I've been in a comic book frame of mind lately, what with all the superhero movies hitting theatres this summer.
Hot on the heels of The Dark Knight's debut comes the trailer for next year's most highly anticipated comic book - I'm sorry, graphic novel adaptation, The Watchmen.
You can watch the trailer here.
My first impression is that Dr. Manhattan looks great, but the Nite Owl looks far too young, muscular, and slick. The paunchy, bookish Dan Dreiberg from the original seems to have been sexed up for the Hollywood version, and that doesn't bode well for the movie.
Not that I ever had any real hope for this project. Not after 300, which had all the subtlety and intelligence of professional wrestling. There's no doubt that Zack Snyder has a visual flair, although he tends to overdo it if you ask me, but it's his story sense and ability to work with actors that I found so appalling in 300.
A great movie could be made based on The Watchmen, but I doubt Zack Snyder's the guy to make it.
An Eventful 24 Hours
Yesterday at this time I was unemployed, discouraged, and wondering if I would ever find work again. Then, just before bed, I decided to check the job bank, fully expecting to find nothing.
Five minutes later, I'd found a position I was perfectly qualified for. Thirty minutes later, I'd sent off an application, my hope restored.
This morning, at 11:00 am, I received a message saying I would probably be able to start today if I was available. At 1:00 PM, I spoke to the person doing the hiring over the phone. By 1:20 PM I was hired. At 3:00 PM, I met my new boss face to face for the first time. By 5:00 pm I had been given the keys to the office and was left alone to supervise the operation. What's more, I was working in the owner's office where she'd left her passport in plain view.
It's a good thing I'm so damn trustworthy.
I don't normally like it when things move this fast, but it seems my new employer was every bit as desperate as I was, so it's a good fit for now. There's no job security, it's strictly an on call position that could disappear next week or next month, and the responsibilities are significantly less than what I'm used to, but the hourly rate is as much as I've ever made in my life, the location is good, and I can show up for work in shorts if I want to.
It's a dream job in many ways, but my main duty is something I haven't had to do regularly for ten years, and I hated it then. But there's a good possibility for advancement, and if things continue to move quickly I'll hopefully be moving on to bigger and better things soon.
I wonder what tomorrow will bring?
Five minutes later, I'd found a position I was perfectly qualified for. Thirty minutes later, I'd sent off an application, my hope restored.
This morning, at 11:00 am, I received a message saying I would probably be able to start today if I was available. At 1:00 PM, I spoke to the person doing the hiring over the phone. By 1:20 PM I was hired. At 3:00 PM, I met my new boss face to face for the first time. By 5:00 pm I had been given the keys to the office and was left alone to supervise the operation. What's more, I was working in the owner's office where she'd left her passport in plain view.
It's a good thing I'm so damn trustworthy.
I don't normally like it when things move this fast, but it seems my new employer was every bit as desperate as I was, so it's a good fit for now. There's no job security, it's strictly an on call position that could disappear next week or next month, and the responsibilities are significantly less than what I'm used to, but the hourly rate is as much as I've ever made in my life, the location is good, and I can show up for work in shorts if I want to.
It's a dream job in many ways, but my main duty is something I haven't had to do regularly for ten years, and I hated it then. But there's a good possibility for advancement, and if things continue to move quickly I'll hopefully be moving on to bigger and better things soon.
I wonder what tomorrow will bring?
New Actors, Old Roles
When The Dark Knight opens this Friday, the character of Rachel Dawes will appear, but Katie Holmes will not. And in the trailers for the latest Mummy movie, that's clearly not Rachel Weisz tagging alongside Brendan Fraser. The re-casting of raven-haired Rachels is a distraction in both cases, but hardly without precedent. And with the first of these high profile sequels opening this week, the Onion's AV Club and IFC.com both decided to look at other awkward re-castings in film history.
I think the AV Club did a better job of it by focusing on situations where characters with new faces are appearing in the same timeline as their earlier incarnations, so reboots and remakes are given a free pass, but the IFC deserves top marks for remembering Crispin Glover's absence from the Back To The Future sequels.
In the case of The Dark Knight, I'm more than willing to suspend my disbelief because Katie Holmes was horribly miscast in the first film and Maggie Gyllenhaal seems much more at home in Christopher Nolan's version of Gotham City. Holmes is adorable eye candy and she's been excellent in other roles, but she's far too youthful and perky to be convincing as a District Attorney who bravely crusades against murderous crime bosses. Maggie Gyllenhaal, with her off-beat looks and aura of intelligence, should easily fill Katie Holmes' shoes, but not her bra, while making the role her own.
