On comic book movies and Superman

So a few days ago I ran across this post that has some early shots of the new Superman reboot. I posted on google+ lamenting about how Hollywood just doesn't get how to update old favorites. There's not much we can do about that. Except maybe quit our day jobs and become filmmakers (I wish). But one of the responses to my post caught my eye, so I decided to rant about that for a while.

The comment was:

"I think the only way to make Superman more gritty is to make him less super. If he is indestructible he isn't all that interesting."

That's true. And it's it's always been true of Superman. But that's not the last word. Why is Superman a classic story then? Why has it endured for 50 years? Why are people even today excited about a Superman movie even while watching Hollywood screw it up?

Well first off, I reject the idea that the only way to modernize something is to make it more "gritty" or "real". That can certainly be awesome. It's saving the Batman franchise as we speak. But I think that makes sense. Batman was always supposed to be dark. He's always been a tragic figure. The delicious conflict in Batman is that Bruce Wayne could easily have become a psychopath. You could even argue that he is. It's just that he has managed to channel his rage into doing good. And "good" is even a relative term in the Batman universe.

But we're not talking about Batman. We're talking about Superman. Supes is all american. He's clean cut and heroic. He's not conflicted about his mission or his values at all. In fact, I would argue that we like Superman precisely because we know he is going to win. It's about justice. No matter how bad the bad guys get, they will never be as awesome as Superman. So we delight in seeing the bad guys grow to epic proportions and then still get trounced.


And that brings me to my problem with the last Superman movie. A comic book movie is only as good as it's villains. Compare X-Men to the Fantastic Four. Magneto is an epic villain; the dumbed down version of Dr. Doom was not. And as much as I like Kevin Spacey, he is no epic super villain on the Superman scale. What makes a Superman movie enjoyable is watching him be super. They need to ratchet up the awesome in order to convey just how powerful he is. And that creates a much more satisfying experience.

But that's not the only piece of the puzzle. You need more than an epic villain and some super spectacle. You also need to give me a reason to follow the story arc. Remember that we already know what happens at the end. Superman stands over the defeated bad guys without a scratch on him. Everything's back to normal. So you've got your work cut out for you in filling in the middle. The real question is where does the conflict come from in Superman stories? You can't have a film without conflict. That's where Superman Returns fell down.

In most other good guys vs. bad guys story, the primary conflict comes from a simple and primal place. What if the good guy loses? We watch the bad guy's schemes come to fruition. We watch the hero get beat down. And there's a possibility that he won't make it in time to save the world. Sure, you can make the same argument that we know what's going to happen. We know the hero will triumph. But at what cost? Batman limps away at the end of the Dark Knight pursued by authorities. The love of his life and the public symbol of justice are both dead. We care because there is a cost to victory.

So what about Superman? What things can we take away from him? Not many. There's no way they can kill Lois Lane. She's the only real world attachment he has. If he lost her, he'd probably just leave. He only protects the rest of us because of the abstract human value system imparted by his parents. Oh, what about his parents? Well in that same vein, Superman's parents could die at any time. They've fulfilled their purpose in raising him to be Earth's greatest hero. He rarely seeks their advice or suffers because they aren't around. So everyone in Superman's life really only serves as a convenient foil for falling into the villains trap and luring him in. Not so riveting.

Well I have a different idea about what creates conflict for Superman. Loneliness and isolation. And I don't mean just because he's an alien and his home was destroyed. He is alone in everything. He is the mightiest of us, so whenever there is a problem, he alone can save us. But there is only one of him. As fast as he is, he can't be everywhere. And he must always be careful not to hurt anyone. What happens when he can't save everyone? How does he choose who to save? What is the backlash when he makes the wrong choice? What does it do to him every time people die because he didn't come through? What if Superman became paralyzed by the monumental weight on his shoulders? What if he gives up? Even for the briefest of moments.

Perhaps this is a darker way to look at things. But I think it still happens within the black and white world that Superman inhabits. Finding that balance is tough. But I think it could be really compelling.

And it's far better than the only other idea that Hollywood has. "Let's just change his clothes".

Transformers 2 or: How To Tell If Your Brain Has an Off Switch

I saw Transformers 2 at the first midnight show Wednesday. I had hoped to write this review before the weekend. But in true lazy-ass fashion, I neglected to adequately warn you of the impending doom represented by this movie. And because I failed in my duty, Michael Bay sailed to a $200 million opening week. And with that, my hopes of ridding myself of the Cinematic Ambivalence disease were irrevocably damaged.

Now that I've gotten over the melodrama, let's talk about why this movie sucked.

My feelings about TF2 were pretty much summed up in my initial tweet after the viewing.

