Nerd shit

« Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole

tn_batmansuperman Okay guys, since every conversation lately seems to turn into Batman or Superman, here is a thread to do it without derailing important The Phantom or fighting owls analysis. This could be kind of like the potpourri thread except limited to comic strip movies and what not.

To show that I’m not above it I will comment on the news that set off the recent Superman conversation: that Zack Snyder is on a list of potential directors for the new Superman picture. I thought about it and I think actually Snyder might work well with David S. Goyer, who wrote the script, so I’m for it. Also on the list is David Bowie’s son Duncan Jones, who did MOON. I have no idea if he can pull off a big studio movie, but he seems like the most interesting director on the list.

Also they’re saying Darren Aranofsky now. I’d see that. It could be Matt Reeves (CLOVERFIELD, LET ME IN, co-creator of an old TV show called Felicity). And Jonathan Liebesman (TEXAS CHAINSAW reprequel) most likely based on the alien invasion movie he has coming out, but he’s also supposed to do CLASH OF THE TITANS 2: THE RE-CLASH.

But the rule is they always go with the worst guy on the list, so congratulations to Tony Scott, who will direct the first Superman movie where nobody can tell if the guy is supposed to be flying or not.

3 people like this post.

Unlike

crap to click on:

Potpourri

Tags: posts done just to keep people on topic in other comment threads

This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 28th, 2010 at 11:27 am and is filed under Blog Post (short for weblog). You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

501 Responses to “Nerd shit”

Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 11:31 am

SUPERMAN ON FIRE

You will believe subtitles can kind of wiggle distractingly.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 11:43 am

“so I’m for it. Also on the list is David Bowie’s son Duncan Jones, who did MOON. I have no idea if he can pull off a big studio movie”

Vern – Don’t you think its strange how you could have used the same very words back in the early 2000s? you know back when that Nolan dude just did that low budget backwards-memory-loss thriller and that modest-scale Alaskan murder mystery and he’s given BATMAN. Can he pull off a big studio movie? Weird because in some ways history is repeating itself here with Duncan Jones possibly getting hired by Nolan much like Soderbergh and Clooney hired Nolan for INSOMNIA.

And your endorsement of Snyder is…well, its like if you were endorsing Michael Bay back then. Harsh but really Snyder is a slightly more respected Bay, both guys who despite all the money and CGI in the world, they can’t direct compelling comprehensible action worth a shit.

As I said elsewhere, imagine Snyder’s SUPERMAN in all its green screen jackass jerking off. How fucking unappealing this side of bread pudding. Who wants to see that bullshit? If Bay has explosions explosions explosions, Snyder has awkwardly “cool” (when really its the opposite) mid-motion freeze.

Matt Reeves isn’t a bad idea either, but lets see with his new remake how he does without shakey cam. Its getting good reviews so far. Which means it might be good, which means it’ll flop. If we’re going by 2010 good vampire pictures tracking like DAYBREAKERS.
Outlaw Vern
September 28th, 2010 at 12:07 pm

I think the only comparison between Snyder and Bay is that they’re both slick commercial directors. But their styles are very different. Obviously I hate Bay’s for its lack of rhythm or comprehensibility. Snyder’s I like – it looks beautiful but still has clear, exciting action scenes in all of his movies so far. I personally like his use of slo-mo because it flies completely opposite of what’s popular now, trying to make sure you see exactly what’s going on instead of trying to make sure you have no way of seeing what’s going on.

And of course tonally they’re very different too. All four of Snyder’s movies take their concepts seriously. Bay fills his movies with hundreds of lame jokes at the expense of any drama. Now that you make the comparison, I guarantee you Snyder could’ve made a much more enjoyable (although not as insane) version of a Transformers movie. There would be none of that wisecracking, the fights I’m sure would be easy to follow and he’d probly treat the robots with the respect he does his, uh, owls and stuff. Damn, now I can kind of see the potential of a Transformers movie.

As far as greenscreen, I’m not sure what that means. Do you think somebody else is gonna hang Superman off a helicopter and fly him around? Snyder did 300 with green screens but created a fully realized three dimensional stylized world, unlike Sin City which often looked like flat backdrops. For Dawn of the Dead and Watchmen he shot on locations and sets. Plus I don’t see producer Nolan wanting to help out with a Sky Captain type movie.

Like I said, I wish Snyder had a little more smarts, but after enjoying all four of his movies so far I gotta admit he has something.
PacmanFever
September 28th, 2010 at 12:11 pm

They’re making a CLASH OF THE T2TANS? Fuck the “first” was a rare BATMAN & ROBIN/BATTLEFIELD:EARTH level big budget distater to me. I know everyone who read that instantly thought “no way dude”, but, no, I mean it.
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 12:15 pm

The new CLASH OF THE T1TANS was just boring. I really can’t stand that joyless approach to old-fashioned adventure. Everybody acts like saving the world from giant monsters is such a chore. Try working for a living, buddy.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 12:24 pm

I feel like Snyder could compose some really compelling action scenes, but if he were directing then Nolan’s script better be out-of-this-world, and Nolan should probably be keeping an eye on the actors, too. I think darren aronofsky is the best choice of the one’s above, and he and Nolan have similar backgrounds, but if Nolan is godfathering this thing then a more up-and-coming director likes Jones might work better. We sort of don’t know just how involved Nolan will be, which could determine whether they go with someone younger and fresher, or someone more established (who may not enjoy having Nolan over his shoulder the whole time).
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 12:27 pm

To be fair, the original CLASH OF THE TITANS wasn’t that good either. I usually refer to it as the prototype of the modern hollow blockbuster, that has nothing to offer than effect shots and suffers from bad actors and a mindnumbingly stupid script.

And in terms of Zack Snyder: I still don’t care for anything he does, so I guess if he makes a Superman movie, I won’t watch it. (The scars that 300 caused are still hurting.)
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 12:30 pm

And I still hope that the Nolans browse one day through the internet and come across that old AICN post, where Moriarty suggested a Superman movie that takes place in the 1930’s and is made by the Coen Bros.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 12:31 pm

Vern – You really like Snyder’s slow motion nonsense?

I dunno his bullshit comes off like way too many guys after they saw several John Woo movies and wanting to replicate, but of course missing the entire point. The stop motion in itself isn’t “cool,” but how it relates to the rest of the narrative’s visual aesthetic storytelling. A master, or used to at least at this sort of shit was Mr. Brian DePalma. Would you at least agree with me that DePalma is better at that one aspect than Snyder?

As for green screen….you need to see that trailer for Snyder’s new movie SUCKER PUNCH. Then tell me again I’m being silly.

Why am I getting worked up? Why am I being an asshole? Snyder aint gonna be hired. WB might want him because 300 was a big hit, WATCHMEN was a big disapointment* and if SUCKER PUNCH goes like the last few geek chic-tailored-hyped-up-the-ass comic con favorites, it won’t do shit in theatres. Otherwise I don’t see Nolan hiring/backing him, and if he does end up employing him….I’ll eat crow.

I don’t see Darren A. happening, not out of questions about his possible merits, but I can’t picture WB getting behind him for such a big dollar project with real jobs on the line. Plus I doubt he’s interested in it, though he did cook up that infamous crazy-ass BATMAN: YEAR ONE script where Alfred was a black mecanic, the batmobile was a souped-up cadillac, and Batman at one point wears a hockey mask in his early escapades. Great director though so who knows?

PacmanFever – Yeah it was shit and somehow made a big pile of money so…hooray for hollywood? Talk about a movie made by guys after they just played GOD OF WAR. But instead of Kratos I get AVATAR guy. That’s not much of a trade-off.

*=INCEPTION, another bigass budget movie with a similar long running time made more money in America than WATCHMEN (based off a “classic” book with all the inherit adapted advantages attached) did in its entire worldwide run.
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 12:31 pm

CJ: Yeah, but at least you could laugh at it. There’s nothing worse than a bad movie that isn’t even funny.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 12:32 pm

Hell yes. The Coens would make an incredible Superman movie, though I can’t picture them coming in and doing it from someone else’s script. A period-piece would be cool, too, but I think it’s more important to get a modern, relevant Superman film. With all the shit going on in the world today, it seems like it shouldn’t be too hard to make something that can really connect with audiences.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 12:33 pm

CJ Holden – Sure why not? Isn’t that where Bale got the Batman gig?
I am Vern's Message Board
September 28th, 2010 at 12:33 pm

Vern starts a thread just so you nerds can stop cluttering up movie reviews with Superman talk and what do you do? Use it to talk about Clash of the Titans.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 12:35 pm

RRA – actually I believe Frank Miller wrote the script for Aronofsky’s Year One. Thank god that never got made and they went with Nolan instead.

Also, if you this interview (http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/rorschachsrants/news/?a=22918) says Snyder already passed on Superman.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 12:35 pm

Lets instead talk about The Phantom. ;)
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 12:36 pm

Sorry for the incomprehensible grammar in that last post.
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 12:36 pm

At least nobody is gonna mention THE WIRE in here…
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 12:37 pm

Levon Swift – OK thanks for the correction. Thanks for the link.

BTW off topic but why has Miller just plain lost his damn mind in the last few years? From being one of the great influential (or too influential to hack writers/artists in 1990s with the violence and gritty nonsense) comic book people of the 1980s, he’s really shit in his legacy bed lately aint he?
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 12:41 pm

Mr. Majestyk: Sorry, but I couldn’t even laugh at the original CLASH. It was just a fucking bad movie, that can’t even be watched with nostalgia or Hey-old-movies-are-cheesy-MST3K-mindset (Which I don’t have anyway.)
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 12:50 pm

CJ: It’s not one of my favorites, but I got a lot of love for the creatures in that movie. Plus, that soft-focus, shot-through-a-screen-door look they got going on is always hilarious. It makes everything look like a Barbara Walters interview.
Eddie Lummox
September 28th, 2010 at 12:51 pm

Well, Miller’s always been insane. He just doesn’t have the filters (most of them probably external) that he used to have anymore.

Same thing with Alan Moore. He used to have editors who could keep him in line, but now everything just goes straight from his head to the paper, and it’s a damn mess.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 12:51 pm

RRA, I have to agree with Vern. I think Snyder is a talented but flawed film maker. He may have a lot of room to grow as a director, but he is no Micheal Bay. Snyder, directs great action sequences, but makes somewhat shallow films that lack emotional resonance. Bay doesn’t even direct good action sequences and his films are heartless big budget commercials. However, I very much agree with your observation about Duncan Jones. I really enjoyed MOON.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 12:52 pm

Frank Miller has lost his damn mind. I read All-Star Batman & Robin the Boy Wonder, and I gotta say man it was almost heartbreaking to read something that seemed to understand Batman so little by a writer who helped define the modern interpretation of the character.
Eddie Lummox
September 28th, 2010 at 12:52 pm

By the way, I was talking to RRA, there. Don’t want to confuse anybody.
CallMeKermiT
September 28th, 2010 at 12:58 pm

I agree. I still don’t see why he’s often called “visionary” , especially when most of his work is a translation of somebody else idea , but Snyder’s movies are more easy to follow than most of today action-driven “cinema”. I think he’s somewhat stuck in the Matrix nineties , but , hey , slow-mo is good enough for me , I can follow the action better .

Since this is the nerd channel , thanks for The Phantom (1996) review. I had a lot of fun with that , an ultra-silly movie not afraid of what it is. One of my favorite scenes is James Remar ( playing an Indiana Jones clone ) trying to stike his Asian child sidekick with his elbow . Good stuff . In fact , so good , that I’m currently trying to find some Phantom comics , but good lord I don’t know where to begin , the character started his publishing career in the 30s and never fucking stopped !
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 1:03 pm

That “Visionary” label is fucking hubris at its most awesome, like when DePalma was declared “Master of the Macabre” for DRESSED TO KILL.

Of course DRESSED TO KILL was actually pretty good and in some ways DePalma does deliver in that hype but hey MOVING ON we’ve made our stands, crossed our lines on the sand, all that.

Speaking of DePalma….what the fuck happened to him on REDACTED? Its like he had a mid-life crisis, pissed at Iraq and made that sort of whiney experimental movie with bad acting you would expect from a college short film.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 1:07 pm

The new Clash deserves all the hate it gets, but it is worth checking out this article about how studio melding is most likely the reason it sucked so bad.

http://www.chud.com/articles/articles/23299/1/BY-ZEUS-THE-VERSION-OF-CLASH-OF-THE-TITANS-YOU-DIDN039T-SEE/Page1.html
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 1:09 pm

Frank Miller also really liked the Daredevil movie.
Jones
September 28th, 2010 at 1:13 pm

You can hate Snyder for any reason and say his action isn’t compelling, but I don’t think you can say it isn’t comprehensible. You always know who is doing what to do, and where everyone is in relation to each other. The action is clear. He’s one of the few guys out there making clear cut action flicks, I like him. Like Vern, I like that the guy isn’t ironic or winky or putting in stupid jokes like every other dumb blockbuster. He plays things straight.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:18 pm

I loved the action in 300, and I think Snyder’s action can be very clear and compelling, but I thought that his style was all wrong for Watchmen.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 1:23 pm

Hey RRA, if you are still here, i wanted to say that i had to create a new email and MSN account, so please let us find a way to get into contact with each other again.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:24 pm

… and would be all wrong for Superman, too, though not really for the same reasons. I mean, a Snyder-shot slug-fest between Superman and Darkseid would be pretty badass, but the subtlety is too important.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:28 pm

With that said, I would rather let Snyder direct every Superman movie from now until the end of time then see Tony fucking Scott anywhere near this thing.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 1:28 pm

“I like that the guy isn’t ironic or winky or putting in stupid jokes like every other dumb blockbuster. He plays things straight.”

Jones – Oh you’re right about that, especially since he didn’t have to on 300 because that movie was a complete joke.

AsimovLives – I guess Witness Protection failed me again.
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 1:31 pm

I like Aronofsky a lot, but I think he’s all wrong for Superman. Supes should be a beacon of light, not a wallow in the muck. That’s why I think Snyder is a great choice. There might not be much subtext going on in his movies, but that’s fine. It makes him an earnest filmmaker whose work seems to exist solely in the moment, giving him a really strong command of the beat-by-beat dynamics of cinematic storytelling. I think he truly believes in the power of pop art imagery. With his instincts for the iconic, I think he’d give us some truly super and heroic superheroics for a change.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 1:32 pm

Levon Swift – Let me guess. Snyder isn’t cartoonish, but Scott of the last decade is? That’s like hating Looney Tunes but liking Disney.

I just don’t get it, and I’m obviously fucking outnumbered in this debate this side of Seagal in UNDER SIEGE. Without badass killing methods or akiidoo skills. So I guess I’m the chick then. Without the nice titties.

Tony Scott making SUPERMAN is another depressing thought. I mean jesus enough dude, your UNSTOPPABLE looks like a retarded actioneer remake of the wonderful RUNAWAY TRAIN and you want to do the same for THE WARRIROS.

Tony, you’re an asshole. Sad thing is, unlike a Snyder or Bay, once upon time you were a decent director Tony who made some decent movies. TOP GUN was garbage but hey you made TRUE ROMANCE and REVENGE. And fucking HUNGER.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 1:33 pm

RRA, so how are we to do this? Is there any place you know of where you feel safe to tell me your email again? or for me to give my new one?
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:35 pm

I just mean that at least in Snyder’s film you’d be able to see where Superman is and what/who he is punching. I’m not sure Scott could deliver that much. I don’t think Snyder’s a great choice either; Jones or Aronofsky would be my picks. Personally I think they should scrap the whole thing and have Superman in Batman 3, but for some reason Nolan is intent on keeping them separate.

I’d also like to take this opportunity to jump on the Jon Hamm as Superman bandwagon.
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 1:42 pm

Nobody denies that a slow motion shot is better than shaky cam and epileptic editing, but even slow motion needs timing and pace. And if 300 taught me anything, then that Zack Synder got no idea when to use it or how. (To be fair, he might have improved by now, because I neither saw Watchmen or the owls movie, but just hearing that he is is still using lots of slow motion shots in his movies makes me doubt it.)
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:43 pm

Watchmen was a step down from 300. 300 is still his best movie, so if you don’t like that…
Stu
September 28th, 2010 at 1:43 pm

“But the rule is they always go with the worst guy on the list, so congratulations to Tony Scott, who will direct the first Superman movie where nobody can tell if the guy is supposed to be flying or not.”
Featuring the line “Is it a Bird? Is it a Plane? No, seriously, what the fuck is it?”

Snyder’s slow motion/speeded up alternating style actually when you think about is a really logical choice for Superman action scenes. If he’s taking down, let’s say, a bunch of robots at Superspeed, then it’d made sense to go from him blurring from one to the next, then slowing it right down to show him landing his blows in detail and let the power be shown. Smallville does something like that all the time, and I thought this scene from last season was a pretty nice example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTUMNu28PE8
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 1:45 pm

Levon Swift – The reason for SUPERMAN is that by order of court over a lawsuit with the Siegal/Shuster estates (dudes who created Superman), WB effectively has until 2012 I believe to make a new SUPERMAN movie before the film rights lapse back to those estates.

And yeah, I quite dig the Hamm/Supes idea too.
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 1:51 pm

I’m all for Hamm because I prefer my Superman to be a grown-ass man, but if they go younger like you know they will I nominate that tall dude from THE OFFICE. Especially if they go with that (possibly imaginary) Coens Bros one set in the thirties. Watch LEATHERHEADS and tell me I’m wrong.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:53 pm

That tall dude was almost Captain America. I thought he’d have been perfect, and I wasn’t sure about Evans, but recent set picks show him looking exactly fucking like Steve Rogers.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 1:54 pm

Also, Stu, that tag line is hilarious.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 1:54 pm

I am with Mr. Majestyk, as much as I like Aronofsky he is the wrong choice for Superman. Superman is not Batman, he is not dark or brooding, and I worry that an Aronofsky directed Supes would tread in the same melancholy and joyless waters RETURNS did. Superman is like a Greek god among men, and his adventures should be larger then life and fun with a touch of humanity.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 1:59 pm

Mr. Majestyk – Makes sense. I like the Hamm casting in idea because it ties into less youthful, more mature Superman that was prevalent in Golden Age comics and the George Reeves TV program.

But really, I would use that 90s cartoon as something of a role model of how to do Superman.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:00 pm

RRA, check out your escape ny email, see if you got my email, please. thanks.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 2:04 pm

Yes to using the 90’s cartoon as inspiration. The whole Timm/Dini animated universe is great.

Anybody wish we could’ve seen a Spielberg Superman movie? With everyone worrying about Aronofsky being too dark (which he generally is, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t do something like this too), it just got me thinking about how Spielberg’s style could’ve been so perfect. Of course, he’s the perfect Captain America director, too, and Marvel must know that since they hired Joe Johnston (i.e. Spielberg-lite).
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 2:06 pm

Speaking of Tony Scott, anybody else think RUNAWAY TRAIN ON FIRE (I’m trying to make it the new PORT OF CALL NEW ORLEANS. Work with me here) looks potentially not shitty? Sure, Tony’ll probably get flop sweat over it and fuck the whole thing up, but the trailer makes it look like a throwback to early-nineties high-concept A-list action. It could work if somebody makes sure Tony gets his nap so he’s not all overstimulated.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:10 pm

The wrong man for this job is already named, and it’s Zack The Hack Snyder. I’m even suprised that Vern is so easy on him. That guy all kinds of wrong for a Supermanmovie, as much as Tony Scott. As i see it,. there’s only two really interesting choices right now: Duncan Jones and Darren Aronofski. And if people are worried that Jones is not enough experience,d well, he’s currently about the start a medium budget movie, so he’s raising in the ladder. And Darren never made a big budget movie either. But so it was with Christopher Nolan with BATMAN BEGINS. There’s always a first time for everything.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:12 pm

Mr. Majestyk, that Tony Scott train movie will be crap, and the fact that Nu Kirk actor is init doesnt bode well either. I’m starting to seriously dislike that dude, as much as i’m starting to seriously dislike Zoe Saldana too.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:15 pm

I’m terribly suspicious of the positive reviews that ELT ME IN, Matt Reeves’s latest movie is getting. I think those positive reviews are either from the people who never watched the original movie, or they are those that Jar Jar Abrams bought for his long time dedicated ass slave.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 2:38 pm

I am just going to throw it out there, but Eric Bana would make a badass Supes, and so would Tom Hardy if you wanted to go younger. They both could pull it of physically, and are very good actors. Hardy carried BRONSON, and was one of my favorite parts of INCEPTION. He already has the Nolan seal of approval.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 2:41 pm

I gotta disagree about Hardy. He was a total badass in Inception, but he just doesn’t look like Superman to me.

Also, and I suppose this could be debated, but I think it’s important to have an American actor play Supes, as important as it is to have an American play Cap. That’s part of why I like Hamm so much – he looks like he could actually be from Midwest America (because he is).
ThomasCrown442
September 28th, 2010 at 2:43 pm

I agree that a Superman movie should not be like a Batman movie. When I watch a superman movie, I just wanna have a good time. A superman movie should be more like the 1st Spiderman movie than the Dark Knight. Bright and colorful, but not completely brain dead. I also agree that the Superman remake was completely dull. Bad casting too. I like Kevin Spacey but come on, him as Lex Luthor?

As far as Snyder, I really feel this guy is on the verge of genius but I don’t think he’ll ever get there. Visually this guy is incredible. There were moments in Watchmen, especially the Vietnam segment, where I got a pit in my stomach (you know, when a scene is so well put together yet the content is so disgusting you’re conflicted emotionally) that only guys like Kubrick used to give me. Yet, in the end, his movies are a little too emptyheaded to really consider him in that league of filmmaker. In the end, he just makes popcorn movies. The one time he took real risk and made something different (Watchmen) it flopped big time (though I really liked it).
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 2:43 pm

Majestyk – Couldn’t you argue the same for Tony’s lackluster as fuck PELHAM remake? The original is a tight mean thriller, remake is the slacker son rebelling against dad.

Asimov – try my hotmail account. You know, the one with my real name in the address?
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 2:51 pm

RRA: The PELHAM remake just looked crappy from the outset. I love the look and feel of the original so making it shinier was never going to appeal to me. I never saw it though so it might be an underappreciated classic for all I know.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:51 pm

RRA – OK, i’ll try that, if i can recall it. Memory and old age, you know?
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 2:53 pm

Since we have a new thread, I would like to openly apologize for derailing the Phantom thread a few days back. That said, I was not trolling, I honestly find vigilante justice to be a deeply troubling concept and not something that should be inherently seen as “kid’s stuff.” To me at least, it is clearly not. I feel so strongly about the subject that I actually wrote my senior thesis project in film school on the subject. It’ a hardcore action film that deals directly with these themes and a pretty good agent is reading this weekend. I also just made a phone call today and found out that I could probably get it to, no shit, Steven Seagal.

