Jan
31
“G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra” Superbowl Spot
Filed Under Movies | Leave a Comment
I don’t like football, nor do I like commercials, so I won’t be watching the Superbowl this year. Besides, all the ads for upcoming movies will wind up on the Internet in an eyeblink anyway. In fact, the Superbowl spot for “G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra” is already up at Coming Soon, and the game isn’t until tomorrow!
I already had very little hope for this film. The 30-second commercial spot pretty much confirms that I am clearly not the target audience. Maybe if I had never watched a movie before, but having already seen all three “Matrix” films, all three “X-Men” films and “Team America: World Police,” I don’t really see what razzle-dazzle this movie offers that isn’t directly lifted from another flick. Cripes, the Eiffel Tower is knocked over in the opening scene of “Team America!”
I also am getting a very uncomfortable Blackwater vibe from this movie. The Joes don’t answer to anyone?! Yeesh, I’m not sure how I feel about that. I want the Joe team to be taking their orders from President Obama. And frankly, I’m offended that the filmmakers have done away with the “Real American Hero” tagline. G.I. Joe is supposed to be unabashedly jingoistic. Yes, they personify the Military Industrial Complex, but in a good way. It’s fantasy, y’see!
This seems like a neo-Conservative wet dream, the Coalition of the Willing by way of “The Matrix.” It’d be one thing if Stephen Sommers were a remotely competent filmmaker. Chris Nolan was able to make audiences root for a fascistic Batman, but Sommers does not have a gift for nuance. If only he’d completely divorce the material from reality, like the cartoon, then this project might work. Jazzing up the War on Terror with bullet-time is like putting lipstick on a pig.
And that being said, the Baroness looks like Sarah Palin.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
30
Brad vs. Predator
Filed Under Movies | Leave a Comment
Sometimes I think Hollywood hates me. I imagine there’s a board room in an undisclosed location where all the heads of the major movie studios are seated at a big long table, and at the head of that table is Ernst Stavro Blofeld, gently petting a milk white Persian cat. It’s in this board room that these studio bosses conspire with James Bond’s archenemy to make the absolute worst movies imaginable.
As if yesterday’s news that a “Thing” prequel is in development wasn’t bad enough, now there’s word that reboot of “Predator” might happen, according to Bloody Disgusting. WTF?!
Last Sunday I watched “Predator” and “Predator 2″ back-to-back. What a great double-bill. I’d love to see a third “Predator;” I don’t count the AvP movies as anything but fan films with astronomical budgets.
At any rate, rebooting the “Predator” franchise is pointless. All the filmmakers need to do is drop the titular beastie in another exotic locale. The first film pits the Predator against Green Berets in the fictional South American country of Val Verde; movie two is set in the near future (1997!), where another Predator hunts beleaguered cops in Downtown L.A. The sequel is more or less a reboot of the original, but it still advances the franchise by not discarding anything that happened before. In the second film, a subplot revolves around a group of government spooks who are trying to capture a live Predator.
So why don’t they make another sequel? After “Live Free or Die Hard” and “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” both did reasonable business, I thought that long-in-the-works sequels were making a comeback. Rebooting this franchise is dismissive and redundant. I wish Hollywood would destroy a brand I could give a damn about for a change.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
29
The Stupidest “Thing” I’ve Heard All Day
Filed Under Cult Films, Movies | 1 Comment
There was a time — oh, so long ago — when remakes were few and far between. They were also damn good. “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” “The Fly” and “The Thing” rank as some of my favorites. There’s been talk for awhile now about a sequel or a prequel to “The Thing.” Well, apparently a prequel’s being scripted, according to Chud.com. Prequels to remakes always seem weird to me, but I digress. At any rate, in the 1982 remake, the heroes battle a shape-shifting beastie in Antarctica that was apparently unearthed by a Norwegian expedition. The prequel will be about those ill-fated Norwegians.
What’s really, really stupid about this whole idea is that the heretofore unmentioned brother of Kurt Russell’s character in “The Thing” is supposed to be the lead. Now I’ve seen the movie a dozen times. MacReady never, ever says anything about having a brother who’s chillin’ with the Norwegians. One would think this particular bit of information would come up at some point, especially when he and another character arrive at the Norwegians’ camp and find it’s in ruins and full of dead bodies. I imagine a bit of dialogue like, “Man alive, I hope my brother got out of here,” would’ve been uttered. It’s possibly MacReady didn’t like his brother, but still.