"That was simultaneously one of the best and one of the worst movies I've ever seen."

I did enjoy parts of the movie. Whenever Optimus Prime started kicking ass, I was on the edge of my seat like everyone else. This movie does deliver on the overabundance of giant robot mayhem that was sorely missing from the first movie. But instead of canceling out the horrible schlock that filled in the rest of this movie, it somehow served to make me revile it even more. Because the simple fact is, if anyone gave a shit about this being a good movie, it could've been amazing.

Instead, what was clear to me is that no one was trying to make a good movie. They were trying to make a movie that would make as much money as possible. And the best way to do that is to make a movie that no one will dislike. That's a pretty important distinction and it's the real reason I would be pretty nervous if I ever get the chance to make movies with Hollywood types. You see my logic goes something like this:

If you make the best movie possible with the best talent you can get, then everyone will like it and it'll make a ton of money.

I know, sounds reasonable right? But here's how the logic actually works in Hollywood when it comes to Summer Blockbusters:

If we get people to turn off their brains and enjoy themselves for a few hours they'll thank us for giving them a diversion. All we have to do is follow the tried and true formulas, put some big spectacles in it and throw in some hot stars. Everyone will think it's awesome because they can't remember anything that they disliked about it!

And Transformers 2 delivers on that idea better than any movie in recent memory. This movie contains more overdone cliches and hackneyed plot devices than anything in my darkest nightmares. And furthermore, it's headlined by 2 of the worst, most throwaway "movie stars" to ever demand multi-million dollar paychecks in exchange for pretending to be likable.

Let's take a walk through this train wreck shall we?

Sam (Shia LeBeouff) and Mikaela (Megan Fox) are still together. Because only a harrowing adventure featuring giant robot aliens could make Megan Fox forget that she is way out of LeBeouff's league. Yep, you've gotta be the savior of mankind to have a shot with this chick. The camera spends so much time on closeups of her cleavage that I had flashbacks of nursing.

Sam's mom is a cutout caricature of the zany mom who goes through split-second mood swings with "hilarious" results. "Oh boo hoo, my wittle boy is off to college." * switch * "I don't care of they are giant space robots, tell them to stop blowing up my flower garden" And that's before she innocently inhales an entire bag of weed-laced brownies. Then things really get "fun." Don't even get me started on the stupid, over-sexed, pseudo-geek roommate, or the fact that even John Turturro buys into this stupid sidekick nonsense. In the late 80's early 90's, this routine would've been pure gold. As it is, it made me pray for Megan Fox to show up again. At least she's nice to look at and doesn't talk half as much.

The super macho marines return in this installment to continue shooting metal aliens with regular bullets like it has any effect whatsoever. At least we didn't have to hear more about Tyrese's left butt cheek. And they're joined by the uptight bureaucrat that knows nothing about what's happening but doesn't let that stop him from making terrible decisions. But what's even more mind-blowing is that Bay and the writers of this film would have us believe that America's leaders are arrogant enough to speak for the entire world! "The President may determine that you're a threat to our national security. And you would then be asked to leave our planet." Hey buddy, can we put it to a democratic vote on whether we'd like to keep the benevolent aliens who have saved our asses once already? As a matter of fact, fuck off and let Optimus and the crew stay in Switzerland or something. Good grief.

The Autobots in the first movie were bland caricatures at best and blatant stereotypes at worst ("What's crackin' little bitches?" Yes, that actually happened) And because we let them get away with that least time, those lovable guys are replaced by the worst robotic minstrel show since, well... ever. Introducing Skids and Mudflap. Along with black stereotypical accents ("Who you talkin' to fool?"), these two bumbling knuckleheads come with gold teeth and big ears to boot (remember they can change their shape at will, they CHOSE to look like this). And they top it off by claiming proudly that they "don't do too much reading." And to add insult to injury, they are extremely incompetent and the most ineffectual at protecting the humans in the movie. Even though that's all they are supposed to do. Even Bumblebee smacks them around and he has always been the runt of the group.


I honestly don't really care about the so-called racism these characters represent. White people won't stop doing this until we stop showing them that we like it (I'm looking at you Tyler Perry). It bothers me more that they chose to go with outdated stereotypes. At least stay current! I can't remember the last time I heard a black person say "I'mma bust a cap in yo ass." Get T.I. to do the voices or something. Oh wait, he's in prison for doing something monumentally stupid. Get Lil Wayne then. At least let him advise on the current state of black slang before making your $200 million movie.