In any case, I will henceforth refrain from getting into Nietzsche on these boards.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 2:54 pm

Here’s an article where they choose 14 directors who they think Nolan should pick:

http://www.hitfix.com/galleries/who-should-direct-chris-nolans-superman
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:55 pm

When will Tony Scott finally realise he became a living joke? When people who defend Zack The Hack Snyder can piss on Tony Scott, that’s when you know you have hit rock bottom.
AsimovLives
September 28th, 2010 at 2:56 pm

Hunter D., so you are the one to blame, hem?
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 2:58 pm

Levon Swift, Hamm is not a bad choice. He does have an oldschool Christopher Reeves quality about him, but he lacks the physical presence Superman needs. And, I don’t buy that an American needs to play Supes. Bale, is a great Batman even with his silly growling line delivery. Actually, the more I think about it the more I think Hardy is perfect for the part.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 2:59 pm

One of their potential choices is Bay. They dismiss the idea, and I would really like to, were it not for a troubling interview with Nolan’s cinematographer Wally Pfister in which he says that Nolan really likes Bay’s movie (Pfister also says it’s one of the things they often disagree about).
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:01 pm

I don’t think an American needs to play Batman though. I think Superman and Cap are the only two. Plus, the Waynes are clearly descended from British aristocracy.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:08 pm

I also don’t buy that Hamm lacks the physical presence. Yes, he’d have to bulk up a bit, but I think his performance on Mad Men shows why he’d be perfect. In fact, one of the more intelligent commenters over on comibookmovie.com (there aren’t many of them) made a very valid point about how in many way Don Draper is like a dark reflection of Superman. Draper hides the farmboy past he’s ashamed of so that he can appear to be the man he wants to be, thinks he should be, while Superman really is that man, but he’s hiding in the guise of this normal average farm boy.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 3:10 pm

Levon Swift, interesting point about the Waynes, but I am sticking with my nomination of Hardy. Tell me you wouldn’t go see a Jones directed Superman starting Hardy.

It is funny that Jones and T Scott are up for the same job because Jones reminds me a lot of Ridely Scott.
Brendan
September 28th, 2010 at 3:13 pm

I give my vote to either Snyder, who is unparalleled as a visual stylist these days, and I’m sure could deliver a great movie if he had a great foundation, or either Matt Reeves or Duncan Jones, just because I think it’d be sweet to have a low-budget auteur take a stab at it.

Dream director? I’m gonna agree with Moriarty that a Coen Bros. Superman movie would be fucking amazing, and would be totallly different from anything else anyone is making.

Why not just rehire Brandon Routh? SUPERMAN RETURNS had many, many problems, but he wasn’t one of them. The dude inhabited every aspect of the character perfectly, and if they actually let him play the Man of Steel, he has ‘All Time Greatest’ in his sights.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:15 pm

I’d be okay with re-hiring Routh, who I felt was good maybe capable of more, but I just don’t see them going with the actor from the last movie that flopped that this is re-booting.
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 3:26 pm

Wait…what? You guys like Watchmen but hate Man on Fire? Seriously?

I anxiously await each new Tony Scott film. I think he really pushes the medium. For all the shit that it gets, Domino is a work of unbridled genius. You just have to keep in mind that the whole film is a fractured narrative told by someone who is coming down from a serious, unintentional mescalin high and it comes together quite nicely. Only introducing the fact that the narrator has been high the entire time late into act three is a daring choice. A subtle unreliable narrator ploy that I put on par with the reveal of Tyler Durden’s true nature in Fight Club. I’m dead serious. By far the best thing Richard Kelly has ever written. (And by the by, what the hell is up with Kelly? His screenplays read so damn smoothly but the dude cannot tell a story for the life of him!)

Meanwhile, I found Watchmen to be nigh unwatchable. Longest 3 hours of my life. I knew I was in for a bumpy ride when I saw that awful, cartoonish Nixon makeup about 4 minutes in. I can’t remember ever being that disappointed by a movie. I can’t find the review I wrote, but I remember the title was something along the lines of “BLUEKAKI!” and my lead was “When it was first announced that My Chemical Romance would be doing a cover of Bob Dylan’s ‘Desolation Row’ for Zach Snyder’s adaptation of ‘Watchmen’ many assumed it would be the worst element of the film. Sadly, it turns out to be one of the best.”

The problem for me was that Snyder just doesn’t “get” Watchmen at all. I listened in on the last 30 minutes of his live director’s commentary on the Director’s Cut at Comic-Con 2 years back and the dude said that the “Real question of Watchmen is, if you were in Ozymandias’s shoes and you knew you could ensure world peace through killing, would you?” And this is, of course, way, WAY off base. The point of the novel is that Rorschach is a horrible, fascist leaning bastard of a human being who is morally reprehensible, and completely right and Ozymandias is an enlightened, liberal-minded fellow with humanities best interest in mind, and he is completely and totally wrong. The only way the alien attack will ensure peace is if he continues massive population purges every few years. It boils down to an argument about Locke and Hume and the wisdom of Malthus and I’m pretty sure that Snyder doesn’t even know who Malthus IS.

That said, I met Snyder once and he was really, really cool to me. I think he has a great sense of visual style and that he is an exceptionally nice guy, but that he’s about as deep as a thimble. And the lack of depth would be fine, except that he keeps making movies with inherently political concepts.

Post Script: Expect Sucker Punch to bomb, hard. Female lead action films that market themselves on being sexually provocative don’t play well. The moment of faux-feminism Riot GRRL aesthetics has past. Furthermore, I write about movies for a few websites and I read all the trades every day and I have literally NO IDEA what the hell the plot hook for Sucker Punch is. And just like Scott Pilgrim (which I also disliked after a superb first half hour) any time you make a youth culture movie with an unclear plot hook in the trailer, it dies on the vine.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:29 pm

Hunter – I agree about Watchmen. I was sooo disappointed. You’ve almost convinced me to give Domino another shot too.
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 3:29 pm

I don’t hate MAN ON FIRE or DOMINO. I like to watch them like they’re lava lamps and just let the visuals wash over me without trying to make sense of them. I just don’t want to see that kind of gonzo approach applied to every movie, whether it warrants it or not.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:31 pm

The only reason Snyder might work is that Nolan could balance his flaws. Really, they could balance each others flaws, since the fight scenes in Nolan’s Batman movies are usually the weakest part.
Mr. Majestyk
September 28th, 2010 at 3:32 pm

I didn’t like WATCHMEN, though, although I don’t blame Snyder. All the problems I had with it were problems I had with the book, e.g., overlength, unsympathetic characters, general sadsackery. It started out great but by the fourteenth or fifteenth hour I just wanted it to die.
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 3:32 pm

Out of that Hitfix list that Levon linked to, I would give my vote to Kathryn Bigelow (If she leaves the shaky cam in the hurt locker), Danny Boyle (Who is changing the film genres he works in more often than I cut my hair [WAY more often], so it’s about time that he does a big budget comic book action movie) and Gore Verbinski (Who I consider at this generation’s Richard Donner [Someone who constantly delivers very solid and enjoyable work, without making the material his own]).
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:44 pm

Also, I just want to say Thank You Vern for giving me a place to talk about all this shit that ISN’T comicbookmovie.com, a website which is full of people who think Jon Hamm is too old to be Superman (but Tom Welling is perfect!), hate the next X-Men movie already (even though it’s from a solid director with a promising cast and written by the guy who made the first two good ones), and don’t have any idea how to construct a coherent sentence (and seem to be spelling all their words phonetically).
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:45 pm

@ CJ – I always kind of thought of Martin Campbell was the modern Richard Donner.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 3:53 pm

Sorry about complaining about bad grammar and then saying what I just said. I’m a little bit drunk.
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 4:01 pm

Can’t really comment on Martin Campbell’s Donnerbility. I only know his two Bond movies and VERTICAL LIMIT. But I would say Verbinsky is the better new Donner, because he seems to be able to deliver a solid entry in every genre, budget or rating. So far the genres he worked in contain broad slapstick, quirky comedy, moody horror, low key dramedy and loud and colourful fantasy adventure. If you compare that to Richard Donner’s filmography, you will find some similarities.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 4:01 pm

Hunter D., I give you props because you have some balls to call Domino genius. I don’t hate Tony Scott, and I don’t think that Domino is the pile some label it, but to call it genius is a stretch of Reed Richards proportions. Watchmen is a flawed film with a flat ending, but I would rather watch it any day over Domino. I disagree with you that Snyder did not understand Watchmen. I think that despite his best effort the film even at a 3 hour run time could not support the density that is the Watchmen story. In trying to cram as much in as he could and stay true to his source material he struggled to build the sense of dread and hopelessness the book achieves in it’s final chapters and it hurt the end of the film. If he were willing to brake away from the book more and add more with Nixon, other world leaders, and news clips in the later half of the movie he could have done a better job creating that feel of a countdown to doomsday necessary to set up the power of the ending.

And, for those that hate on the makeup in Watchmen, you have to understand they were not going for realism the were going for the feel of the art of the book. Nixon looked like Gibbon’s Nixon not the real life Nixon, and that was by design. I understand if you don’t like the choice, but you have to except that it is not the result of poor craftsmanship.
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 4:03 pm

I think Man on Fire is a very intelligent movie. One of my favorite revenge films. Some racial issues to be sure, but not a dumb movie by any means.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 4:07 pm

Hunter, I will agree with you about Man On Fire. I really enjoy that movie.
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 4:10 pm

One more thing before I go to bed, considering Tony Scott and Pelham 123: His remake is not THAT bad. To be honest, the first half is even pretty good. Unfortunately it starts pretty quick to paint by numbers and by the end I didn’t even care for anything that happened. It also lacks the mix of humor and gritty thriller, that made the original so great. (Which I won’t hold against the remake. Putting humor into a thriller without making it feel out of place is very difficult, so maybe the writers of the remake decides to don’t even try.)
On a more positive note: Tony Scott seriously restrained himself from abusing his AVID. After an opening sequence that looks exactly like we expect a new Tony Scott movie to look like,
CJ Holden
September 28th, 2010 at 4:12 pm

(damn, hit accidently the submit button)
…he uses his typical avid farts on very few occasions (as far as I remember. And I don’t remember any after the first five minutes.)
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 4:12 pm

I will agree that the Nixon make up was really, really well done. It was just a poor artistic choice, in my opinion. As for Domino, I tend to think of it as a 60 million dollar experimental film. Scott was playing with expectations and genre and really going for it. Sure, it’s not perfect, but it’s certainly more ambitious than 90% of the films I see coming out during any given year and I tend to appreciate films with a reach that outdistances their grasp. They get extra credit from me. Of course, I haven’t seen Domino in a few years, so perhaps you’re right and I should revisit it before branding it with the “genius” label.

I also contend you could make a brilliant Watchmen movie…if it was nothing at all like the book. Take the tone and the themes and do a deconstruction of the comic book movie instead of a deconstruction of comic books…as a movie.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 4:23 pm

Hunter, I agree with both your your points. I would rather see a film maker get burned for flying to close to the sun then play it safe and make a boring movie. An ambitious failure can at least still be interesting or though provoking, and you can’t knock it out of the park if you don’t swing for the fences.
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 4:31 pm

Also, Vern; thanks for this thread. I was a bit worried I was about to be chased from my favorite websight with pitchforks after the Phantom debacle. Glad to see that everyone here remains levelheaded.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 4:41 pm

Mr. Majestyk – You know what Charles Bronson would do in your shoes? Go watch RUNAWAY TRAIN before seeing the (inferior) remake. RT is a no-bullshit movie, and Bronson was no-bullshit. Don’t dishonor Paul Kersey.

CJ Holden – No the PELHAM remake wasn’t technically a bad movie, but watchable in a mindless sort of fashion. You know, like most television. $100+ million spent, you had a solid timeless story for basis and two stars who can be (if not reliably) very good. And that is the best they can do?

Vern – You might have created a monster with this thread.
ThomasCrown442
September 28th, 2010 at 4:52 pm

Maybe I liked Watchmen because I never read the book. Is this one of those movies that people who read the book hated it and people who didn’t read the book had no idea what was going on? Kinda like Hitchiker’s Guide to The Galaxy?

As far as Domino and Man on Fire

Man on Fire : Grew on me after a few viewings and now I really enjoy it. Scott actually made the avid fart style of editing work here since the movie is supposed to be somewhat disorienting (I could still tell what was going on) and I felt suited the material.

Domino: What a piece of crap. The movie is completely incoherent. This is avid fart editing for avid fart editing’s sake. Even the “haha its brian austin green and ian zeiring” scene (which I heard about beforehand and thought was going to be at least a little amusing) was uninspired. The only saving grace was Keira Knightley looking just ungodly sexy. Other than that, this film is a mess and a waste of a good cast (Dabney Coleman!)

I used to really like Tony Scott. The period from Top Gun to enemy of the State is pretty strong (though The Fan sucked).
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 5:10 pm

Not having read Watchmen might’ve helped, because, having read it numerous times over the years, I couldn’t help but imagine how great it could’ve been (especially back when Greengrass was attached and they were going to change some things and make it more realistic and less stylized).
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 5:14 pm

… so I wasn’t able to enjoy how kind of okay it was.
The original Paul
September 28th, 2010 at 6:03 pm

Ok, offering my opinions on everything bar the kitchen sink, in response to various people:

I’ve never read “Watchmen” and I liked the film, although parts of it did drag.

I’ve never seen “Domino” (thanks, Vern!) or “Man on Fire”.

I thought “Enemy of the State” was a bad waste of a good concept. It’s not terrible, but it’s not particularly good either.

I liked X-Men 1 and 2, hated X-Men 3 and Superman Returns, and thought all three Spiderman movies were so much tosh but enjoyable in a “so bad they’re good” way nonetheless.

The original “Taking of Pelham 1 2 3″ is one of my favorite little-known movies. I haven’t seen the remake and don’t plan to. I’ve seen enough so-called “good” remakes of great films to know that I don’t want to waste my time or money on another one.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 6:16 pm

Y’know, in regards to the Spider-Man movies, I really loved 1 and 2 when they came out, and then I really hated 3, but now when I see 1 or 2 on TV I can’t help but feel like they’ve aged really badly. They’ve got good moments but there’s a whole lot of crap in there.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 6:38 pm

I think that Arronofsky could do a good Superman without it being moody. I think he’s bright enough to get the tone of Superman.

That being said I would rather both Arronofky AND Duncan Jones keep doing what they’re doing. They should be making great originals and not wasting their time with a comic book movie (possibly a trilogy) that someone like Zack Snyder could do a fine job on.

I think Zack Snyder could make a good Superman movie and given his track record (remake, comic book, comic book, owls) I don’t feel like we would be missing out on something like The Fountain, Moon, or The Wrestler.

Consider that Sam Raimi was making some pretty good Spiderman movies (I even liked the third one) but none of them was as good as Drag Me To Hell or A Simple Plan or Darkman. The point is these guys are only going to be making a finite amount of movies in their career and I would rather see them use their creativity to make something original and leave the comic book and remakes to guys like Snyder who, while very competent in my opinion, don’t seem to have or want to express the talent to make something that is creative, original, and personal.

Popeye was a good movie, but now that Robert Altman is dead and we don’t get anymore of his movies, don’t you kinda wish he did something else?
bullet3
September 28th, 2010 at 6:40 pm

Just as long as its not Tony Scott, I’m fine with it. Please, dear god, don’t let it be Tony Scott.

I was with him up through Man on Fire, but I just recently watched his Taking of Pelham remake, and the man has completely lost his mind.

Vern, I dare you to sit through his Pelham remake and review that piece of shit.

I knew it wouldn’t be as good as the original, but I thought that they might at least have some fun with the premise and use it for
some modern day action scenes. Problem is, that movie seriously has the most obnoxiously
terrible stylistics of anything I’ve ever seen. You’d think the reason to remake that movie would be to do an awesome 10 minute
car-chase set-piece as they have to rush the money across town. Instead, Tony Scott just randomly cuts away to some blurry shots of cop cars driving fast
every couple minutes between dialogue scenes. And then when they get to the big climax where the train is supposed to be going 100 miles an hour,
he shoots it from a distance and blurs the camera for NO FUCKING REASON, which makes the train look like its going 10 miles an hour.
Just completely retarded, random shit. Not to mention the opening 10 minute montage of random editing bullshit that makes you want to punch the screen.
Charles
September 28th, 2010 at 6:40 pm

Levon, I have never seen Spider-Man 3 because I don’t know a single person that liked it, and I do not want it to tarnish my admiration for Sam Raimi. I think until THE DARK NIGHT RETURNS came along and stole it’s crown Spider-Man 2 was the best comic book movie ever made. I have watched both Spidey 1 & 2 recently and think they hold up well, but the tone of both films are so much lighter and cartoonish then the comic book films being made now. Spidey 1 & 2 may not be dealing with as sophisticated or dark ideas as The DN RETURNS or Watchmen, but they are excellent movies.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 6:40 pm

hamsline – that would be an interesting point, if Nolan weren’t kind of an antithesis to it. He gets to make increasingly good comic book movies with even better originals in between.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 6:44 pm

Charles – I try to appreciate that fact when I watch them, but I think Iron Man kind of proved that you can make a great comic-based film that is fun in that popcorn blockbuster kind of way but still avoids the cheese that Spiderman has heaping helpings of.
Brendan
September 28th, 2010 at 6:54 pm

Hunter D: I am being dead serious: How is Domino playing with genres and styles? There’s nothing in it that you couldn’t see from any of the ten thousand post Pulp Fiction movies that have been shat out over the last two decades. The only thing that sets Domino apart is the visual style that ensures that the viewer has no clear sense of place or character or tone or rhythm.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 6:54 pm

He’s what I like to call “an asshole for fucking up my theory”. I could do without Batman Begins (It was good but it was my least favorite of his movies) but The Dark Knight was tits.

I don’t think that Snyder could have made something as great as The Dark Knight but once Nolan is done making movies I’ll still wonder what two (three once Batman Ends comes out. I guess you should also count Insomnia, being a remake and all) amazing worlds that Nolan never created would be like.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 6:58 pm

Levon – By the by, not that it’s a big deal or anything but it’s hamsliMe with an “m” or you can just call me Erik (you can use a “c” or a “k” it won’t hurt my feelings any) since that’s my real name.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 7:00 pm

I would also say that Nolan taking a break between Batmans to make great original films (actually Prestige is an adaptation of a book, but… wait, is Inception is only original film?) is part of what keeps him fresh for each new installment. Raimi should’ve done the same.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 7:01 pm

Sorry hamslime/erik/eric – as I said above, I’ve been drinking tonight.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 7:05 pm

The funny thing is that I went to a night class in between where I said that earlier and where I fucked up your name (and that “is Inception is” instead of “is Inception his”).
ThomasCrown442
September 28th, 2010 at 7:06 pm

Iron Man is somewhere between the Spidermans and the Batmans which to me is why its the most consistently satisfying comic book movie in a long time. I can be in any mood and enjoy Iron Man while the Spidermans and Batmans, I need to be in a certain mood. Though I think, overall, Dark Knight is the best movie out of the Iron Mans, Spidermans, and the Batmans.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 7:15 pm

I guess his first film, The Following, is from an orginal script, but after that:
Memento – adapted from a short story by his brother
Batman Begins – comic
The Prestige – novel by Christopher Priest
The Dark Knight – comic
Inception – original
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 7:20 pm

You may be right about The Prestige but for whatever reason I don’t usually look at book adaptations the same as remakes or comicbooks even. Book adaptations are remakes in a way I guess, but since books require you to use you imagination to create the world you are reading about maybe that’s where the distinction lies with me.

I also think Memento was an original work. I can’t find Following so I haven’t seen it nor can I really comment on it.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 7:22 pm

I don’t think you can count Memento as an adaptation then. If it was someone other than his brother, then yeah, but I think he gets a pass for that one.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 7:29 pm

Actually, Nolan’s track record looks real similar to Snyder’s. Perhaps he should lay off the comicbook movies as well and start creating some original work as well. I guess he’s doing that with Sucker Punch, so good for him.

The heart of this though is that as entertaining as comicbook movies are there’s just some filmmakers that I would rather see avoid the trap. Another example I’ll bring up (although, different rules apply since it’s a different medium) is Between The Buried and Me’s, The Anatomy Of album. It was interesting to hear their versions of songs that inspired them but it wasn’t as great as any of their other albums.
Jones
September 28th, 2010 at 7:34 pm

JUst for the sake of argument: is anyone who hates Snyder under 35, or even 30? I sort of think to a certain extent, that a guy like him is one of those generation gap type of filmmakers, like how the old folks didn’t understand Easy Rider. Like all of the 36 year olds who post on AICN and hate anything with CG effects.
The original Paul
September 28th, 2010 at 7:38 pm

Charles – I ‘m probably the only person who liked Spider Man 3 more than the first two, because it seemed fully conscious of how ridiculous it was, whereas Spider Man 1 and 2 just took themselves way too seriously for the most part. I felt that Spider Man 1 really, really wanted me to believe in a villain that could best be described as “Alien Xenomorph Barbie” as set to some of the worst dialogue and scoring I’ve ever heard. (Seriously, what was up with Danny Elfman’s operatic music?)

Whereas SM3 had an emo-Spidey, a musical interlude, half a dozen different super-beings and an epic battle involving some bloke made of sand. I think by then the series had learnt that if you can’t command respect, you might as well try and make people laugh.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 7:39 pm

The weird thing about that is everyone on comicbookmovie.com hates 3D, but I’m pretty sure they’re also all high-schoolers.

I actually know about Between the Buried and Me, so that reference is not lost on me, though I haven’t heard their covers album.
Levon Swift
September 28th, 2010 at 7:41 pm

I’d say something about swimming to the moon, but Jim Morrison actually said that before they did.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 7:44 pm

“I actually know about Between the Buried and Me, so that reference is not lost on me.”

I knew there was a reason I liked you.
SirVincealot
September 28th, 2010 at 8:36 pm

I go away for dinner and Outlaw goes red giant.

VERN!!!

GET THEE A FORUM BOARD, BUD.

that’s all. Thank you for listening.
dieselboy
September 28th, 2010 at 8:54 pm

@Hamsline-Following is available via Netflix instant streaming.

My favorite comic book flicks would def be, and in no particular order
Howard the Duck
Electra
Catwoman

OMG Just kidding fellas. I think we can all agree that those are the bad ones and I was being sarcastic and we all had a good laugh. To be fair,out of those movies, I’ve only seen Howard the Duck and I was no older than five. My five year old memory tells me it was amazing. But it also thought that about the Garbage Pail Kids movie and Punky Brewster, so you gotta take it with a grain of salt.

Number 2’s all the way for me though, the best ones are always the sequel(Iron Man being the exception)

X-Men 2
Hellboy 2
Blade 2
The Dark Knight
Spider-Man 2

Those are arguably the five best comic book films we’ve got yet. Alot of people would probably switch Hellboy with Iron Man or Watchmen. But I find the second half of Iron Man feels rushed and rather empty.
The original Paul
September 28th, 2010 at 9:04 pm

Dieselboy – we certainly can NOT all agree. You’re putting “Electra” in the same category as “Howard the Duck” and “Catwoman”? That’s a HUGE stretch.

Considering I just spent half a freaking day arguing in “The Tournament” thread that that and “Electra” were essentially the exact same movie with a slightly different tone, I don’t really “get” the “Electra” hate (or the “Tournament” love, come to that).
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 9:11 pm

“Actually, Nolan’s track record looks real similar to Snyder’s.”

hamslime – How so? In fact…..this doesn’t make much sense to me. Maybe I’m drunk on this one?

Actually you might be onto something. Consider that both men had a superhit one-in-a-million (TDK, 300) and both were basically given carte blanche on their follow-up (INCEPTION, WATCHMEN) which were highly anticipated by the industry, and hyped up the ass by the nerds.

Both won their opening weekend convincingly, both basically same amount (62 vs 55) but quickly afterwards WATCHMEN dropped like coke in a police raid, barely scratching to 100 in America. While INCEPTION….well you know what happened. Hell INCEPTION made more money overseas than TDK, believe it or not.

Anyway, to put an extra shine on my dickery on our collective grand Snyderology: The big difference though between the two (among many others, but bear with me) if you ask me is that one needs computers. The other doesn’t.
Jones
September 28th, 2010 at 9:12 pm

I can’t see HATING Electra, it was just the one of the most boring movies I’ve seen. But it was so dull and forgettable I can;t muster up the energy to hate it.
Jones
September 28th, 2010 at 9:15 pm

RRA, computers are just another tool. Snyder could have made 300 like they did in the 60s and done it on a soundstage with painted backdrops. But it wouldn’t have looked the same.

