Reviews of films, DVDs and documentaries along with discussion of the current state of the film industry.
Showing posts with label comic books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label comic books. Show all posts
Saturday, 4 May 2013
Iron Man 3 Review: Is the 3rd time the charm?
Any decent film franchise will try to recover from a failure if the potential upside outweighs the downfall. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Like most people, I wasn't a big fan of Iron Man 2. It had its moments and some great characters, most notably Scarlett Johansson in a skin tight suit kicking butt and taking names. Not to mention any movie that involves Samuel L. Jackson always gets a bump in credibility with me. That man can read the phone book and make it fascinating. Oh, and did I mention Scarlett Johansson in a skin tight suit? Even that can't save a badly told story from a weak script. As a friend recently told me, a good story can make people forgive bad production value but the reverse isn't necessarily true.
Thankfully, Iron Man 3 has a good story and good production value. Whereas Iron Man 2 was more wrapped up in setting the scene for The Avengers and the preceeding Captain America and Thor movies, this movie is about the aftermath. How does Tony Stark live with what he's seen and done? What does a scientist do when his perception of the world has been shattered and he realizes that the world is much bigger and more deadly then he could have imagined? Can a hero even operate under that kind of environment? That's the reality that Tony Stark is living with at the beginning of the film and the theme of the whole movie.
It's a powerful theme and something that's pretty common in the superhero film genre, particularly in today's world. Doing it well and in a fresh way takes a lot of planning and a good foundation. The best part about adapting a comic book character with as many years behind it as Iron Man, you have a lot to draw from. Particularly when your audience may not be as familiar with the character's history as most hardcore fans. The first film raised the profile of the character but I'm guessing that the fans of the first two films didn't go out and read all the best comics of the character. I can count myself among such fans.
Still, I know enough to know what makes a good superhero film for the bigger fans. This film has a lot of those elements but doesn't require you to go out and read through every comic book to understand the context. It also refocuses the story on the main character, something sorely lacking in a film that has such a self-centered hero. In the end though, I think most people will be very happy with the latest installment of the Iron Man franchise. It's smart, funny and has a lot to say about the world we live in. The way a great movie of this type of film genre should do things. Even better is the fact that we know that this franchise is far from over. They have Thor and Captain America 2 coming out and while the film doesn't appear to set up anything for them, it does leave you with room to do another chapter if the folks at Marvel want to.
And with the sucess they have been having lately they most certainly will. Unlike other film trilogies, the character's story isn't entirely wrapped up but many elements which have been carried over through the three films do get a resolution of sorts.
Is the 3rd time the charm for Iron Man? I was definitely charmed by it and I look forward to seeing more from the character and the Marvel Universe.
Check out the trailer below:
Friday, 7 September 2012
Should you fear Dredd because he is in 3D?
Here we have a bit of a different situation though. We have a movie which in some cases is considered a remake of a film made not 15-20 years ago. A movie which I am old enough to have remembered the original release of the film I saw when it did. I can understand people’s hesitation in going out to see the film. I went into the film with low expectations of what it might actually do because of the fact that I remember the first Judge Dredd movie starring Sylvester Stallone. There is a case to be made for remaking a film too soon. Much like a mourning process, it’s a good idea to wait an appropriate amount of time before trying again. What that waiting period should be is open to interpretation. Personally I think that a minimum of 10 years is required to truly get a film out of someone’s mind before taking it on.
A person who is a big fan of an adapted work might disagree with that assessment, but like I said that’s open for debate. However, suppose for example that something was done badly the first time. Should a shorter waiting period be implemented? Many of the fans of the Judge Dredd comic book weren’t very big on the 1990s adaptation to a feature film. Do you listen to them and try again quickly or do you wait until someone who really understands the material comes along and adapts it properly? How does one even find such a person?<
In the case of Dredd 3D, I think they have found those people. Director Pete Travis and star Karl Urban clearly care about the material they are involved in and they worked together to make it what it is. During the Q&A, the writer said that this was one of the most collaborative projects he had ever worked on. Speaking from personal experience I know that sometimes that can be a drawback in a project, particularly in one where the makers have such strong feelings about the subject in question. But with the right kind of people and the right kind of vision, sometimes it can be a great thing.
Dredd 3D is such a project in my opinion. There are people out there who have seen the Judge Dredd from the 90s and will automatically avoid it for fear of another dud. Unfortunately, those people are going to miss out on something that is absolutely worth seeing. Karl Urban’s portrayal of the infamous Judge Dredd is worth the watch alone. Olivia Thirlby as Anderson and Lena Headey as the villain Ma-Ma manage to elevate Urban’s performance even further if only because a man like Dredd is focused and driven, something that Urban does well, and he needs someone to play off of. Thirlby in particular adds the human element to the story without being a helpless victim for Dredd to constantly save. She can save herself if she has to, and trapped in a 200 floor tower full of criminals? I think it’s safe to say that she has to.