I would comment on the inane plot of this movie. But honestly, I don't even remember it. Apparently there's this old Deceptacon who's more badass than Megatron and the only person who can stop him is Optimus Prime. World hangs in the balance, yada yada yada. I would've been perfectly fine with it except for the fact that they spent waaaay to much time talking about it. This movie was 2 and half hours long. You can cram in all the action, crude humor, slow motion boob shots and sad, over-dramatic death scenes you want. You're still only gonna end up with an hour and a half. And the rest of it is spent explaining in great detail why Sam has been chosen to revive Optimus Prime and save the world. Only it's the worst excuse for a coherent plot you can imagine.

• Optimus Prime is a descendant of the ancient Primes who once ruled their entire race. How do giant robots have kids? How come there's only one left? Meh, whatever.
• One of the pyramids in Egypt contains an ancient alien death machine. How did the decades of study by scientists miss this fun factoid? Meh, whatever.
• There is a special key that activates the machine and it was sealed away long ago. Why seal it? Why not destroy it and the machine? Meh, whatever.
  
• If the Autobots are the good guys and knew about all this, how come they didn't give us a heads up? That's an easy one. Cause then there wouldn't be a sequel! Oh, and because they smartly crammed all of their historical knowledge in the magic cube that was destroyed in the first movie. Nice move Sherlock.

You know I could go on about what was wrong with this sorry excuse for a movie. But it would only result in my fingers cramping and my soul dying a little more with each passing minute. Plus it doesn't matter, because you liked it. You thought it was awesome. Because you found that little switch in the back of your brain that let's you enjoy this drivel without thinking too hard about it. That is truly a gift my friend. Cherish it. I have yet to receive this gift and so I'll continue to lose brain cells with each passing summer. Can't wait for G.I. Joe!

THE Review is in... Roger Ebert on Terminator Salvation

So... today I am excited for this movie.

Roger Ebert:
Terminator Salvation ** (2 stars)
'Anyway, most of the running time is occupied by action sequences, chase sequences, motorcycle sequences, plow-truck sequences, helicopter sequences, fighter-plane sequences, towering android sequences and fistfights. It gives you all the pleasure of a video game without the bother of having to play it.'

Yes, Yes.Y.E.S. Earlier in the review he guesstimates it to be about 90% action by volume. Maybe this will be the all-out action and destruction Terminator movie I have been waiting for 20 years to see.
I have been trying not to get my hopes up for this movie as I was afraid that they would do 2 things: hold back on the action and add a tedious story to make us sit through (see Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines).
Even with a 40% on RT, all of the reviews keep washing those fears away. The ones that are bad consistently say that it is because of a lack of story, all that say it is good say that the action sequences are mind-blowing. I guess we will know in about 14 hours.

Note: For those who don't know, I love Roger Ebert. Granted I don't always agree with his reviews but they do make it easy to decipher what the movie is like and whether or not I will like it. Suffice it to say, T:S sounds like a movie I will enjoy.

I Just Know McG Is Gonna Screw Me On This One

Me: dude, Terminator tomorrow

Calfman: yeah, has a whole 25% on RT
Calfman: 2 to 6 though
Calfman: so it isnt all that true yet

Me: kinda nervous about it

Calfman: meh, you wont like it, I will
Calfman: all action, no story

Since This Went Unsaid...

I wasn't really excited for Star Trek, looking back, I'm not sure why. I should have been. It was very good. Go see it. :)

note: I back dated this post so it will be in chronological order for the release of all this summer's movies. A full review may appear here at some point as well.

Expectations: Wolverine, the Appetizer of This Year's Summer Blockbusters

To follow up on Marco's post: I also saw Wolverine at the midnight show. Not the same theater as Marco. And had a totally different, yet very similar reaction. I know, no surprise there.

I have to say that, once again, this is a movie that is only enjoyable if you know what to expect. If you go into it expecting a gore-filled slash-a-thon with Wolverine mowing down baddies with all but minimal resistance, it won't live up. However it was what I was expecting, watered-down and all.

The point of Wolverine is not to be the be-all end-all Wolverine movie. The point is to get asses in seats, money in pockets, and just not actively disappoint people. My expectation going into this movie was pretty low and that it would be what it was: same tone/intensity as the 3 previous X-Men movies, pulled punches on the gore/blood and overblown action sequences that give more weight to scale and being bombastic than technical proficiency and realism.

Now, I think there is something to be said for viewing and reviewing all movies in a vacuum, judging it against all films, and for its lasting appeal and delivery on its potential. In fact, I respect Marco's opinions for this reason. It is the review that looks at things from a distant perspective: When someone watches this movie 30 years from now, will it be what it could or should have been?