And really, comparing Watchmen to a Nolan movie is stretching quite a bit…the studio was insane to give the movie that kind of budget. Gruesome, violent, no happy ending…compare to Nolan who’s still making mainstream entertainments. Yeah, TDK was dark but we still get Comissioner Gordon at the end giving us a reassuring voiceover that Batman has done good.
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 9:36 pm

“But it wouldn’t have looked the same.”

Believe it or not, its not the tools that was my problem with that silly cartoon 300. Besides with that logic I should have hated fellow computer-aided comic book-look-on-film SIN CITY, and I enjoyed that one. Haven’t seen it again since but hey at its essence it gave me what a movie should: Compelled me, made me give a shit what happens, some nice acting and action. Hell I might netflix it next week.

Sad thing is, 300 is SIN CITY compared to THE SPIRIT. Jesus Christ…

“the studio was insane to give the movie that kind of budget.”

I love revisionism history, now its the studio that were the bad guys right? Am I understanding this right? They gave Zach the keys to the kingdom. And he lost it down the drain while he was taking a shower. Shit happens. If that movie had been good, surely it would have had some life and legs, even for a pretty dark nearly 3 hour movie?

Besides INCEPTION, wasn’t that one pretty complicated, especially for a summer blockbuster thriller? You had to use your brain a little bit and it makes sense (well most of it) and if you view the ending one way, its a downer: The hero choosing fantasy over reality. Yet people clicked to it, and that fucker is still in the Top 15 weekly box office making money. Impressive.

I get it, WATCHMEN and INCEPTION are apples to oranges. I think thats fair enough, just making my observation on those two respective careers right now. Whether one thought of WATCHMEN as a good movie if a financial miss, or an admirable miss,etc….still a miss. INCEPTION was a hit with critics, moviegoers, and quite possibly (if not a lock) it will score a Best Picture Oscar nomination.
Darth Irritable
September 28th, 2010 at 9:46 pm

It is my opinion that any director of a major action or super hero film should be required to prove him (or her) self by first screening an action short in a hospital.

If the short induces an epileptic attack, they should be banned from producing any action movie that involving a star other than Matt Damon or Denzel Washington.
Jones
September 28th, 2010 at 9:56 pm

What revisionism? The only people who seemed to think Watchmen was going to be a gigantic hit were delusional nerds. If you were the studio, would you want to bet a blockbuster budget on an ultra-violent, somber, long movies with a depressing ending? The studio isn’t the bad guy, Snyder made lots of money for them and they took a chance, good for them…they gambled, they lost.

And the feeling that if the movie were better than it would have done better at the box office is also delusional. When has quality ever equalled box office? Sometimes the two meet, like The Dark Knight or Inception, and sometimes we get Grown Ups making 160 million. If quality equalled money then Blade Runner, Citizen Kane and Office Space wouldn’t have been flops which turned into classics. I think Zodiac is a ton better than Watchmen but Watchmen beat its entire box office run in one weekend.

Weird but SIn City is actually the movie I disliked. 300 was cool to me and Sin City should have been right in my wheelhouse…but it ended up seeming too digital and clean looking, and just hokey…typical of Rodriguez who’s about the laziest major filmmaker working.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 10:08 pm

RRA – I was speaking more in terms of the amount of comicbook movies and remakes the both of them did.

Snyder – Dawn of The Dead / remake
300 / comicbook
Watchmen / comicbook
Legend of Guardians: Owls Going Bonkers / book

Nolan – Insomnia / remake
Batman Begins / comicbook
The Dark Knight / comicbook
The Prestige / book
RRA
September 28th, 2010 at 10:09 pm

hamslime – That makes good sense then. Thanks for the clarification.
hamslime
September 28th, 2010 at 10:32 pm

Since this is a comicbook nerd page and all…Does anyone remember a comic called Plastic Forks? I remember reading it and liking it but I haven’t read it in ages. I was just curious if it’s as good as I remember it.

There’s also another comicbook (it might be a children’s book actually, I read it in 5th grade) that was essentially a bunch of fairy tales like Icarus and whatever story had a cyclops in it but the main character (actually all the characters if I remember correctly) was a pig and he yelled OMIGOSH! once in a while. It was either some sort of battlecry or maybe a magic word of some sort. At any rate, if anyone remembers the name of that one I would appreciate if you would enlighten me. I’ve been trying to remember the name of that one forever and Google is failing me in that regard.
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:33 pm

RE: Brendan,

As I said earlier, I haven’t seen the film in a few years, so it’s entirely possible that I remember it being better than it actually is, but I was quite impressed by the thematic consistency and the ingenuity of the way it displays and foreshadows the unreliable narrator elements of the mescaline trip stuff. Everything that doesn’t make sense, makes sense when you recontextualize it as the story of someone trying to put the pieces of her own fractured life back together in the midst of a heavy, heavy drug trip. It recreates the feeling of hallucinogens very effectively.
Hunter D.
September 28th, 2010 at 11:59 pm

General thought:
Everyone complaining about adaptations should remember that pretty much every film Kurbrick ever made was an adaptation.
Between the Buried and Me gave me a headache in under 30 seconds. Glad you like it, but I’d rather listen to *gulp* Owl City.

RE: Jones,
I don’t like Snyder that much and I’m 21.

RE: dieselboy
Ghost World and Batman: Mask of the Phantasm are both better than any of the films on your list, in my opinion.
Also:
Men in Black
Mars Attacks! (kinda…)
Batman Returns
Road to Perdition
The Crow
A History of Violence
Josie and the Pussycats (shot by Matthew fuckin’ Libatique and featuring a soundtrack by Letters to Cleo, plus A+ performances from Alan Cummings AND Parker Posey),
And
American Splendor
All of these films are solid to great comic book movies in my estimation.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 12:05 am

Top 11 Comic Book Adaptations (In my opinion, and no order)

Batman Mask of the Phantasm
American Splendor
Ghost World
Josie and the Pussycats
Hellboy 2
Spider-Man 2
Batman Returns
The Crow
A History of Violence
The Punisher (Dolph Lundgren)
Blade II
M. Prestwich (no relation)
September 29th, 2010 at 12:45 am

I say give it to Jones, if for no other reason than Moon was so gd enjoyable. Of course what we think rarely matters so Vern is probably right and it will go to Scott.
Vern
September 29th, 2010 at 12:50 am

I wanna play. I choose A History of Violence, Barbarella, Blade 1-2, The Dark Knight, Ziggy 4: The Crackdown.
Ace Mac Ashbrook
September 29th, 2010 at 2:48 am

As far as funny books to movies go, Garfield is pretty good. Bill Murray as Garfield. Genius. But why not a cartoon dog?
dna
September 29th, 2010 at 3:08 am

- Hunter D.

I liked Domino a lot, especially after reading up on the real Domino Harvey and her relationsship with Tony Scott. She was no doubt a very interesting and strong young woman, who also happended to be mentally ill, abusing drugs and obsessed with creating her own myth. I think the movie is quite profound as a portrait of her. But why on earth do you think that Man On Fire is intelligent?

Watchmen (directors cut) just gets better and better everytime I watch it and I`ve read the comics several times. Znyder might not have the biggest brain in the buisness, but he definetly has the biggest balls. His use of slow-motion is quite baffling though. I doesn`t serve the story and it doesn`t make the action exciting. I can see why he went for it in 300, trying to recreate the iconic images of Miller and Lynn, but now he seems to be caught by his own hype and thinks it`s his stylistic trademark. The first 10 minutes of Dawn of The Dead is by far the best sequence he has ever done and it was stylistic as hell, without using slomo.

My favorite cartoon-movies are BATMAN RETURNS, BLADE, HELLBOY, THE IRON MAN and SPIDERMAN. Oh.. And ICHI THE KILLER by Miike.

And talking about Miike, he might have made the movie we all wanted The Expendables to be. Some critiqs even call it his first real masterpiece and ranks it along Kurosawa`s best. Yes, baffling, but since AUDITION is one of my favorite movies, I`m not that surprised. (It`s calles 13 assassins by the way. Oh, boy, am I excited. )

I`m sure Vern has no idea about who I`m talking about, otherwise he would have reviewed a bunch of Miikes stuff. But he hasn`t. Not even a single movie of one of cinemas true outlaws have been deemed worthy of Verns critical writing of cinema.

Just kidding, Vern. Please review some Miike. If you still enjoy cockfighting after OWLS 300, you might give CITY OF LOST SOULS a shot. Or maybe check out some of his classics; FUDOH, DEAD OR ALIVE, GOZU, GRAVEYARD OF HONOR, LEY LINES, VISITOR Q and SHINJUKO TRIAD SOCIETY.
Caoimhín
September 29th, 2010 at 3:12 am

I believe the top six comic book adaptations are actually the Lone Wolf and Cub films.
Vincento
September 29th, 2010 at 3:32 am

The best Superman and Batman movies are the animated ones. The Mask of the Phantom, Under the Red Hood, Superman Doomsday…
dna
September 29th, 2010 at 3:35 am

- Caoimhín

Agree! And Lady Snowblood!
Vincento
September 29th, 2010 at 3:40 am

My top 10:

1- Flash Gordon
2- Mask of the Phantom
3- Hellboy 2
4- Hellboy 1
5- Superman II
6- Barbarella
7- Oldboy
8- Akira
9- X-Men 2
10- Diabolik
Outlaw Vern
September 29th, 2010 at 4:00 am

Yeah, I just realized I forgot Lone Wolf and Cub, that’s the best. I also wanna put Popeye on there, but I don’t think I’ve seen it since the ’80s so it might not be how I remember it. Anybody remember if it was about Popeye?

I thought I reviewed Audition, but I guess not. Mini-review: one of the better romantic comedies of recent years. Miike sizzles!

As far as Mr. Snyder’s controversial slo-mo, I gotta defend him by saying that the scenes in OWL 300 are his best uses of it. The flying parts I mentioned in the review really are showing you the owl’s extreme perception of his surroundings. So although yes, it does look extremely fucking cool, it’s also being used to communicate something very important. And I think if he did Superman it would make sense to use it in that way too.

But that’s irrelevant because obviously my choice for Superman would be Jodorowsky or Harmony Korine.
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 4:07 am

Batman Returns is a great Tim Burton movie, but it is an absolutely awful Batman movie.
Caoimhín
September 29th, 2010 at 4:33 am

Those Popeye films were pretty different from the source, what with Gene Hackman playing him as a cop and not eating spinach once.
dieselboy
September 29th, 2010 at 4:45 am

So any of you other nerds ever read this comic book series Preacher? I’m on volume seven and it’s basically the most addictive thing I’ve ever picked up. Supposedly Sam Mendes is attached to adapt it to the big screen but this thing would make The Watchmen easy to adapt by comparison. It’s part Western,part Horror, full of religious over-tones,some of the most fucked up caricatures imaginable(rhe Allfather anyone). I can’t recommend it highly enough to anyone who likes fucked up pulpy shit.
Jam
September 29th, 2010 at 5:11 am

After seeing the two hour flying scene in ENTER THE VOID, the producers are keen to get the services of Gaspar Noe for the next SUPERMAN film…
Caoimhín
September 29th, 2010 at 5:17 am

Gaspar Noe SUPERMAN starring Vincent Cassel? I’d buy that for a dollar.
dna
September 29th, 2010 at 5:26 am

- dieselboy

Yep, I liked them a lot, but thought that the story ran out of steem towards the end. But great characters and one of the funniest comics I`ve ever read. I wrote a lesbian vampire script a couple of years ago and stole some great vampire-gags from Cassidys origin-story (.. eh.. paid homage to..you know.. nevermind, I cut it out again)

I can`t remember the title, but I read a brilliant sci-fi-horror comic last year. It`s about aliens that invade a small town. The aliens are all beatiful naked young girls, who can`t talk, but wants to have sex with all the men and kill all the women and feed their corpses to a giant glowing sperm-cell, which makes a giant forcefield around the town. Oh, and the naked girls lay giant eggs with even more naked girls when they have been impregnated. I think the comic is called Girls, but I`m not sure. It`s pretty awesome and would make a great movie. I think.

I like this nerd-shit-thread!
Jones
September 29th, 2010 at 6:10 am

I read some of Preacher. It was good and I could see why people liked it…and then came along this vampire. Which has to be about the most retarded thing ever. A VAMPIRE??? I just couldn’t get past it, it was too nerdy. If they ever make a movie or show out of it, leave out vampires.
Doc Z
September 29th, 2010 at 6:43 am

No one ever mentions Dolph’s PUNISHER (1989).
Tuukka
September 29th, 2010 at 7:00 am

What on earth are some of you people talking about? Snyder isn’t a right choice for Superman because he doesn’t understand subtext and makes juvenile movies?

We are talking about SUPERMAN here. It’s an escapist fantasy about a guy who can fly, is super strong and shoots laser beams from his eyes. He is a 100% earnest, good-hearted, brave, all-American hero. You don’t need subtext with Superman. You just need a lot of ass-kicking and iconic, heroic moments. With a lot of slow-mo.

Snyder is a PERFECT choice for Superman. His juvenile tendencies are exactly what a Superman movie needs.

Mind you, there are some other directors in the list that I would prefer to do the film… But they would most likely do a modern, “dark”, realistic version of Superman. Which would not really be what Superman was originally intended to be.

As far as capturing the silly, pompous, cheesy, juvenile, heroic essence of Superman, Snyder is a great choice. He understands stuff like that.
The original Paul
September 29th, 2010 at 7:04 am

You guys are all too young to remember when slo-mo was considered the thing that was going to ruin action movies then? I know that it’s a while ago and that it seems like a hopelessly quaint idea right now, with the current generation of avid-fart-shakycam practitioners, but there are still a LOT of movies out there, especially late Woo, where the slo-mo just gets in the way. Heck, “Face-Off”’s only weak point is exactly this. And just look at “Lord of the Rings”. A very good three-hour movie stretched out to ten and a half hours by the injudicious use of helicopter landscape shots and slow-mo. Plus it’s an excuse to have ridiculously long movie deaths. (Sean Bean in “LOTR” / Chow Yun Fat in “Crouching Tiger” anyone?)

Ok quickfire round.

Hellboy 1 – Parts of it were a lot of fun, but it didn’t make a coherent whole. Suffered from weak villain syndrome. Ron Perlman was great.
Hellboy 2 – See Hellboy 1, although I didn’t think the sequel was as good as that – and the first one wasn’t that great either. Erm… the gas guy was funny?
Spiderman 1 – it has Alien Xenomorph Barbie as its villain, the scoring is one of the most bombastic, serious and overdone I’ve ever heard, Kirsten Dunst plays an irritating non-character, and Tobey Maguire’s death’s-rictus of a grin serves to outline the terrible, pompous dialogue, much of which is repeated several times. (What comes with great power again?) Other than that it’s great!
Spiderman 2 – At least they got the mandatory “corrupt scientist father-figure” villain out the way in S1. There was NO WAY they were going to do that one again, right? Right? Oh fuck.
Spiderman 3 – The first Spiderman film that recognized that it was part of a bad soap opera and embraced this fact. As such, far better than the first two. (Yeah, comic book fans are gonna have my head over that one.)
Superman 1 – Fantastic, until Gene Hackman enters as Lex Luthor, a billionaire master criminal whose cover is property development (and who lives in a sewer with two morons). Basically every scene without these three idiots in it is pure gold. Every scene with these three idiots is pure shit.
Superman 2 – Easily the best “Superman” film. Actually this is probably one of the best comic-book adaptations of the lot.
Superman 3 and 4 – Not quite as bad as everyone says; but let’s face it, would you recommend either of them to anybody?
Superman Returns – Apparently what the world really needed was another moronic Lex Luthor (played in a career-worst performance by Kevin Spacey of all people) and a cast of characters that are almost universally unlikeable, including Superman himself. Oh, except for the guy who gets screwed over at the end, he was nice. I HATED this movie.
Flash Gordon – “I love you Flash! But we only have twenty-four hours to save the world!” Everything you need to know about this movie is encapsulated in that one quote. Brian Blessed really should’ve had a better death though. Come to think of it, Brian Blessed should’ve been the main villain – Von Sydow looks practically subdued in comparison. Still lots of fun though.
Akira – Undoubtedly groundbreaking, but you’ve got to be “into” that sort of thing to really appreciate it I think. I thought it was brilliantly done, but it left me cold.
X-Men – Everything before the last twenty minutes is gold. Everything after the X-Jet is revealed is pure shit – the character-driven drama gives way to horrible, horrible puns, in-jokes, and one-liners, and everybody in the film basically starts behaving like morons. It’s a pity because the build-up is so good.
X-Men 2 – I loved it when I first saw it. Re-watching it on DVD has shown its flaws – it’s a little clinical in places, and some of the scenes are cut way too much. (The Magneto / Prof. X scene at the start should definitely have been one long scene without breaks.) That said, this is really, really good, almost a classic.
X-Men 3 – Ok, let’s get one thing out of the way here. This film shouldn’t be despised because it’s a bad adaptation of a classic story or because it’s not similar enough to a comic book that everyone who’s read it practically worships. It should be despised purely on its own merits – it really is that awful. A classic case of “same actor, no character”. For the entire fucking cast.
Batman – Still very enjoyable, although looks dated nowadays.
Batman Returns – I’ve only recently realised just how much Michelle Pfeifer’s character brings this movie down. She’s like Famke Janssen in “Goldeneye” – a female “sexy killer”-type character whose every scene just sucks the life out of the movie. I think it’s ironic, given how much press she and Danny DeVito’s Penguin received, that the best villain is Christopher Walken’s Max Shreck. If you can get past Catwoman it’s a very good movie.
Batman Forever – Still enjoyable despite being complete tosh. Not sure why the original “Spiderman” is rated above this one, considering they’re pretty much the same movie, but oh well.
Batman and Robin – You can watch this one on TV and just laugh at every bad one-liner, absurd visual jokes (anybody else spot Saddam Hussein buying mutant plant hormones from Poison Ivy?) and everything else that’s wrong with this hilariously terrible movie. It helps if you have taken a lot of drugs first though.
Batman Begins – A case of “brought down by producer intervention”. I presume that’s the only reason why the Batmobile and Katie Holmes’ character are in the movie, since both seriously drag it down and neither is really necessary to anything that happens. (I’m prejudiced against the batmobile – I just don’t see why a ninja needs a tank.) Other than this, I thought this was a fantastic movie. The antagonist is not so much a man as an entire society – the “league of shadows” – and is portrayed fantastically.
The Dark Knight – I genuinely did not expect this to be as good as it was. If I have to criticize I’d say that the bit with Two-Face at the very end had some ropey dialogue, and the character of Two-Face hadn’t really been built up enough for it to work. But this is a fantastic movie nonetheless – for once it lives up to the hype.
Mask of the Phantasm – the animation is VERY ropey, but the soundtrack is fantastic, the villain is great, and unusually in a Batman movie there’s a genuine whodunnit involved, which adds to the movie IMO.
Watchmen – neither as bad or as good as you’ll hear it is from other people. Personally I thought it was frequently great but occasionally dragged.
Ghost World – I think I have to watch this one again, since I didn’t really “get” it the first time. I didn’t like any of the central characters, which meant that I really wasn’t invested in what happened to them.
Men in Black – very good. Haven’t seen the sequel but I enjoyed the first one. This is an adaptation?
The Punisher (Dolph version) – So much better than people give it credit for. It’s gritty and looks rather cheap, production-wise, but I can live with that. It’s two intertwining stories – one of revenge, one of betrayal – and both work IMO.
Blade – Suffers a bit from weak villain syndrome early on (Steven Dorff is never really established as a real threat until quite late on) but other than that it’s great.
Blade 2 – Don’t share the love for this one, sorry Vern. The action sequences are really, really ropey, which wouldn’t matter if the story or characters were interesting. They’re not. Although Snipes’ scenes with Leonor Valera are some of the best in the Blade trilogy. On a side note though, it does that annoying thing where a character who’s just been “there” for most of the film and about who we know absolutely nothing turns out to be a rat traitor, and we’re supposed to care about it. And the point is…?
Blade 3 – Has one really annoying unnecessary death and one of the lamest versions of Dracula I’ve seen on film. Although honestly I think Blade has its own particular mythology – why bring Dracula into it at all? Blade 2 was one good idea (the vampire hunter squad) done badly, this is one bad idea done worse. Not even bad enough to watch and laugh at.

Phew, that was long.

Ok, on a completely different subject: we’ve had one thread for the action buffs, and one thread for the nerds. Anyone else want to make requests?
Mr. Majestyk
September 29th, 2010 at 7:57 am

Vern’s done so much for us, I think we should take one for the team and let him have that FELICITY thread he’s been jonesing for.
rewrite
September 29th, 2010 at 8:04 am

I’m gonna throw this one out there, but I think James Mangold would be a worthy director for a SUPERMAN movie. Actually, I was hoping he would do Deadpool. But after seeing Knight and Day, the guy can pull off action and charm pretty well. Also, he did 3:10 to Yuma, Walk The Line (A movie I thought surpassed RAY as the better biopic), and IDENTITY so he does have range in making something somewhat enjoyable and polished.

i
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 9:25 am

Mangold’s an interesting choice… I kind of like that actually. He’s another Richard Donner, I guess (solid films, not an auteur).
Stu
September 29th, 2010 at 9:32 am

Any chance of some Animated Comic Adaption reviews, Vern? Aside from all the anime that’s adapted from manga (Afro Samurai has a score from The RZA, like you’re always pining for), Warners/DC put out a whole slew of ones, the best of which I’d say so far are:
Wonder Woman (just a nice solid introduction to the character with some great action scenes and fun characters)
Justice League: The New Frontier (Puts the characters in the 50s and has the issues of the time affecting them
Green Lantern: First Flight (Part TRAINING DAY, part STAR WARS)
Batman: Under The Red Hood (Batman deals with a new player in the underworld, while we look at how the death of a partner affects him and how his principle about not killing is challenged)
Oh, and the game Batman: Arkham Asylum is basically the Batman equivalent of DIE HARD.
RRA
September 29th, 2010 at 9:36 am

rewrite – Not a bad suggestion. Too bad the boards hated KNIGHT & DAY, which I sorta enjoyed as a matinee diversion.
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 9:39 am

DC has made some great animated movies. The Spectre and Green Arrow shorts are great too. I thought Under the Red Hood was underwhelming though, and New Frontier falls just short of greatness with the way they rush things at the end (I guess because they aren’t allowed to make these movies longer than 90 minutes).
Caoimhín
September 29th, 2010 at 9:43 am

I was expecting a lot from Afro Samurai, but it didn’t deliver. For starters, he didn’t even have an afro, just a scraggly mass on his head. Not quite as irritating as Black Samurai Jim Kelly not doing anything even vaguely samurai related in that whole film, but still.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 9:48 am

There are many great films based on comic books that are not about super heroes. A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, V FOR VENDETTA, 300, Sin City, and GHOST WORLD are a few excellent examples, but I am going to keep my list limited to the sub-genre of American superhero comics (sorry JUDGE DREAD).

