When people talk about the great superhero movies, it's a bunch of names everyone knows that get passed around. Superman the Movie, Superman 2, Batman (1989), X2: X-Men United, and Spider-Man 2. But for the majority, the contest for best superhero movie comes down to a battle between two relatively young movies: The Dark Knight, and The Avengers (not the Sean Connery one).
But why are these the most popular? Why can no one agree ultimately on which is better? Why does the Fan Dumb on both sides feel the need to constantly be at war with each other? Why do so many people argue in favor of TDK, when Avengers was one of the highest-grossing movies of all time? And which one is the better film? Okay, that last question is purely opinion based, so that's not really one that can be definitively answered. But nevertheless, I shall attempt to tackle all of these today, and then proceed to ignore the inevitable backlash from the cults of Whedon and Nolan, assuming any of them actually bother to read this poor excuse for a blog.
The Dark Knight is often regarded as the movie that proved superhero films could actually have good stories, and be grounded in reality. While its predecessor, Batman Begins, attempted this, it didn't ultimately achieve the same heights as the sequel. But why? Where did BB fail, but TDK succeed? Well, I think the obvious answer is the villain. Let's be honest, if you remember any Batman villains at all, The Joker is at the top of the list. Not to mention the fact that Nolan and Ledger worked out an absolutely brilliant place to take the character. I have seen many, many villains in film, but I can honestly say, The Joker ranks right up there with Hannibal Lecter as one of the best and most memorable. Even if Ledger hadn't died, he'd still have been a serious contender for the Oscar. The man has practically been martyred for the film now, and it's had a huge effect on its popularity. It also does raise some good questions about how we deal with criminals in the real world, and at what point has the battle against crime escalated too far? How do we keep ourselves from going too far? And where is it that we finally draw the line? This was a huge part of the movie, and it is a great debate. Essentially, TDK did for superhero movies what Watchmen did for comic books, or at least something very similar.
So if TDK has so much going for it, why do so many people argue in favor of Avengers? I think for that one, you need to look at the reasons people love that movie, and what made it different from TDK. When people explain why they love Avengers, they often say the humor, the characters, the action, and essentially the fun. Avengers is a very fun movie. Most of the comics fans who love it say that it's like the comic was actually on the screen. I think that's really the tipping point here. TDK is all about taking Batman and The Joker, and changing them to apply to the real world. Avengers is more about taking the world of the comics, and subtlety tweaking it just enough that it seems semi-plausible in the real world, but still maintains the spirit of fun and adventure from the comics. Avengers openly embraces its origins, whereas TDK tries to steer away from them. Both worked extremely well. The difference is, you watch The Dark Knight to see something that, theoretically, could happen in our real world, but we certainly hope it won't. But when you watch The Avengers, you're here to see something from a world that we absolutely do not live in, and yet, in a strange way, want to. Because the possibilities of the world of the Avengers are way beyond anything in our world. Anything can happen, and given enough time, it probably will.
So, where do I stand on this debate? Well, prepare for controversy everyone, because what I'm about to say is probably going to upset someone. I think The Dark Knight is better than The Avengers. But, I think Avengers is a much more enjoyable movie. While TDK does have some good enjoyable bits, it's just nowhere near the sheer fun of Avengers. And it's not just the action, the humor and character bits in Avengers really outdo TDK. Sure, TDK had very realistic characters, but can anyone seriously tell me they would rather watch Bruce Wayne than Tony Stark? Come on. The Avengers is at its core, everything we loved about the comics come to life. Both movies transcended the boundaries of superhero films, but in different ways. TDK deconstructed the superhero movie, and showed how these concepts would likely work in the real world. Avengers reminded us why we fell in love with superheroes in the first place, and how they can be adapted to suit our needs as a changing audience. TDK changed the unrealistic into the realistic. Avengers took the realistic, and found a way to coexist with the unrealistic. That's why Marvel's The Avengers is my favorite movie. It's a movie that encourages us to dream of the impossible, and find a way to make it happen.