And if the re-casting of Katie Holmes is distracting, imagine how awkward it will be if the studio tries to replace Heath Ledger as the Joker in the next Batman film. I doubt Christopher Nolan would get involved with something like that, but it's just the sort of thing a clueless executive might think up.
Here's hoping that common sense prevails.
Or buy from Amazon.ca (Canada)
I have very little to say about Maria Bello taking over for Rachel Weisz in the Mummy sequel because I like both actresses but I despised the first film, skipped the second, and have no intention of watching the third. Replacing the writer/director with someone a lot better than Rob Cohen would be the only way to get me to watch another Mummy movie.
You can read the AV Club's article on awkward re-castings here and the IFC take on these matters here. Both are interesting reads for movie buffs.
I can't think of any glaring omissions on either list, but I did find David Hyde Pierce's absence in Hellboy 2 a disappointment. I know it wasn't him under Abe Sapien's makeup in the original, but his distinctive voice brought the character to life in the first film, and Doug Jones gave a comparatively flat performance in the second.
And on a final note, I got a real kick out of this part of the IFC's article:
How soon we forget Boogie Nights.
I think the AV Club did a better job of it by focusing on situations where characters with new faces are appearing in the same timeline as their earlier incarnations, so reboots and remakes are given a free pass, but the IFC deserves top marks for remembering Crispin Glover's absence from the Back To The Future sequels.
In the case of The Dark Knight, I'm more than willing to suspend my disbelief because Katie Holmes was horribly miscast in the first film and Maggie Gyllenhaal seems much more at home in Christopher Nolan's version of Gotham City. Holmes is adorable eye candy and she's been excellent in other roles, but she's far too youthful and perky to be convincing as a District Attorney who bravely crusades against murderous crime bosses. Maggie Gyllenhaal, with her off-beat looks and aura of intelligence, should easily fill Katie Holmes' shoes, but not her bra, while making the role her own.
And if the re-casting of Katie Holmes is distracting, imagine how awkward it will be if the studio tries to replace Heath Ledger as the Joker in the next Batman film. I doubt Christopher Nolan would get involved with something like that, but it's just the sort of thing a clueless executive might think up.
Here's hoping that common sense prevails.
Or buy from Amazon.ca (Canada)
I have very little to say about Maria Bello taking over for Rachel Weisz in the Mummy sequel because I like both actresses but I despised the first film, skipped the second, and have no intention of watching the third. Replacing the writer/director with someone a lot better than Rob Cohen would be the only way to get me to watch another Mummy movie.
You can read the AV Club's article on awkward re-castings here and the IFC take on these matters here. Both are interesting reads for movie buffs.
I can't think of any glaring omissions on either list, but I did find David Hyde Pierce's absence in Hellboy 2 a disappointment. I know it wasn't him under Abe Sapien's makeup in the original, but his distinctive voice brought the character to life in the first film, and Doug Jones gave a comparatively flat performance in the second.
And on a final note, I got a real kick out of this part of the IFC's article:
For unspecified reasons — speculation ranges from script dissatisfaction to loyalty to departing "Silence of the Lambs" director Jonathan Demme — Jodie Foster chose not to reprise her performance as FBI Agent Clarice Starling. Ultimately, the honor of playing Clarice in Ridley Scott's sequel fell to Julianne Moore. Demme went to great lengths to diminish Foster's Starling physically onscreen; in a world of beefy guys, she's always the smallest person in the elevator. Scott and Moore's Starling, on the other hand, is some kind of supercop; blissfully snoozing seconds before she's blowing baddies away. After seeing the performances side by side, it's hard to believe their IMDb pages, which state that at five foot four inches tall, Moore stands just a half an inch above Foster. In, "Hannibal," it's more like half a foot. People joke about the camera adding 10 pounds; I never heard of it adding 10 inches before.
How soon we forget Boogie Nights.
Batman, Spider-Man, X-Men & Other Comics For Sale
"But they'll be worth money some day!"
That's the excuse given by countless young boys and (occasionally) girls when their parents ask why they're wasting all their money on comic books.
Well, according to the comic book price guide, some of the issues I have are in fact worth money now. Selling them, however, has proven to be a pain.
I've got ads up right now on Craigslist and other places, so I figured I may as well post the details here too. One never knows who might be reading.
They're all from the mid 80s-early 90s, and most are in Very Fine-Near Mint condition according to my unprofessional analysis.