In no particular order my top ten are:

The Dark Night Returns
Iron Man
Spiderman 2
Superman 2
Blade 2
X2
Kick Ass
Watchmen (Yes I know it was made by Brits, but they where working in the American superhero comic sub-genre)
Hellboy 2
Batman Begins

The runners up are (again in to particular order):

Hellboy
Ironman 2
Spiderman
The Incredible Hulk
Superman
Blade

And finally the worst (in no particular order):

X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Superman 3 & 4
Batman & Robin
Hulk
The Spirit
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 10:06 am

Aw hell naw son you better not be hatin Ang Lee’s Hulk.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 10:10 am

Sorry, but I find the Ang Lee Hulk to be a joyless snooze
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 10:17 am

Actually I completely understand that sentiment, I just think the movie is unfairly maligned. It’s an example of what someone was talking about above – a director swinging for the fences but not quite getting it there.
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 10:24 am

but there definitely is too much HULK CONTEMPLATE! instead of HULK SMASH!
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 10:30 am

Your right Lee did swing for the fences and I give him credit as an artist and film maker, but boy did he strike out bad. I find the film exceptional hard to sit through, but Nick Nolte is awesome in it.
Darryll
September 29th, 2010 at 10:34 am

Tuukka, I totally agree. It seems kind of obvious to me that Snyder is the right director for a SUPERMAN film.
Jareth Cutestory
September 29th, 2010 at 10:54 am

Can we all agree that a Verhoeven SUPERMAN starring Dolph Lundren would pretty much rule?
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 11:04 am

wouldn’t that have to be called UBERMENSCH?
ThomasCrown442
September 29th, 2010 at 11:04 am

Top Ten (in no particular order)

- Batman (89) – Almost perfect in my opinion.
- Watchmen – I’ve already defended this enough.
- Sin City – Some people didn’t like the use of green screen here but I thought it suited the material. Love the noir feel.
- Dark Knight – I find it hard to believe that Batman and Harvey Dent are fighting over Maggie Gyllenhaal. Really? I don’t even think I could get it up for her.
- Superman 2 – Terrence Stamp baby!
- Iron Man – Just fun to watch.
- Blade 2 – This one is just fuckin cool.
- 300 – Love the look of this one visually.
- The Crow – I think Brandon Lee’s performance is a little overrated but Michael Wincott is great.
- Wanted – I really enjoyed the outright zaniness of this one.

Close but no cigar:

- Incredible Hulk – Could’ve been great but ended being mediocre. Would love to see the “Norton” cut
- Daredevil – Maybe I’m in the minority here but the director’s cut is actually pretty good.
- Spidermans and X-mens – Good films but nothing memorable.
- Batman Begins – The action scenes are terrible. Everything else is pretty great.
- Mystery Men – Thought this movie was hilarious.

Bottom 10:

- Hulk – The most boring comic book hero film I’ve ever seen. I remember Josh Lucas being particularly bad in this.
- Ghostrider – One of the worst movies i’ve ever seen period. Almost so bad its funny. Also one of the worst villains. Thank god for Eva Mendes’ cleavage.
- Batman and Robin – What else is there to say?
- Fantastic Four – Other than Chris Evans as the Human Torch this film is laughable. Maybe kids like it?
- LXG – Intriguing idea, terrible execution. Pretty much killed Stephen Norrington’s career (Though on IMDB it says he’s directing a Crow remake?)
- Steel – Shaq? Ha ha.
- Elektra – Watched the first half hour of this and changed the channel. That says it all. Did anyone want this to get made in the first place?
- Catwoman – Sorry this is as bad as everyone says it is.
- Constantine – Wow, i really wanted to like this one but its a complete mess. Keanu Reeves cannot play a burnt out, cigarette smoking, detective type. He just can’t.
- Bulletproof Monk – Maybe the low point of Chow Yun Fat’s career.

Honorable Mention:

- Barb Wire – Nice look to it and pretty good wanking material. Other than, its pretty bad.
Brendan
September 29th, 2010 at 11:07 am

dieselboy- I am constantly baffled by people trying to adapt Preacher. For one thing it’s simply not a movie, it’s choppy and episodic and there’s no real narrative throughline that you can cut to. With Preacher, the crazy, multi-issue digressions ARE the story. And that’s before you get into how offended 99% of the world will be when they see it. If a by-the-numbers potboiler like the Da Vinic Code can cite riots, there’s no telling what a legitimately angry and vicous attack on faith and patriotism could start.

Plus, Arseface? How the fuck do you do Arseface? Would you WANT to do Arseface?

PREACHER loses some steam in its last couple installments, I mean it’s never bad or anything, but it just feels like Ennis has constructed a world so thoroughly packed with people and places, in his attempt to pay lip service to all of them he loses sight of his core group, and then has to try and cram in the stuff that by all rights should be the center piece of the whole thing: The stuff between Jesse and Tulip and Cassidy.

Even with all that said, PREACHER remains utterly unique and absurdly entertaining and actually bizarrely optimistic and upbeat, even as it portrays the most hideous dregs of society.
Brendan
September 29th, 2010 at 11:20 am

Oh, uh, ranking comic book movies, my faves are, in a vague order

DARK KNIGHT
A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE (has anyone else here actually read this comic? I’m not sure it’s possible for a film adaptation to have less to do with its source matireal then this one did)
SCOTT PILGRIM (ridiculously entertaining, no matter what anyone says)
SPIDER-MAN 2
HELLBOY 2
WATCHMEN
BATMAN RETURNS
IRON MAN (except for the final fight)
BLADE 2
V FOR VENDETTA (underrated)

Also, I really enjoy INCREDIBLE HULK, SIN CITY and 300, I just don’t think they reach the same heights as these other ones. Also, I’d probably put THE INCREDIBLES near the top, except it isn’t based on a comic book.

I’d also add that I think that CONSTANTINE and Lee’s HULK are both interesting, sort of underrated films, although seriously flawed in different ways. I actually really enjoy HULK, but it is impossible to ignore how slow and over-indulgent it is. Everyone except Nolte acts like they’ve just had a fresh injection of novacaine.
Caoimhín
September 29th, 2010 at 11:31 am

Slight tangent from Preacher, Adam McKay is supposedly directing an adaptation of the Boys, Garth Ennis’s thing about basically a bunch of thugs kicking the fuck out of deviant superheroes. Which will presumably have Will Ferrell in it, like everything else he’s done. I have my doubts.
Mr. Majestyk
September 29th, 2010 at 12:01 pm

The nice thing about THE BOYS movie is that Simon Pegg pretty much has them over a barrel. Let’s see them try to not meet his asking price when the artist drew the fucking main character to look exactly like him.

The other roles are fairly easy to cast, too. Gerard Butler for Butcher, the guy from DELICATESSEN for the Frenchman, Devon Aoki for The Female, and Dennis Haysbert for Mother’s Milk.

As for McKay, wasn’t THE OTHER GUYS supposed to have decent action scenes? Maybe he’s making a play to leave his Farrell days behind. Although I wouldn’t mind seeing him play one of the dickhead superheros. He wouldn’t be my first choice for The Homelander but I think I could live with it.
dna
September 29th, 2010 at 12:03 pm

The Original Paul

Wow, that must have taken you forever to write. I must say I don`t agree with you. And I`m not sure if you succeed in mentioning every comic-book ever adapted into a movie. I applaud the effort though. Combining the obsessiveness of nerdism with substantial movie-commentism is.. ehh.. I`m not even sure which word that descripes it. Here`s my 2 cents:

Danger Diabolik:
It`s fun, but far from the classic I expected. Beastie Boys reboot was way better, funnier, shorter and had a kickass soundtrack. But it`s always fun to see what stylistic tricks Mario Bava comes up with.

Baba Yaga
Great titles and that`s it. The comic is lame too.

Lone Wolf and Cup 1-6
Classics, brilliantly directed and staged. Great characters, great stories, just totally awesome. Part six kind of goes insane, especielly when that zombiedude rapes his sister and the father kills them both. A shame, cause it didn`t really need that supernatural sexploitation stuff.

Lady Snowblood 1 and 2.
Even better. I think this is the movie Tarantino stole his un-chronological structure from. And the gimmick with the voice-over who suddenly becomes a character in the story, the unsuspected fourth act, the closing image, use of frames from the cartoon etc. It`s just brilliant. Part 2 is okay.

Superman
I haven`t seen it since I was 8, but I remember that it had a very, very, very long title-sequence. It just went on and on and on and on…

Heavy Metal
Saw it twice in a row in some french art-house cinema and thought it was the best movie ever. It isn`t. Great soundtrack, though.

The Punisher
Saw it several times and can`t remember anything from it.

Batman
One of the most overrated movies ever. Prince should be shot (I would have written castrated, but that would be pointless and a pretty bad joke too). Kim Basinger is boring. Jack Nicholson is giving mega-acting a bad rep and the action is stiff. Danny Elfman delivers, though. Amazing score.

Batman Returns
Tim Burtons best film. Danny Elfmans best score. Everything works. The scene with Batman and Catwoman dancing as the only non-masked guests at the masquerade ball chokes me up. Must be some deep psychological methaphor or something. And Daniel Walters screenplay is littered with brilliant one-liners. Still the best Batman in my book. And I actually have a book! Nevermind…

Batman and Robin
Everything that was wrong with Batman 1 times ten. Didn`t watch the fourth one.

MIB
Really good, funny and original. Loved all the deadpan slapstick stuff. And great score by Elfman.

Blade
Cool and beyond badass. Only a uninspired ending lets it down.

X-men
Points for trying, but kind of underwhelming. They should have included a middle act. Great acting, though. Also notable for the worst one-liner ever. “Do you know what happens to toads when they are struck by lightning? The same that happens to everything else!” No, really?

From Hell
I liked it a lot. All movies should start with the main-character getting high and thinking back. They should also have a subliminal cut with a close-up of a bloodsoaked vagina. And the great Robbie Coltrane as a sidekick. The movie doesn`t really do the graphic novel justice at all, though.

Road to Perdititon
I don`t like Tom Hanks and the great Jennifer Jason Leigh is wasted. (Well, actually.. She is, but that`s not what I meant.) The comic is kind of boring too. But great shoot-outs.

Blade 2
Boring story with great fights, great characters and great sfx. And I love like the shakespearian drama that kicks in in the last 10 minutes. Could have been so much better with an actual story, but still one of the most entertaining marvel-adaptions of the decade.

Spiderman
I love it and it still holds up. Kirsten Dunst is THE girl next door, the set-pieces are brilliant and the final fight is pure movie-magic, where sound-editing, editing, cinematography and sfx just clicks together. Sam Raimi might be a juvenilie prankster, but he`s the king of mise-en-scene (in that book I have)

The Punisher
Very decent old-school action. Thomas Jane is great and Rebecca Staminos or whatshername is georgeus without blue latex. Kind of underwhelming, but very enjoyable on a second and third viewing with lowered expectations.

Daredevil
The directors cut is really really good. Also, this movie almost killed me. True story. I left the cinema in superhero mood, having flashbacks of the fantastic Frank Miller comic and all, when I noticed a drunk person walking out in front of a car. I rushed into the traffic, grabbed the dude, dragged him through the howling cars and dropped him on the pavement. The homeless guy just started yelling at me; “what the fuck are you doing, jerk, let go of me goddamit! Fuck you!” and I ran away. “Come back, you asshole, I`ll kick you ass…(etc)” Pretty embarrasing.

Hulk
Really slow, but once it gets going, it`s pretty great. One of the most intelligent and serious psychological comicbook movies ever. I even like the acid-trip at the ending. I tried that stuff with channeling pain and rage onto my mum, but it didn`t work at all. She still thinks that she was a great parent. She burned my comic-collection for fucks sake. ARGHH!!! DNA SMASH!! And she refused to let me play dungeons and dragons because it turned teens into psychos, who couldn`t tell the difference between reality and fiction. A goddamn feminist with a crush on James Bond. That is some twisted shit right there. What a brainless cow. James Bond treats women like shit and they lap it up. I don`t get it.
Anyway, Hulk is pretty good if you are dealing with bad parenting-issues and have problems with rage.

Electra
I love Frank Millers Electra and no movie shall tarnish my memory.

X2
A lot better than the first. Not as good as Batman Returns, Blade, Blade 2, Spiderman and Hellboy, but better than Blade Trinety, Spiderman 2, A history of violence, Aeon Flux, Batman Begins, Constantine, Fantastic Four, V for Vendetta, Superman Returns, X-men 3: The Last Stand, 30 days of night, FF2: Rise of the Silver Surfer, Ghostrider and Punisher War Zone. Kind of above average, I guess..

Oldboy
It`s very good, just not as good as Lady Vengeance and Sympathy for Mr Vengeance. I guess I get turned off by the overly stylistic cinematography (it was just TOO stylistic) and I understood the plot long before the bad guy finished explaining it. He just kept yapping. I don`t think it`s that shocking either. He fucked his daughter, big deal, shit happens. Lady Vengeance is just beyond brilliant, but I won`t rate it since it`s not based on a comic. That movie makes me cry like a little bitch, though. Oldboy is just too damn clever for it`s own good.

Blade Trinety
Somebody complained about Batman being a part of the Blade-mythology, but Blade actually started as a character in the Dracula-comic, before he got his own comic. Dracula was a great comic. I collected them when I was a kid, but my mum burned them all. Dracula wasn`t a bodybuilder with a east-european accent though, so the movie kind of does it wrong.. No, scratch that. The movie does everything wrong. It`s horrible. Parker Posey should have played Dracula and it could have been a guilty pleasure, like Erotic Nights Of The Living Dead or Land of The Lost or.. anyway..

Hellboy
The directors cut is really good. The visuels are amazing and I love the bit where the blue girl bursts into flames and Hellboy kisses her. I watched the theatrical version and it just didn`t work for me. The directors cut is kind of a perfect blockbuster.

Spiderman 2
The first one had a sweet innocent naive attitude, this one cranks that attitude up to elleven, nah.. twelwe! and turns it into bad soap. And does every bad guy have to be a brilliant scientist who goes insane? Still, great directing, fun characters, great gags (love the bit in the escalator) and great set-pieces. It just seems more like a great episode in a tv-show than a great movie in it`s own right.

Blueberry
Misunderstood and underrated. Best description of a lsd-trip yet. Kind of stupid, though. Highly recommended.

Sin City
Just like reading the comics.. Well, I agree with Vern on this one. Very watchable, but not really a movie as much as a stylistic experiment. Rourke is the only element that brings any sort of life into this showreel for Rodriquez new green-screen.

A history of violence
I like it, but I expected more from Canadas finest. I mean, it`s a pretty interesting set-up for a movie, but it doesn`t go below the surface and is nothing more than a competent executed b-movie. I guess I don`t get it. One of Cronenbergs lesser movies, and a damn shame that critics calls it one of his best. It`s like they all heard that he was a great director and as soon as he makes a movie that doesn`t requiere brains or barf-bags, they hail him as a master of cinema. It`s the emperors new clothes, I tell ya!

Batman Begins
It`s good. Very entertaining. But Nolan doesn`t know how to direct an action-scene. Better than Batman forever.

Constantine
Pretty cool little flick. Great cinematography, interesting ideas and some pretty good acting. This is one of the better comic-movies, as long as you ignore that it`s based on a comic. If any movie ever deserved a reboot, it HELLBLAZER.. eh.. sorry.. CONSTANTINE!!

Fantastic Four
Shoot me, I like it. It reminds me of the eighties. It`s funny, colorfull, entertaining and stupid. And for kids, you know? A nice confident martinee like they made them in my youth.

V for Vendetta
Boooooooooring. We wondered why Warchovskys woundrous visuels were vanished without.. arh shit.. I try again.. Where were Warchowskys wonderfull visuels? Where?

Superman Returns
I liked the titles. They reminded me of the original. But Superman is so boring. Such a boyscout. I hope Rob Zombie makes the next. That would be cool. A whitetrash superman with a big beard. Skullfucking ensues. Nah, I actually liked it. I was pretty drunk when I watched it though. Maybe that helped. I liked they made him a superstalker. And Parker Posey should have played Lex Luthor.

X-men 3: The Last Stand
Terrible, just terrible. I mean, they shoot Mystique and Magneto turns his back to her? I know that he`s evil and wants to exterminate mankind and stuff, but betraying Mystique, the greatest character in the entire franchise, that`s just TOO evil and totally out of character. Like Blofeld choking his cat and feeding it to the piranhas or something. Well, actually all the characters seems pretty cold in this one. Cyclops gets snuffed and nobody cares, then why should I?

30 days of night
Huh? 30 days? Did they stay for 30 days in that attic? The movie made it feel like a couple of hours. They could have called it 3 days of night instead. Never read the comic, but the movie was quite boring. Some nice gore, but too much shakycam and that stupid monotone chords which a lot of directors apparently think is usable as a score. Because it`s moody or something.

FF2: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Okay, this guy destroys planets and kills billions of people, but it turns out that he`s a good guy cause he`s in love and likes to surf. Well, it`s still pretty entertaining as a matinee, as long as you ignore that the newest hero in the franchise makes Hitler look like a reasonable fella. It`s for kids, you know?

Ghostrider
Hmmm. The jury is still out on this one. I thought it was the worst movie I had ever seen the first time I watched it, but last week it didn`t seem that bad. I guess it ranks between worst movie ever and not that bad, then..

Spiderman 3
I don`t get the hate for this one. Parker dancing and being a dork? That`s funny! The soapy storylines from Spiderman 2 actually pays off. The action is great. Spiderman doesn`t fight another brilliant scientist gone mad and the score is sweet. And James Franco can actually act! Yeah, it could have been a lot better with just one or two bad guys, but it still delivers and it is a fitting chapter to a great trilogy. Better than average.

Persepolis
One of the best comic-book movies ever. It also makes you smarter. Great cinema.

Hellboy 2: The Golden Army
It`s good, but not as good as the first one. The actors doesn`t live up to their performances in the original, the editing feels sloppy and the jokes feels tired. It seems rushed. But a Del Toro movie is still better than 90% of everything else, including cinema, so I shouldn`t be too harsh on it. The tooth-fairies are worth the price of admission alone.

300
Jeez, reviewing all the comic-movies I`ve ever seen was a pretty stupid idea. Not as stupid as 300 though. Here we go. 300 is pretty. The flow is bad. The nipples are good. The malenipples are acceptable. I love the credits. The trailer was awesome. Verns review was even better. But if I have a hangover and crave eyecandy, it delivers, as long as I press forward during the talky bits.

The Dark Knight
Scary movie about the nessecity of fascism. Brilliant acting. Brilliant screenplay. Okay directing. Overrated score. Not the finest of 2008, but damn close. Also, burning down a forest in order to get the bad guy is not very sympathetic. But terror makes people do stupid things, I guess. Hey, that`s clever. If that is what Nolan was trying to say, I`m all for it. Well, a blockbuster that made my brain hurt and despise people in general, must be worth something. I guess it`s a masterpiece, then.

Iron Man
Best superhero-movie of 2008. Snappy, exciting and exhilarating. Great score, great acting and great story. The best of the marvels.

The Incredible Hulk
Good action. Laughable romance. Bland charaters.

Punisher War Zone
It`s really stupid, in a bad way.

Watchmen
Gets better everytime I watch it. I love the mood, the flow and the story. I`ve tried to show it to several of my non-nerd friends and they actually fell asleep. I just love the world Znyder has created and I care for the characters. And I`m pretty sure that the night-owl ejaculating fire is supposed to be funny. I hope so. I never expected a adaptation this epic and uncompromising.

Iron Man 2
As much as I loved IM 1, as much I despised the sequel. That`s not correct gramma. Anyway, watching the actors in IM 2 is like watching an actors workshop with actors having fun for their own sake. And in the end it all turns out to be a very long trailer for the avangers anyway. It does have some cool beats in it`s action-scenes, but I think that`s all that Kennedy guy from Samurai Jack and Powerpuff girls doing his magic action-beat thing. Damn, that guy knows how to make a kick-ass actionscene. But the director and actors think their shit doesn`t stink and doesn`t even try to hide it. They just smear it on the screen and orders another diet-coke (or what else induced their rampling let`s all talk at the same time and forget rythm, pace and beats and what else made the first one a classic.) I`ll have to say the movie dissapointed me.

Wanted
Good, dirty fun.

Kick-ass
I liked it when they beat up the nerd. It`s funny because it`s true. But that Hit-girl was way to sane for my taste. There`s nothing cool or funny about a little girl beating a grown man. She should at least had been traumatized. Like Lady Snowblood and Coffy.
Ace Mac Ashbrook
September 29th, 2010 at 12:13 pm

Brendan> Didn’t even know History of Violence was a funny book. Does it count? I mean Viggo didn’t wear a spandex suit or anything.
CJ Holden
September 29th, 2010 at 12:22 pm

Never heard of THE BOYS and haven’t seen THE OTHER GUYS yet, but Adam McKay is my favourite comedy director working right now and he already proved with TALLADEGA NIGHTS that he has a hand for surprisingly well done action scenes (even if we a re “just” talking about racing and car crashes). He’s my #1 candidate for a MEGAS XLR movie, if they should ever do one.
rewrite
September 29th, 2010 at 1:19 pm

Since a few of you brought up Constantine, I wonder why Francis Lawrence isn’t on that list? He’s pretty capable with a budget, he’s done a comic book movie, has WB to back him and he’s not bad visually. Although he might be Znyder-lite in some respects. Okay, maybe he’s not a good choice for superman but maybe something else. I actually think his music videos are better than his movies so maybe they should just do shorts with all of the directors BMW style.

Actually, speaking of music videos, there’s also Jonathan (that guy who could be kubrick if we let him) Glazer. Not sure how interested he would be in doing a superman movie, but put him with Nolan and who knows what would could happen.

As for the Boys, I really think Adam Mckay might be the wrong choice given the material. I mean the Boys is funny, but not SNL/absurd funny. If they really let him do what he wants with it then maybe it could work, though I doubt they’ll let him use at least 90 percent of whats in the comic. The closest we have with something like that would be like Hancock though times 100 with more blood, sex and less will smith. I really can’t think of a choice, but hopefully they’d get someone British. Nothing against McKay, but going by his track record so far he’s done three Will Ferrell Movies and has wrote for SNL so I don’t think he’s going to be changing up his style for the Boys anytime soon. But I’m hoping I’m wrong. The best we could probably hope for in this age is A-TEAM/Losers quality at best.
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 1:21 pm

I just read a rumor that Robert Zemeckis might be interested in Superman. I can’t believe none of us thought of that. That seems fucking perfect.
Stu
September 29th, 2010 at 1:30 pm

Did anyone read the Die Hard: Year One comic? I skipped it, because I didn’t get the point in adapting Die Hard into a gritty 70s cop story. It’s not what people go to the franchise for.
ThomasCrown442
September 29th, 2010 at 1:35 pm

Zemeckis would be great . . . if we could travel back in time and grab the mid to late eighties Zemeckis. Sadly, I just can’t trust this guy to make a good movie anymore.
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 1:41 pm

There are a lot of things about Forrest Gump that, whether you love it or hate it, seem to indicate that Zemeckis could make a really great Superman movie. IMO.
Mr. Majestyk
September 29th, 2010 at 1:41 pm

Stu: I read the first issue and liked it. Good art, good writer, although it read more like DIE HARD WITH A VENGEANCE: YEAR ONE. But then I fell behind. I have them all but haven’t gotten around to finishing it yet. I’ll let you know when I do.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 1:42 pm

Didn’t realize we were playing in an international sandbox here. Revised list:

Batman Mask of the Phantasm
American Splendor
Ghost World
Josie and the Pussycats
Persepolis
Akira
Batman Returns
The Crow
A History of Violence
Oldboy
Blade II

Were Mr Vengeance or Lady Vengeance comic books? If so, both of those belong on there.

Haven’t seen Lone Cub. Wasn’t Aronofsky gonna remake this? Isn’t this basically being remade by Pixar right now?