Friday, November 29, 2013
Friday, November 15, 2013
Thoughts on HIMYM Part 2: Why the show's length makes sense
The most common complaint I've seen about How I Met Your Mother is that it's taking to long with actually meeting the Mother. Now, I can understand that a lot of people think that since it's a foregone conclusion, they should just get on with it. But when you step back and look at the whole picture, you start to realize that something Ted said in season 3 is very true: this isn't just about how he met the mother, it's also about how he became the person he needed to be to meet and fall in love with the Mother. However, I'll one-up this by presenting an argument I haven't seen before, though I'm sure has been pointed out by someone before me somewhere. The show's also about how Barney became the man he needed to be to meet the mother.
If you take a look at the early seasons, you can tell that Ted's the main character, and Barney's the goofy sidekick. But as it goes on, Barney becomes more and more prominent in the story, to the point where he and Ted are practically deutagonists. This is because Barney's growth was what ultimately lead him to marrying Robin, throwing the wedding where Ted finally met the Mother. And, beyond that, the stories of how Barney and Ted met the love of their lives are inexorably linked.
!!!WARNING!!! SPOILERS TO SEASON 9 EPISODE PLATONISH BELOW!!!
!!!READ AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!
If it weren't for Ted seeing Robin and falling in love with her at first sight, she and Barney would never have met. That's a given, but the episode mentioned in the above spoiler warning (and if you seriously don't want spoilers, stop reading NOW! Yes, NOW!!!) revealed that right between Splitsville and The Stamp Tramp, Barney tried to hook up with the Mother, failed, and was convinced by her to try to win Robin back in the most grand way possible. Thus, the genesis of 'The Robin' play. So both Ted and the Mother had a large role in causing their own meeting to take place, and Barney and Robin were also a large part of that process.
So yes, you could simply have Ted say "We met at your Uncle Barney and Aunt Robin's wedding", but here's the thing. That may be quicker, but that's not really the story the show is trying to tell. This is really a story about two things: first, the growth of two men who become better people in their quest for true love, and second, that sometimes when you think your life is going one direction, little things that you may not even notice can actually be leading you to somewhere even better than the place you thought you were going. And believe it our not, that last part is also the story of how my Dad met my Mother.
If you take a look at the early seasons, you can tell that Ted's the main character, and Barney's the goofy sidekick. But as it goes on, Barney becomes more and more prominent in the story, to the point where he and Ted are practically deutagonists. This is because Barney's growth was what ultimately lead him to marrying Robin, throwing the wedding where Ted finally met the Mother. And, beyond that, the stories of how Barney and Ted met the love of their lives are inexorably linked.
!!!WARNING!!! SPOILERS TO SEASON 9 EPISODE PLATONISH BELOW!!!
!!!READ AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!
If it weren't for Ted seeing Robin and falling in love with her at first sight, she and Barney would never have met. That's a given, but the episode mentioned in the above spoiler warning (and if you seriously don't want spoilers, stop reading NOW! Yes, NOW!!!) revealed that right between Splitsville and The Stamp Tramp, Barney tried to hook up with the Mother, failed, and was convinced by her to try to win Robin back in the most grand way possible. Thus, the genesis of 'The Robin' play. So both Ted and the Mother had a large role in causing their own meeting to take place, and Barney and Robin were also a large part of that process.
So yes, you could simply have Ted say "We met at your Uncle Barney and Aunt Robin's wedding", but here's the thing. That may be quicker, but that's not really the story the show is trying to tell. This is really a story about two things: first, the growth of two men who become better people in their quest for true love, and second, that sometimes when you think your life is going one direction, little things that you may not even notice can actually be leading you to somewhere even better than the place you thought you were going. And believe it our not, that last part is also the story of how my Dad met my Mother.
Saturday, October 19, 2013
My thoughts on the Current State of How I Met Your Mother
Okay, this is kind of mainstream for me, but I felt like writing about it. And hey, it is my blog, so I can write about whatever the heck I want to write about. It may not always be interesting to you, my awesome readers (seriously, anyone who bothers to read this little obscure blog written by a teen who's clearly not as good a writer as he thinks he is is awesome), but it's my blog, my rules. Rule 1: Don't Panic. Rule 2: Bring a towel. Rule 3: I'll write whatever I want, regardless of its quality. Anyways, HIMYM!