Make an offer on any issues that interest you, or for the whole lot. Any questions can be emailed to johnerle (at) yahoo.com.
That's the excuse given by countless young boys and (occasionally) girls when their parents ask why they're wasting all their money on comic books.
Well, according to the comic book price guide, some of the issues I have are in fact worth money now. Selling them, however, has proven to be a pain.
I've got ads up right now on Craigslist and other places, so I figured I may as well post the details here too. One never knows who might be reading.
They're all from the mid 80s-early 90s, and most are in Very Fine-Near Mint condition according to my unprofessional analysis.
Amazing Spider-Man #264, 284, 286-298*, 301-311, 314, 319-326, 328, 329, 331-360, 365
(*first Todd MacFarlane) $600 for the lot
Batman: The Killing Joke
(1st edition, one of the great Joker stories ever told) $10
Complete or nearly complete runs of the following:
Batman: Legends Of The Dark Knight #16-39
Batman #431-479
Detective Comics #592-661
Uncanny X-Men #225-261, 270-285
X-Men #1-5 (1991)
John Constantine: Hellblazer #1-69
X-Force #1-8
Green Arrow #1-74
Daredevil #252-302
X-Factor #1-90
Spectacular Spider-Man #134-183
Web Of Spider-Man #30-90
Assorted issues of:
New Mutants (first Deadpool)
Excalibur #1-25
Batman: Shadow Of The Bat
The Punisher, Punisher War Journal
And a handful of indie comics, Dark Horse, Aliens vs. Predator, Star Wars, Terminator, Concrete, etc.
Make an offer on any issues that interest you, or for the whole lot. Any questions can be emailed to johnerle (at) yahoo.com.
Sarah Silverman Dumps Jimmy Kimmel
E! Online reports that Sarah Silverman has finally come to her senses and ended her relationship with Jimmy Kimmel after five long, baffling years.
The article doesn't specifically state that it was Silverman who did the dumping, but the reverse would be inconceivable, so I'd say it's a safe bet that Kimmel was the one being cast aside.
I happened to be watching Silverman's guest appearance on Star Trek: Voyager
just last night, so I can only assume that she sensed I was thinking about her and had a vision of the better life that awaits her if she'd only pick up the phone and rescind that restraining order.
Here's my offer to you, Sarah Silverman. I will happily bathe you from head to toe and perform a cleansing ritual to remove the lingering stench of failure which must still be clinging to your sublime skin and luxurious hair after spending so much time in close proximity to Jimmy Kimmel.
In other words, I'll help you wash that man right out of your hair, massage that man right out of your shoulders, rub that man right out of your thighs, and tickle that man right out of your taint.
Furthermore, I promise to dedicate every waking moment to supporting you and fulfilling your every need in a way that only an unemployed man could. There's no chance of me ever placing my career before you since I have no career and no desire to find one. And I could never be jealous of your accomplishments because the more successful you are the more time I get to spend basking in your glory, helping you traverse mud puddles, carrying your purse, eating bonbons, and hand-washing your unmentionables.
I also pledge to be less fat and every bit as charming and witty as Jimmy Kimmel ever was, but really, how could I not?
You can read more about my on-again/off-again/in-again/out-again relationship with Sarah Silverman by clicking here.
The article doesn't specifically state that it was Silverman who did the dumping, but the reverse would be inconceivable, so I'd say it's a safe bet that Kimmel was the one being cast aside.
I happened to be watching Silverman's guest appearance on Star Trek: Voyager
just last night, so I can only assume that she sensed I was thinking about her and had a vision of the better life that awaits her if she'd only pick up the phone and rescind that restraining order. Here's my offer to you, Sarah Silverman. I will happily bathe you from head to toe and perform a cleansing ritual to remove the lingering stench of failure which must still be clinging to your sublime skin and luxurious hair after spending so much time in close proximity to Jimmy Kimmel.
In other words, I'll help you wash that man right out of your hair, massage that man right out of your shoulders, rub that man right out of your thighs, and tickle that man right out of your taint.
Furthermore, I promise to dedicate every waking moment to supporting you and fulfilling your every need in a way that only an unemployed man could. There's no chance of me ever placing my career before you since I have no career and no desire to find one. And I could never be jealous of your accomplishments because the more successful you are the more time I get to spend basking in your glory, helping you traverse mud puddles, carrying your purse, eating bonbons, and hand-washing your unmentionables.