Also, whoever mentioned the dance scene in Batman Returns, EXACTLY! One of my favorite scenes ever. So many wonderful layers. They’re the only ones unmasked at the costume ball. They’re dancing like they’re fighting. The dance, like the fight, is foreplay. The interplay of sex and sexual violence (but not the bad kind of sexual violence), the whip smart dialogue. The beat where they both feel each other’s bodies sexually, only to discover the wounds from the night before and she looks up (in a stunningly beautiful shot) and says, “Does that mean we have to start fighting now?” So funny, so psychological. The single best moment of any batman film and possibly any comic book film. The second contender would likely be the scene with the joker at the end of Dark Knight (which is all over the place for me. Very uneven. What the hell were they thinking with Harvey Dent’s introductory scene in the courtroom? It was as bad as anything in Batman 3+4).

I’m really disappointed to see that American Splendor gets no love here. That movie made me cry. A beautiful, hilarious, and deeply human story. Seriously guys, go see it. I’ve yet to meet the person who doesn’t enjoy it.

On a completely different note, Josie and the Pussycats is worth a look too. It’s a movie so good that I didn’t even mind that Tara Reid co-starred. You got Rachel Leigh Cook in top form, Rosario Dawson back when she was a little more full bodied, Parker Posey, who I think is as hot as she is funny (which is to say, very), Alan Cummings as one of my favorite sleazy businessmen, a super catchy soundtrack full of surprisingly dirty lyrics, cinematography from the same dude who did REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, THE FOUNTAIN, IRON MAN (which I actually didn’t like the look of, but…), and a bunch of Spike Lee Joints, plus it’s from the same writer/director duo who did Can’t Hardly Wait, which is the most realistic and under appreciated teen sex comedy of the 90s. Sure, I may have a soft spot for it because it came out at exactly the right age for me, but I think it is a legitimately fun slice of popcorn joy. If I ever feel depressed, I pop the DVD in and I’m all smiles and giggles for 90 minutes. Plus, it actually has a good moral at the center.
Mr. Majestyk
September 29th, 2010 at 1:43 pm

Zemeckis would be great if we could get him to use an actual camera again.
rewrite
September 29th, 2010 at 1:49 pm

That actually sounds like a really good idea. If we can’t have Spielberg, Zemeckis is probably the closest we’ll get in terms of feel. He’d get it right visually, and he also has love for the old time america so maybe that’ll bring his interest given Superman’s Character. He can pull action and effects pretty well, though sometimes i’m not so sure if he’s good by himself. He might need Spielberg or Nolan to convince him not to do the whole movie in Mo-cap. Actually, I’d take anything from Zemeckis if it meant he’d lay off the 3D once in awhile. Nothing wrong with him doing those movies, but as ThomasCrown put it, he’s not what used to be.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 1:50 pm

Zemeckis IS up for Superman!

http://www.deadline.com/2010/09/robert-zemeckis-plots-return-to-live-action-and-time-travel/
Vern
September 29th, 2010 at 2:00 pm

CJ – THE OTHER GUYS is a really funny movie, but the action scenes are incomprehensible. Not that they’re done in a post-action type of way, it just seemed like he didn’t know how to get the right shots and edit them together. I love his movies for the laughs, but I would be surprised if his straight action movie was really good.
RRA
September 29th, 2010 at 2:04 pm

Mr. Majestyk – if its 80s Zemeckis, GREAT IDEA. If its subsequent Zemeckis….

Urgh.
ThomasCrown442
September 29th, 2010 at 2:05 pm

Wow Hunter, some Josie and the Pussycats love? And Can’t Hardly Wait? In the same paragraph? Nice. Didn’t really like either of those movies but kudos to your defense of them. Actually, I kinda like Can’t Hardly Wait but it tries too hard to be a teen movie classic instead of just being one. On top of that, I just can’t buy Jennifer Love Hewitt falling in love with Ethan Embry in one night over a letter that he wrote.
RRA
September 29th, 2010 at 2:07 pm

BTW, I thought Zemeckis was too busy with his (ill-advised) YELLOW SUBMARINE remake?
CJ Holden
September 29th, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Damn, hearing that about the action scenes in THE OTHER GUYS sucks. (I’m just glad that I’m not producing a MEGAS XLR movie or now I had to look for another director who can handle action and absurd comedy.)
Mr. Majestyk
September 29th, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Well, there goes that idea.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 2:29 pm

I like the stuff I like. And sometimes that stuff is diametrically opposed to what most other people like. But I’ve yet to change my opinion on something just because it’s popular or unpopular. I can most always defend what I like with reasoned arguments however, so I’m not too concerned with what others think. There isn’t an ounce of irony in my adoration for Josie or Can’t Hardly Wait, nor is there any sense of holier-than-thou in my dislike for say, Iron Man (which I thought was dreadful in every scene where he played superhero). Sure, some of my posts, especially in this topic, have been hyperbolic to say the least, but I’m pretty sure I meant all of it.

But seriously, American Splendor is a good movie, not just by my wonky standards, but by any reasonable measure.
The original Paul
September 29th, 2010 at 2:38 pm

DNA – gotta say, considering you don’t agree with me, you really don’t seem to disagree on that much. “Batman” is where we collide the most, and I will happily admit that even though I obviously enjoyed it more than you did, it’s no masterpiece.

You picked up a few that I missed, but no biggie, I agree with you (and Vern, in the case of Sin City) mostly there as well.
The original Paul
September 29th, 2010 at 2:41 pm

Oh yeah, and I love “V for Vendetta” despite its many flaws. A movie that’s much, much greater than the sum of its parts IMO.
The original Paul
September 29th, 2010 at 2:44 pm

Also I think another Superman movie is a REALLY bad idea unless they can dump the Otis – Tessmacher – Luthor triumvate of suck. Plainly, as one who hated Superman Returns largely because the only remotely likeable character gets screwed at the end, I think this is also one case where movie justice is not only justified but mandatory.
dieselboy
September 29th, 2010 at 2:51 pm

American Splendor didn’t click with me at all. Maybe it had something to do with never having read the source material, but I found it rather boring.

Im picking up from this thread that I should prolly start The Boys next.

In other comic book related shit, The Walking Dead starts in a few weeks on AMC. I know I know zombies have been done to death and now we’re all on swamp things or whatever but I’m still pumped for it. AMC is awesome. They put Danny Trejos head on a turtle for fucks sake.Now this?

The trailers look really good and faithful to the first volume. I’m only on volume three with the comics but I really was digging them up until getting distracted by Preacher. I love that they got Frank Darabont to direct the first episode.I’m a giant fan of The Mist and The Blob.
Jol
September 29th, 2010 at 2:51 pm

Jam, Marvel is probably giving Gasper Noe a call for Doctor Stange after seeing the live-action black light film that is Enter The Void, but after dna mentioning Blueberry, Jan Kounen would be perfect for Strange. Kounen is a master of modern film acid trip skills and he went to art school to become a comic book artist before moving into film.
rewrite
September 29th, 2010 at 2:56 pm

Hunter D, I really liked American Splendor too (RIP Harvey). I think it was an even better experience not knowing it had any relation to CRUMB, which I saw prior to that. I’m not sure if Vern’s reviewed it yet but I think it would be the perfect film for him, since it’s almost a companion piece to the zwigoff/cloves movies, though not directly related or as absurd. Which is weird I know, but fits perfectly in that world of independent comics. I think he’d really like it too, since it has one of those heroes he talks about, the normal working man trying do what he loves which in this case is “nerd shit” and jazz. Who knows maybe we’ll get a VERN movie American Splendor style in a few years, only with mambo socks, a Seattle setting, some hip hop and maybe even a lead role from Bruce.

I also liked Can’t Hardly Wait. But its one of those things I’ll never forget, since its also the day me and my friends finally got to see BLADE. Which resulted in one of the longest known friendships I’ve ever had to this day thanks to those movies alone.
dna
September 29th, 2010 at 3:02 pm

- The original Paul

I think we sort of disagree on Spiderman, Hellboy and Batman Returns.

I left out Akira, thought it might turn into another anime-bashing thread, but for the record: I watched Akira when I was 15 and it blew my mind. It was the first anime I ever watched and I didn`t even care for animation at that point. But if Akira counts as a great cartoon-movie, I might also include Ghost in the shell, Nausica in the valley of the wind, Lupin the 3, Memories, Tekkenkonkrit, Little Nemo in Slumberland, Urotsukidoji etc..

Oh, and Battle Royale was based on a comic too.
Levon Swift
September 29th, 2010 at 3:34 pm

On the topic of Batman Returns, I just have to sort of expand what I said above. It’s a really great movie, well-written, well-acted, funny, exciting, and psychological. The only problem is it isn’t a Batman movie. And I don’t mean in the “Batman is a supporting character” kind of way – that’s just sort of a consequence of having really great villains. The problem is that none of the characters bare any resemblance (aside from physical) to their comic-book counterparts. That IS NOT Catwoman, that IS NOT the Penguin, and that IS NOT Batman.
Mr. Majestyk
September 29th, 2010 at 3:56 pm

This has nothing to do with nothing, but have you guys heard this fucking tearjerker from the EARNEST GOES TO CAMP soundtrack?

http://www.mediafire.com/?y4zoyzem1lv

You guys know I’m tough as tungsten but that shit about “a wounded warrior needs a place to hide” makes the room get all kinds of dusty real sudden like.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 4:39 pm

Man this is a fun thread.

American Splendor is an excellent comic book adaptation. One thing this post brings to light is how advanced and diverse the medium of comic books has become that there so much good source material out there with which to base a film on.

Also, I don’t think anyone as mentioned it yet but BATTLE ROYAL is based on a comic book, and is a fucking great movie.

Were LONE WOLF AND CUB & LADY SNOWBLOOD comics before they where movies?
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 4:47 pm

Oops, I need to pay attention DNA already mentioned BATTLE ROYAL.
The original Paul
September 29th, 2010 at 4:48 pm

Agree on Battle Royale, apart from the cop-out ending.

As long as you accept the Spiderman movies as a succession of bad soap-opera plots, they’re a lot of fun. The moment you start taking them as seriously as the first two movies at least seem to take themselves, their corniness becomes an issue.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 4:55 pm

I have to agree with RRA about Zemeckis, the dude had a decent run in the 80’s but his misses out number his hits. I think he is kind of overrated. Maybe if you wanted to make a really cartoonish Superman movie set in 1950’s Zemeckis would be suitable, but otherwise no thank you. If your going to go the Zemeckis rout why not just get George Lucas to do it.
Jones
September 29th, 2010 at 5:01 pm

What was cop-out about the Battle Royale ending?
RBatty024
September 29th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

As far as the above directors go, my choice would be either Arronofsky or Zowie Bowie (aka Duncan Jones). I’m surprised by so many mediocre to bad directors on this list. It would be kind of funny if Warner Bros. went through all of this trouble to reboot the franchise and then ended up with a worse movie than Superman Returns (which I enjoyed).

I would like to say that as I scan the comments, I’m happy to see so many people supporting Mask of the Phantasm. I know it’s a cartoon and all, but its easily my favorite Batman film. The movie does such a good job of telling its story visually, that I think a lot of live action directors should take notes from it.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 6:34 pm

Looks like Zemeckis is out. Check it.

http://www.deadline.com/2010/09/robert-zemeckis-plots-return-to-live-action-and-time-travel/#more-70915

I am glad he is no longer in the running. I just hope now Arronofsky finds another gig as well. As I have stated before the dude is very talented and has a great body of work but wrong for the material. Besides, as others have already pointed out his talents would be much better utilized on an original work instead of wasted on Superman.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 6:36 pm

I know I spent like 500 words defending the honor of an Archie Comics spin-off movie, but I must say, Battle Royale is a total POS. It’s to Asian cinema what Dane Cook is to comedy. You’re having a perfectly good conversation with some friends about Patton Oswalt or Eddie Izzard, or Lenny Bruce and George Carlin, and then some dumb fratboy comes up and says something like, “Lenny Bruce? Isn’t he the fat black guy from those Popeye’s Chicken ads and XxX2? I guess he’s okay, but you know who’s really fuckin’ funny? DANE COOK!”

That’s the same feeling I get when someone brings up Battle Royale. Of course, I’ve already exposed that my taste is questionable at best, so maybe It’s really me who’s the fratboy asshole.

Also, Ghost in the Shell clearly belongs on my best comic book adaptations list. Does Fritz the Cat count too? Shit, am I really gonna end up with a list completely devoid of masked superheroes? I guess the girl in Ghost World does wear as Batman themed S&M mask in one scene…
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 7:01 pm

Hunter, why do you hate BATTLE ROYALE so much? I can see how it is not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, but what makes it a POS? Yes it is somewhat sensational, but at it’s core it is a brutal movie about how children suffer for the sins of their parents. The director Kinji Fukasaku witnessed this first in hand in his youth when Japan was bombed during WWII.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 7:06 pm

I see Battle Royale as jingling keys in front of your face. I never really bought the politics. It always struck me as a thin validation of endless gratuitous violence. Perhaps it’s not even the film I dislike so much as the cult around it because frankly, like 5 out of ever 100 people who mention it even understand the WWII connection.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 7:14 pm

Hunter, I can see your point. I am sure that there are many people who like it for the wrong reasons, and I am sure many of them are the same people who love HOSTEL and all the SAW films.
Jones
September 29th, 2010 at 7:25 pm

I can see where you’re coming from Hunter, but I also think it’s sort of lame to hate a movie because of the fans. If annoying fans of specific media turned me off to things, I’d hate Star Wars and Firefly and Troma movies and a lot of horror in general. And if you have a problem with a movie being a thin validation of endless gratuitous violence, then you must hate a LOT of Japanese cinema.
Hunter D.
September 29th, 2010 at 7:32 pm

Here I am again, captain bad taste, but I not only like the Saw films, I’m also friends with several of the above the lines. Of course, I also read those films as socially important reactions to 9/11. You have sleeper cells, terrorist actions, a villain who wants to convert you to his way of thinking, everyday objects turned into weapons of mass murder, conspiracies, ect. I also kind of dig the goofiness of the incredibly intricate plot. I mean, the twist in part 6 hinged on a minor scene featuring a character who had been dead and absent from the series since part 3. You gotta respect that level of soap opera bullshit.

I actually don’t like too much of Japanese cinema. I vastly prefer Korean cinema, which is my favorite national cinema in the world. And I generally avoid thinking about the fanbase of a movie before deciding if I like it or not. But I saw Battle Royale in probably the 9th grade after hearing ALL about it from kids whom I really didn’t want to be emulate. At this point I can differentiate, but my guard was lower when I was 13.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 7:59 pm

Hunter, you and I seem to have very different tastes, but I hope you don’t feel like I am giving you shit. I may not agree with you but I respect your opinion, and personally I think you get a lot out of having a dialogue with people who share different views than yourself. With that said, I have to say I never heard anyone imply that there is even a shred of an intellectual subtext to the SAW films. To be far I have not seen them all, but what I have seen left with me with no desire to see any more. I would have found the ridiculous plot twist at the end of the first film intellectually insulting if I hadn’t already written off the story as an excuse to show violence and torture. SAW is a fake FACES OF DEATH strung together with a ridiculous narrative.
Charles
September 29th, 2010 at 8:12 pm

Hunter, to your point about your reaction to BR being tainted by the fans of the film you knew, I had a similar experience with TRAIN SPOTTING. For years I refused to watch the film and wrote it off because I knew to many dipshits that liked it for the wrong reasons. I eventually I gave it a fair shot and thought it was a good film. As Jones eluded to in his post you can’t blame the artist for their fans reaction to their work. I know tons of idiots that love GOODFELLAS for the wrong reasons, but that does not take away from the quality of the film.
Lawrence
September 29th, 2010 at 8:47 pm

I haven’t read any of the over 200 posts here but I agree with everybody.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 12:08 am

Hey who saw VENTURE BROS. this week? A very good episode, I mean you gotta love how Ghost Robot…a ghost in a robot body…isn’t really all that impressive. Or that the location of this Death fight tournament is an abandoned horsetrack.
CJ Holden
September 30th, 2010 at 12:45 am

I’m not sure what to think of the last Venture Bros episode. The story was kinda poor, but the laugh ratio was the highest of season 4.5 so far. (By following the link in my name you get to my stupid random blog, which features a longer, but poorly written review of the episode. Sorry for the plug. I’m a jerk.)
Loudabagel
September 30th, 2010 at 1:15 am

That Venture Bros episode was the weakest one in quite a while. There was just too much of everything. Having Toby Huss as Cotton Hill play the OSI general was a nice choice, but the writing just mangled the fun out of the character. Most all of the jokes in the episode were overdone. When the main story involves Billy Quizboy, Pete White and Henchman21 trapped in gladiator prison, it shouldn’t be necessary to pad the same shitty side-joke on top of itself repeatedly.
Loudabagel
September 30th, 2010 at 1:23 am

Anybody care about this new Brian K Vaughan TV show?
Caoimhín
September 30th, 2010 at 2:36 am

RRA, you know what else came from a comic book and has an unimpressive ghost robot? G Men From Hell, that’s what. William Forsythe makes a good Bogart.
Vincento
September 30th, 2010 at 4:24 am

Preacher is my favourite comic ever.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 7:54 am

Loudabagel – “Worst episode EVER!”

Sorry couldn’t resist. I think I probably agree with CJ, it was busy but it was FUNNY.

Seriously you didn’t like that “sad tits” exchange?
Loudabagel
September 30th, 2010 at 9:11 am

I really didn’t much care for the “sad tits” thing. Just take the two or three best lines and give us more gladiators.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 9:19 am

You wanted more Brock-kills-with-ridiculous-gruesome-methods, right?

Well in that case, I agree.

I can’t decide which kill was more creative: decapitation by shark or shoving guy’s own thumb up his own ass?
Loudabagel
September 30th, 2010 at 9:28 am

I know I showed up late to this shindig, but here’s a list of my favorite comic book movies, in no particular order-

Ghost World
Spider-Man 2
American Splendor
Batman
Batman Returns
X-Men 2
V For Vendetta
Blade 2
Hellboy 2
Sin City
and Art School Confidential if it counts.
Brendan
September 30th, 2010 at 10:56 am

I thought that last episode was easily the funniest one of the newest season (and I loved the sad tits exchange) but it did have a certain slapdash quality to it, it didn’t build to the dizzying level of insanity that most episodes do, but still, as individual moments, it was top notch. Plus, as a long time fan, how does the room not get kind of dusty when Rusty tells a disguised Hank just how much Hank resembles young Rusty? I get the feeling that this season is building towards some kind of huge, game changing event that will alter the landscape of the Ventureverse as heavily as the deaths of the clones did.
CJ Holden
September 30th, 2010 at 11:24 am

Yeah, season 4 was so far all about change, with Brock leaving the Ventures, Hank and Dean growing up (kinda), Triana moving to her mother, #21 becoming a badass, Professor Impossible becoming a villain and Sgt. Hatred becoming a desperately-trying-to-not-be-pedophile bodyguard. It would be a shame if they would abandon this theme in the season finale.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 11:53 am

RE: Charles

You never, EVER need to apologize for disagreeing with me. I come to this sight because it is the single best haven for true film fans that I have yet found. Everyone here is polite and actually interested. And no one ever calls anyone homophobic slurs. It’s also the kind of place I can make a half-baked comment about Nietzsche in a discussion of a Billy Zane movie…and get a half a dozen serious responses. So, no worries, dude. I should be the one apologizing for recommending films that no one besides me seems to like.

—

Okay, time to get my film theory on!

The Saw films are not politically important uninto themselves. In fact, I think the first film was written possibly BEFORE 9/11. Too, it was an Australian film made with American money. However, just as Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Last House on the Left before it reflected the trauma and turmoil of the Vietnam war long before a straight film could ever be made about the subject, I contend that the Saw films have resonated with the American public and captured the zeitgeist because they touch upon elements of the modern world that cannot be discussed in a literal fashion. Saw is popular for the same reason that the “(not on) Ground Zero (and also not a) Mosque” is controversial.

I’ve actually written about this subject…a lot. In fact, I almost wrote my senior thesis project in college on “The Politics of Torture Porn.” But then I wrote a screenplay instead.

In any case, here are some of the articles I wrote while forming what would have been my thesis…
http://www.collider.com/dvd/article.asp/aid/6045/tcid/3
http://www.collider.com/dvd/reviews/archive_detail.asp/aid/3687/tcid/3
http://www.collider.com/dvd/reviews/archive_detail.asp/aid/5304/tcid/3
http://www.studentvoiceonline.com/2.7994/christmas-spirit-and-murderous-lust-torn-from-the-same-cloth-1.1100698

I was in high school when I wrote most of these so please forgive the sometimes wonky use of punctuation and the slight misspellings.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 11:55 am

Well, I just wrote a fairly long explaination of why I think Saw is culturally relevant…and it’s “under moderation” because I linked to a bunch of articles I wrote. So…if you care, click on my name and it will take you to one of the articles I did for Collider on this subject.
Rogue4
September 30th, 2010 at 12:44 pm

I Always seem to come to the good topics late. Oh well, gotta say I think we’re gradin Mr. Snyder’s action style on a pretty steep curve friendos. I don’t think he’s a hack or anything, but come on guys. As far as the Greengrassian nonsense has dragged down action filmaking, lets not come to the point where mere comprehensibility earns a diretor a gold star. The choreography of the battle scenes in 300 would’ve been all the more visceral if it hadn’t been buried under a bunch of “style”. Compare the battle scenes in 300 to the ones in “Braveheart” or “The Last Samurai”. 3 words: no friggan contest. I just think theres something to be said for getting the hell out of the way and letting the action speak for itself. I also think we could extend a little more slack to Mr. Scott. I think he’s a solid director whose simply overindulged some bad habits of late. But “Beverly Hills Cop II”, “Top Gun”, “Crimson Tide”, “Man on Fire”, “Days of Thunder”, and “Spy Game” are all classics to me.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 12:50 pm

I think that Battle Royale is more culturally significant if you live in Japan. Apparently it was hitting some hot-button topics over there at the time.
Charles
September 30th, 2010 at 12:52 pm

Hunter, thanks for the link. I can’t really argue with anything you wrote. I guess I just fail to see the value in the films you that you do. Also, I have no interest in fanning the flames of the torture/violence porn debate, but to me that label has less to do with sadomasochist sexual undertones in a film and more to do with a film that features a structure and/or plot that is an excuse for a visual gimmick or pay off. Obviously pornography is about sex, and more often then not everything else in a pornographic film like story or character plays a secondary role to the sex, if they are even present in the picture at all. The films you refer to as “gorno” often resemble pornographic films in that they place the same value or lack there of on story, narrative, and/or character. Also, I would also argue that not only can horror films be violence porn but so can action films. There is no blood or guts in Transformers 2 but it is like a porno film in it’s treatment of narrative and story. Bay merely uses them as excuses to bombard our senses. It is part of the dumbing down of cinema that is often debated and discussed on this sight.
The original Paul
September 30th, 2010 at 12:55 pm

Loudabagel – I can’t think anybody who’s actually been to art school would have any respect for “Art School Confidential”. I mean, I’m glad you and Vern liked it for the sake of you and Vern, but it’s not a film I would ever recommend to anybody. It stinks of someone who’s either never been to art school or just has no idea of how to make a realistic portrayal of it, doing a movie about art school.

As to the ending of Battle Royale – three of them survived the island. Three. There’s no fucking way that should have happened. And to get it to happen, the plot has to go where I believe the technical term is “batshit bonkers” and have the kids – who are monitored at all hours and are wearing exploding neck collars to stop a rebellion – somehow stage a successful coup against the adults. Sorry, but NO. This is as much of a cheat as “Elektra” is or “The Tournament” is or any of the other films I mentioned in that overlong analysis of “The Tournament” are.

