As a kid I was always a big fan of horror and anything that required me sneaking into the living room to watch late night HBO. Tales From the Crypt fit that bill. Granted, by the time TFtC hit the airwaves I was 13 and didn't have to do much sneaking, it was still on late enough that I didn't want to wake the old people in the house. Now Warner Bros. is releasing them on DVD. Season six just hit the shelves recently, and while the show only lasted a total of eight seasons, and didn't pack the same punch in those later years, it was always fun!
Season Six features 15 classic episodes from 1994, featuring many stars of the silver screen, as well as some future stars waiting for their big break, including Benicio Del Toro, Sherilynn Fenn, Isabella Rosellini, Bruce Davison, Isaac Hayes, Corey Feldman and many others. In The Assassin, Corey Feldman and Jonathan Banks play Hitmen out to kill one of their own who has gone into hiding; capturing his wife just might bring him out of hiding, but how far has this hitman gone to hide his identity? The story has all of the fun and camp that you remember from both the EC Comics' title, as well this great HBO gem.
In "Let the Punishment Fit the Crime," Catherine O'Hara stars as an ambulance chasing lawyer who just might have met her match in a town that has a low tolerance for crime. It harkens back to the old Twilight Zone episodes as it builds some nice suspense with a fun conclusion. Catherine O'Hara gives a fun performance in an episode that has a nice twisty ending as you would expect from TFtC.
These episodes are fun, but not as scary as I wanted to remember. Of course, I seem to remember the early seasons having more scares, but that could just be one of those charished memories that don't live into adulthood. However, scary or not, the show still packs some really nice suspense, and fun twists. As always, the Crypt Keeper is our highly entertaining and ghoulish host. Most of the bits framing each episode in this season use pop culture references, such as dressing as Forest Gump, or playing games with William Sadler's Death (Yes, the very same Death from the highly underrated Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey). In fact, the appearance of Death was a highlight for me, like that missing piece of Bill and Ted lore.
Sure, there are a couple of episodes that feature some gore, however, it's 13-year-old gore and not quite what it used to be. On the other hand, any viewer interested in this set should already know that. It was ahead of its time, at the time, but time was starting to catch up by 1994. Overall, this set is certainly worth getting and watching on those late nights, with the lights out and some popcorn at the ready!
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Monday, August 6, 2007
Pathfinder Loses Its Way!
The Unrated Pathfinder DVD came out last week, and I've had a chance to give it a once over. At first I thought it was an unfortunate happenstance that this film came out at roughly the same time as 300. Both are based on comic books published by Dark Horse, and both have an extremely stylized vision. Unfortunately Pathfinder's vision is like a blind man in the dark.
For something that I expected to be mildly entertaining, I was fighting the urge to turn it off. The tale in itself should have been one to hold my interest as my own heritage includes both Vikings (My family tree on my Father's side can be traced back to Leif Erricson) as well as Native American's, being 1/16 Blackfoot on my mother's side. A tale of Viking conquest in the new world should have been right up my alley, but it was not.
The meat of the story is that a Native American woman finds a Scandinavian boy alone and scared on an abandoned Viking warship. She takes this boy in and raises him as her own child. We flash forward to the boy as a young man, still not fully accepted by his tribe. Then, a second wave of Vikings invades and a battle ensues.
Unfortunately, the battle is rather uninteresting. Not to mention the fact that the Vikings are given subtitles while the natives speak English in a story that precedes the English arriving in the new world. Why not subtitle everyone, or perhaps subtitle no one? In this it begins its sloppiness. Add in CG blood that is the only real color in the film and it's not even interesting to look at. The film has a blue-grey color palette, but doesn't work with fake blood. The blood should match the rest of the style and it does not.
Clancy Brown gives a decent performance, but that's about all this film has to offer. The action is quick and looks choreographed, and most of the performances are bland. And so, not having seen the theatrical cut, it is tough to say what might make it Unrated. And if this is edgier, I now understand why there was such a minor media push for this film theatrically ... it just never gets to where it needs to be. The costumes are great, the color palette looks interesting, but these are all distractions from the fact that the film has so little going for it in terms of story and filmmaking. With a tale such as this, I would like to see the action, but the camera moves around it all so quickly that much of it is a stylized blur. Rent it if you must, but don't say I didn't warn you.
For something that I expected to be mildly entertaining, I was fighting the urge to turn it off. The tale in itself should have been one to hold my interest as my own heritage includes both Vikings (My family tree on my Father's side can be traced back to Leif Erricson) as well as Native American's, being 1/16 Blackfoot on my mother's side. A tale of Viking conquest in the new world should have been right up my alley, but it was not.
The meat of the story is that a Native American woman finds a Scandinavian boy alone and scared on an abandoned Viking warship. She takes this boy in and raises him as her own child. We flash forward to the boy as a young man, still not fully accepted by his tribe. Then, a second wave of Vikings invades and a battle ensues.