If Universal’s desperate to cash in on “The Thing,” I don’t see why they simply make a direct sequel. The movie’s open-ended as hell. This would be a much better approach. In fact, MacReady’s brother would be a better fit here, leading a rescue operation that arrives at what’s left of American base camp, the one where the Thing is still lurking. What are the filmmakers Thing-king?
-Brad Lohan
Jan
29
So I Finally Saw “The Dark Knight” in IMAX
Filed Under Blockbusters, Comics, Movies | 3 Comments
It’s been over 6 months since “The Dark Knight” was released. The movie’s now available on DVD, but it’s also been given a limited theatrical re-release for Oscar season. Although I saw the movie four times in the theater during its original run, I never did catch it in IMAX. I kept meaning to. I mean, I saw “Kung Fu Panda” in IMAX. And I’m a bigger fan of Batman than I am of pandas. Unfortunately, there were only two IMAX auditoriums in the L.A.-area that were showing the film last summer, and pretty much every screening was sold out for weeks on end.
The Burbank 16, an old familiar haunt of mine, has since refitted one of their auditoriums so that it can now present films in the IMAX format. Last night I decided that I should boogie across town and finally catch “The Dark Knight” on their Godzilla-sized screen. What’s more, AMC MovieWatcher members get free popcorn on Wednesdays, and I still had a coupon for a free large drink (thanks, Aaron!) left over from Christmas. Not having to pay for concessions lessened the sting of the inflated ticket price: $14.50(!). Also, there were a total of a half-dozen people in the auditorium — another big plus.
So how is the IMAX presentation of “The Dark Knight” different from seeing it in your average movie house? For one thing, the picture quality is pristine. I’ve seen a lot of movies in the Dome at the ArcLight, and always thought their digital projection was a little blown out, just a touch too bright. The best looking movies shown in the digital format are ones that are filmed digitally. Converting film to digital ever so slightly robs the picture of its brilliance. That being said, “The Dark Knight” nonetheless looks gorgeous in IMAX. Even the actors’ warts, pockmarks and bad teeth are a visual feast.
There were some scenes in the film that were shot specifically for IMAX. IMAX cameras are a right bastard to make a movie with. For one thing, they’re incredibly loud, so all the dialogue has to be re-recorded in post. The film magazines hold significantly less celluloid, so you constantly have to keep changing them out. They’re also quite cumbersome. An IMAX camera can’t exactly be mounted on a Steadicam and lugged around by some burly camera operator. As such, only the opening bank robbery sequence was shot entirely with IMAX cameras, but most of the bits that take full advantage of the format are establishing shots or specific moments during the action sequences. It’s not terribly noticeable, the shifting aspect ratios; the bulk of the film is shot in an aspect ratio of 2.40:1, giving it the widescreen look that’s the bane of philistines who obsess over black bars.
I’m glad I got to watch the movie in IMAX. “The Dark Knight” is a film I really enjoy. I count myself as one of those chronically single oddballs who’s disappointed the movie didn’t get a Best Picture nom. At the very least, I got to see the biggest movie of 2008 in the largest format imaginable.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
28
“Dark Avengers” Review
Filed Under Comics | Leave a Comment
I didn’t bother finishing the 7-issue “Secret Invasion” mini-series. I liked the concept: shape-shifting Skrull “sleeper agents” have infiltrated the Marvel Universe, and the heroes don’t know who to trust. But the execution was piss-poor. Creator Brian Michael Bendis dumped most of the A-list characters in the Savage Land for several issues in which they talk (at length) about the situation but do little to resolve it. Nick Fury returned to the Marvel U after having been off the grid for a few years, but who cares? The series was gimmicky and forced. I read the spoilers for the final issue online and thought BMB had really jumped the shark. When I reorganized my comic book collection a few weeks ago, “Secret Invasion” #1-6 wound up in the trash.