In short – if you have a setup as great as the one in “Battle Royale”, stick to it. Don’t wimp out and stage a completely implausible twist towards the end, for no fucking reason that I can see other than these are the “nice” kids and the “nice” kids have to survive, or some such bullshit. Don’t ruin a grittily satirical character piece with a dumb-as-shit piece of “movie justice” at the end.

And to make this clear, for the vast majority of “Battle Royale”, I freaking love it. The kids are such relatable, intricate characters that I really empathised with the situation they were put in. I just find the “revolution” ending completely out of sync with the rest of it. It doesn’t fit, it undermines the rest of the film, it leaves a sour taste in the mouth, it cheapens the deaths of all the other kids who we’re supposed to care about. Sorry, but FUCK that shit.
The original Paul
September 30th, 2010 at 1:02 pm

Also, why the fuck is Greengrass getting the blame here? The “Bourne” films – at least the first and third – were great. I found the second almost unwatchable due to the constant shakycam, but Greengrass seemed to realise this and toned it down in #3. Does he have to take shit for learning from his own mistakes?

I don’t think you can blame Greengrass for bad action sequences by other directors, any more than you can blame Gloria Gaynor’s “I will survive” for inspiring a whole generation of insipid multi-racial female “R&B stars”. And why pay to hear a group of lurching semi-doped women endlessly bitch about their menfolk? I can go home and get it for free.
CJ Holden
September 30th, 2010 at 1:06 pm

Greengrass toned it down on part 3? Fuck no, part 3 was the unwatchable one that I just don’t wanna watch again, because its camera movements and hyperactive editing made me physically ill for a whole day. (Seriously! After I watched it, I spent the rest of the day with a headache in bed, even throwing up one or two times. And I only watched it on DVD! I don’t wanna imagine what had happened if I had seen it in theatre!)
Charles
September 30th, 2010 at 1:09 pm

Just to be clear I have no problem with violence in movies. I love Seagal films, but I have little to no interest in violence for the sake of violence. Tarintino movies often have a great deal of violence in them but the violence in his films are part of the narrative and add to the story. You mentioned SAVING PRIVATE RYAN in one of the articles linked to your review, and while in some ways the violence in that film may be greater then that of HOSTEL or SAW it is not gratuitous in nature and exists as an organic part of the narrative of the film used to tell it’s story, and is crucial to the emotional payoff of the film.

PS: Sorry about all the typos, poor grammar and spelling. I am not the best writer.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 1:52 pm

RE: Charles

I am specifically interested in analysis of films and media that people think are submental or valueless. This starting point leaves us in a very vulnerable place with the films. People completely brush them off for specifically the reason they are interesting to me. They speak very directly, and very loudly to parts of ourselves that we might wish to ignore. In that same vein, I also took several feminist studies classes on Pornography as a film genre, (not about how porn is evil, mind you. And not joke classes, the professor won a MacArthur Genius Grant this year). I don’t really like porn for its intended use, but I do find what it has to say about power structures, race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality to be intellectually stimulating. Plus there’s that whole Foucault thing about “multiplying pleasures.”

The late, great Robin Wood wrote several mindbendingly brilliant books of film theory and analysis on this subject that seriously changed my life when I discovered them at about 15. Specifically “Hollywood from Vietnam to Reagan” which offers serious analysis of Dawn of the Dead, It’s Alive!, Doom Generation, and many films of this ilk. I donno if Vern knows this guy’s work at all, but any serious genre film nerd (as opposed to film geeks who love things unconditionally and uncritically) really owes it to him or herself to read this book as it is often seen as the primogenitor of scholarly analysis of the B-movie.

Remember that David Bordwell Article from a few days back? Well, he wrote several of my text books. I basically majored in that stuff. I’m trying to use it to write action movies that are more like a 4 course meal with a beautiful and kinky redhead who majored in Criminology at Harvard instead of a 2 AM burger and fries with your stoned cousin Flannery.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 2:06 pm

Also, the Saw films are interesting structurally because of the way that they use film logic to hide the plot twists, which actually deal with real logic. For example,

In Saw II, we have the character of Amanda returning. The audience accepts her because we know that we need Morris the explainer. You know, the black guy from a Steven King novel? Normally, this character dies at the end of act 2B, leading the protagonist into what I refer to as “the long, dark teatime of the soul.” Here however, she is actually made to be part of the twist.

In Saw III, we accept that the traps are more violent and gratuitous because we understand that this is how franchise filmmaking works. Each film must get “bigger” than the last one in order to counteract the law of diminishing returns. But then, in act 3, this escalation of violence ends up being essential to the twist.

Saw IV is very interesting in that, it is a film that takes place after the death of nearly every single main character in the entire franchise. How do you possibly extend a film series after the death of all of the (nonsupernatural) killers? Well, the insane continuity of the franchise allows for a bit player from part II and III to become the protagonist here. It seems like less of a cop out because, the dude was indeed featured rather prominently in several of the previous films, albeit without lines. Even more interestingly, the entire film is basically an extended experiment in the Kuleshov effect. We assume that each scene builds on the previous one because of their placement in the narrative when in fact, they are totally unrelated.

Part V is a bit of a letdown, but I think it has some of the best traps and features a great, almost philosophical debate between 2 of the killers at its center. Too, it’s also the only time I have ever seen a protagonist actually get killed by a crushing wall. There are other elements that are of note too. The film acts as commentary on the post-9/11 paranoia about neighbors and the B-plot trap story is basically an adaptation of The Twilight Zone’s The Monsters on Maple Street.

Part VI is the only horror film I have ever seen about health care reform. Like, the plot is overtly about healthcare reform. Also, it’s easily the best part VI in any horror franchise, ever. The ending even surprised me, and I am never, ever surprised by movie twists.

Again, I’m bias. I’m friends with a few of the above the lines and have been since I was like 16. But I liked the movies before I met them, and I honestly think they have something to say about our society, even if that something is entirely symptomatic meaning rather than intentional meaning.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 2:10 pm

So Paul, if you get mad at Battle Royale for the characters winning under almost impossible odds, do you dislike Seagal movies or Die Hard or any other action movie for the exact same thing? Yeah, the kids are being watched and the movie clearly shows how they figure out how to get around it. And also, only two survive not three. Yeah, the one guy got off but he still died. I mean, the movie basically followed along with typical action/thriller movie formula, from Chuck Bronson to Norris to Arnold.
Charles
September 30th, 2010 at 2:18 pm

Hunter, thanks for the heads up on the book you mentioned. I will have to check it out. I really enjoyed the David Bordwell article from a few days back, and ended up reading various other essays and articles on his site. Everything I read was very interesting and I intend on checking out his site on a regular basis.

I wish you the best of luck on your screen writing aspirations, maybe one day we could discuss your work.

Also, if you have the chance check out a film called BUNRAKU. I wrote about on the thread that featured the David Bordwell article. It is an elegant and visually stunning high concept genre bending action film. It is a creative and sophisticated in it’s story telling and construction. I don’t think it will be released until later this year, but I bet you would enjoy it.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 2:26 pm

Hey charles, email me at straight to video (at) gee mail dot com.
Charles
September 30th, 2010 at 2:45 pm

I just did hopefully it went through.
The original Paul
September 30th, 2010 at 3:37 pm

Jones – Die Hard – different film, different tone.

Y’see, I can “buy” the characters surviving in, say, Die Hard, or Toy Story 3. (Similar movie examples there.) It fits the tone of the film. It’s satisfying. John McClane was a survivor anyhow, so there’s nothing intrinsically backwards about his overcoming the odds. It’s set up from the start that he’s gonna win through in the end.

But to make “Battle Royale” THAT good and then to blow it at the end with a totally fucking stupid inane makes-all-the-smart-characters-behave-idiotically God-damned ass-backwards switcheroo… NO. It’s just too fucking dumb. It doesn’t fit the tone of the film. Dammit, do I have to repeat my entire rant?

Y’know what I think happened? I think they had an ending all ready where the psycho and the veteran killed each other leaving only the final boy and girl, and the boy decided to sacrifice himself for her or vice versa, becoming the sole survivor, and the guy behind it all didn’t get a bad case of “movie justice” in a completely fucking stupid way. But some producer or test audience or whatever said “You know what, this is too bleak, let’s have them BOTH survive. Oh, and let’s kill off the teacher while we’re at it. Yeah, I know it renders the rest of the movie totally pointless, but who cares? It’s kids killing each other, nobody’s gonna notice!”

Look, I’ve had it up to the neck with a rash of recent movies I’ve seen where they have a fantastic setup and no payoff. Do you think “Rocky” would have been improved if Rocky had won that fight? Do you think “Rambo” would’ve been better with a contrived “happy ending”? Do you think “The Thing” would’ve been better if there hadn’t been that ambiguity at the end? (I’m not talking about the bit where everybody decides to blow shit up and separate from each other for no reason, and the Thing decides to transform into an easily killable giant monster, it would DEFINITELY have been better without that part. I’m talking about the bit where the two men sit down in the snow.) Well do you? No? WELL NEITHER DO I.

So why the fuck do we have to put up with this over-contrived bullshit in place of a real ending?
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 4:25 pm

I think what Paul is getting at is best exemplified in The Village. Battle Royale sets up very specific rules, then fails to follow through on them. Characters in the film can lie, but when the film itself lies, you have a problem. M. Night was doomed the minute he showed the dates on the graves in the first scene of The Village and Battle Royale was doomed the minute it set up stringent rules that it had no intention of following through on. Chekhov’s rule of a gun in act one means a murder by act 3 comes to mind too.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 4:42 pm

Well, I guess we saw Battle Royale in different contexts. I saw it as an action movie thriller, it was never played otherwise…and usually in those, the hero perseveres until the end. It’s like hey, Silence of the Lambs was a dark, gothic movie…so is it a cheat that Jodie Foster saves the girl in the end and shoots the bad guy? And it’s not like Rocky had a sad ending anyway. And First Blood had a happier ending than the original one where he shoots himself.

How exactly did the smart characters act stupid in order for the ending to work? Which smart characters are you talking about?

Also, the book basically ends the same way, except it’s even more unbeliveable because the kids mow down all of the soldiers with machine guns and only get the chance to do so because no one verified the bodies.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 4:44 pm

How did Battle Royale lie though, Hunter? Yeah, there were specific rules…which were then thwarted. The Village didn’t lie either, it was a cover-up.

To use Die Hard again, it’s like you’re saying that movie lies because Hans tells McClane that he’s going to lose…but McClane ends up proving him wrong. Hans wasn’t lying about that threat, he meant it, he just didn’t follow up very well.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 4:51 pm

So Snyder is a hero and Greengrass is the villain?

What the hell?
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 4:56 pm

Come on RRA, this isn’t professional wrestling here. I don’t think anyone’s saying that. Although I’d take Snyder over Greengrass.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 5:05 pm

It stretches credulity too far for me to believe that the adults made gravestones with fake years. That’s just dumb. The high concept of Battle Royale was that it was a death match, in Die Hard it’s just a bad guy’s speech .
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 5:20 pm

Jones – I believe I’ve made my case.
rewrite
September 30th, 2010 at 5:24 pm

Aronofsky for Preacher, any thoughts on this?

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/108039–could-darren-aronofsky-direct-preacher

Every time someone leaves this project it just seems to get in better hands as it comes along. The choice seems about right to me. I know someone mentioned earlier that he should be doing his own projects, but this one seems more of a fit than superman. That black swan trailer gave me chills, brought me back to the first time I saw Requiem. And if he can do that with preacher, then count me in. Actually, I could almost imagine him doing Sandman with Natalie Portman too. But If he chooses any of these projects, I doubt he’ll stay on them for long. He seems to move on these types of projects and then leaving doing something oscar worthy, which is probably for the best.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 5:25 pm

So Hunter, you could buy that the adults in the village created a fake town and lied to their children for years and dressed up as monsters but fake dates on tombstones is the breaking point?

And yes, the high concept of Battle Royale was a deathmatch. hat the villains set up. That doesn’t mean the good guys can’t figure out a way to subvert that system and win. That’s the general arc of action movies and thrillers.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 5:29 pm

rewrite – I’m gonna agree with you.

If SUPERMAN gets Zach Snyder so to appease these nerds here and I get Darren A. for PREACHER, I’ll be satisfied with that tradeoff.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 5:29 pm

I mean, Mad Max refused the rules of Thunderdome, although he paid a price for it (but got his revenge anyway). And was anyone complaining when Arnold beat the Running Man game?
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 5:36 pm

Yeah, everything the adults did had motivation…except for faking the years. That was done only to fool the audience. There was no diegetic reason, ergo it’s a cheat.

Also, Running Man is about an exceptional person who is thrown into the game. In Battle Royale, I don’t remember the set up including anything about these kids being specifically extraordinary. But I only saw the movie twice, nearly a decade ago, so…
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 5:37 pm

I think I’d use the words “us” nerds if I liked a funnybook that had a random vampire in it.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 5:42 pm

But Hunter, WHY do the kids have to be extraordinary to win? Can’t they just persevere? Back to Silence of the Lambs…Clarice isn’t the greatest detective ever. She’s hardworking and tenacious, but still wouldn’t get to where she was without Lecter giving her info. But she won. And seeing the way you view Battle Royale, no matter what the kids did to win wouldn’t satisfy you. If they had just ran into the compound and shot everyone instead of what happened, would that have been better? Even Arnold wouldn’t have beaten The Running Man without his computer hacker buddies, he didn’t do it by himself.

And back to the Village…why I’d basically agree with you, I will give the adults some leeway seeing as they’re so into what they’re building than why not go all the way and set the clock back 100 years or so?
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 5:50 pm

Actually, one thing I just thought about regarding The Village…I’d think faking the dates would be important. Why? They had books. Now you can’t have books from 1998 or whatever because the kids are going to start asking question like what are cars and what’s a McDonald’s? So you can only give them books from the 1800s or so. But you have to fake the dates because if you don’t lie about the year, and they only have books from 100 years ago, they start asking why don’t they have any recent books? Thus, the dates.

Apparently M. Night is a genius.
Hunter D.
September 30th, 2010 at 5:54 pm

You know, Jones. That literally never occurred to me. You’re completely right. Touche.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 6:08 pm

M. Night Shymalan should write a memoir and title it TOXIC.
Jones
September 30th, 2010 at 6:20 pm

I hate to make it seem like I’m defending The Village too much. Up until then M. Night was doing no wrong for me. Yeah yeah, I was fine with the cheesy water stuff in Signs since that was about a minute of screentime. But midway through The Village is where I said “uh oh.”
ThomasCrown442
September 30th, 2010 at 7:16 pm

There was a time when I thought M. Knight was going to be the next great filmmaker. I didn’t even get 1/2 way through the Village before I had my uh oh moment. I went through a period of about 3 or 4 years where I didn’t want to believe that he lost it.
Charles
September 30th, 2010 at 8:54 pm

What is the deal with M. Night? The guy made 2 great movies (6th Sense & Unbreakable) and 1 good one (Signs) then everything else he has done since borders on unwatchable. I caught some of The Happing one night on HBO and it was so bad on so many levels that I couldn’t believe it was made by the same guy that made 6th Sense & Unbreakable. I haven’t seen it but I have had a few people tell me The Last Airbender isn’t bad. Has anyone here seen it?
Levon Swift
September 30th, 2010 at 9:20 pm

I usually hate shakycam, but I love all three Bourne movies. The third one is the best. It’s like a parade of badass moments.

Anyone else wish Tarantino would direct a live-action Venture Bros. They’d have to cast Patrick Warburton as Brock, though, because no one else sounds like that.
Levon Swift
September 30th, 2010 at 9:22 pm

Also, some good director should direct THE TRAGEDY OF M. NIGHT SHYMALAN.
Levon Swift
September 30th, 2010 at 9:58 pm

Guys, this has nothing to do with movies, but if this is the admitted nerd thread then you guys probably already know about this and find it exciting too, but it’s time to get excited about motherfucking SPACE.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1316243/Is-GLIESE-581-g-new-Earth-Planet-20-light-years-away-support-life.html
rewrite
September 30th, 2010 at 10:32 pm

Wow, they found Pandora. I knew James Cameron wasn’t faking that shit. All this time we thought he was inventing cameras for the deep oceans, when in reality he was making regular visits with the ABYSS taking him to worlds unknown so he could film it there. They showed him where christ was, how skynet could be formed, and it took him 10 years to document when he lost the footage and had to re-enact it all using what was left.

Yep, I’am not in Kansas anymore

Also, in the the tragedy of M.Night. I have come to the theory that he really is Mr. Glass and that all the disasters he’s made recently are tests to find a real movie somewhere. Just a few more train wrecks and I’m sure he’ll find it.
RRA
September 30th, 2010 at 11:33 pm

rewrite – You mean Cameron is gonna be an even bigger prick now?

Man his ego doesn’t need anymore inflating. That shit of him “considering” options on how to stop the BP oil spill was hubris hall of fame.
rewrite
October 1st, 2010 at 12:13 am

Don’t you see!? He planned that too. The oil spill? all HIS idea. Why do you think we’re just finding out about this “new world” information all of a sudden. He’s been leaking it out slowly, so we can start to “jump ship” once we see for ourselves what “we” have done to our own world. These are the options he was considering for us all along. I blame the Academy for letting his ex wife take the OSCAR from him, since now it has only driven his hunger even more to be “king” of the world. It was an Ozymandias dick move, but James fucking Connor doesn’t stop in trying to save us all.
dna
October 1st, 2010 at 1:41 am

- Hunter D

Exciting stuff about the saw series. I would still love to hear your thoughts on why man on fire is an intelligent movie.

Regarding Battle Royale. The movie is about a system that punishes kids for breaking the rules (of society). The kids turns the table and survives the system and it`s punishment by breaking the rules. Makes sense to me.
Hunter D.
October 1st, 2010 at 2:25 am

Well, for one, it has the restraint to not have Denzel kill anyone until minute 70. I believed Denzel’s character and I thought it properly exploited (in all senses of the word) a real world socio-political situation. I thought the kid was unusually well written, and the gooey stuff was well done. The ways in which Denzel tracks the kidnappers felt fresh to me. I was even kinda okay with the cop out of the kid still being alive. Though it pissed me the fuck off the first time.
dna
October 1st, 2010 at 2:55 am

- Hunter D

They should have kept the original ending, where Denzel stuffs a buttplug with plastic explosives up his arse and triggers it inside the bad guy`s mansion.
Outlaw Vern
October 1st, 2010 at 3:07 am

You know what, guys? This is not just at you, RRA, this is the whole internet. I say don’t be bitter about Cameron. I don’t know if this is widely known, but the fucking guy directed TERMINATOR, TERMINATOR 2, THE ABYSS. If he only directed ALIENS he would still be a hero worthy of building a statue of. Who gives a shit if he went crazy, got obsessed with submarines and perfecting movie technology.

This is my message to the nerd community: stop killing your heroes. It seems like you worship people for years only so you can spend twice as long hating them. You gotta have more positivity in your life, more appreciation for the good, more forgiveness of the bad.

People get old. People get fat. People lose their touch. Just accept it and don’t be so god damn bitter. When the world thinks of Muhammad Ali they think of The Greatest of All Time, they don’t fixate on that depressing asswhooping he got from Larry Holmes. But what do you gentlemen fixate on when you think of Star Wars? Not the movie that you love so much, but the anger you have at things the guy did later. It’s not healthy.

George Lucas gave you fucking STAR WARS. He gave you more joy than sex has given you. That’s not a “you’re a virgin” joke, it’s a scientific fact based on all the years that you played with his dolls and wore his pajamas and philosophized about his characters in your dorm room. But later on you don’t like what he’s done so you literally say over and over again that he forced his dick up your ass. Fucking ingrates.

So Marlon Brando made FREE MONEY, that doesn’t erase what he did for acting before. So FLIGHT OF FURY is shitty, that doesn’t change OUT FOR JUSTICE. So Batman turned evil after he went into another dimension, there was still all those times he saved people from riddles and what not. And maybe your grandma got kind of loopy in her old age, said some weird shit about “the orientals” or something. She was still nice to you when you were little. If James Cameron is a goofball now, and AVATAR is kind of corny, so the fuck what. He made motherfucking ALIENS.

I repeat. ALIENS. Appreciate it.

You know what, this requires all caps. HE MADE ALIENS. And more. I get it, he’s full of himself, but I don’t see why it has to be constant negativity every time his name comes up, or more often when his name doesn’t come up but you throw it in there just to add some negativity flavoring. You don’t have to worship them blindly but jesus, have some appreciation I say. As far as the type of movies I enjoy, I really believe he’s made some of the best movies of all time, and to me that’s worthy of respect.

and plus, what if he DID figure out how to clean up the oil spill? Would you apologize?

(okay, looking back I think the comments that inspired this rant were fairly innocent and not deserving of this type of fury, but I’m still gonna click ’submit comment’ because these things need to be said every once in a while)
Christof
October 1st, 2010 at 3:33 am

AVATAR was pretty dumb, though.
Levon Swift
October 1st, 2010 at 6:54 am

I still love Cameron. I liked Avatar. Who cares if the story is kind of shitty and completely predictable? The visuals were unlike anything to come before it. And Zoe Saldana was badass. And it made me imagine how great a Spider-Man or Superman movie could be in 3D.
rewrite
October 1st, 2010 at 9:11 am

Whoa whoa, did not mean to incite the fury. I’m a still a big fan of Cameron and what he’s done. I really didn’t it mean any harm, honestly all in good fun. I’m not trying to go after him personally by calling his filmography shit or make fun of how old he is, whatever the sarcasm might imply. In defense of RRA though, its true Cameron does have quite an ego weather you like him as a director or not. He’s a celebrity. And sometimes maybe giving him too much love for things like AVATAR probably inflated that ego just a bit. We knew he was coming back, and we anticipated his next film to be the greatest thing ever and you know why? because we love ALIENS, and we love the TERMINATOR movies. We expected him to fuck eyeballs or whatever and bring that back regardless of what he had done because WE ARE FANS. Sure the movie might not have quite the impact on us or delivered to our expectations. But what can we do? it made over a billion dollars, and we as fans (maybe not quite the population to equal a billion) put him in that position to have that ego. And I’m sure regardless of whatever crazy things he’s done or is going to do, his movies will still be watched and remembered. People will still remember TERMINATOR and ALIENS, and given our last string of directors doing action we really can’t turn back on him now for making enjoyable movies. I’m probably not making any more sense here, but I will say that I still have love for Woo, and I still have love for the Peter Jacksons, the Mctiernans, and hell even the Wes Cravens. I even still got love for you vern, despite you instilling the rage and even calling the things I like “nerd shit”. But whatever, I will still continue to be on the site. WHY? because of that fucking “I’ll Always Know What You Did Last Summer” review you did back in “06″.
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 9:20 am

Well put, Vern. My whole philosophy has always been that no matter how bad movies are, they’re still movies. That means they’re the good part of life, the part where you get to relax and let your imagination run free. If movies piss you off that much, you’re watching them wrong. Maybe you should deal with you and not worry so much about what George Lucas is doing.
Levon Swift
October 1st, 2010 at 9:25 am

I still think it’s okay to hate Lucas. He isn’t what made the first ones great, in my opinion, so it’s okay to be pissed at him for not hiring other writers and directors. He’s said in interviews that he knows he’s not that good at dialogue or with actors. It’s so fucking crass. Whenever I see them on TV I can’t help but imagine how great they could’ve been, if he had only let someone else re-write and streamline it, and then also someone else direct the entire thing.
Levon Swift
October 1st, 2010 at 9:26 am

You can’t help but feel like it’s nothing but a cash cow to him. Cameron is truly passionate about Avatar at least.
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 9:35 am

The Lucas hate just gets so out of hand. Everybody acts like he violated some kind of contract. They seem to think that the Declaration of Independence guarantees all American to “life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and STAR WARS prequels that are at least as good as JEDI.” He made the movies. He did his best. They didn’t work out as well as we’d hoped, though I feel that they’re entertaining movies overall. If you hated them, guess what? You never have to watch them or any other Lucas product ever again. There’s no reason to keep infecting every conversation with bitterness.
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 9:36 am

(Not saying that’s what you’re doing, Levon. Just talking about Internet folks in general.)
dna
October 1st, 2010 at 9:44 am

Leave Lucas alone! He did direct 2 great movies of the seventies; THX 1138 and American Graffiti, cooked up the concept for Indiana Jones and created Starwars. He appearently spend 4 years in a room, rewriting and shaping the script into cinemas greatest mythology, at a time where everybody thought sci-fi was stone dead.