Unfortunately, the battle is rather uninteresting. Not to mention the fact that the Vikings are given subtitles while the natives speak English in a story that precedes the English arriving in the new world. Why not subtitle everyone, or perhaps subtitle no one? In this it begins its sloppiness. Add in CG blood that is the only real color in the film and it's not even interesting to look at. The film has a blue-grey color palette, but doesn't work with fake blood. The blood should match the rest of the style and it does not.
Clancy Brown gives a decent performance, but that's about all this film has to offer. The action is quick and looks choreographed, and most of the performances are bland. And so, not having seen the theatrical cut, it is tough to say what might make it Unrated. And if this is edgier, I now understand why there was such a minor media push for this film theatrically ... it just never gets to where it needs to be. The costumes are great, the color palette looks interesting, but these are all distractions from the fact that the film has so little going for it in terms of story and filmmaking. With a tale such as this, I would like to see the action, but the camera moves around it all so quickly that much of it is a stylized blur. Rent it if you must, but don't say I didn't warn you.
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Live Free or Die Hard? No Thanks ...
Never in my life have I seen so many goddamn explosions. In fact, I think that might have been the original working title for Live Free or Die Hard, the fourth installment of the Die Hard series starring Bruce Willis. Of course producers backed off when they realized having “Goddamn” in the title might have negated that PG-13 rating. Live Free or Die Hard is a joke.
I know I will probably take one on the chin for this as most movie-goers are going to love this film. Bruce Willis is back as John McClane and he’s taking on more terrorists. For some, that’s the worth the price of admission alone. Then you add blowing up a helicopter with a car, a battle with a bad-ass kung-fu chick, lots of gunplay, a battle between a semi-truck and a jet plane, and most fans are going to go nuts for this movie. However, those people don’t mind that there’s no plot, even though the first act began with a pretty good attempt at one.
The first act introduces us to our baddie Thomas Gabriel (played by Timothy Olyphant, who I like a lot, and even like in this role), a jilted computer engineer who decides to use computer technology and a group of hackers to bring America to its knees over the Fourth of July weekend. There are some extreme leftist ideas, speaking the disenchantment of those who would ring the phrase, “I love my country, but fear my government.” At times, it almost feels anti-American, and that, to me, was extremely interesting and bold considering the political climate that we currently live in. Obviously, John McClane is going to save the day, but not before the ideas of those who live comfortably as capitalist fat cats, and blindly follow their government are questioned, right? Well, no … actually … what begins as an interesting premise dissolves into everything exploding, with the plot being a mere backdrop, and never actually living beyond the plot devices of the sequels that preceded it.
I like Justin Long (The Mac kid, who doesn’t actually use a Mac in this film), who is the buddy in this go-round of Die Hard: The Buddy Sequels, playing a computer hacker and unwitting accomplice to Thomas Gabriel’s meltdown of technology. This is pretty much the starting point of the story as there can be no witnesses and John McClane finds himself protecting the hacker with a criminal record. There are some nice ‘buddy’ moments, admittedly, and I did like this film through most of the first and second acts, but the third act becomes a parody of itself.
The filmmakers have forgotten every reason why it is that they have a job making a fourth, yes fourth, Die Hard film. You make sequels when you have a successful film. I understand that, but none of the sequels have lived up to their predecessor, and Live Free or Die Hard might be the worst offender. Die Hard is a perfect action film that reinvented action movies, as well as reinvented what we expect from the action hero. The entire film takes place in one building, and a shoeless John McClane takes on the terrorists and defeats them because he is brave, cool, collected, and smarter than his adversaries. He is a regular guy who saves the day against all mathematical probability.
As the sequels have progressed, however, the filmmakers have forgotten, or just ignored these facts. Sure, I want to see big action, but I don’t need to see it at the expense of plot. When there is little story making me truly believe the action occurring on screen is even partly feasible, then my attention is already lost, which brings me to my complaints about the third act. I’ll forgive the weak CGI in the highway tunnel scene that we’ve all seen in the trailer, depicting a car flipping into the air and Willis and Long just ducking in time. I’ll forgive the ridiculousness of a car going up a ramp and crashing into a helicopter. I will not forgive a semi-truck battling a jet plane while pieces of the highway are crashing all over the place only to wind up with Willis surfing on top of said jet. That was it. The over-the-top aspects that I could buy into as summer popcorn fun, disappeared into mockery.
People will like this film if they’re looking for 2 hours and 10 minutes of non-stop cartoon-like action, with a few catch phrases sprinkled in there, and if they can also accept the fact that it starts out with promise only to fail in its storytelling. I could not be so forgiving.
I know I will probably take one on the chin for this as most movie-goers are going to love this film. Bruce Willis is back as John McClane and he’s taking on more terrorists. For some, that’s the worth the price of admission alone. Then you add blowing up a helicopter with a car, a battle with a bad-ass kung-fu chick, lots of gunplay, a battle between a semi-truck and a jet plane, and most fans are going to go nuts for this movie. However, those people don’t mind that there’s no plot, even though the first act began with a pretty good attempt at one.