I was introduced to the show by a German exchange student we were housing 2 summers ago. All it took to hook me was Neil Patrick Harris, who I had loved in Doctor Horrible's Sing-Along Blog. Alyson Hannigan helped too, as by that point I was a converted Whedonite, and loved Buffy the Vampire Slayer. For the next three weeks of his stay, we were binge-watching it all the way to season five. After he left, I kept watching the show with my sister, and eventually got bored after the mess of the Arcadian arc in Season 6. It didn't help that Netflix didn't go past that season at the time, so I had no way to catch up (legally, but I wasn't willing, and still am not, to explore illegal means of watching a show). So, I watched the show on-and-off for over a year, and eventually my sister showed me that Season 8 was finally up. When I learned that the Mother had finally been shown in the Season 8 finale, I decided to get back in the game, and we watched seasons 7 and 8, and got caught up with the current season through the CBS website. After watching all that, I've come to a conclusion: the show may not be as funny as it once was, but it's definitely still worth watching.
There are a number of factors that led me to this conclusion. First, it's the final season, and we're so close to the end, pulling out just doesn't seem worth it to me. Second, I've seen the Mother, and I think the payoff will be worth it. Third, when HIMYM does have a funny scene, it's every bit as funny as some of the best of the earlier stuff, particularly any scene the Mother is in. Fourth: the emotional beats are as good as they've ever been. Seriously, look at any scene where Barney is honest about his feelings to Robin, and tell me he hasn't matured. It's really great to see him come so far. And it's not just Barney, all of the characters have matured. Robin, who abhorred the idea of marriage, is now going through with this wedding, if the scene of her at the reception in 'Band or DJ' meant what I though it meant. Everyone on the show has grown from the first episode, which is part of the point of the show. Barney and Robin had to grow up to get to the point where they could get married, Marshall and Lily had to grow into their role as parents, and Ted has to mature to be ready for meeting the Mother. This at least, is one thing that hasn't changed at all about the show. My problem with most sitcoms is that when they stop being funny and start focusing on the characters, the characters are written so poorly, it ceases to be worth watching for any reason. HIMYM has, amazingly, avoided this. Sure, it's not as consistently funny as it used to be, but it definitely has its moments, and the character bits do actually work (at least for me).
So, overall, I'd say that HIMYM is a show worth watching, even now. It's got great characters, great stories, and some good jokes. They don't hit dead-center like they used to, but they are still funny, nevertheless. It's a show that's changed and grown with its characters, and it's still definitely worth a look if you have the time.
I was introduced to the show by a German exchange student we were housing 2 summers ago. All it took to hook me was Neil Patrick Harris, who I had loved in Doctor Horrible's Sing-Along Blog. Alyson Hannigan helped too, as by that point I was a converted Whedonite, and loved Buffy the Vampire Slayer. For the next three weeks of his stay, we were binge-watching it all the way to season five. After he left, I kept watching the show with my sister, and eventually got bored after the mess of the Arcadian arc in Season 6. It didn't help that Netflix didn't go past that season at the time, so I had no way to catch up (legally, but I wasn't willing, and still am not, to explore illegal means of watching a show). So, I watched the show on-and-off for over a year, and eventually my sister showed me that Season 8 was finally up. When I learned that the Mother had finally been shown in the Season 8 finale, I decided to get back in the game, and we watched seasons 7 and 8, and got caught up with the current season through the CBS website. After watching all that, I've come to a conclusion: the show may not be as funny as it once was, but it's definitely still worth watching.
There are a number of factors that led me to this conclusion. First, it's the final season, and we're so close to the end, pulling out just doesn't seem worth it to me. Second, I've seen the Mother, and I think the payoff will be worth it. Third, when HIMYM does have a funny scene, it's every bit as funny as some of the best of the earlier stuff, particularly any scene the Mother is in. Fourth: the emotional beats are as good as they've ever been. Seriously, look at any scene where Barney is honest about his feelings to Robin, and tell me he hasn't matured. It's really great to see him come so far. And it's not just Barney, all of the characters have matured. Robin, who abhorred the idea of marriage, is now going through with this wedding, if the scene of her at the reception in 'Band or DJ' meant what I though it meant. Everyone on the show has grown from the first episode, which is part of the point of the show. Barney and Robin had to grow up to get to the point where they could get married, Marshall and Lily had to grow into their role as parents, and Ted has to mature to be ready for meeting the Mother. This at least, is one thing that hasn't changed at all about the show. My problem with most sitcoms is that when they stop being funny and start focusing on the characters, the characters are written so poorly, it ceases to be worth watching for any reason. HIMYM has, amazingly, avoided this. Sure, it's not as consistently funny as it used to be, but it definitely has its moments, and the character bits do actually work (at least for me).