And A New Hope is brilliantly directed. Changed my life when I were 5 years old.
Levon Swift
October 1st, 2010 at 9:47 am

So, speaking of the ALIEN franchise, which someone was, you guys hear that shit about Ridley Scott’s new Alien movie getting put on hold? Fox wants it PG-13, and doesn’t want to give him the $250 million he wants.
Brendan
October 1st, 2010 at 11:27 am

Eh, he’ll walk away, they’ll hire some commercial or music video director to do it for half the money and a PG13. Becuase that always works out.
CJ Holden
October 1st, 2010 at 11:44 am

I gotta admit that I can understand Fox at least on the budget side. Please don’t get me wrong, I’m all for artistic freedom and big budgeted movies from talented directors and as a fan I would love to see how Ridley Scott tries to re-establish the grace of the franchise with one of the highest budgets ever, but filmmaking is (unfortunately) a business and the Alien series lost its prestigious status as a must-see event almost 20 years ago. So from a business point of view I can totally understand that Fox would prefer a lower budgeted version.
The ratings question is inexcusable, though. (Although of course one could argue that a PG 13 movie can be much scarier and more disturbing these days than just 10 years ago.)
ThomasCrown442
October 1st, 2010 at 11:55 am

I think movie fans get angry when a director or actor loses it because they’ve shown that they’re capable of more, therefore we expect more. When you’re a fan of somebody and they let you down, whether it be music, movies, sports, etc., it feels like a slap in the face. Is it unfair for fans to feel like a “contract” was broken? Yes, but thats the reality of it. Unfortunately, nobody bats a 1000, people are gonna strike out every now and then. Thats ok. When someone’s career takes a complete 180 and you wonder “what the hell happened” is when people get angry. They used to make classics but now either make mediocre films (Zemeckis, Burton) or outright terrible ones (M. Knight).

It seems like alot of the filmmakers that we grew up with, filmmakers who shaped modern cinema and made fucking classics, are all kinda washed up now without anyone to really replace them. Who’s gonna replace Lucas, Spielberg, Zemeckis, etc.? This is what scares me about modern cinema. Just when i think someone has stepped up and is ready to lead modern cinema, they fall flat on their faces . The Wachowski’s, M. Knight, Peter Jackson (King Kong was awful). Nolan’s the only one who has really stepped up his game and has made blockbusters that also happen to be incredible movies (unlike, say, Michael Bay). Scorsese and Cameron still make great movies but for how much longer?
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 12:38 pm

But why get angry? I don’t get it. They don’t suck on purpose. They’re probably just as mystified as you as to why their new shit doesn’t work as well as their old shit. How frustrating must it be to not be able to do something you used to be so good at. If you were ever truly a fan, can’t you find it in your heart to forgive the artist, even if you no longer like his art?

Then there are guys like Tim Burton who are wasting their talents on projects that are so clearly beneath them. But even then, why get angry? Just don’t see the movies. That’s what I do, and it’s served me well thus far. I still treasure all the good times we had together, though. Nothing can take BEETLEJUICE away from me.

I guess my point is, I got 99 problems and a bad movie ain’t one.
FTopel
October 1st, 2010 at 1:00 pm

I agree with Vern’s comment on a philosophical level. It’s just healthier to be positive. You don’t have to like everything someone does, but still, a movie you don’t like is not a personal betrayal equivalent of a terrorist act. We’re here to discuss the movies that mean something to us and help each other discover the rare obscure ones we wouldn’t have known about.

So, like Majestyk says. Don’t be angry. Just note that it’s not their best work and move on. Heck, as a fan, I’ll still watch any new Jackie Chan movie just in case it’s got a scene like the conveyor belt in The Myth.
ThomasCrown442
October 1st, 2010 at 1:12 pm

Just to clarify, I’m not agreeing with those who get angry at people for not making good movies. I’m just attempting to rationalize it. I can kinda see why people do get angry though. Its a fine line between anger and disappointment. I’m not angry that Tim Burton doesn’t make great movies anymore but I’m sure as hell disappointed. Sure I can ignore the last 5-10 years of his career and not get worked up over it but as movie fans, we naturally get worked up about movies. Isn’t that why were on this site? Getting worked up to the point of getting angry is ridiculous though. Lots of fans think they own the movies they love. Well, they don’t. The people that made them do. People who get personally offended because of midichlorians or whatever need to dial it down a notch. And I agree that if someone is making shitty movies now, it does not erase all the awesome ones they made before.
Mr. Subtlety
October 1st, 2010 at 1:26 pm

Forgive me if I failed to notice discussion of this issue, but I’d like to take a brief moment to mention that on September 28th, we lost one of the greats — Arthur Penn directed BONNIE AND CLYDE, ALICE’S RESTAURANT, LITTLE BIG MAN, NIGHT MOVES, and others throughout his long career. He hadn’t directed since 1996, but I feel that his passing probably merits some discussion of his amazing art (again, apologies if I merely missed it). I’ve always consdiered him one of the classic directors of his era, and one of the top tier workaday directors of all time. He could direct many styles and never really left a trademark to cultivate his status as an auteur, but nonetheless did solid work in nearly everything he tried.

He’ll be remembered for his revolutionary work in BONNIE AND CLYDE, but I think we’re sophisticated enough around these parts to consider his whole body of work. For me, I know LITTLE BIG MAN will always resonate with me as a truly funny, compassionate revisionist history (which I’ll always prefer to the real thing) and NIGHT MOVES is one of the most mysterious and affecting neo-noirs I’ve ever seen. I haven’t seen TARGET or DEAD OF WINTER but maybe I’ll segue into the Halloween season by watching em. Anyway, I just thought it was worth a mention here. If you’re unfamiliar with Penn’s work (and I seriously doubt anyone here is) use this as an exucuse to get out there and soak in one of the undersung greats.
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 1:30 pm

And just to clarify before RRA beats me to it with a comment about TRANSFORMERS 2, I’m not saying you have to like every movie or give a movie a pass or keep your mouth shut if you don’t have anything nice to say. Speak your mind, but think of the cumulative effect of your words and don’t let the negative outweigh the positive. Movies are a blessing, not a curse. I can fall victim to the temptation to harp on my pet-peeve movies, but I try not to let that the majority of my output. I’m sure someone will let me know if and when I fail.

I do think that a lot of this negativity comes from more and more movies being made based on established properties. People (myself included) have preexisting notions about how these movies (i.e., nerd shit) should be made, so we’re more likely to think they fall short. When STAR WARS came out, nobody could say they fucked up the character of Darth Vader because Darth Vader was being invented right in front of us. But now everybody thinks they know what Darth Vader is like, so any discrepancies will be noted and cataloged and lamented. There are fewer and fewer movies that are created out of whole cloth that we can just take as they are and not regret that they’re not as we wanted them to be.
Vern
October 1st, 2010 at 1:55 pm

I guess the thing I’m trying to say I’m against is making it so personal. Profound disappointment with your favorite director now making movies you hate is reasonable. But the thing I see on the internet with Lucas and to a lesser extent with Cameron is anger at him as a person, making fun of his appearance and insulting him personally. And of course the weird personal grudge thing where you can be talking about Chinese food or mowing the lawn and somehow you’re gonna bring up how George Lucas would ruin it. And also I’m against the bullying nicknames, even saying “Mikey Bay” and shit like that, I don’t really get that attitude.

But these are things that happen less in these comments than in other movie discussion places I look at, so I appreciate that. I’m not accusing any of you. Making fun of Cameron for the oil thing set it off because it strikes me as unfair. It’s not like he has nothing to do with that area. He spent 10 or 15 years funding and operating cutting edge underwater vehicles and robots. I think it’s reasonable to think he might have some ideas. Also, I heard that Kevin Costner has a company that built machines that we were being put to good use there. If Costner can help I’m sure Cameron can.

Also I think it’s more of a backlash against his ridiculously huge mainstream success than it is with Lucas. If AVATAR had been a failure I know at least a few of the people who hate it would be saying it was misunderstood and underrated.

He’s still wrong to dis FRIDAY THE 13TH 3-D, though.
Vern
October 1st, 2010 at 2:00 pm

and rewrite, please don’t be offended by the “nerd shit” title. I’m just teasing. I’m not trying to be the bad guys from REVENGE OF THE NERDS. People get mad at me sometimes but nobody seems to notice that I watch all of the fucking comic book movies. I think I even like more of them than the people I’m calling nerds do. I liked all three Punishers, I love Ang Lee’s Hulk, I didn’t think Spiderman 3, X-Men 3 or Blade 3 were as worthless as everybody said. Maybe I’m more of a nerd than you are.
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 2:05 pm

Vern, I believe the two main bad guys from REVENGE OF THE NERDS eventually became nerds themselves in the sequels. So be careful about staring into the abyss, etc.
ThomasCrown442
October 1st, 2010 at 2:20 pm

I know Ogre does in the Part 2: Nerds in Paradise. Not sure about Stan Gable/Ted McGinley though. I didn’t see part 3,4,5,6,7, or 8.
Mr. Majestyk
October 1st, 2010 at 2:34 pm

I think he got nerdified in Part 7: NERDS IN SPACE.
CJ Holden
October 1st, 2010 at 3:14 pm

And I would like to use this moment to suggest again that Vern’s next book (if he releases another one) should be about “nerd movies”. (Including reviews of the whole Harry Potter and Star Trek movie series.)
RRA
October 1st, 2010 at 4:36 pm

Vern – Since you say its not at me but the Internet, but you were looking at me when you typed it, let me say this. Unlike some people, I separate the artist from the person, as George Orwell told us we should.

GHOST WRITER was a hell of a slow-burn-but-heavy-payout thriller, awesome. I also wouldn’t lose sleep if Roman Polanski ever finally went to jail.

Regarding James Cameron, the guy is by all acounts a total asshole with an ego the size of Pandora, and the fact that he made Ed Harris cry during ABYSS shooting….I mean damn, that’s hardcore. All this can’t be discounted. I’m not allowed to laugh when he flat out called Glenn Beck an asshole? Yeah he’s right, Beck is an ass. But pot calling kettle black?

That said, James Cameron has made quite many good fucking movies, and can’t we agree that TRUE LIES, TITANIC, and AVATAR aren’t as good as TERMINATOR, T2, ALIENS, and ABYSS? Nevermind that I busted your balls about reviewing ABYSS last year to tie-in with AVATAR, right?

I think what seperates those two branches is that Cameron once could write hell of a decent story where aside from kickass action and thrills, he also gave you characters you gave a fuck about. I would even include his STRANGE DAYS screenplay.

I suppose what bugs me about AVATAR is how Cameron the writer has gone from telling stories about people which also involved FX to bigass FX spectacles about arcetypes. I believe you mentioned something about this in your AVATAR review, and I agree. That said, AVATAR (if you read some of my comments in your review thread) at its best was Edgar Rice Burroughs-esque escapist daydreaming and showed that nobody could cut a meaner (comprehensible) action scene than old man Cameron. I gave it a decent review, recommendable I suppose as the critics would fart.

So how exactly am I killing these “heroes”? Idoltry in the first place is what cause these Nerd Blacklashes. It happens to all the masters one way or another, especially Christopher Nolan sooner or later.

Hell you mentioned Lucas and Cameron, let me add another one: Oliver Stone.

Late 80s, early 90s Stone was to say it mildly was great. Always on the nose, about as subtle as sledgehammer and controversial take-it-or-leave-it with out opinions. But fuck it he was rather awesome whether it be NATURAL BORN KILLERS or PLATOON or JFK or NIXON and so forth. A babyboomer making movies about his generation. Nevermind that mother fucker wrote SCARFACE.

So what happened to him the last decade? ALEXANDER isn’t as bad as its reputation, but a skippsable mess (though AsimovLives swears to me the Final Cut is worth watching), WORLD TRADE CENTER was intentionally vanilla wafer bland, and….come to think of it, his last 3 movies including that WALL STREET sequel aren’t bad movies technically. They’re just utterly unremarkable and uninteresting. Like most television.

Also its not Mikey Bay. It’s Baynito Michaelini.

Mr. Subtlety – Personally I was pissed Tony Curtis’ passing got more coverage than Arthur Penn. No offense to Jamie Lee Curtis’ daddy, but Arthur Penn made 1970s cinema possible. Still I learned from the Curtis death which I didn’t know: He’s on the SGT. PEPPER album cover. Good job Tony.

CJ – Brilliant suggestion. Do it Vern.
Outlaw Vern
October 1st, 2010 at 4:43 pm

RRA – you’re not killing your heroes, I really meant that at the end when I said I went back and realized that your comments didn’t justify my response. But I do think that about 90% of Ain’t It Cool talkbackers do that. Give Chris Nolan one or two movies before they turn on him and obsess over him like our friend you-know-who here does the co-creator of Felicity.
The original Paul
October 1st, 2010 at 7:11 pm

Jones – I thought “Signs” was tosh but liked “The Village”, so it’s a matter of opinion. I will state to my grave that the only two things wrong with “The Village” were an incredibly over-pomped soundtrack (rising dramatic violin cues scored over scenes that were clearly intended to be humorous) and some really bad dialogue. I don’t have a problem with the story or the characters or the twist or the Shyamalan cameo, just those two things.

And comparing “The Running Man” or “Die Hard” or any other big budget action movie of that particular type with “Battle Royale”, which is a cuttingly satirical character piece, is like trying to compare a pair of underpants with an aubergine. In my humble opinion. The difference is that the rebellion / revolution bit at the end of “The Running Man” WAS the payoff. The bit at the end of “Battle Royale” was used to AVOID the payoff – and done in an incredibly contrived, irritating way, at least to me.

(In case I haven’t made it clear, I love 90% of “Battle Royale”. I think the kids are almost universally excellent, the compact five-minute character-sketches are great, the score is one of the best I’ve ever heard – I’ve certainly never heard “Handel’s Largo” used any better than in that movie – and the whole thing is paced, edited and directed expertly. I just wish they hadn’t wussed out on the ending.)

RRA – I agree with pretty much everything you say, apart from the bits about “The Abyss” (incredibly over-rated), “True Lies” (a little under-rated), and “Avatar” (never seen it). It’s interesting that you bring up Cameron though, because I was in the middle of an interesting discussion about his work. I gotta say, I’ve not met a single person who could sit through “The Abyss”. It’s one of those movies (”Munich” and “Casino Royale” being the other obvious examples) where if you look at the Internet, “everyone” seems to like them. And yet I don’t know a single person in real life who could sit through any of them. Is this some kind of a bizarre cultural thing? Or do you guys in America/ Australia/ Canada get different versions of these films than we do over here in Europe?

Vern – I agree that the personal attacks on Cameron, Lucas and his ilk are unwarranted, but I also think they’re made by a very small but vocal minority. I think it’s to do with the territorial instincts, etc. Honestly, I wouldn’t waste your time worrying about it. The good thing about idiots on the Internet is that everyone who matters KNOWS they’re idiots on the Internet. Let ‘em troll.

I also agree with you about Spiderman 3 – I think I enjoyed it more than the first two, simply because it embraced its soap-opera roots – but I think “worthless” is a pretty good description of “Blade 3″. I don’t think it’s terrible, I just didn’t see anything in it that I could point at and say “THIS is why you should watch this film!” I can barely remember Wesley Snipes or Ryan Reynolds in it, and when the two “leads” are so forgettable, it’s rarely a good sign.

As for X3, I’ll have to revisit your review of that to see what you liked about it, because I saw it fairly recently and hated it. I’ve never read any of the comic books or had exposure to any X-Men stuff except the first two films, but I hated what it did to the characters of those films. People whose relationships had been painstakingly crafted in X1 and X2 were reduced to throwing animated fireballs at each other in X3, often for no apparent reason other than someone somewhere thought it would look “cool”. It took everything that made the first two films so good, and stripped it away – the characters, the politics, even the subtext. (Unless there’s some kind of magic syringe that turns black people into white people?)

And in case it’s not obvious from my recent diatribes on what films like “Battle Royale” and “The Tournament” and various other films, I am easily disappointed. But generally speaking it’s not with a specific director, it’s when a movie clearly HAS potential but doesn’t quite live up to it. (Ok, “has potential” might be a little ambitious for “The Tournament”, given my criticisms of it. But you guys know what I mean.)
The original Paul
October 1st, 2010 at 7:20 pm

Oh for God’s sake… that post above was about one and a half “comment boxes” long before I posted it!
RRA
October 1st, 2010 at 7:45 pm

The original Paul – don’t know your situation, but I always liked ABYSS and prefer the Special Edition cut which I argue is a superior edit beyond just whether one or not liked that admittedly hokey ending.

Also, how is your Seagal filmography viewing going so far? Gotten to FIRE DOWN BELOW yet?
FTopel
October 1st, 2010 at 9:19 pm

I joined the discussion less on the personal attack front and more on the sheer negativity front. It’s not just an internet thing unfortunately. I live and work in a community where people just think it’s cool to be as mean as possible if they don’t like something. There are many complex factors of which the internet is only one, but I am of Vern’s mind that it’s simply better to have perspective. It’s more peaceful and happy personally and it’s better for others too.

Yes, we’re all passionate about movies and that’s good. Majestyk, I agree, movies are a blessing. We get to pay $10 to watch something that cost millions to make. We also live in a country where we can afford to go to movies, watch them at home and have internet to discuss them. Some people don’t have running water. ThomasCrown, I also agree, the people spending millions are taking the real risk. All that’s at stake for us is a couple hours of entertainment or boredom.

So some of us won’t watch Avatar again, and some won’t bother with the next Tim Burton movie out of personal preference. I’m glad they all exist for us to choose from.
The original Paul
October 2nd, 2010 at 1:07 pm

RRA – I haven’t watched a new one after “Kill Switch”. That and “Submerged” have put me off a bit. At least “Against the Dark” was better than expected, although still not good.

I think I’m going to have to go for a good one before I lose motivation altogether.

Seagal roundup, from best to worst:

“Marked for Death” – still a personal favorite of mine. Great soundtrack, some good fight scenes, and Keith David. Basil Wallace is easily the best antagonist Seagal has ever had, at least of the films I’ve seen.

“Exit Wounds” – twisty, turny, with some great comedy beats that manage not to be irritating for the most part, plus some classic action movie moments (my personal much-quoted favorite bit being when Seagal shoots a helicopter in the DOOR and it instantly turns into a gigantic fireball.) This is by no means the best of Seagal’s pictures, but it’s definitely one of the most fun.

“Fire Down Below” – Another personal favorite, this one takes Seagal out of the city and puts him in the American backwoods. Co-stars Whistler from “Blade” and the blonde from CSI, both of whom do the script justice. The only reason I haven’t rated this one higher is because I think it loses it a bit at the end (the sudden traitor revelation makes no damn sense, and I hate the FBI agent’s death right at the end – it’s just negligent on the part of Seagal to let that happen). Still one of my faves though.

“Executive Decision” – Seagal plays a supporting role in this one, but it’s still one of his best films. Makes the similar “Air Force One” look scrappy and badly-plotted (which, to be fair, it is.)

“Under Siege” and “Under Siege 2″ – The first one has Tommy Lee Jones, the second Eric Bogosian. The first is undeniably the better movie, but the second keeps up the sheer entertainment factor for longer (and is also officially the best movie ever made for the drinking game “spot the phallic symbols”). I can’t really separate them in terms of personal preference, so I’ve put ‘em both together.

“On Deadly Ground” – I gotta be honest, this is the first one on this list that bored me. Even a scenery-chewing Michael Caine and a great bar fight can’t save it from being a little humdrum. As a Seagal flick it’s one of his most personal, but as a movie in general it’s definitely sub-par compared to the ones I’ve mentioned above. I think it’s worth seeing as a curiosity, but it definitely wastes a great cast.

“Against the Dark” – yeah, it’s still better than the ones below. Massively flawed, I think it’s still genuinely more interesting than the likes of “The Glimmer Man” and “Hard to Kill”. (Although I definitely wouldn’t fault anybody for disagreeing with me there – I can see why others dislike it so much.) And talking of which…

“The Glimmer Man” – this one just bored me, but unlike “On Deadly Ground” it doesn’t have the compensations of an excellent bar fight or Michael Caine. This one’s for diehard Seagal fans only. I have nothing more to say because it made so little impression on me. I didn’t actively dislike it, unlike…

“Submerged” – it doesn’t surprise me that this one went through the wringer during the editing process. I think it COULD have been good, there are flashes of some better than it is, but the final product, when it’s not laugh-out-loud hilariously bad, is just incredibly boring. There’s no interesting characters, no good fight scenes, and the whole thing is just ruined by avid farts. It actually has a very good B-list cast – Christine Adams, Nick Brimble and Vinnie Jones all feature – but they’re pretty much wasted here.

“Hard to Kill” – I think it’s fair to say that this is the only one on which Vern and I absolutely disagree. I watched the last ten minutes recently and thought it was ok. The trouble is, everything else about it is wrong. The main problem I have with this movie, apart from the terrible score that sounds like something that was put together on a computer in the space of half an hour or so, is that despite having a few good ideas there’s really nothing entertaining or exciting about it. It’s incredibly dumb, but then so was “Exit Wounds”, and at least that was fun to watch for the comedy, bizarre action sequences, and Scooby-Doo-esque twists. Nothing about “Hard to Kill” is fun.

“The Patriot” – Yep, it’s that bad. I can’t think of a single reason to watch it. It has no characters. It barely has a plot. It has no emotional hook. It has no action sequences (seriously). It may not be the worst, technically speaking, of the lot, but I never thought I’d see less entertaining Seagal film than this one. Until…

“Kill Switch” – Sleazy, unpleasant, gritty, with terrible action scenes and no likeable characters, this is like watching a stranger get beaten up outside a pub for two straight hours. Just horrible.
RRA
October 2nd, 2010 at 2:42 pm

Paul – To be fair, we did warn you about some of them so…we warned you.

When you get your Seagal mojo back, check out URBAN JUSTICE.
The original Paul
October 2nd, 2010 at 4:23 pm

RRA – well to be fair, I knew what I was getting myself into. Vern’s review of “Kill Switch” pretty much nailed that one IMO. And “Submerged” was always going to be terrible, although VERY occasionally it rose to the level of “unintentionally hilarious”. I still don’t think “Against the Dark” is quite as bad as it’s made out to be, although I couldn’t in good conscience recommend it to anybody except the most die-hard Seagal fan (and, judging by how much Vern disliked it, not all of them.)

But it’s not all bad. Of the twelve / thirteen films I’ve watched** (which ain’t bad going in itself) I’d definitely recommend six of them to any action movie fan, recommend the seventh with strong reservations, and have good things to say about all but the last five. It’s not as though getting through them has been a totally joyless experience.

