of every character. The fact that the film goes in depth to show what Superman means and to show why he is needed is a very nice touch. I also liked the whole thing dealing with Superman searching for home and the role that home plays in our lives to be very well put together. Although I kind of wish that superman had some qualms about throwing the only giant vestige of his home planet back into space, I understand that the film was long as is and couldn't handle much longer.
Now, as to what really bugs me, and this is not something small, is the script. Although the dialogue and characterizations and scenarios are excellent, and it even does a fine job of setting things up after the second film and explaining the past and giving Superman quite the situation to walk into, there is no excuse, none, for the child. This critique is meant for those who have seen the film so if I have spoiled something, sorry. Superman should never have had a child in this film. It added too much on and felt a little too cliche. I would have introduced the kid in this film and developed the idea of the Supes child in the next film. It was rushed and didn't look good especially since Lois Lane doesn't confess to anyone. Only Luthor and Lois know...what crap. Supes should be able to see his own son and Marsden character should know the truth as well. That is essentially its own little drama in and of itself and should have been another movie. Also, what in the world was all of the is Superman dead junk? Look, Raimi and Singer, you don't need to show the city waiting in expectation, cheering, or mourning to show that a city needs its heroes or supports them. When you do, the action becomes about the nameless masses cheering which is okay for maybe a 2-3 seconds but then it needs to pass because there was no tension in this film. Sure, Supes comes the closest to dying that he ever has, but no one realy believes he'll die, he is Superman! So all of that in the hospital and the slow waiting to see if Superman was okay should have been sped up because the audience wants to know but if we think we already know then the waiting isn't anticipating anything, its just maddening the viewers. And then there is the biggest plop of this film...Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane. To her credit, Bosworth pulls off the caring for her son and family thing and at times is able to do the desiring Supes but hating him at the sametime. I think she thought that the craziness of Lois Lane from Margot Kidder's days would have died some since she won the Pulitzer Prize and is engaged with a son and good man...but that is wrong. Sorry, but Lane has much more defiance and crazy will power and a very STRONG personality that Bosworth just never reveals. The old Lois Lane was great because she would spite Superman for the hell of it but you knew from how she held herself and swayed a little that she didn't really spite him and it was just her way of dealing brusquely with the world around her. I really hope Bosworth can gain some piss and vinegar back into her character in the next outing, because it was possible in the writing, just was never utilized in the acting. Now for the other real reason why I despise the child of superman idea. In the past, the films have always been about Superman and his relation to the people and what he means to them and what he means to Lois Lane. Hell, the Dean Cain Superman show survived pretty much because of the excellent rapport of the characters playing Supes and Lois Lane. By introducing Marsden's character into the film, it made sense and it added a layer of spice and one-upmanship, a chance to see something new and different from the Man of Steel besides the hunkydory good guy. He was envious, never held it against Marsden and never got jealous. In all he was a good guy about it. So now the movie ends with this extra layer coming between Superman and Lois Lane which is what the audience wants, especially the females. They might not care about the fighting or the cool shots or anything else, but then you add in the romance with the Superman who is the hunk of dreams and they are there. So not only do you have that layer, but you manage to efficiently change the focus from Supes and Marsden and Lane to Supes and son and how will the son affect everything. The father son theme is a big part of the Supes mythology, but he is supposed to symbolize the savior, Christ, what you will and guess who is commonly accepted not to have had a son? Exactly. The son thing completely clashes with the savior motif of the film and it suggests several things that come across poorly. A. Superman conceived a child with Lois Lane outside of wedlock, conservative christians will love it. B. If Superman is a literal Christ figure, then you are suggesting Christ had a son. I don't care about either theologically, but I know that audience members do, especially those from where I spawned. Also, honestly I never wanna see a movie or television show entitled the Adventures of Superman Jr. Anyhow, with the plus and cons mapped out, here's the stupidity of the studios for you.