I personally tend toward reviewing the full experience of a movie, the zeitgeist if you will. In this context, I deliver the following review:

Wolverine was what I expected, no more, no less. And I liked it because of this. The best part of the experience though, was the Terminator Salvation trailer beforehand.

The last line of that simple review holds the key to my expectations and similarities to Marco's reaction: To me, Wolverine was destined to be a piece of trash, not awesome, not mind-blowing, but instead a forgettable lead-in to the Summer Blockbusters to come.

Right now, I would say that Wolverine was enjoyable. On the other end of the summer, after being visually thrashed by Transformers 2 and having my soul crushed by the bleak world envisioned in Terminator Salvation I may have a different opinion of Wolverine, if I even remember it happened.

Wolverine: Destined To Suck

I saw Wolverine at a midnight show on Thursday. Despite what that implies, I wasn't that excited about it. In fact, I was pretty sure it was going to be a watered down, poorly written mess of a movie with underwhelming special effects to boot. My cinematic ambivalence was once again justified. The actual reasons I went to the midnight show are best saved for another post.

But I had to think for a bit before writing about the movie. What do I want to say about it other than it pretty much sucks? Well, I decided to talk about why it was destined to suck all along.

Movies like Wolverine, X-Men and Iron Man are required to have a PG-13 rating. I use the word "required" on purpose and I'll explain why. These movies have pretty big budgets. I'm calling anything over $80 million big, because that means the movie has to do very well to recoup the cost. With that in mind, I'm gonna take a stand and say it's damn near impossible for an R-rated movie to make that money back. There are still a lot of theaters that actually enforce the Restricted rating and there are still a lot of parents that forbid their children to see these films. And the sad fact is, if your movie has a large budget, but doesn't get a certain percentage of teenagers or younger children, you're toast.

Just think about the scene at your local theater at any given time. If it's packed, there's probably a pretty high percentage of teenagers or parents with multiple kids. If there's a low turnout of teenagers or kids, there's probably a low turnout of... everybody. The Underage are the bread and butter of big budget hollywood. Plain and simple.

So back to Wolverine. Why does it need to be R-rated? Why will it never work as PG-13? Because unlike a lot of other popular comics, the Wolverine comic itself is gloriously R-rated. In the comic, people are dismembered, decapitated and otherwise dispatched on a regular basis. There are buckets of blood. Or at least they were in the comics I remember (and still own). But this is in contrast to the X-Men comic and other places where Wolverine makes an appearance. These are your usual family friendly affairs. Instead of gutting a foe, Wolvie will cut down a light pole and let it fall on them or he'll miss the kill swing and kick them into a wall instead. Still cool, but definitely censored.

This is perfectly acceptable for Spiderman or Iron Man. But, Marvel knows better than to do this with the Wolverine comic. They created a classic anti-hero character with Logan. He's tough, a man of few words, takes shit from nobody and backs up his talk with decisive action. And then they made him more badass by giving him 2 key weapons.

1. Indestructible metal blades that can cut through anything
2. The ability to take any amount of physical abuse we can imagine.
   

When they took stock of their creation, they understood that Wolverine is an engine of violence. And not the wimpy violence that the other comic book heroes depend on. Stunning eye-beams, freeze rays, magnetism. Sure these are cool to look at, and I'd take any one of em if god were giving out random super powers. But they don't deliver the same level of morbidly satisfying mayhem as Adamantium Claws. Couple that with the healing factor. A power you can only showcase in one way: by beating the ever-loving piss out of Hugh Jackman. I'm picturing John McClane at the end of Die Hard, only in the next scene he's looking a bit better, and in the scene after that, he's back in tip top shape and kicking ass again. Basically, to capture what makes him appealing, the Wolverine movie should be the superhero version of Fight Club.

So what did they give us instead?

• Hugh Jackman's Wolverine smiles more than I do. Fail.
• Instead of slashing through torsos like butter, he stabs everybody... in the shoulder. And the claws come out squeaky clean every time. Fail.
• A truckload of giant timber logs falls on top of him, and they don't even do us the courtesy of giving him the trickle of blood down the forehead. Let alone showing us what we expected. The twisted, broken bones that will heal momentarily with really cool effects. Fail.
• A man does get decapitated. And we don't even get to see the bloody stump or the death grimace on the disembodied head. Fail.
  
• Only computer generated claws. Fail. (Having undeniably real steel blades strapped to Jackman's hands would've done a lot to placate me. Even if all he did was peel an apple or something)
• Adamantium bullets? Wielded by an old white dude wearing a tie? W... T... F.
  

So how do you make a good PG-13 Wolverine movie? I have no idea. Because frankly, I can't imagine one that would deliver the carnage that the character embodies.