The first act introduces us to our baddie Thomas Gabriel (played by Timothy Olyphant, who I like a lot, and even like in this role), a jilted computer engineer who decides to use computer technology and a group of hackers to bring America to its knees over the Fourth of July weekend. There are some extreme leftist ideas, speaking the disenchantment of those who would ring the phrase, “I love my country, but fear my government.” At times, it almost feels anti-American, and that, to me, was extremely interesting and bold considering the political climate that we currently live in. Obviously, John McClane is going to save the day, but not before the ideas of those who live comfortably as capitalist fat cats, and blindly follow their government are questioned, right? Well, no … actually … what begins as an interesting premise dissolves into everything exploding, with the plot being a mere backdrop, and never actually living beyond the plot devices of the sequels that preceded it.
I like Justin Long (The Mac kid, who doesn’t actually use a Mac in this film), who is the buddy in this go-round of Die Hard: The Buddy Sequels, playing a computer hacker and unwitting accomplice to Thomas Gabriel’s meltdown of technology. This is pretty much the starting point of the story as there can be no witnesses and John McClane finds himself protecting the hacker with a criminal record. There are some nice ‘buddy’ moments, admittedly, and I did like this film through most of the first and second acts, but the third act becomes a parody of itself.
The filmmakers have forgotten every reason why it is that they have a job making a fourth, yes fourth, Die Hard film. You make sequels when you have a successful film. I understand that, but none of the sequels have lived up to their predecessor, and Live Free or Die Hard might be the worst offender. Die Hard is a perfect action film that reinvented action movies, as well as reinvented what we expect from the action hero. The entire film takes place in one building, and a shoeless John McClane takes on the terrorists and defeats them because he is brave, cool, collected, and smarter than his adversaries. He is a regular guy who saves the day against all mathematical probability.
As the sequels have progressed, however, the filmmakers have forgotten, or just ignored these facts. Sure, I want to see big action, but I don’t need to see it at the expense of plot. When there is little story making me truly believe the action occurring on screen is even partly feasible, then my attention is already lost, which brings me to my complaints about the third act. I’ll forgive the weak CGI in the highway tunnel scene that we’ve all seen in the trailer, depicting a car flipping into the air and Willis and Long just ducking in time. I’ll forgive the ridiculousness of a car going up a ramp and crashing into a helicopter. I will not forgive a semi-truck battling a jet plane while pieces of the highway are crashing all over the place only to wind up with Willis surfing on top of said jet. That was it. The over-the-top aspects that I could buy into as summer popcorn fun, disappeared into mockery.
People will like this film if they’re looking for 2 hours and 10 minutes of non-stop cartoon-like action, with a few catch phrases sprinkled in there, and if they can also accept the fact that it starts out with promise only to fail in its storytelling. I could not be so forgiving.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon is Probably the Best Horror Film You've Never Seen!
Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon comes to DVD on June 26, thanks to the fine folks at Anchor Bay. However, it is also thanks to the fine folks at Anchor Bay that most have never heard of this film. What is without a doubt the best horror film to be released in years, Behind the Mask was only given limited release in theaters, and was, ultimately, marketed wrong. In many cases this film was being billed as a documentary of a serial killer, which we’ve seen enough, and is interesting enough, but totally off the mark in this case, and not going to get the attention of horror fans who should have seen this film.
The Rise of Leslie Vernon is not a documentary about a serial killer, nor is it merely a mockumentary about a serial killer. It is a perfect post-modern deconstruction of the supernatural horror film. Leslie Vernon (an inspired performance by Nathan Baesel) is a man who was presumably killed as a young boy by the townspeople of Echo Falls where the legend of that fateful night lives on, and he is now ready to begin a killing spree worthy of his myth.
With journalist Taylor Gentry (Angela Goethals) and a film crew in tow, Leslie describes how it is that he plans to live up to the masters Jason, Freddy, Mike and Chuck, and even delves slightly into how they do it. The idea of the supernatural is never made to be silly or ridiculous, but instead is serious work, and takes much in the way of preparation. Baesel’s Vernon is very funny, witty and charismatic, which makes Behind the Mask seem like a comedy, but it is his charming attitude that makes him seem that much more haunting. Not all killers are outwardly psychotic; it is because they are charming and charismatic that guys like Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy were so successful at luring unsuspecting victims.
It is, however, Vernon’s dry explanations that make this film a bit comedic as he deconstructs the genre, and even introduces us to his mentor, Eugene, played by Scott Wilson. Wilson seems to represent more of the Slasher/ Grindhouse films of the 60s and 70s, prior to the obligatory sequel. He is a man who has respect for the game of fear, and knows that if he didn’t play his part, then there would be no evil to go head to head with good.
It is in this understanding of good and evil that Vernon explains that the true battle for someone in his line of work is against the Survivor Girl, the virgin who has the only true chance at surviving his killing spree. The plot thickens, of course, when Robert England as Doc Holloran shows up to fulfill the role of Vernon’s “Ahab,” the man from his past hell bent on stopping his murder spree.