That said, the fallout from “Secret Invasion” — Norman Osborn has replaced Tony Stark as the director of S.H.I.E.L.D. — is now being addressed in what’s called “Dark Reign,” a crossover event that’s off to a promising start. I’m not going to buy every book under the “Dark Reign” banner, but from what I read last weekend in “Dark Avengers” #1, this is one gimmicky event that has potential.
I hate the fact that Norman Osborn/The Green Goblin is still alive. He was killed years and years ago in a pivotal battle with Spider-Man that was a defining moment for the character, one that also resulted in the death of Spidey’s girlfriend, Gwen Stacy. But Osborn was resurrected during the Clone Saga and has popped up every now and then to irritate me. Until recently, he was in charge of the Thunderbolts, a team of supervillains who fight for good in order to stay out of prison. Now, Osborn’s the director of S.H.I.E.L.D., and by extension, the Avengers.
To his credit, Bendis somehow makes this work. Osborn is the Lex Luthor of the Marvel Universe, an oily businessman and a mad scientist. Though his return from the grave is a slap in the face to Spidey fans, I think that actually works for “Dark Avengers” #1. As readers, we’re supposed to be offended by this guy still being alive. So when Osborn armors up as the Iron Patriot — a fanwank hybridization of Iron Man and Captain America — at the end of the issue, we should feel at once betrayed and yet surprisingly enthusiastic about where the story’s headed.
But Iron Patriot is only one member of this new Avengers team. Bullseye, a favorite of mine, is also given a slot on the team, but wearing Hawkeye’s mantle. The book also adds Venom to the roster, though he’s disguised as Spider-Man in his black costume. In fact, the entire team is rounded out by baddies in hero drag. I see a lot of upside here.
Bendis is very good at setting up a killer concept. Hopefully, “Dark Reign” won’t be “Secret Invasion Redux.” For now, it’s gotten me excited about what’s going to happen next, which is why I read comics in the first place.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
28
Drag Me to H-E Double Hockey Sticks
Filed Under Movies | Leave a Comment
The other day, I wondered what was up with Sam Raimi’s latest horror flick, “Drag Me to Hell.” Raimi’s been saying for years now that he wants to return to his roots, to make a low-budget horror-comedy in the vein of “Evil Dead 2.” But the “Spider-Man” trilogy has kept him busy. I think dealing with studio executives at Sony and constantly having to placate the dim-witted demands of the fanbase — Venom was a needless addition to the Spidey film franchise — also made Raimi long for the days when he didn’t have to run every directorial decision by a committee.
At any rate, I found Quint’s clumsily-worded review of “Drag Me to Hell” on Ain’t-It-Cool. I’d heard the script was mediocre, but Raimi has an unusual gift for elevating b-material. That said, Quint seemed impressed with the film. What surprised me the most about his review was the revelation that the movie is apparently going for a PG-13 rating. Gah!
I know Raimi’s produced the remake of the J-horror film, “The Grudge,” which I passed on because of its teen-friendly rating. The PG-13 rating has become anemic, more of a marketing gimmick than anything else. “The Dark Knight” is probably the first PG-13 movie in 20 years that actually feels like it deserves the rating. Most of today’s PG-13 movies, though, are softer than the PG-rated fare I saw when I was a kid. Last Friday I revisited the PG-rated “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles,” which has more violence, naughty language and “depictions of tobacco use” than all three PG-13 “Spider-Man” movies put together.
Still, “Drag Me to Hell” is a Sam Raimi flick. And perhaps the success of “The Dark Knight” might encourage filmmakers to really push the boundaries of the rating. I’m nonetheless disappointed that Raimi’s next film won’t be as blood-soaked as “Evil Dead 2,” but I’m sure the inevitable Unrated DVD will be something else.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
27
Dated Dystopia
Filed Under Comics, Cult Films, Movies | Leave a Comment
Last Saturday instead of running a bunch of errands like I usually do, I decided to stay home and revisit some movies I hadn’t seen in awhile. I noticed during my mini-marathon (the overarching theme was “dated dystopia”) that certain story conventions were being repeated — little character bits or plot devices that I guess could be considered cliches. At any rate, I thought I’d point out funny little similarities among the four films. The movies I watched were as follows:
“V for Vendetta”
“The Running Man”
“RoboCop”
“Darkman”
And here’s a by-the-numbers list of recurring themes:
Number of movies in which the big bad offers the hero a job after the hero’s killed all of his henchmen: 2 (“The Running Man” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the hero is disfigured and/or dismembered: 3 (“V for Vendetta,” “RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the media is controlled by the state: 2 (“V for Vendetta” & “The Running Man”).