So, overall, I'd say that HIMYM is a show worth watching, even now. It's got great characters, great stories, and some good jokes. They don't hit dead-center like they used to, but they are still funny, nevertheless. It's a show that's changed and grown with its characters, and it's still definitely worth a look if you have the time.
Monday, August 19, 2013
Browncoats: Obsessive Geeks or Unsung Heroes?
If you're one of the twenty people who normally read my blogs, chances are you know what a Browncoat is. But, just in case, I'll explain anyway. Browncoats are fans of the show Firefly, like how fans of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic are called Bronies (and sometimes Pegasisters). However, if you don't know what a Browncoat is, you probably don't know what Firefly is either. Firefly is a space western created by Joss Whedon, of Buffy and Avengers fame. It starred Nathan Fillion, Gina Torres, Alan Tudyk, Morena Baccarin, Adam Baldwin (who is not one of the Baldwin brothers), Jewel Statie, Sean Maher, Ron Glass, and Summer Glau. It first aired September 20, 2002, and was cancelled by December 20 of the same year. So yes, Browncoats are essentially the fanbase of a doomed show. But that then begs the question: are these guys obsessive morons clinging to a show that no one liked? Or are they simply another large cult who just love their show?
Now, to answer that question, we're going to have to really delve into the mindset of a fan, and find out why they do what they do. The Browncoats didn't grow overnight, after all. We're also going to have to go into some of the history behind the show, and even explore the history of fandom in general. Because while on the surface this looks like a simple question, it really isn't. This is a question that, at it's very core, explores what passion truly is.
Fandoms have always been around. They may not have always been called that, but the concept has been here since the dawn of time. And that's simply because, at their core, each person is passionate about something. Hunters are passionate about catching prey. Architects are passionate about building. Painters are passionate about art. It's just something that's always been there. And where there are passionate creators, there are people who are passionate at admiring their work. How else did Mozart, Shakesphere, Da Vinci, and Van Gogh become the universally known figures they are today? Their fans carry on their legacy, and spread it to the rest of the world. But those guys are the great artists of their time, with universal recognizability today. How can Whedon compare to them?
At the time, Joss Whedon was a somewhat recognizable name. He had created the well-known Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and it's counterpart, Angel. Around this time, he read The Killer Angels, a book about the Battle of Gettysburg written by Michael Shaara. The idea of exploring the frontier through the eyes of the people history stepped on intrigued him, and he eventually came up with Firefly. I'll admit, I'm not exactly sure where the space idea came from, but it did have a huge effect on the show. One thing Whedon was sure of was that he didn't want to make a sci-fi show like the then-current norm, which he felt was too pristine and rarefied. In essence, he wanted to tell the story of a man who fought for the Confederates and had to deal with their loss, but in space. The end result was one of the most unique shows in television history. However, that was part of the problem. Being a space western, the average viewer was unsure how to cope with this strange universe. It didn't help that FOX, the network that aired the show, did make some poor decisions that ended up hurting the show in the long run. It started when they decided the pilot episode, which introduced the characters and explained why they were on the Firefly-class ship Serenity, would not be aired, and instead they would air the second episode first. This haphazard airing of the show would plague it for the rest of its short life. The promos didn't help either, trying to make it look like an action show, when it clearly was not. The final nail in the coffin was FOX airing it during the Friday night death slot. With all these problems combined, Firefly was practically DOA. So why do so many fans still cherish it today?
For many Browncoats, the main reason they love Firefly is the characters. People love Mal, Wash, Zoe, Kaylee, Jayne, and the rest. Their interactions and traits felt very identifiable to many people. None of them were evil, and none of them were saints either. They were just people trying to survive in an unforgiving world, something most us have gone through at one time or another. Another reason is the humor, a staple of most Whedon productions. However, the most surprising reason is also partly the reason for its demise: the world. Many people find it an interesting, new world, that feels identifiable, unlike worlds like Star Trek's. To clarify, these are Browncoat opinions, not mine. I'm trying to leave my bias out of this, though it is difficult. But whatever the reason, all Browncoats agree that cancelling Firefly was the dumbest thing FOX ever did. So what did they do about it?