This kind of story marks a turn in the way people are being portrayed on screen. In some ways it’s a return to the good guy versus bad guy storytelling that was common up until the tragic hero and the anti-hero became the popular way to tell a story in recent years, but with one major difference. We have moved beyond the “hero rescues the girl” or the “helpless love interest” female character that was also common of the pre-tragic hero story and we are looking to do something new with it. Dredd 3D is the beginning of what comes next, and personally, I am glad to see it. So…
Should you fear Dredd because he is in 3D? Absolutely not, in fact I think you should cheer him on.
Tuesday, 4 September 2012
Scott Pilgrim vs. the World: Who wins?
Comic book movies are by no means unique in this day and age. There are so many of them that you’d almost think that comic books and Hollywood studios are the same thing. Of course, in some ways they are given that the biggest comic book producers, Marvel and DC Comics, are both owned by major Hollywood studios (DC by Warner Brothers and Marvel more recently by Disney). However when it comes to comics, they are by no means the only game in town. You’ve got The Walking Dead being published by Image, Hellboy and R.I.P.D. and many others by Dark Horse, and of course Scott Pilgrim vs. The World by Oni Press.
What all these comics have in common, obviously, is that they have been or are being adapted into feature films or in the case of The Walking Dead, a TV show. But I think one of the things that might make Scott Pilgrim different is that in a way it’s not just a comic book adaptation. In a way it’s also a video game adaptation. This is where things start to get interesting because as much as comic book adaptations have a bad reputation in the filmmaking community video games have an even worse reputation. A reputation that is not entirely undeserved. Many video game adaptations have gone horribly wrong in their transitions from game console to (most often) large scale live action film.
Going into this film then, I can certainly understand why people might not rush out to see it since just those two things already creates two strikes against it. Unfortunately for those that didn’t (in which I count myself), those two strikes are part of the reason you should have seen it, particularly if you grew up in that bit of a sweet spot era when comic books and video games were a central figure of your childhood. The film manages to blend those two worlds together almost seamlessly while not taking away from the reality of the film elements of today. Having never read the comic book on which it’s based myself, I can’t really comment on just how faithful it stays to the comic book or the video games for which it makes numerous references throughout, but from what I can gather the creator of the comics was heavily involved in the production of the film and he seems quite happy with it based on what I hear.
It strikes the right balance between the simple, quiet, character driven moments that are necessary for us to care about the characters we’re being introduced to, some of us for the first time, and the epic battle sequences that are littered throughout to ramp up the emotional adrenaline, all of which builds to the dramatic climax that both video game and comic book based films are often known for. The film is a visual masterpiece just in the way that all the graphics and special effects are more often than not a part of the story and enhance it in many ways. At its core though, the film is about an awkward teenager who falls in love with a woman that has a lot more baggage then he was probably expecting to deal with when he asked her out.
If you’ve ever been in love with someone you weren’t sure how to, you will understand this film. Or wished your life and relationships were a lot more fun than it is, you will understand this film. And if you’ve ever experienced both, then this movie is definitely for you.
So, in the epic battle of Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, who wins? The audience wins.
Tuesday, 28 August 2012
Does Arrow hit its mark?
The final pilot that I managed to see in the recent 4 day weekend of fandamonium that is FanExpo was Arrow, the newest show based on a DC Comics superhero character after the end of Smallville which chronicled the story of a young Clark Kent as he grows up to become Superman. Many attempts to get something else off the ground in television have been tried since the success of that show and so naturally they are often compared to Smallville and I am sure that many will be in the years to come. Attempts were made to do a Smallville spinoff of the Supergirl character which appeared on the show, as well as an unconnected Robin story which follows the same formula of a young Dick Grayson before he came to be trained by Batman. All of which seem to have fallen by the wayside. So the fact that Arrow managed to make it as far as it did is something of a feat in and of itself.
What I think contributed to Arrow getting itself off the ground is that it didn’t try to trade off the success of Smallville in the same way that previous superhero origin story attempts have. Despite the fact that the character of Green Arrow appeared in Smallville and would eventually become a main character in its final years, Arrow doesn’t seem to take the easy way out. It cast new actors in the roles of Oliver Queen and Dinah Lance when it could have easily brought them over and pleased the fans of both Smallville and many comic book fans as well, but it didn’t. The show attempted to stand on its own and tell its own story in its own way. For that, people should be grateful.