Number of movies in which we see what’s on TV in the future: 3 (“V for Vendetta,” “The Running Man” & “RoboCop”).
Number of movies in which a corrupt businessman is revealed to be the main villain: 2 (“RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which we see a scale model of a futuristic city: 2 (“RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the hero has amnesia: 2 (“V for Vendetta” & “RoboCop”).
Number of movies in which the hero wears a mask: 3 (“V for Vendetta,” “RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the hero is bald: 3 (“V for Vendetta,” “RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the hero has superhuman strength: 3 (“V for Vendetta,” “RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the hero does not get the girl: 3 (“V for Vendetta,” “RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies in which the hero is killed or believed to be dead: 4 (“V for Vendetta,” “The Running Man,” “RoboCop” & “Darkman”).
Number of movies actually based on a comic book: 1 (“V for Vendetta”).
-Brad Lohan
Jan
26
“Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” at the Nuart
Filed Under Blockbusters, Comics, Indies, Movies, TV, Toys | 1 Comment
It’s the 25th anniversary of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. The first issue of Kevin Eastman and Peter Laird’s self-published comic first hit stands in 1984. It was another four years before the cartoon debuted. New Line Cinema then released a live-action film in 1990, which became the highest-grossing independently produced movie at the time.
When I was a kid, I was a colossal fan of the Ninja Turtles. The concept is at once hilarious and ingenious. Four turtles are exposed to radioactive mutagen that turns them into anthropomorphic reptilian teenagers. They’re trained in the art of ninjitsu by a humanoid rat, and with the help of a TV news reporter, they battle a crime ring headed up by a masked nogoodnik with a fetish for sharp objects. Named after Renaissance painters, the turtles are nonetheless impetuous adolescents, who love pizza and pop cultural references. Each has wields his own particular ninja weapon and wears a color-coded bandanna, so you can tell them apart.
I remember seeing “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” in the theater four times during its original release and probably north of a hundred times on home video. Watching it again last Friday at the Nuart, I was struck by how well it still plays. The turtle costumes — created by Jim Henson’s Creature Shop — look great; I even noticed a scar on Raphael’s nose. The martial artists inside the bulky outfits also manage to pull off some pretty spectacular moves during the fight sequences. This film was made back when action was coherently shot and edited.
Miraculously, the script does not short-change the characters or the story. The film cherry-picks elements of the comics and the cartoon, which have slightly different approaches to the material, and the finished product is something that fans of one or the other (or both) can enjoy. The movie’s also endlessly quotable. I learned that the hard way the other night, when I found myself sitting in front of an entire row of assholes who were saying every line of dialogue along with the characters. After about ten minutes of that horseshit, I moved.
I think the original 1990 movie represents the apex of the franchise. To celebrate the Turtles’ 25th anniversary, in the coming weeks I’ll blog about the comics, the cartoon, the movie sequels and the 2007 all-CGI film. Cowabunga.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
26
In the UK, there used to be a list of what were called “video nasties,” films (or “fillums,” rather) that were banned from distribution for many years because of their violent and/or sexual content. Many of them have since been released, according to Wikipedia, so Britishers can now watch a bloke get his John Thomas chopped off during the bathtub scene in “I Spit on Your Grave.”
If “Donkey Punch” had come out twenty years ago, it would’ve doubtless been on the “video nasties” list, which is interesting because the film is a British export. It’s good to know that the UK’s temorary ban on explotation horror movies hasn’t produced a generation of namby-pamby filmmakers across the pond. No, they’re just as socially deviant as chaps like Eli Roth.
“Donkey Punch” is not a movie about a boxing mule. If it were, I imagine the film would have gotten a wider release Stateside. No, a “donkey punch” is a sexual act that you’re going to have to Google because even I’m too much of a prude to describe it here. It’s one of those things you hear about from some drunken frat boy in college and immediately dismiss as fiction. “No one would ever really do that,” you tell yourself. “But, someone should make a movie about it.”