This is all from second hand sources called articles that I read and pieced together over time, so the actual attitudes and conversations of said studios could be completely inaccurate or imagined. When Singer was gearing up for X-Men 3, Warner Bros. approached him and impressed with his work, offered him a chance at Superman. Singer, seeing it as the Holy Grail of comic book films knew he had to do it and he was a HUGE fan of the Donner films. When he agreed to it, Fox was terribly upset since he had just finished the box office whopping X-Men 2 and they wanted another soon. They were upset that Singer was going to Warner Bros. to direct another comic film for a rival studio. I believe that Singer wanted them to wait until he had done Superman and then he would have come back and directed X-Men 3, but Fox was pissed so they told him to forget it. He shrugged and off he left. Fox already had a date planned for X-Men 3 and they wanted it to combat the Superman movie in the same summer, so they refused to back down from the planned release date even though they had no helmer to pull it all together. Then they hired Matthew Vaughn after his turn doing Layer Cake but when they insisted that he move to LA to direct X-Men 3, he quit saying he wasn't going to force his family to move from London to LA. And still, they refused to move the release date. As time grew short, with only a couple of months of pre-planning left before going into production supposedly, they hired Brett Ratner. He had lots of studio pressure to create a product to compete with superman and no time to really revise and edit the script like it needed. So, he did a rush job of it creating the X-men film that is the least likable and cofirming what many thought about poor affable Ratner, that he simply wasn't that good of a director whether it was fair to think so or not. Then there was the whole rumored business about the actors. Like I said, Fox had it in for Singer at thsi point and Warner and they wanted to make them pay for not finishing a trilogy. Sony had Raimi after all. Anyhow, apparently thsi hatred spilled over. Rumor had it that the reason Cyclops dies so early in X-men 3 is because he was given a part in the Superman film and in fact at one point the studio considered writing him out all together. Also, during this whole bad blood thing, supposedly Singer met with Famke Jannsen in Australia(the woman who plays Jean Grey) to possibly offer her the part of Kitty. Famke thought about it and told him that she had a big part in the new X-men movie and didn't want to risk losing the part or being written out of it for playing a smaller part in his film. It was understandable and things passed. This bad blood between the two companies did more hurt to Fox's credibility in the long run than WB or Singer, but that sort of pressure and tension can not have helped either camp to turn out the quality product necessary. As for future Supermen installments, WB has said maybe if the script is much lower budget and Singer has stated that he will be returning to the franchise again after finishing his current project Valkyrie and possible one more film just to get the script right. Plus, if Singer doesn't get back soon, then you may see Routh appearing in the new JLA movie that WB is cooking up. So expect more superman in one form or another and I'm betting next time Lois Lane will be tougher after all the flack crappy fanboys and critics like myself have been dishing out.
4.3 out of 5
Have you ever eaten an imitation of something, such as say crab or tofu meant to be chicken and found it to be delicious but not quite right? Unfortunately the same can be said of Singer's recent attempt to make a worthy sequel to the second film of the old-school Christopher Reeves Superman movies by Richard Donner. Singer cut his teeth directing big time comic book movies by creating the X-Men franchise from scratch. So, let's just say I've been wanting to see this film for a while now but things like IMDB's current 6.9 rating have kept it from the top of my list. Now, since the last gloriously rich colors have faded from the screen, I would like to go in depth on why IMDB has that score and where Singer messed up. However, I would first like to point out the amazing job stylistically and directorially Singer achieved with this film. Then to finish, I would like to discuss the stupidity of studio politics that screwed with this film and the X-Men franchise and the possibility of future Superman movies.
The first question about any Superman movie set in the same continuity as the Donner films is can the actor playing Superman/Clark Kent do it right? HELL YEA HE CAN. I never thought I would see the charming acting style of Reeves done so well again after his death, but man, Brandon Routh has the look and the fumbling Kent down perfectly. Although there is something slightly...slightly too perfect about his appearance as Superman and too lacking. Reeves eyes used to sparkle even as Superman and you had the sense that he laughed with them. Routh seems to have not picked up on the laughing trait of Superman but everything else is played up nicely. Also, Routh's Superman becomes much more believable and interesting as the movie begins, he just starts a little awkward which is fair since he is a newbie to Hollywood and he has just been asked to fill one of the most iconic roles in history in the same style as the most iconic actor to have played him. Great job sir! Speaking of superman, another thing I appreciated about this film was that the writing and Singer intentionally play up the Christian undertones and the Christ motif throughout in a manner that isn't mindnumbingly Matrix. I don't know, I had nver noticed the parallels until maybe a year or two before the film came out when I dove back into graphic literature and I am happy to see that it is given more prominence so that the world can understand why Superman survives and is needed as an icon. Other great things involve the sets and the feel of the film and even the angles. Singer has a couple of shots that are obviously his own but because he developed an organic palette of angles and shts based off the ones Donner would have used in the old films, not even the angles Singer creates on his own feel outside the realm of possibility and fit in nicely with the rest of the film. Everything looks like it came from the Donner days of the films and feel slightly 40-50 years older. I have to say though, that I am not so sure I am a fan of the use of modern day materials such as cell phones and laptop computers...as a design aesthetic it just doesn't sit well with me and occassionally felt like potential advertising.