The DVD has some nice behind-the-scenes stuff as well as some deleted and extended scenes. All have commentary with director Scott Glosserman, which does much to explain and expand on some of the concepts within the film. The actor commentary is fun, but not particularly informative. It amounts to little more than storytelling, not so much a mini-film school as some director commentaries can be. Ultimately, though, it is not the extras that make this DVD worth owning, although there’s some good stuff in there, all worth watching, it is the brilliance of this film that you are going to want to watch again and again.
Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon is everything Scream should have been. Instead of playing to laughs exclusively, BtM is exactly what it strives to be. It is not a parody and, in fact, plays more to its intended audience, but does enough explaining that a mainstream audience could have a lot of fun here. At its heart, though, this is a celebration of horror films that is itself the beginning of a new killer to add to the pantheon of greats.
The Rise of Leslie Vernon is not a documentary about a serial killer, nor is it merely a mockumentary about a serial killer. It is a perfect post-modern deconstruction of the supernatural horror film. Leslie Vernon (an inspired performance by Nathan Baesel) is a man who was presumably killed as a young boy by the townspeople of Echo Falls where the legend of that fateful night lives on, and he is now ready to begin a killing spree worthy of his myth.
With journalist Taylor Gentry (Angela Goethals) and a film crew in tow, Leslie describes how it is that he plans to live up to the masters Jason, Freddy, Mike and Chuck, and even delves slightly into how they do it. The idea of the supernatural is never made to be silly or ridiculous, but instead is serious work, and takes much in the way of preparation. Baesel’s Vernon is very funny, witty and charismatic, which makes Behind the Mask seem like a comedy, but it is his charming attitude that makes him seem that much more haunting. Not all killers are outwardly psychotic; it is because they are charming and charismatic that guys like Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy were so successful at luring unsuspecting victims.
It is, however, Vernon’s dry explanations that make this film a bit comedic as he deconstructs the genre, and even introduces us to his mentor, Eugene, played by Scott Wilson. Wilson seems to represent more of the Slasher/ Grindhouse films of the 60s and 70s, prior to the obligatory sequel. He is a man who has respect for the game of fear, and knows that if he didn’t play his part, then there would be no evil to go head to head with good.
It is in this understanding of good and evil that Vernon explains that the true battle for someone in his line of work is against the Survivor Girl, the virgin who has the only true chance at surviving his killing spree. The plot thickens, of course, when Robert England as Doc Holloran shows up to fulfill the role of Vernon’s “Ahab,” the man from his past hell bent on stopping his murder spree.
The DVD has some nice behind-the-scenes stuff as well as some deleted and extended scenes. All have commentary with director Scott Glosserman, which does much to explain and expand on some of the concepts within the film. The actor commentary is fun, but not particularly informative. It amounts to little more than storytelling, not so much a mini-film school as some director commentaries can be. Ultimately, though, it is not the extras that make this DVD worth owning, although there’s some good stuff in there, all worth watching, it is the brilliance of this film that you are going to want to watch again and again.
Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon is everything Scream should have been. Instead of playing to laughs exclusively, BtM is exactly what it strives to be. It is not a parody and, in fact, plays more to its intended audience, but does enough explaining that a mainstream audience could have a lot of fun here. At its heart, though, this is a celebration of horror films that is itself the beginning of a new killer to add to the pantheon of greats.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Silver Surfer Helps Take Fantastic Four to New Heights!
Is it possible? Is Fantastic Four 2: Rise of the Silver Surfer really, truly, the first great summer blockbuster?! It’s certainly the most fun I’ve had staring up at that silver screen this summer. With all of the talk about it being directed at kids and carrying a PG rating, I have to say that the PG doesn’t matter. There isn’t going to be nudity or partial nudity in an FF film; there isn’t going to be any blood and gore in an FF film; and there certainly isn’t going to be any cussing in an FF film. However, there is another suggested nude scene with Sue Storm, there is a little bit of risqué humor, and it does lean a little dark at times. Keep in mind, though, that all of the places one might desire for this film to go to achieve that PG-13 rating are the very same places that the comic book never goes. This is a family film and that’s ok.
FF2 has officially learned from the mistakes made on the first film, and writers Don Payne and Mark Frost have made a nice effort in bringing the feeling of Marvel’s First Family to the big screen. I daresay that Don Payne gets it! Yes, we need big action, but we also need depth within the family and between the four main characters, and it’s all here. This time, the jokes are funny, the action is fun, and the villain doesn’t come off as silly. Doom is in this film, but he’s depicted as a bit more dark and menacing, even if Julian McMahon as Victor seems to grin and wink at the camera. It’s when we see Doom that this character works.
On the set of Rise of the Silver Surfer in Vancouver Julian McMahon was asked if Doom would be a bit more evil this go round, and his response was a cocky grin and, “Well, you can’t make him too evil or the kiddies wouldn’t be able to watch.” The problem then, is that he has no idea what comic book evil is. It’s not the same as real world evil. It is without rhyme or reason, more about grudges and power … well, that sounds a lot like real world evil, but my point is that the hero always wins in comics, and always defeats the larger than life evil of a comic book villain, and is not a danger to the innocence of “the kiddies.”