Well, the wait is over. In “Donkey Punch,” three giggly young British lasses vacationing on the Mediterranean meet up with four deckhands, who invite them aboard a luxury yacht to party. They drink, they listen to bad music, they take some E, and they start fooling around. One of the gals winds up dead after receiving a fairly half-hearted donkey punch from the wussiest guy of the group, and everyone else on board copes with their grief in a variety of different ways: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, etc. Ultimately, one of the two remaining girls clobbers a guy with a spinning boat rotor — the “acceptance” phase.
“Donkey Punch” is a horror film — I hate the term “thriller” — without any supernatural elements. It reveals how monstrous people can be to one another when they find themselves in a desperate situation. In some ways, that’s much scarier. “Donkey Punch” also reminds me why I’m better off just staying home and watching video nasties rather than galavanting off to some idyllic locale and getting shot in the torso with a signal flare.
-Brad Lohan
Jan
23
“Star Trek: Nemesis” Review
Filed Under Cult Films, Movies | 1 Comment
“Star Trek: Insurrection” received a lukewarm reception when it was released in 1998, and it would be another four years before another “Trek” film would hit theaters. Paramount decided to shake things up a bit with movie ten. The studio hired John Logan, hot off the success of “Gladiator,” to write the script and Stuart Baird — the guy who, uh, directed “Executive Decision,” the only movie Steven Seagal dies in — to helm the film; Jonathan “Two Takes” Frakes had directed the previous two “Trek” entries.
As a film editor, Stuart Baird is top notch, having spliced some of my favorite genre flicks, “Superman: The Movie,” “Lethal Weapon,” “Casino Royale,” etc. His directorial efforts, however, are fairly blah. “Star Trek: Nemesis” is his weakest movie and in my opinion the absolute worst “Trek” installment to date. It tanked at the box office and kiboshed any subsequent films featuring the Next Generation crew. So, what went wrong? I’d have to say just about everything.
“Star Trek: Nemesis” is clearly trying to reinvent itself for a broader audience. It’s darker, more action-oriented and retarded — three key components in most summer blockbusters. Unfortunately, in their attempts to expand the franchise’s appeal, the filmmakers ended up with a movie that no one, not even a diehard Trekker, would enjoy in the slightest.
In the film, the crew of the Enterprise-E is sent to the planet Romulus where they meet Shinzon, a clone of Captain Picard. Never mind that Shinzon looks nothing like Picard; he’s at least thirty years Picard’s junior and dresses like one of the Sectaurs. We learn that Shinzon spent the bulk of his youth as a slave in the mines of Romulus’ sister planet, Remus. For whatever reason, he’s now a Reman Praetor and mad at the world and sitting on a doomsday weapon and who cares? I’ve seen this movie twice now, and I seem to understand it less each time. “Dune” makes more sense than this movie.
Along the way, the Enterprise crew also happen upon an android similar to Data named B-4. Why is he called B-4? Well, he was made before Data. Ugh.
The movie doesn’t feel like a “Star Trek” film. It’s so dour and joyless. Commander Riker and Deanna Troi get married at the top of the film, but Picard’s toast to them has this weird undercurrent of bitterness that’s supposed to come across as jovial. It really just sounds like he’s butt-hurt about still being single and pissed that he’s losing his Number One guy.
The problem with the Next Generation films is that they never really found their stride. After the success of “First Contact,” the filmmakers should’ve continued to mine the television series for characters who deserve the big-screen treatment. Where the hell’s a movie with Q as the villain? I’ve probably seen about a dozen episodes of TNG, but even I know that Q was one of the series’ A-list big bads. A putz like Shinzon doesn’t hold a candle to Q.
It’s disappointing that the Next Generation crew goes out with a whimper in “Nemesis.” I found myself getting into the characters more than I’d expected to while watching the last four films. I might even start renting episodes of the series — definitely anything with the Borg — in the coming weeks.
That about wraps up my reviews of the “Star Trek” movies. Live, blog and prosper.
-Brad Lohan