Other things I appreciate include the great actor choices from Parker Posey as Kitty to Kevin Spacey as Lex Luthor. Parker plays Kitty very straight and she eeks out as much as she can given the script. I have to admit that with Kevin's Lex I sort of missed the more old talky-jokey Luthor of Gene Hackman days. However, there are moments such as when he is begging Lois Lane to tell him something that you can see that Spacey saw the old films and easily stole the craziness and attitude of Hackman. He was merely building on it. Spacey's Luthor spent five years in jail and had to bag an old lady to come back and he holds all of that against Supes, so it makes more sense for him to be less jokey and more about cool calculating evil business, and Spacey knows how I like it. The other two big happy castings for me are James Marsden as Lois Lane's fiance and Sam Huntigton as Jimmy Olson. Marsden's character comes off as a good guy with some concerns, which makes sense now that he is engaged to Lois who once had a thing with a man who could move buildings and shoot heat rays from his eyes. He's Superman right? I'm sure Marsden's character is constantly asking just how Super is Superman? Superbig?...anyhow, Marsden never dips into the jealous evil boyfriend territory and even makes you like him if you are rooting for Supes and Lois to get back together. I never knew what was so great about his as Cyclops, but now that I can see his eyes, it makes all the difference. Also, Sam Huntigton as Jimmy Olson is perfect. His nice kid but constantly turning up short when he needs things to work luck is perfectly displayed in Worthington's expressions. I once wondered who Worthington was when I heard he got picked up for a big part in an upcoming movie, now I know and I approve. He's got real skill and I look forward to more of him. Unfortunately the character I got to know the least and remember from the old films the worst is Frank Langella's character. In this film he plays him as a nice news boss who knows how to handle his staff to make sure they get the real "selling" news. He is good, but there doesn't seem to be much to go on.
Lastly, what I love concerning this film is most of the script. Almost every character has dialogue that sounds like it could have come from the actors of the Donner films and that it was therefore a continuance of every character. The fact that the film goes in depth to show what Superman means and to show why he is needed is a very nice touch. I also liked the whole thing dealing with Superman searching for home and the role that home plays in our lives to be very well put together. Although I kind of wish that superman had some qualms about throwing the only giant vestige of his home planet back into space, I understand that the film was long as is and couldn't handle much longer.
Now, as to what really bugs me, and this is not something small, is the script. Although the dialogue and characterizations and scenarios are excellent, and it even does a fine job of setting things up after the second film and explaining the past and giving Superman quite the situation to walk into, there is no excuse, none, for the child. This critique is meant for those who have seen the film so if I have spoiled something, sorry. Superman should never have had a child in this film. It added too much on and felt a little too cliche. I would have introduced the kid in this film and developed the idea of the Supes child in the next film. It was rushed and didn't look good especially since Lois Lane doesn't confess to anyone. Only Luthor and Lois know...what crap. Supes should be able to see his own son and Marsden character should know the truth as well. That is essentially its own little drama in and of itself and should have been another movie. Also, what in the world was all of the is Superman dead junk? Look, Raimi and Singer, you don't need to show the city waiting in expectation, cheering, or mourning to show that a city needs its heroes or supports them. When you do, the action becomes about the nameless masses cheering which is okay for maybe a 2-3 seconds but then it needs to pass because there was no tension in this film. Sure, Supes comes the closest to dying that he ever has, but no one realy believes he'll die, he is Superman! So all of that in the hospital and the slow waiting to see if Superman was okay should have been sped up because the audience wants to know but if we think we already know then the waiting isn't anticipating anything, its just maddening the viewers. And then there is the biggest plop of this film...Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane. To her credit, Bosworth pulls off the caring for her son and family thing and at times is able to do the desiring Supes but hating him at the sametime. I think she thought that the craziness of Lois Lane from Margot Kidder's days would have died some since she won the Pulitzer Prize and is engaged with a son and good man...but that is wrong. Sorry, but Lane has much more defiance and crazy will power and a very STRONG personality that Bosworth just never reveals. The old Lois Lane was great because she would spite Superman for the hell of it but you knew from how she held herself and swayed a little that she didn't really spite him and it was just her way of dealing brusquely with the world around her. I really hope Bosworth can gain some piss and vinegar back into her character in the next outing, because it was possible in the writing, just was never utilized