I also pledge to be less fat and every bit as charming and witty as Jimmy Kimmel ever was, but really, how could I not?
You can read more about my on-again/off-again/in-again/out-again relationship with Sarah Silverman by clicking here.
In Bruges: A Review
In Bruges (it rhymes with stooge) is a wonderfully coarse and talkative crime caper that deserves to be mentioned in the same breath as the best of Tarantino and the Coen Brothers.
Two hitmen (Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson) have been ordered to hide out in Bruges (it's in Belgium) until the heat dies down after a recent job. Gleeson, best known as "Mad Eye" moody from Harry Potter films, is a reasonably cultured and introspective hitman, so he delights in the city's medieval buildings, canals, and cobblestone streets, but despite the director's obvious love of this stunning city, Farrell's character never wavers from his belief that Bruges is a shithole. While Gleeson is awestruck by the city's rich history, Farrell "sulks like a five-year old who's dropped his sweeties".
He only perks up when he discovers a film shoot involving midgets, and then meets a beautiful young woman (Chloe) who he invites to dinner after sneaking on set. They each have sordid pasts, but offer each other a shot at redemption.
Farrell is a bundle of nervous energy, as usual, but this time there's a reason why his character is always trying to crawl out of his own skin. I won't reveal the reason here, but after a half hour or so you'll understand why he's constantly at war with himself. On a dinner date, for example, he tells Chloe a coarse joke about a recent series of murders in Belgium. When Chloe says that one of the victims was a friend of hers, his self-loathing is genuine, but moments later she reveals that she was only teasing, and Farrell is soon bursting with laughter. A minute later, he's beating up the man at the next table.
Gleeson, on the other hand, is the relatively philosophical voice of reason. He's a more experienced hitman who's good at his job, but would have chosen a different career if his life hadn't turned out the way it did. He manages to think of himself as a relatively decent person despite the fact that he kills people for money, so he becomes Farrell's de facto therapist, tour guide, and father figure while trying to help him work through his issues, which are very real and not played for laughs like in Grosse Pointe Blank or Analyze This.
But the sightseeing, bonding, and laying low can't last forever, so once the high-maintenance, volatile crime boss (Ralph Fiennes) reveals the real reason that Farrell and Gleeson are in Bruges, the threat of future violence comes into play.
You might find the first half of the film a bit slow if you're expecting non-stop action, and if you're easily offended you might find yourself wincing repeatedly as Farrell makes consistently rude remarks about Americans, homosexuals, midgets, and countless others.
The fact that there happens to be a film shoot taking place In Bruges is somewhat self-indulgent, but the dialogue was so sharp and funny, and the location was so stunning, and the brotherly relationship between Gleeson and Farrell was so appealing that I was able to forgive the somewhat contrived ending.
Unlike most comedies about killers, this one reminds us that innocent people often get hurt when there's gunplay, and when the violence does come in the third act it's quite brutal, so the movie should appeal to fans of the Coen Brothers' Fargo. And there are obvious parallels between these two hitmen and those portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta in Pulp Fiction, but In Bruges has a style and tone that feels fresh. And, most importantly, it's extremely funny and I cared about these characters as much as they cared for each other.
Final verdict: 9/10
Two hitmen (Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson) have been ordered to hide out in Bruges (it's in Belgium) until the heat dies down after a recent job. Gleeson, best known as "Mad Eye" moody from Harry Potter films, is a reasonably cultured and introspective hitman, so he delights in the city's medieval buildings, canals, and cobblestone streets, but despite the director's obvious love of this stunning city, Farrell's character never wavers from his belief that Bruges is a shithole. While Gleeson is awestruck by the city's rich history, Farrell "sulks like a five-year old who's dropped his sweeties".
He only perks up when he discovers a film shoot involving midgets, and then meets a beautiful young woman (Chloe) who he invites to dinner after sneaking on set. They each have sordid pasts, but offer each other a shot at redemption.
Farrell is a bundle of nervous energy, as usual, but this time there's a reason why his character is always trying to crawl out of his own skin. I won't reveal the reason here, but after a half hour or so you'll understand why he's constantly at war with himself. On a dinner date, for example, he tells Chloe a coarse joke about a recent series of murders in Belgium. When Chloe says that one of the victims was a friend of hers, his self-loathing is genuine, but moments later she reveals that she was only teasing, and Farrell is soon bursting with laughter. A minute later, he's beating up the man at the next table.