Doom has a grudge against Reed, and uses it as his reason for becoming the iron fisted dictator of Latveria, which is glazed over in this film, but his bid to take over the world is there, and in terms of comic book evil, all you really need is a grudge. But it’s only there because the writers understand the character.
It is because the writers understand the character, that this film is stepped up a notch. Tim Story also does a fine job of mixing the humor and emotion with some fun action beats. We finally get to see Reed step up and become the leader of this team. No longer is he the wimp that he was in the first film. Ioan Gruffud is still a little awkward, but the characterization is strong. Sue, who spent much of the first film in a “whoa is me, why can’t we get married” state of mind, comes full circle in this film and becomes more of the matriarch that we know and love from the comic books.
While Reed and Sue are slowly becoming the heads of the “family,” the relationship between Johnny and Ben deepens and is right on. Chris Evans understands the character of Johnny Storm so well that he stole the show in the first film; this time around, he gives a better performance, but doesn’t steal the show because he’s no longer the only actor working his ass off. Michael Chiklis is great as The Thing, still curmudgeonly, but really is the ever-lovin’ blue eyed Thing. As much as Johnny and Ben pick on each other, we see a little bit of heart here. Through Johnny’s cocky attitude, we see that he is a bit jealous of Ben and Alicia, and it works without being mired in emotion like the first film.
Which brings us to the Silver Surfer, whom this story is primarily about. WOW! Silver Surfer is one of those characters in the comic book that instantly captures the imagination. Few other mediums could do justice to a silver entity riding a surfboard through space, which is why it works in comics, and these things don’t always work in movies. Fans have been clamoring for years to see Norin Radd on the big screen, much the way fans thought they wanted to see Venom. To the benefit of FF and the Silver Surfer, though, Tim Story makes this character work. Doug Jones, also, should receive kudos aplenty as his movements make this character so fluid, so cosmic, so … perfect. That Laurence Fishburn plays the voice is sort of inconsequential. So much emphasis was put on the effort to get a “real actor” to voice the surfer, but with few lines it could have been anyone, and should have been Doug Jones. Fishburn didn’t make me love the character any more than I did already. It’s the story that drives the character, and the story is fun.
In fact, one of the largest geek complaints is in making Galactus a storm cloud, but I think seeing is believing. Would I have liked to see the big purple and blue eater of worlds? You bet your surfboard I would have, but it didn’t matter. He was depicted more as a circumstance, and it worked. Much the way Venom was rushed into Spidey 3, putting Galactus as more than just a presence in this film, might have felt rushed. Instead, seeing a cloud of dust and debris as he makes his bid to eat Earth ends up feeling a bit more cataclysmic, perhaps, less silly. And if you look close enough, you’ll even see an outline of the helmet.
This is Silver Surfer’s story, and the movie is stronger for it. It is an entertaining ride, and just plain old popcorn-eatin’ fun! I give it a 7.5 out of 10. It’s good, fun adventure that doesn’t pander at the kids, and doesn’t just try to sell them action figures (although, there certainly are action figures and fast-food tie-ins, and oh how I would love a Fantasticar!). Rise of the Silver Surfer understands that the adults can like these movies, too.
FF2 has officially learned from the mistakes made on the first film, and writers Don Payne and Mark Frost have made a nice effort in bringing the feeling of Marvel’s First Family to the big screen. I daresay that Don Payne gets it! Yes, we need big action, but we also need depth within the family and between the four main characters, and it’s all here. This time, the jokes are funny, the action is fun, and the villain doesn’t come off as silly. Doom is in this film, but he’s depicted as a bit more dark and menacing, even if Julian McMahon as Victor seems to grin and wink at the camera. It’s when we see Doom that this character works.
On the set of Rise of the Silver Surfer in Vancouver Julian McMahon was asked if Doom would be a bit more evil this go round, and his response was a cocky grin and, “Well, you can’t make him too evil or the kiddies wouldn’t be able to watch.” The problem then, is that he has no idea what comic book evil is. It’s not the same as real world evil. It is without rhyme or reason, more about grudges and power … well, that sounds a lot like real world evil, but my point is that the hero always wins in comics, and always defeats the larger than life evil of a comic book villain, and is not a danger to the innocence of “the kiddies.”
Doom has a grudge against Reed, and uses it as his reason for becoming the iron fisted dictator of Latveria, which is glazed over in this film, but his bid to take over the world is there, and in terms of comic book evil, all you really need is a grudge. But it’s only there because the writers understand the character.
It is because the writers understand the character, that this film is stepped up a notch. Tim Story also does a fine job of mixing the humor and emotion with some fun action beats. We finally get to see Reed step up and become the leader of this team. No longer is he the wimp that he was in the first film. Ioan Gruffud is still a little awkward, but the characterization is strong. Sue, who spent much of the first film in a “whoa is me, why can’t we get married” state of mind, comes full circle in this film and becomes more of the matriarch that we know and love from the comic books.