(**I cannot in good conscience say that I’ve “watched” The Patriot, since I’ve never actually managed to finish it. But when you get through an hour of a film and nothing of any apparent significance has happened, I think you are justified in thinking that there’s not much point in going on with the rest of it.)
Stu
October 2nd, 2010 at 6:07 pm

We all like a bit of Roddy Piper round here, right?
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/de3008ff0e/rowdy-roddy-piper-fights-childhood-obesity
RRA
October 2nd, 2010 at 9:29 pm

Stu – Next time you see a fatty eating a candy bar, tell ‘em you got two things to do.

But you’re all out of gum.
RRA
October 3rd, 2010 at 8:09 pm

Also new VENTURE BROS. tonight, which honestly looks like the sort of joke set-up that either will absolutely deliver or underwhelm to the point that negative opinions about the previous episode might get reversed in retrospect.

I expect lots of Dick jokes. Since you know, private eye, private detective, gumshoe, P.I., Slick Dick, etc.
Brendan
October 3rd, 2010 at 9:14 pm

HANK HAD SEX! Instant classic.
RRA
October 3rd, 2010 at 9:43 pm

Brendan – I know. As I thought, episode was episode but funny but I could see why a few people wouldn’t think much of it because of the gimmickyness.

But that ending made the episode. So Hank.

Also, dammit now someday I want a Shore Leave/Alchemist team-up episode. It would be most awesomely gay since Freddy Mercury or Neil Patrick Harris.

P.S. – I thought also funny, if cruel and creepy, how that one particular character grew up in basically in Jack Nicholson’s shoes.
Mouth
October 3rd, 2010 at 10:59 pm

One thing has stuck out to me in the above chat. dna wrote:
***A history of violence
. . . it doesn`t go below the surface and is nothing more than a competent executed b-movie. I guess I don`t get it. One of Cronenbergs lesser movies, and a damn shame that critics calls it one of his best. It`s like they all heard that he was a great director and as soon as he makes a movie that doesn`t requiere brains or barf-bags, they hail him as a master of cinema. It`s the emperors new clothes, I tell ya!*** [multiple sics]

I recommend you watch it one more time, chief. Do me a favor and pay close attention; have an open mind about its narrative and tone. A History of Violence is one of the top 10 films of the 21st century thus far. Here’s one phrase that might help color your thinking regarding its symbolic richness as you view it: Global War on Terror.

***************************
Ha, I just noticed the little cartoon picture at the top of this thread. So nerdy.
CJ Holden
October 4th, 2010 at 1:17 am

“What’s with the whip?” “It came with the hat. It’s a detective whip.”
The new Venture Bros episode was the best of this season half so far and delivered on both sides (Gags and story). And man, every time you think all dirty secrets of Rusty’s past where revealed, something like THIS happens! I was also glad that The Order Of The Triad returned, even if it was just 2/3 of them.
dna
October 4th, 2010 at 1:34 am

- mouth

I`ve wached it several times and I don`t see any subtext on global war on terror. Unless the point is that USA has a violent past, which will come back and haunt it.

I don`t really want to go into a political discussion, but I would love to hear your take on A History of Violence and it`s symbolic richness. I suspect that my perspective on 9/11, the invasion of Iraq and The Global War on terror differs greatly from what this movie might have to say. Maybe that`s why I find it hollow. Maybe not. I disagree with the political subtext of The Dark Knight, but still finds it a valid, interesting and intelligent description of USA post 9/11. It made me think and I aplaud it for that. A History Of Violence didn`t.

But I look forward to reading your thoughts on the movie. I feel like the only nerd in cyperspace who can`t grasp the brilliance of A History of Violence. It`s kinda lonely, you know?
Mouth
October 4th, 2010 at 4:56 am

Allow me to preface this all by noting that no work of art possesses exclusivity of meaning. Also, AHOV is not a fun movie. It’s primary function is not entertainment, in my opinion. It is a work of art, not merely a movie.

Well, it’s an allegory, dna. There’s not necessarily much subtext or political positioning, just a nicely fitting allegorical tale of the US’s fight against bad guys from the East, whether Cronenberg deliberately made it as such or not. (If you’re curious, I arrived at this conclusion unassisted during the car ride home after the first time I saw it, which was before I became a federal employee.) Bah, I’m typing on my phone right now, about to go back to work to prep for, well, one more trip back East. I have to refine my team’s plan to kill or capture several bad guys before Thanksgiving. Talk about a list you don’t want to be on! I’ll have to finish my analysis later today.
dna
October 4th, 2010 at 6:24 am

- mouth

Well, one has to assume that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 to percieve A History of Violence as an allegory. Which I don`t.

Don`t get me wrong. I like AHOV a lot and have watched it several times. I just think it`s overrated and it kind of rubs me the wrong way when a lot of critics call it one of his best.

I guess AHOW reminds me of one of my favorite movies STRAW DOGS, it is just not as complex, uncompromising and mindfucking as Peckinpahs masterpiece. AHOW makes you root for violent retribution, aknowledges violence as an aprhodisiac and tries to leave the audience in a moral vacuum, but doesn`t really dare to go all the way. I know it`s not fair to compare two totally unrelated movies like that, but that was kind of what I expected from AHOW, mostly based on the hype surrounding the movie when it was finally released in my country. Hype like “too controversiel for cannes”, and “Cronenbergs masterpiece”.

Well, I`ve seen it at least 5 times since, with lowered expectations, and I still don`t understand the impact it must have had on those who love it.
jsixfingers
October 4th, 2010 at 3:33 pm

So now thats its official I’d like to hear Vern’s thoughts on Zack Snyder being given the Superman gig. I haven’t been paying attention to the rest of this discussion but I read that story today and well…nerd shit right?
RRA
October 4th, 2010 at 4:09 pm

Well I’m glad the fucking nerds, including some in this thread, got your dream choice.

Just if the movie is indeed limp, don’t be bitchin’. This post is timestamped and I’ll be bringing it back up when it comes out.

I’ll be like a Pro Wrestling heel. I’ll enjoy rubbing it in.
GoodBadGroovy
October 4th, 2010 at 4:17 pm

I’m pretty happy with Snyder getting the gig, mainly because I’d just like to see a bad-ass live action superman film. We have the technology, I want to see Superman having superfights on the big screen. I don’t want any more origin story, I don’t care much about his relationships problems with Lois or any of the Daily Planet stuff. I want Superman fighting legions of super-villains; I want to see him struggling with having all this power and the people that fear him for it. Comic Book stuff, basically. The Superman films have been far too “reality” based for my liking.
RRA
October 4th, 2010 at 4:30 pm

Since when does Snyder know anything about “badass”?

Vern, sure. Zach? Since when?
DT
October 4th, 2010 at 5:52 pm

Snyder makes entertaining movies with a lot of chutzpah so I say it’s a good choice. Although he does sort of ask for the criticism that gets lobbed at him when he says things like Superman is “kind of awesome.” (see original Deadline breaking news) Oh Zach, you incorrigible frat boy.
As long as they don’t make the mistake of trying to remake Richard Donner’s Superman (like the last one) and instead go with a new interpretation of the Man of Steel, I’d say I’m optimistic. In the best case scenario Snyder will balance out Nolan’s seriousness with some of his WHIZ-BANG-SLOOOOOOOW visuals and Nolan will inject just enough intellectual gravitas into the thing to make it more meaningful. If Snyder wasn’t there and it was Aronofsky or Reeves or Jones we might get a “Superman, but Gritty!” story…and that’s getting old.
Someone over at Twitch remarked that it would be cool to get Terrence Stamp to reprise his role as Zod and I’m all for that.
Vern
October 4th, 2010 at 7:11 pm

Well, I got nothing invested in Superman, but it sounds like a good fit to me. If Nolan’s producing you don’t want another auteur like Aranofsky, but you don’t just want a shitty hack. Snyder is a good in-between, a guy who’s not as smart as Nolan but has a strong sense of the cinematic. I think he’ll make a great team with Goyer. He wouldn’t have made as good of a BATMAN BEGINS as Nolan, but he would’ve made sure Batman had a big fight with those ninjas before sliding down the mountain, and that’s what I want to see here.
RRA
October 4th, 2010 at 8:19 pm

Vern – How ironic for you to write that. Rather depressing really.

Because if you think hard, this situation in a way does remind one of TRANSFORMERS.

OK I admit, that’s a low blow. I mean surely this SUPERMAN will be good, right?

I mean its not Hamlet.
Brendan
October 4th, 2010 at 9:24 pm

RRA- Dude, why? You think that Chris Nolan and his brother will just shit out some quicky, lowest common denominator pap? No, absolutely fucking not. They’ll put together a script that is, if nothing else really interesting, and Snyder will shoot the shit out of it.

Seriously dude, lighten up.
RRA
October 4th, 2010 at 9:37 pm

Brendan – Because they’re bullet proof, right?

Besides I thought you guys liked that last STAR TREK movie? Didn’t those same writers pen TRANSFORMERS 2?

Just consider it.

Besides if I’m wrong, fine I’ll admit it. I’m fucked anyway because these postings can’t be deleted. But regardless, if I’m wrong I’ll admit I was wrong.

Rather look stupid and get a good movie than be right and get a turkey.
Brendan
October 4th, 2010 at 10:08 pm

RRA- I wouldn’t call them ‘bulletproof’ but I’d argue they’ve never made a bad movie, and Goyer has a great track record with superhero movies (by which I mean Blade and Blade 2 are good) and Snyder has some narrative issues, but the motherfucker is one of the strongest visual artists working right now.

What does Star Trek have to do with anything? They wrote one script that worked out alright, and thye wrote one script that didn’t (although I’d argue that the worst stuff in that movie came out of Bay’s ‘let everyone riff endlessly, isn’t this shit hilarious?’ tendencies). It happens. The Coen brothers wrote Fargo, and they also wrote the Ladykillers. Shit happens.

Not sure what relevance that has to Superman though.
jsixfingers
October 4th, 2010 at 10:08 pm

Dear Internet,

Why does shit always have to be ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and ‘good’ and ‘bad’. Can’t movies just be fuckin movies, and if you enjoy a movie, great. If you don’t, well it was only 2 hours of your life so get over it and shut the fuck up already.

I’m all about debating a director’s merits when it comes to them tackling a project, but there isn’t going to be any way to interpret the finished product until we we watch it. Even then, no matter what the fuck Zack Snyder manages to pull off, some people are going to hate this movie. Some people are going to love it. Thats just fact.

Opinions are great and all, but everybody’s got one and yours ain’t no more valid then anyone elses.

Regards, J SixFingers
RRA
October 4th, 2010 at 10:11 pm

Brendan – I noticed for Goyer, you didn’t mention BLADE TRINITY. Was that concious?

jsixfingers – Well you’re right about that. We all are guessing really. As I said, I could be wrong. Right? Hell Vern wouldn’t review MONSTER SQUAD until we ganged up on him and hey turns out, he agreed with us.

On the flipside, I recommended DOOMSDAY, which he hated. Shit happens.

That said, can’t you blame some Internet people for their negative knee-jerk gut reaction earlier today to this news?
jsixfingers
October 4th, 2010 at 10:27 pm

RRA – Can’t I? Sure. Do I? No.

I absolutely get why Superman/comic fans who haven’t cared for Snyder’s films are bummed that he will be helming a project they are excited about. Still, reserve just the tiniest iota of judgement if you can. I don’t care if you hate Zack Snyder’s entire body of work with every molecule of your being. He still could make a Superman film that just might blow you away. Or not. I’m just saying, its all just entertainment. If you aren’t entertained quit watching.

What happened to the excitement and enthusiasm of looking forward to films? There’s so much negativity lobbied at some projects even in pre-fucking-production stages it boggles my mind.
Brendan
October 4th, 2010 at 10:27 pm

RRA- I specifically said that I vouch for Blade and Blade 2, implying that other stuff by Goyer is suspect. The guy’s iffy, but his Nolan collaborations have been great (yes, I know for some reason some of you guys don’t like Batman Begins and Dark Knight, but c’mon at least admit that you’re in a minority and that the movies are at least INTERESTING, and ambitious) so yeah, I think that Supes is in good hands. I think the right choice has been made on all fronts and I’m looking forward to what WB is doing with their characters, like GREEN LANTERN.
CJ Holden
October 4th, 2010 at 11:35 pm

You know my opinion on Zack Snyder and the Nolan’s take on Batman, so all I’m gonna say is that they have to do a hell of a job to convince me to watch that next Superman movie.
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 12:28 am

jsixfingers – Ever had a buddy who said he would do something but repeatedly didn’t get around to it? After awhile, would you depend on him?

I just been absolutely underwhelmed (understatement) by Snyder’s cinematic involvements so far.

Brendan – Apologies then since I didn’t get that assumption from your posting. Sorry.

Speaking of which, man I actually hope AsimovLives doesn’t come around here today after hearing that news.

He’s gonna be pissed.
Vern
October 5th, 2010 at 12:36 am

RRA – come on bud, you can’t pull that Hamlet shit on me. I’ve written in detail about each of Snyder’s movies, so you know how I feel about his entire body of work (overall positive). I have already explained why I think your comparison to Michael Bay doesn’t fit (short version: both know how to make pretty pictures, Snyder knows how to use them to tell a story, Bay uses them to ruin any attempt at telling a story). I have also explained why I think Snyder will be good for this movie and with this collaboration.

So how is that saying “It’s not supposed to be Hamlet”? No, I’m saying “I think this will be good, like Hamlet!”

We now have a few years of documentation of my misgivings about Snyder, but also what I like about him and that I’ve enjoyed all of his movies, so yes, him doing Superman working from a recipe by the makers of what I consider the best comic book movies ever made (Blade, Blade 2, Dark Knight) is a good match that should take advantage of his strengths and help out with his weaknesses.
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 1:14 am

Vern – Nothing personal with the Hamlet shit, I just wanted a little zing to make my knee-jerk point.

Regardless, I’ll tell you what. I will give this a chance, just because of you. You were right about URBAN JUSTICE, you were right about UNIVERSAL SOLDIER: REGENERATION, you were right about I COME IN PEACE, and you were right about the last DIE HARD movie.
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 1:19 am

Also, thoughts anyone on Tony Gilroy directing BOURNE 4?
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 1:43 am

Deadline, in a weirdly off-handed comment, reported that WB allegedly offered SUPERMAN to Ben Affleck to direct, and he turned it down.

And Kevin Smith weeps.
Mouth
October 5th, 2010 at 2:45 am

dna, if you’re still curious, I nerded out a little bit on the A History of Violence review, available in the Viggo tags. Best to keep it separate and leave the Hamlet discussions here, dontcha know.

I’d love to see Julie Taymor get a crack at Hamlet, see if she can duplicate the success she had with Titus Andronicus. In fact, I’d give anything to see a Taymor Superman. Maybe the script calls for Clark Kent to be disabled by a kryptonite blow to the head, and Snyder can let Taymor guest direct the segment where he’s in a debilitated daze.
The Limey
October 5th, 2010 at 4:57 am

Jude Law for Zod!

And Mouth, isn’t Julie Taymor doing the Bono/Edge/Broadway Spider-Man musical?
Mouth
October 5th, 2010 at 5:07 am

Holy shit, you’re right, The Limey. I was just being facetious about the Superman thing. Taymor’s Spider-Man on stage might begin this December? ?!?!!!! Now I need to schedule my next trip to Manhattan.
heimp
October 5th, 2010 at 10:03 am

Hopefully that Jon Peters guy will still be attached and we’ll finally get that gay robot butler and those polar bears guarding the fortress of solitude…
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 10:34 am

I like how Patrick Warburton was on ESPN today and they mention all his voice-over work.

Except VENTURE BROS. What a diss.
AsimovLives
October 5th, 2010 at 11:32 am

I was never disapointed with Christopher Nolan before. Until i learned that it was anounced that Zack The Hack Snyder was hired to direct. Worst news of the week bar none. And i’m not even much of a Superman fan. I’m now calling this movie SUPERMAN FUBAR.

On the plus side, it’s not Tony Scott. But it still sucks.
Hunter D.
October 5th, 2010 at 12:00 pm

For the record, here is how Transformers 2 was written; the writer’s strike.

The Star Trek guys had just started outlining the basic beats of the script when the WGA struck. So, Bay went down to ILM and did previs on all the action scenes. Then, when the strike finished, he came back to the writers, handed them a DVD with all of the action scenes, locked them in a hotel room for a month, and told them to write a “story” around the previs work that he had already done. Then he got the dude who wrote Scream 3 to slather tranny-balls jokes all over it.

Seriously, that is how that movie was “written.” I also have it on good authority that the screenplay budget for that film was TEN MILLION DOLLARS.

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how you get to robot heaven.
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 12:12 pm

Hunter D. – Unfortunately, that wouldn’t shock me at all if the truth basically happened in that vein.

AsimovLives – You know Chris Nolan said somewhere he’s a fan of Bay, right?
CJ Holden
October 5th, 2010 at 12:21 pm

RRA: Maybe Warburton just forgot it. Because, well, he is in EVERYTHING! And if you do voice work for everything, you tend to forgot even the important things.
Mouth
October 5th, 2010 at 12:29 pm

Hunter D.’s story makes me sad. And angry.

Angry enough to do the mature thing and taunt that HT weirdo in the Face//Off thread? Maybe.
Mouth
October 5th, 2010 at 12:31 pm

RRA, Christopher Nolan just said that to enhance his chances of getting an invitation to the next Playboy Mansion shindig.
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 12:40 pm

Mouth – Or get a discount on a new red Ferrari.

CJ Holden – That program did inform me that Warburton is working the new SCOOBY DOO program. Which brings up awkward multi-verse questions, especially since we know what happened to the Scooby Doo gang-stand-ins in the VB universe.
CJ Holden
October 5th, 2010 at 12:48 pm

Do me a favor and don’t mention that new Scooby Doo series in front of me or I, as the Scooby Doo fan that I am, will start to act like AsimovLives in a Star Trek 2009 related talkback. It’s hard to believe, but this must be the worst thing that was ever part of the Scooby Doo franchise! And it doesn’t even have Scrappy, Flim Flam or the Harlem Globetrotters! (Although I gotta admit that it’s maybe the visually most stunning cartoon on TV right now, despite its ugly character design. See? I can’t even say something positive about it, without adding something negative.)
RRA
October 5th, 2010 at 1:46 pm

CJ – I always thought weird how a late 1960s cartoon made to cash-in on ARCHIE and hippies turned out to have a ridiculous long life-span on TV this side of other supposed old school toon “classics” like LOONY TOONS, Mickey Mouse, and Tom & Jerry.

Or the most surprising bit for me: Frank Welker has worked SCOOBY DOO since the very beginning. I guess Slimmer really is immortal.
CJ Holden
October 5th, 2010 at 2:10 pm

Yeah, even I don’t know what it is, but they did obviously something right when they created Scooby Doo.
Charles
October 5th, 2010 at 3:53 pm

Man I have been out of the loop for a couple of days, but it looks like Snyder has got the gig. Now that he is on board I am sure the next step will be to cast Supes. I have admit I have never liked Superman the way I like Batman. I have always found him and many of his adversaries to be cartoonish in comparison to the dark night, but I think Snyder will make a fun movie.
Charles
October 5th, 2010 at 3:58 pm

The sadest thing about Hunter’s Transformers 2 story is how I am in no way surprised. Actualy, I take that back. I am surprised that much work went into it.
Mouth
October 5th, 2010 at 4:20 pm

Zing!

No, wait, Charles, the saddest thing about the story is that if Mike Bay ever reads it himself, he will do so from atop a bed of $1000 bills, modern-day Scrooge McDuck-style, a $5000 cocaine-lined bill gently protruding from his nose.
Charles
October 5th, 2010 at 4:37 pm

Mouth, your right that is even sadder, but I doubt Bay reads. I am sure he pays someone to do that for him.
Mr. Subtlety
October 5th, 2010 at 4:38 pm

Are we really mad that Snyder is directing SUPERMAN? Seems like exactly the sort of thing he could excel at. Big, expensive action movie with very limited subtext and huge, primary-color charicatures at the center. The guy CAN stage an action scene, that much is clear. What more do you want? (full disclosure: I actually really enjoyed Singer’s take on Supes, but the character isn’t particularly special to me).
Mouth
October 5th, 2010 at 4:54 pm

This “nerd shit” deal is out of control. Vern must be laughing. I’m ashamed for all of us. Good DAY, sirs!
GoodBadGroovy
October 6th, 2010 at 7:34 am

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/10/05/david-goyers-superman-story-revealed/

Damn it if this is true I’ve just lost interest in this project again. So the film will mostly be Clark Kent being a journalist around the world deciding to be a superhero or not. :-/ Yeah it’s all good and interesting for a comic arc to explore, but with the time and money it takes to make a blockbuster film I really wish they were doing something else. Also, whatever way you spin it, it’s an origin story, again! It also possibly excludes a grown up actor from the role, so no John Hamm as Superman :(. And the comment about the script being rushed and not finished is shitty as well, ffs. Oh and the villain is Zod again, boring as hell.
Hunter D.
October 6th, 2010 at 10:51 am

So basically, we put more effort into this conversation than Goyer et al put into writing the story?
Stu
October 6th, 2010 at 11:25 am

If that pitch is true, I doubt the movie is really just about Clark Kent as a reporter trying to decide to be Superman or not. I mean, at least not any more than Begins was about “Bruce Wayne travelling the world trying to figure out how to fight crime in Gotham”. Maybe we’ll get the first third of the story about that, and for what it’s worth, I approve of taking the approach from Birthright where Clark’s earnestness/boy scoutiness is still tempered with him being a modern young guy with not quite a definite idea of what he wants to be.
Mr. Subtlety
October 6th, 2010 at 12:37 pm

So… Darren Aronofsky is directing WOLVERINE 2? Can that possibly be true? And if so… I mean, he’s great and all and I’m sure he has a great WOLVERINE movie in him… but…why?

http://cinemablend.com/new/Darren-Aronofsky-Chosen-To-Direct-Wolverine-2-21025.html
Mr. Majestyk
October 6th, 2010 at 1:40 pm

Hugh Jackman: “Dude, I shaved my head and hung out in a space bubble with a tree that used to be your wife. You owe me.”
Mr. Majestyk
October 6th, 2010 at 1:50 pm

(Please don’t take my snarky comment as evidence that I didn’t like THE FOUNTAIN. I’m not dead inside so I liked it quite a bit.)
Stu
October 6th, 2010 at 2:42 pm

Maybe he’s remaking The Wrestler, but with the main character being Wolverine?

“Goddamn they don’t make em’ like they used to.”
“Fuckin’ 80’s man, best shit ever!”
“Then that Liefeld pussy had to come around & ruin it all.”
“Like theres something wrong with just wanting comics drawn with anatomical accuracy?”
“I’ll tell you somethin’, I hate the fuckin’ 90’s.”
“Fuckin’ 90’s sucked.”
“Fuckin’ 90’s sucked.”

“I just want to say to you all tonight I’m very grateful to be here. A lot of people told me that I’d never stab a guy in the face with metal claws again and that’s all I do.”
Mouth
October 6th, 2010 at 7:54 pm

Well, shit. Boss tells me I’m going away on business for a while to some shithole in the cold mountains of another hemisphere. Yup, that’s why I make the big bucks, chasing smelly bearded asshole extremists in snowy valleys while everyone else gets to watch the World Series.

Thanks for making life more enjoyable lately. Have a good autumn/winter, everyone.
Jareth Cutestory
October 7th, 2010 at 11:26 am

Based on the information included in his post, I think that Mouth may be a bounty hunter. Possibly a bounty hunter for justice.
Mr. Majestyk
October 7th, 2010 at 11:44 am

I prefer to think that Mouth is a member of Val Kilmer’s unnamed ass-kicking unit from SPARTAN. He’s just trying to get to the tall grass.

Holy shit, I just remembered that Kilmer was actually planting grass at his home out in the country. Layers, dude. Layers.