Gleeson, on the other hand, is the relatively philosophical voice of reason. He's a more experienced hitman who's good at his job, but would have chosen a different career if his life hadn't turned out the way it did. He manages to think of himself as a relatively decent person despite the fact that he kills people for money, so he becomes Farrell's de facto therapist, tour guide, and father figure while trying to help him work through his issues, which are very real and not played for laughs like in Grosse Pointe Blank or Analyze This.
But the sightseeing, bonding, and laying low can't last forever, so once the high-maintenance, volatile crime boss (Ralph Fiennes) reveals the real reason that Farrell and Gleeson are in Bruges, the threat of future violence comes into play.
You might find the first half of the film a bit slow if you're expecting non-stop action, and if you're easily offended you might find yourself wincing repeatedly as Farrell makes consistently rude remarks about Americans, homosexuals, midgets, and countless others.
The fact that there happens to be a film shoot taking place In Bruges is somewhat self-indulgent, but the dialogue was so sharp and funny, and the location was so stunning, and the brotherly relationship between Gleeson and Farrell was so appealing that I was able to forgive the somewhat contrived ending.
Unlike most comedies about killers, this one reminds us that innocent people often get hurt when there's gunplay, and when the violence does come in the third act it's quite brutal, so the movie should appeal to fans of the Coen Brothers' Fargo. And there are obvious parallels between these two hitmen and those portrayed by Samuel L. Jackson and John Travolta in Pulp Fiction, but In Bruges has a style and tone that feels fresh. And, most importantly, it's extremely funny and I cared about these characters as much as they cared for each other.
Final verdict: 9/10
Horror Nights At The Rio Theatre: Every Friday Night @ Midnight In July
Night owls and horror fans rejoice!
My favourite East Vancouver movie house, the Rio Theatre is showing classic horror films every Friday night this month.
My favourite East Vancouver movie house, the Rio Theatre is showing classic horror films every Friday night this month.
Black Dog Video and the Rio Theatre present:
Scary Midnight double features of Classic Cult films every friday night in the month of July...don't be scared!!! tickets $10, costumes, fake blood, prizes!!!!
This week: Friday July 4th, Dawn
of The Dead & Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things
July 11th Dead Alive & Return of the Living Dead
July 18th Fudoh the New Generation & Ichi the Killer
July 25th The Rocky Horror Picture Show with Live Performances!
Bad Lieutenant: The Remake
That's one movie I never thought would get remade.
Here's a plot summary of the original, courtesy of the IMDB:
Here's the basic plot as I remember it: Harvey Keitel plays a cop who witnesses many bad people doing bad things, but he himself is also a bad person who does bad things. As he investigates a very bad crime and the badness of his bad behaviour escalates, he becomes an even badder person, until the final twist at the end when he does something that is either very, very bad or kinda good, depending on how you look at it. Then he dies.
He's badder than The Bad Seed, badder than Bad Santa (or Badder Santa) and badder than both the Bad Boys put together. He does more bad things than the cast of Very Bad Things, he's a badder influence than the entire cast of Bad Influence, and he dispenses with the Good while going straight for the Bad and the Ugly.
He's just that bad.
Imagine The Bad News Bears being molested by the Big Bad Wolf on the set on Michael Jackson's Bad, and you get some sense of just how bad the Bad Lieutenant is.
Depressing and repetitive is how I remember the film. It makes Todd Solondz' "Happiness" look like a Hope and Crosby road movie. Not exactly the sort of thing that usually gets made in Hollywood, let alone gets made twice.
German director Werner Herzog will be behind the camera, and even more surprising is the A-list cast the remake is attracting: Nicolas Cage, Val Kilmer, and Eva Mendes have already signed on.
Now word yet on whether there'll be a cameo appearance by Harvey Keitel's penis.
Here's a plot summary of the original, courtesy of the IMDB:
A police Lieutenant goes about his daily tasks of investigating homicides, but is more interested in pursuing his vices. He has accumulated a massive debt betting on baseball, and he keeps doubling to try to recover. His bookies are beginning to get agitated. The Lieutenant does copious amounts of drugs, cavorts with prostitutes, and uses his status to take advantage of teenage girls. While investigating a nun's rape, he begins to reflect on his lifestyle.
Here's the basic plot as I remember it: Harvey Keitel plays a cop who witnesses many bad people doing bad things, but he himself is also a bad person who does bad things. As he investigates a very bad crime and the badness of his bad behaviour escalates, he becomes an even badder person, until the final twist at the end when he does something that is either very, very bad or kinda good, depending on how you look at it. Then he dies.