in the acting. Now for the other real reason why I despise the child of superman idea. In the past, the films have always been about Superman and his relation to the people and what he means to them and what he means to Lois Lane. Hell, the Dean Cain Superman show survived pretty much because of the excellent rapport of the characters playing Supes and Lois Lane. By introducing Marsden's character into the film, it made sense and it added a layer of spice and one-upmanship, a chance to see something new and different from the Man of Steel besides the hunkydory good guy. He was envious, never held it against Marsden and never got jealous. In all he was a good guy about it. So now the movie ends with this extra layer coming between Superman and Lois Lane which is what the audience wants, especially the females. They might not care about the fighting or the cool shots or anything else, but then you add in the romance with the Superman who is the hunk of dreams and they are there. So not only do you have that layer, but you manage to efficiently change the focus from Supes and Marsden and Lane to Supes and son and how will the son affect everything. The father son theme is a big part of the Supes mythology, but he is supposed to symbolize the savior, Christ, what you will and guess who is commonly accepted not to have had a son? Exactly. The son thing completely clashes with the savior motif of the film and it suggests several things that come across poorly. A. Superman conceived a child with Lois Lane outside of wedlock, conservative christians will love it. B. If Superman is a literal Christ figure, then you are suggesting Christ had a son. I don't care about either theologically, but I know that audience members do, especially those from where I spawned. Also, honestly I never wanna see a movie or television show entitled the Adventures of Superman Jr. Anyhow, with the plus and cons mapped out, here's the stupidity of the studios for you.
This is all from second hand sources called articles that I read and pieced together over time, so the actual attitudes and conversations of said studios could be completely inaccurate or imagined. When Singer was gearing up for X-Men 3, Warner Bros. approached him and impressed with his work, offered him a chance at Superman. Singer, seeing it as the Holy Grail of comic book films knew he had to do it and he was a HUGE fan of the Donner films. When he agreed to it, Fox was terribly upset since he had just finished the box office whopping X-Men 2 and they wanted another soon. They were upset that Singer was going to Warner Bros. to direct another comic film for a rival studio. I believe that Singer wanted them to wait until he had done Superman and then he would have come back and directed X-Men 3, but Fox was pissed so they told him to forget it. He shrugged and off he left. Fox already had a date planned for X-Men 3 and they wanted it to combat the Superman movie in the same summer, so they refused to back down from the planned release date even though they had no helmer to pull it all together. Then they hired Matthew Vaughn after his turn doing Layer Cake but when they insisted that he move to LA to direct X-Men 3, he quit saying he wasn't going to force his family to move from London to LA. And still, they refused to move the release date. As time grew short, with only a couple of months of pre-planning left before going into production supposedly, they hired Brett Ratner. He had lots of studio pressure to create a product to compete with superman and no time to really revise and edit the script like it needed. So, he did a rush job of it creating the X-men film that is the least likable and cofirming what many thought about poor affable Ratner, that he simply wasn't that good of a director whether it was fair to think so or not. Then there was the whole rumored business about the actors. Like I said, Fox had it in for Singer at thsi point and Warner and they wanted to make them pay for not finishing a trilogy. Sony had Raimi after all. Anyhow, apparently thsi hatred spilled over. Rumor had it that the reason Cyclops dies so early in X-men 3 is because he was given a part in the Superman film and in fact at one point the studio considered writing him out all together. Also, during this whole bad blood thing, supposedly Singer met with Famke Jannsen in Australia(the woman who plays Jean Grey) to possibly offer her the part of Kitty. Famke thought about it and told him that she had a big part in the new X-men movie and didn't want to risk losing the part or being written out of it for playing a smaller part in his film. It was understandable and things passed. This bad blood between the two companies did more hurt to Fox's credibility in the long run than WB or Singer, but that sort of pressure and tension can not have helped either camp to turn out the quality product necessary. As for future Supermen installments, WB has said maybe if the script is much lower budget and Singer has stated that he will be returning to the franchise again after finishing his current project Valkyrie and possible one more film just to get the script right. Plus, if Singer doesn't get back soon, then you may see Routh appearing in the new JLA movie that WB is cooking up. So expect more superman in one form or another and I'm betting next time Lois Lane will be tougher after all the flack crappy fanboys and critics like myself have been dishing out.
4.3 out of 5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