This is not to say that I am not a fan of the idea of a shared universe or that I don’t want to see what I like about characters I have followed for a long time represented on screen. I do. But as a writer I understand that this isn’t always the best way to go. Part of developing a TV show or a movie which has a built in audience is making sure you don’t alienate any potential new fans you can create by telling a story not steeped in too much history. That’s one of the fundamental lessons of a show like Smallville. The story of Superman is not a new story, people know the origin and they have seen it represented in so many different ways. Smallville took what that history and gave it a different tone, a different viewpoint, and weren’t afraid to have a sense of humor about it.
In watching the pilot of Arrow, I think that seems to be a lesson which the creators seem to have learned well from and taken to heart. They seem to have great respect for the character’s history in comics, as well as his importance on Smallville, but it’s by no means an ode to the fans who love him already. Fans of the character and of DC Comics characters in general will definitely appreciate the show and the respect the character is given, but there are all kinds of aspects which even a casual fan or someone who isn’t a fan at all can enjoy. You have the hero with the cause worth fighting for, an unrequited love story, the importance of family and the question of how that is defined, and most of all you have humor.
All of these elements are portrayed quite well by Stephen Amell, and yet the other characters are no less interesting or well thought out. Each of the characters have their own problems and their own struggles to face that don’t rely on Oliver Queen to be told, but ultimately I think what will make the show work is how his alter ego the Green Arrow will interject himself into those problems and help them solve them to come out better for it, much like the show seems to have done.
So does Arrow hit its mark? With pin point accuracy.
Wednesday, 25 July 2012
The Dark Knight Rises Review: Did The Dark Knight Rise? - That Blog Thing - Movie Reviews, Film Reviews, Film Entertainment, Entertainment, The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises, Superheroes, Comic Books, Film, TV Reviews, Television, TV, Television Reviews
“The best way to end a story is to go right back to the beginning, and learn something new about everything you’ve been through for the first time.”
One of my favorite writers said this, and I have never forgotten it. Some of the greatest stories ever told have followed this path and they are revered for it. I’m thinking of films like “Return of the Jedi”, or “Back to the Future: Part 3”, each of them added a new dimension to the characters by literally or figuratively going deeper into the past of each of the characters, showing what made them who they really are in what proved to be their finest hour. Much like those that came before, in the final chapter of Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Saga, “The Dark Knight Rises” brings another dimension to the characters that make them better and more interesting. In that way, the film is fantastic.
Dealing with the past is a recurring theme in the film. One character is trying to return to it, another is trying to escape it, while another is intent on avenging it. But much like many of the characters in it, the film seems somewhat stuck within it. Several characters who we are only meeting for the first time in this film have detailed and important back stories that, while well handled and well told within the film itself, deserved better treatment. One of the major assets of the previous films was its ability to foreshadow in a thoughtful way, the Joker card at the end of the first film, a reference to “protecting against cats” in the second, and yes some references from the first two films do pay off in the third quite well. But where before they seem somewhat like they were contained within what fans refer to as the “Nolanverse”, in the final chapter they seem more like pandering to the fans than anything else.
Christopher Nolan likes to play it close to the chest when it comes to the stories he likes to tell. Reports are that actors initially couldn’t take copies of The Dark Knight Rises scripts home. They had to read it in a locked room and leave the script when they finished. As a writer, I totally understand why someone would want to do that. But given that, and the fact that repeated interviews during this saga’s creation have him denying his intentions to do certain things, retrospectively, as great as everything was done, it feels like he insisted on such secrecy just so fans can go “oooh” and praise his name for giving them what they want. That seems somewhat self indulgent to me.
Don’t get me wrong, as a big Batman fan this entire trilogy was the Batman I had always wanted to see, the dark and gritty hero that the modern day version has been since the 1980s. The characters are written and portrayed as if they leapt straight off the pages of the comic books they were born from. I feel extremely vindicated as a comic book fan to know that Christopher Nolan treated these characters with the respect they have deserved for years. But ultimately, I think that The Dark Knight Rises is the “Revenge of the Sith” of Batman movies. Where what was established in the two previous films became a checklist of things to do in the third. There even seems to be a line in the film that all but points that out.
The film has certainly beaten the “third film in a trilogy” curse that seems to be a staple of trilogies in the past several years. It managed to stay visually and tonally consistent to what came before it and the recurring characters are emotionally consistent with the other films, but ultimately I think it threw a curveball where I think a fastball would have worked better.
Did the dark knight rise? Yes, but I think it could’ve risen higher.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)