He's badder than The Bad Seed, badder than Bad Santa (or Badder Santa) and badder than both the Bad Boys put together. He does more bad things than the cast of Very Bad Things, he's a badder influence than the entire cast of Bad Influence, and he dispenses with the Good while going straight for the Bad and the Ugly.
He's just that bad.
Imagine The Bad News Bears being molested by the Big Bad Wolf on the set on Michael Jackson's Bad, and you get some sense of just how bad the Bad Lieutenant is.
Depressing and repetitive is how I remember the film. It makes Todd Solondz' "Happiness" look like a Hope and Crosby road movie. Not exactly the sort of thing that usually gets made in Hollywood, let alone gets made twice.
German director Werner Herzog will be behind the camera, and even more surprising is the A-list cast the remake is attracting: Nicolas Cage, Val Kilmer, and Eva Mendes have already signed on.
Now word yet on whether there'll be a cameo appearance by Harvey Keitel's penis.
Hancock - Review
Based on the negative buzz and the underwhelming trailer and the mixed reviews and the track record of director Peter Berg, I went into Hancock with low expectations but came out pleasantly surprised.
I found it very refreshing to see two major plot twists in a big budget Hollywood movie that weren't even hinted at in the trailers. Previews usually give away the entire movie in two and a half minutes, but not this time around, and for that reason alone I hope Hancock is a big hit. Maybe it'll give Hollywood the courage to show similar restraint with other marketing campaigns in the future.
Some audiences may be disappointed with the directions Hancock takes because it doesn't follow the typical superhero formula. There isn't much of a villain and the final showdown is a bit anti-climactic. There isn't as much action as you'd except from a Will Smith summer blockbuster, and when it does come, it's darker and more violent than I expected. And even though I laughed a lot, the humour is often edgier than anything in Men In Black or any other recent Will Smith vehicle.
The movie is also more serious and emotionally resonant than I expected, and that may be the final straw for the normal popcorn munchers. Hancock isn't just a comical boozehound/superhero, he's a super-entity with deep emotional scars who takes solace in the bottle whenever possible. And he isn't a loudmouth asshole simply because that's what passes for cool in today's youth culture. He's a jerk because he hates his life, and there's no end in sight because he's immortal, so he lashes out at everyone around him.
I still think Peter Berg is a terrible director, what with his obsessive use of shaky cams, extreme close ups, and sudden zooms for no apparent reason. But the script was solid and unusual, Will Smith does more than just act cool for a change, and Jason Bateman hits all the right notes as Hancock's PR guru, so while Berg and his cinematographer were busy showing off, everyone else got down to making a good movie.
Hancock could have been better with a different director, or it could have been a lot worse with Michael Bay behind the camera, but the film is still worth seeing for the performances and surprises, which I've tried not to give away.
Surprises in a summer blockbuster? What are the odds?
Final Verdict: 7/10
I found it very refreshing to see two major plot twists in a big budget Hollywood movie that weren't even hinted at in the trailers. Previews usually give away the entire movie in two and a half minutes, but not this time around, and for that reason alone I hope Hancock is a big hit. Maybe it'll give Hollywood the courage to show similar restraint with other marketing campaigns in the future.
Some audiences may be disappointed with the directions Hancock takes because it doesn't follow the typical superhero formula. There isn't much of a villain and the final showdown is a bit anti-climactic. There isn't as much action as you'd except from a Will Smith summer blockbuster, and when it does come, it's darker and more violent than I expected. And even though I laughed a lot, the humour is often edgier than anything in Men In Black or any other recent Will Smith vehicle.
The movie is also more serious and emotionally resonant than I expected, and that may be the final straw for the normal popcorn munchers. Hancock isn't just a comical boozehound/superhero, he's a super-entity with deep emotional scars who takes solace in the bottle whenever possible. And he isn't a loudmouth asshole simply because that's what passes for cool in today's youth culture. He's a jerk because he hates his life, and there's no end in sight because he's immortal, so he lashes out at everyone around him.
I still think Peter Berg is a terrible director, what with his obsessive use of shaky cams, extreme close ups, and sudden zooms for no apparent reason. But the script was solid and unusual, Will Smith does more than just act cool for a change, and Jason Bateman hits all the right notes as Hancock's PR guru, so while Berg and his cinematographer were busy showing off, everyone else got down to making a good movie.
Hancock could have been better with a different director, or it could have been a lot worse with Michael Bay behind the camera, but the film is still worth seeing for the performances and surprises, which I've tried not to give away.