While Reed and Sue are slowly becoming the heads of the “family,” the relationship between Johnny and Ben deepens and is right on. Chris Evans understands the character of Johnny Storm so well that he stole the show in the first film; this time around, he gives a better performance, but doesn’t steal the show because he’s no longer the only actor working his ass off. Michael Chiklis is great as The Thing, still curmudgeonly, but really is the ever-lovin’ blue eyed Thing. As much as Johnny and Ben pick on each other, we see a little bit of heart here. Through Johnny’s cocky attitude, we see that he is a bit jealous of Ben and Alicia, and it works without being mired in emotion like the first film.
Which brings us to the Silver Surfer, whom this story is primarily about. WOW! Silver Surfer is one of those characters in the comic book that instantly captures the imagination. Few other mediums could do justice to a silver entity riding a surfboard through space, which is why it works in comics, and these things don’t always work in movies. Fans have been clamoring for years to see Norin Radd on the big screen, much the way fans thought they wanted to see Venom. To the benefit of FF and the Silver Surfer, though, Tim Story makes this character work. Doug Jones, also, should receive kudos aplenty as his movements make this character so fluid, so cosmic, so … perfect. That Laurence Fishburn plays the voice is sort of inconsequential. So much emphasis was put on the effort to get a “real actor” to voice the surfer, but with few lines it could have been anyone, and should have been Doug Jones. Fishburn didn’t make me love the character any more than I did already. It’s the story that drives the character, and the story is fun.
In fact, one of the largest geek complaints is in making Galactus a storm cloud, but I think seeing is believing. Would I have liked to see the big purple and blue eater of worlds? You bet your surfboard I would have, but it didn’t matter. He was depicted more as a circumstance, and it worked. Much the way Venom was rushed into Spidey 3, putting Galactus as more than just a presence in this film, might have felt rushed. Instead, seeing a cloud of dust and debris as he makes his bid to eat Earth ends up feeling a bit more cataclysmic, perhaps, less silly. And if you look close enough, you’ll even see an outline of the helmet.
This is Silver Surfer’s story, and the movie is stronger for it. It is an entertaining ride, and just plain old popcorn-eatin’ fun! I give it a 7.5 out of 10. It’s good, fun adventure that doesn’t pander at the kids, and doesn’t just try to sell them action figures (although, there certainly are action figures and fast-food tie-ins, and oh how I would love a Fantasticar!). Rise of the Silver Surfer understands that the adults can like these movies, too.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Wait Till Your Father Gets Home is Both a Reflection of 1972 and Today!
In 1989 The Simpsons aired their Christmas special, and for many, this was something totally new, a depiction of a dysfunctional nuclear family that seemed more familiar to many families than what was depicted on typical sitcoms. In the beginning that show had dysfunction, but its popularity was largely due to its heart.
However, when that show was aired, not once do I remember it being compared to, what seems to me, its obvious predecessor, Wait Till Your Father Gets Home. With Season One released as a Hanna-Barbera Classic Collection by Time Warner last week, it has become apparent to me what an overlooked treasure this show is.
Wit Till Your Father Gets Home was originally aired in 1972 and features the voice of Tom Bosley as Harry Boyle, an understanding father trying to understand a vastly changing world. His neighbor is conservative, way to the right, terrified of the communist threat to America, and thus runs a crack outfit of pseudo militants, The Vigilantes, bent on bringing justice and safety to their quiet neighborhood. And so The Vigilantes stand as a great example of just one extreme.
His children, however, go to the opposite extreme. The two oldest children, Alice and Chet serve to show the bleeding-heart liberalism that was prevalent in the 70s. Just one example, is in an early episode in which the family suspects Harry of cheating with his secretary. They don’t believe him when he denies it, yet they try to understand why he would cheat, rather than chastise him for doing so. Of course, not once do they consider that he didn’t. And Harry utters, “I get treated better around here when they think I’ve done wrong.” And the largest, most prevalent theme when dealing with the kids is that Chet, at 22, refuses to get a job.
Does any of this sound familiar? Is it a case of history repeating itself, as more and more kids are frightened of entering the workplace after college? Of course, it doesn’t help that there are few jobs waiting for them.
The youngest son, Jamie, who is voiced throughout the season by both Willie Ames and Jackie Earl Haley, seems to be a prototype for Alex P. Keaton, and sign of what is to come in the 80s. The young, entrepreneurial Jamie is constantly trying to sell whatever services he has for a little extra change, and even tries to barter up the value of a lost tooth, asking why the Tooth Fairy doesn’t account for inflation.
And in the middle of all, is Mom. She is a mom of the past. She is dependent on house and husband, but is ruler of the roost at home. However, she is always supportive of both the kids and Harry. She is the sole voice of reason, even when no one is listening.
Overall, it is a very unique family dynamic that sort of encapsulates the feelings of change that were spreading through the mass consciousness. And right along side of all of this social commentary is an animation style that fits the show so well. It is very pared down, putting less emphasis on backgrounds, and more emphasis on characters, and with this minimalist approach the viewer is left with a sort of less-is-more feeling.
In the end, the best way to describe it is as Family Guy living next door to American Dad with the heart, emotions, truth and honesty of the first few seasons of The Simpsons. For those who remember this show, it is worth the purchase as a reminder of the past, and a reminder of the present as it holds up remarkably better than many sitcoms of the 70s. That, in my mind is due to the themes taking precedence over the visual commitment of painting the 70s. It’s just a family, dealing with the issues of their, and our, times.