Surprises in a summer blockbuster? What are the odds?
Final Verdict: 7/10
Baseball - A Game Of Inches
One the great things about baseball is that you could watch a million games and you might never see this happen again. And the greatest thing about YouTube is that even casual fans like me never have to miss the truly remarkable plays like this.*
Missed it byyyyy that much.
* Of course, if Viacom has it's way, YouTube may be about to change forever.
Missed it byyyyy that much.
* Of course, if Viacom has it's way, YouTube may be about to change forever.
Deep Thoughts/Shallow Jokes - July 4th Edition
If today is Independence Day, when do Americans commemorate Dependence On Foreign Oil Day?
Wall-E: A Review
There's something inherently wrong about using words to describe the brilliance of WALL-E, because this is a film that places the emphasis squarely on visuals and music to tell one of the most magical stories of the past few years.
Alfred Hitchcock once said that you're ready to start shooting once the script has been written and the dialogue has been added. The people behind WALL-E understand better than most that talk is cheap and that characters are truly defined by their actions, not their words.
WALL-E is a thoroughly adorable creation not because he offers snappy banter and pop culture references while mugging for the camera like the dogs in that hideous trailer for Beverly Hills Chihuahua, but because everything he does speaks volumes about what a good-natured creature he is. In the same way that R2D2 was the emotional core of Star Wars, this little robot is the most human, genuinely heart-warming movie creation in years. Not since Puss In Boots flashed his baby blues in Shrek 2 has an animated character expressed so much while saying nothing.
And the deserted planet that WALL-E inhabits is an equally fascinating treat for the eyes. When seen from space, the familiar blue, white, and green sphere once known as Earth has turned a rusty shade of brown. WALL-E has been left alone on this abandoned planet to clean up the mess that humans have left behind, and his piles of garbage tower over the largest skyscrapers. The shots of this lone robot wandering through a desolate wasteland while humming a catchy tune are truly stunning.
WALL-E happily goes about his business, as he's done for 700 years, because it's the only life he's ever known. He works all day, compacting garbage into neat little cubes, occasionally keeping trinkets that he finds interesting like egg beaters, a rubik's cube, and the box that a diamond ring came in. The diamond ring, having no inherent value that WALL-E can understand, gets tossed on the trash heap.
WALL-E's managed to survive long after all the other WALL-E models have broken down, and like many Sci-Fi robots before him, the more information he assimilates, the more his own personality develops. He's a machine that's evolved to the verge of sentience, but we see him as a young child who's just beginning to make sense of the world around him and his place in it.
His only friend is a pet cockroach who follows him everywhere he goes like a loyal puppy, and WALL-E spends his off-hours watching Hello Dolly and emulating the dance moves. There's also something about the love story that he finds fascinating, but he doesn't quite understand it all. And then EVE arrives.
She's a newer model robot, apparently designed by one of Steve Jobs' ancestors, and she's been sent to Earth on some unknown mission. WALL-E is initially terrified of this strange visitor, but the more he watches her the more fascinated he becomes, and his initial timid attempts at courtship are thoroughly endearing to the audience, if not to EVE. No matter how many times she threatens to blow him to bits with her highly advanced weapons, all he wants to do is get a little closer, earn her trust, protect her from harm, and hold hands.
Beyond the love story and the laughs, there's some very effective social commentary on the dangers of mega-corporations and our increasingly obese, lazy society. This is deftly handled in a way that's hard to miss, but never heavy-handed.
I honestly don't know if most children will enjoy Wall-E because it lacks the hyper-kinetic action of typical kiddie fare, but I sincerely hope they'll respond favourably to WALL-E's expressive eyes, charming body language, and sweet-tempered personality.
If, after seeing WALL-E, your kids would rather watch Beverly Hills Chihuahua, I weep for the future.
And as for adults, if you don't find WALL-E to be a wondrous movie-going experience, there's an excellent chance that you're a cold-hearted bastard, and if I was the last robot on earth and my choice of companion came down to you or a cockroach, I'd choose the cockroach.
Alfred Hitchcock once said that you're ready to start shooting once the script has been written and the dialogue has been added. The people behind WALL-E understand better than most that talk is cheap and that characters are truly defined by their actions, not their words.
WALL-E is a thoroughly adorable creation not because he offers snappy banter and pop culture references while mugging for the camera like the dogs in that hideous trailer for Beverly Hills Chihuahua, but because everything he does speaks volumes about what a good-natured creature he is. In the same way that R2D2 was the emotional core of Star Wars, this little robot is the most human, genuinely heart-warming movie creation in years. Not since Puss In Boots flashed his baby blues in Shrek 2 has an animated character expressed so much while saying nothing.