However, when that show was aired, not once do I remember it being compared to, what seems to me, its obvious predecessor, Wait Till Your Father Gets Home. With Season One released as a Hanna-Barbera Classic Collection by Time Warner last week, it has become apparent to me what an overlooked treasure this show is.
Wit Till Your Father Gets Home was originally aired in 1972 and features the voice of Tom Bosley as Harry Boyle, an understanding father trying to understand a vastly changing world. His neighbor is conservative, way to the right, terrified of the communist threat to America, and thus runs a crack outfit of pseudo militants, The Vigilantes, bent on bringing justice and safety to their quiet neighborhood. And so The Vigilantes stand as a great example of just one extreme.
His children, however, go to the opposite extreme. The two oldest children, Alice and Chet serve to show the bleeding-heart liberalism that was prevalent in the 70s. Just one example, is in an early episode in which the family suspects Harry of cheating with his secretary. They don’t believe him when he denies it, yet they try to understand why he would cheat, rather than chastise him for doing so. Of course, not once do they consider that he didn’t. And Harry utters, “I get treated better around here when they think I’ve done wrong.” And the largest, most prevalent theme when dealing with the kids is that Chet, at 22, refuses to get a job.
Does any of this sound familiar? Is it a case of history repeating itself, as more and more kids are frightened of entering the workplace after college? Of course, it doesn’t help that there are few jobs waiting for them.
The youngest son, Jamie, who is voiced throughout the season by both Willie Ames and Jackie Earl Haley, seems to be a prototype for Alex P. Keaton, and sign of what is to come in the 80s. The young, entrepreneurial Jamie is constantly trying to sell whatever services he has for a little extra change, and even tries to barter up the value of a lost tooth, asking why the Tooth Fairy doesn’t account for inflation.
And in the middle of all, is Mom. She is a mom of the past. She is dependent on house and husband, but is ruler of the roost at home. However, she is always supportive of both the kids and Harry. She is the sole voice of reason, even when no one is listening.
Overall, it is a very unique family dynamic that sort of encapsulates the feelings of change that were spreading through the mass consciousness. And right along side of all of this social commentary is an animation style that fits the show so well. It is very pared down, putting less emphasis on backgrounds, and more emphasis on characters, and with this minimalist approach the viewer is left with a sort of less-is-more feeling.
In the end, the best way to describe it is as Family Guy living next door to American Dad with the heart, emotions, truth and honesty of the first few seasons of The Simpsons. For those who remember this show, it is worth the purchase as a reminder of the past, and a reminder of the present as it holds up remarkably better than many sitcoms of the 70s. That, in my mind is due to the themes taking precedence over the visual commitment of painting the 70s. It’s just a family, dealing with the issues of their, and our, times.
Friday, May 4, 2007
Spider-Man 3 Allows Too Many Villains to Ruin the Stew!
When Spider-Man first hit the big screen in 2002, I remember describing my enthusiasm as that of a 16-year-old girl on prom night. I could hardly contain my excitement. However, as Sam Raimi and company embark on the third installment of the franchise, I have quite a different phrase ringing in my brain: I didn’t love it! I wanted to love it, but it’s the weakest of the three, and a sloppy effort as a film.
What should have been a slam dunk instead reeks of producer and studio interference. Sam Raimi said from day one that he grew up with, and is a fan of the classic Spidey stories, and the classic villains. And he made it very clear that he was never a fan of Venom, and he would, therefore, never appear in the Spider-Man movies. But, then word gets out that Spidey 3 will include the black suit and a certain brain eating symbiote. So the questions start flying last year at San Diego Comic Con and Sam’s extremely diplomatic response was that the producers thought it was time, that it’s what the fans wanted, and Sam agreed. Although, I don’t think in his heart of hearts that he did agree. And my question to Avi Arad is this: It’s what the fans wanted. Really? Did you beat the pavement, Avi, and ask them?
Now, I’ll admit that I am not a fan of the Venom character and see him as a representation of the Dark Age of comic books that was the 1990s, with brooding heroes and dark, sinister villains. The 90s weren’t really a “fun” time for comic books, and this movie, unlike its predecessors, just isn’t fun. But it’s not Venom’s fault. The problem is that this is two movies forced into one that leaves no room for complete story arcs for any of the villains.
Had this film found a focus and built its story around a specific set of conflicts, it could have been great, but instead it suffers from Part 3 Syndrome and seems to want to cram in as much as possible, just in case there isn’t a fourth installment. So, instead the film relies on a series of coincidences to force conflict, and put all of our characters at odds. Harry is the only one of the villains who receives a decent arc, and in fact, steals every scene he’s in. James Franco plays Harry as vengeful, yet also playful after an incident leaves him with no short term memory. This, then, sets up a nice conclusion for the character, who is actually allowed to develop, unlike Sandman, Venom and even Gwen Stacy.
Sandman is forced into the story as Peter’s origin is seemingly rewritten to give him motivation to fight Sandman. Flint Marko could have been sympathetic without having to put him on the criminal parallel path of Peter. One goes to jail, while the other is lauded as a hero. And Marko, just happening to fall into the experiment that turns him to sand, also feels forced. And it didn’t have to be.
Venom suffers from the same problem. In order to tell Venom’s tale, Peter has to reject the suit, but telling the tale of the black suit in a one hour chunk in the middle of this film, makes Peter too dark and menacing, as opposed to building up over a year or so in monthly installments. Which, again, leaves everything feeling rushed. Peter rejects the suit and Eddie Brock just happens to be in the same church to receive the symbiote. Too coincidental, but there was little time to build as the rest of the film meanders around, trying to give all of these characters something to do and failing miserably.
And, why oh why, couldn’t Harry have been a Goblin. Making him something out of the Ultimate Marvel Universe again reeks of producer interference; especially considering the fact that we are shown an alternate Goblin mask during Harry’s introduction. What could have been a brain-melting third act battle sequence depicting three of Spidey’s villains, instead becomes unappealing icing on a cake I don’t want to eat.
The visuals are great, the performances are strong, but the story and character development are lacking. We are given too little story in 2 hours and 20 minutes. If the Black Suit, and Venom had been saved for a fourth movie, and the film was shaved by 20 minutes, this could have been right in line with the first two, but instead it seems the bar was set too high, and the producers were too scared to let the stories develop on their own.
It breaks my heart to have to say that this film achieves little more than a 6.5 out of 10. I could break it down and go higher on acting, and visual effects, but we go to the movies for the whole product, and the pieces that made this product are strong at times, but the film is just not good.
What should have been a slam dunk instead reeks of producer and studio interference. Sam Raimi said from day one that he grew up with, and is a fan of the classic Spidey stories, and the classic villains. And he made it very clear that he was never a fan of Venom, and he would, therefore, never appear in the Spider-Man movies. But, then word gets out that Spidey 3 will include the black suit and a certain brain eating symbiote. So the questions start flying last year at San Diego Comic Con and Sam’s extremely diplomatic response was that the producers thought it was time, that it’s what the fans wanted, and Sam agreed. Although, I don’t think in his heart of hearts that he did agree. And my question to Avi Arad is this: It’s what the fans wanted. Really? Did you beat the pavement, Avi, and ask them?
Now, I’ll admit that I am not a fan of the Venom character and see him as a representation of the Dark Age of comic books that was the 1990s, with brooding heroes and dark, sinister villains. The 90s weren’t really a “fun” time for comic books, and this movie, unlike its predecessors, just isn’t fun. But it’s not Venom’s fault. The problem is that this is two movies forced into one that leaves no room for complete story arcs for any of the villains.
Had this film found a focus and built its story around a specific set of conflicts, it could have been great, but instead it suffers from Part 3 Syndrome and seems to want to cram in as much as possible, just in case there isn’t a fourth installment. So, instead the film relies on a series of coincidences to force conflict, and put all of our characters at odds. Harry is the only one of the villains who receives a decent arc, and in fact, steals every scene he’s in. James Franco plays Harry as vengeful, yet also playful after an incident leaves him with no short term memory. This, then, sets up a nice conclusion for the character, who is actually allowed to develop, unlike Sandman, Venom and even Gwen Stacy.
Sandman is forced into the story as Peter’s origin is seemingly rewritten to give him motivation to fight Sandman. Flint Marko could have been sympathetic without having to put him on the criminal parallel path of Peter. One goes to jail, while the other is lauded as a hero. And Marko, just happening to fall into the experiment that turns him to sand, also feels forced. And it didn’t have to be.
Venom suffers from the same problem. In order to tell Venom’s tale, Peter has to reject the suit, but telling the tale of the black suit in a one hour chunk in the middle of this film, makes Peter too dark and menacing, as opposed to building up over a year or so in monthly installments. Which, again, leaves everything feeling rushed. Peter rejects the suit and Eddie Brock just happens to be in the same church to receive the symbiote. Too coincidental, but there was little time to build as the rest of the film meanders around, trying to give all of these characters something to do and failing miserably.
And, why oh why, couldn’t Harry have been a Goblin. Making him something out of the Ultimate Marvel Universe again reeks of producer interference; especially considering the fact that we are shown an alternate Goblin mask during Harry’s introduction. What could have been a brain-melting third act battle sequence depicting three of Spidey’s villains, instead becomes unappealing icing on a cake I don’t want to eat.
The visuals are great, the performances are strong, but the story and character development are lacking. We are given too little story in 2 hours and 20 minutes. If the Black Suit, and Venom had been saved for a fourth movie, and the film was shaved by 20 minutes, this could have been right in line with the first two, but instead it seems the bar was set too high, and the producers were too scared to let the stories develop on their own.
It breaks my heart to have to say that this film achieves little more than a 6.5 out of 10. I could break it down and go higher on acting, and visual effects, but we go to the movies for the whole product, and the pieces that made this product are strong at times, but the film is just not good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)