And the deserted planet that WALL-E inhabits is an equally fascinating treat for the eyes. When seen from space, the familiar blue, white, and green sphere once known as Earth has turned a rusty shade of brown. WALL-E has been left alone on this abandoned planet to clean up the mess that humans have left behind, and his piles of garbage tower over the largest skyscrapers. The shots of this lone robot wandering through a desolate wasteland while humming a catchy tune are truly stunning.
WALL-E happily goes about his business, as he's done for 700 years, because it's the only life he's ever known. He works all day, compacting garbage into neat little cubes, occasionally keeping trinkets that he finds interesting like egg beaters, a rubik's cube, and the box that a diamond ring came in. The diamond ring, having no inherent value that WALL-E can understand, gets tossed on the trash heap.
WALL-E's managed to survive long after all the other WALL-E models have broken down, and like many Sci-Fi robots before him, the more information he assimilates, the more his own personality develops. He's a machine that's evolved to the verge of sentience, but we see him as a young child who's just beginning to make sense of the world around him and his place in it.
His only friend is a pet cockroach who follows him everywhere he goes like a loyal puppy, and WALL-E spends his off-hours watching Hello Dolly and emulating the dance moves. There's also something about the love story that he finds fascinating, but he doesn't quite understand it all. And then EVE arrives.
She's a newer model robot, apparently designed by one of Steve Jobs' ancestors, and she's been sent to Earth on some unknown mission. WALL-E is initially terrified of this strange visitor, but the more he watches her the more fascinated he becomes, and his initial timid attempts at courtship are thoroughly endearing to the audience, if not to EVE. No matter how many times she threatens to blow him to bits with her highly advanced weapons, all he wants to do is get a little closer, earn her trust, protect her from harm, and hold hands.
Beyond the love story and the laughs, there's some very effective social commentary on the dangers of mega-corporations and our increasingly obese, lazy society. This is deftly handled in a way that's hard to miss, but never heavy-handed.
I honestly don't know if most children will enjoy Wall-E because it lacks the hyper-kinetic action of typical kiddie fare, but I sincerely hope they'll respond favourably to WALL-E's expressive eyes, charming body language, and sweet-tempered personality.
If, after seeing WALL-E, your kids would rather watch Beverly Hills Chihuahua, I weep for the future.
And as for adults, if you don't find WALL-E to be a wondrous movie-going experience, there's an excellent chance that you're a cold-hearted bastard, and if I was the last robot on earth and my choice of companion came down to you or a cockroach, I'd choose the cockroach.
Deep Thoughts/Shallow Jokes
I love being in touch with my feminine side, because it's the only way I get to touch anything that's feminine.
:rimshot:
:rimshot:
Planets Align On July 4th
Visit this page on NASA's website to learn more about how to view this phenomenon.
I just hope the Bush administration doesn't see this as a sign.
"That there looks like a coalition of willing planets to me. Time to invade Iran!"
I just hope the Bush administration doesn't see this as a sign.
"That there looks like a coalition of willing planets to me. Time to invade Iran!"
Worst Movie Trailer Ever?
I normally try to avoid hyperbole. I hate browsing YouTube and seeing every other video labeled the Worst ___ Ever! or the BEST ____ EVER!!!!!
But after seeing this movie trailer twice and cringing both times, I've scoured my brain to think of a more annoying trailer, and I've come up blank.
View the trailer here, if you dare
It's drivel like this that gives animated movies a bad name. Today was the second time I've seen this trailer, and viewing it before the remarkable Wall-E* was quite a stunning contrast.
If I had kids, I'd sooner give them up for adoption than take them to see this crap. And if they insisted on owning the DVD, I'd be forced to sell them into the white slave trade.
* more on Wall-E later. What a brilliant, heart-warming film.
But after seeing this movie trailer twice and cringing both times, I've scoured my brain to think of a more annoying trailer, and I've come up blank.
View the trailer here, if you dare
It's drivel like this that gives animated movies a bad name. Today was the second time I've seen this trailer, and viewing it before the remarkable Wall-E* was quite a stunning contrast.
If I had kids, I'd sooner give them up for adoption than take them to see this crap. And if they insisted on owning the DVD, I'd be forced to sell them into the white slave trade.
* more on Wall-E later. What a brilliant, heart-warming film.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)