Once Firefly's cancellation was announced, the Browncoats joined together in outrage and sadness. FOX received hundreds of e-mails and petitions pleading for the show to return. None were successful, though they eventually did convince FOX to put the series on DVD. Sales went through the roof. Pre-sales topped the charts of even Amazon.com. Two years later, Universal got into contact with Whedon about making a movie, and he chose to continue Firefly through a feature film. On Spetember 30, 2005, Serenity premiered. After an opening weekend of $10.1 million, the movie would eventually gross $38 million worldwide. Sadly, this was just shy of its $39 million budget, and a sequel has yet to be announced. DVD sales once again saved the day, but the damage was done. On the screen, Firefly was dead. It only lived on through novels, comic books, and an RPG.
While cancellation of cult shows is a common thing these days, the Browncoats made Firefly into more than another short-lived show. The Browncoats have turned Firefly into a symbol for cults everywhere. Sure, the Trekkies were what kept Star Trek alive until the movies, but the franchise was successfully revived, and remains the most popular cult to this day. The Browncoats weren't so lucky. They didn't become a symbol for people who fought the network and won, they became the people who fought the network and lost. Many have noted that their plight is similar to that of Captain Malcolm Reynolds: they fought their hardest, and lost. But they still try to keep the dream alive in what little way they can. Firefly is a symbol of sadness, but also one of hope. Because even now, nearly ten years after the show's death, the fanbase remains strong
So what are Browncoats? Well, if it isn't obvious by this point, yes, I am one, so a lot of bias is going into this. However, that doesn't mean I can't recognize the negative aspects of the fanbase. So what do I think? I think the Browncoats are a little bit obsessed, but I do think most of them have a good head on their shoulders. Ultimately they're just people who are passionate about a show that was killed before it even had a chance, and, like Trekkies, Jedi, Bronies, and all other cult followings, are going to do whatever they can to keep it around. If it weren't for them, the family that developed during the making of the show wouldn't have had a chance to get back together. If it weren't for them, the show would indeed, be dead. And let's not forget, the general public has often done the same thing as the Browncoats. Why does I Love Lucy continue to air, decades after it ended? Why does Doctor Who still persist, even after its cancellation in 1989? Because the people who loved it refused to let it truly die. The Browncoats are doing the same thing. The Browncoats still love the show, and still watch it, and still spread it to people. And in that way, the show remains alive. The fans have done what the cast and crew couldn't, and the networks wouldn't: they've kept the light of Firefly aglow.
Now, to answer that question, we're going to have to really delve into the mindset of a fan, and find out why they do what they do. The Browncoats didn't grow overnight, after all. We're also going to have to go into some of the history behind the show, and even explore the history of fandom in general. Because while on the surface this looks like a simple question, it really isn't. This is a question that, at it's very core, explores what passion truly is.
Fandoms have always been around. They may not have always been called that, but the concept has been here since the dawn of time. And that's simply because, at their core, each person is passionate about something. Hunters are passionate about catching prey. Architects are passionate about building. Painters are passionate about art. It's just something that's always been there. And where there are passionate creators, there are people who are passionate at admiring their work. How else did Mozart, Shakesphere, Da Vinci, and Van Gogh become the universally known figures they are today? Their fans carry on their legacy, and spread it to the rest of the world. But those guys are the great artists of their time, with universal recognizability today. How can Whedon compare to them?
At the time, Joss Whedon was a somewhat recognizable name. He had created the well-known Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and it's counterpart, Angel. Around this time, he read The Killer Angels, a book about the Battle of Gettysburg written by Michael Shaara. The idea of exploring the frontier through the eyes of the people history stepped on intrigued him, and he eventually came up with Firefly. I'll admit, I'm not exactly sure where the space idea came from, but it did have a huge effect on the show. One thing Whedon was sure of was that he didn't want to make a sci-fi show like the then-current norm, which he felt was too pristine and rarefied. In essence, he wanted to tell the story of a man who fought for the Confederates and had to deal with their loss, but in space. The end result was one of the most unique shows in television history. However, that was part of the problem. Being a space western, the average viewer was unsure how to cope with this strange universe. It didn't help that FOX, the network that aired the show, did make some poor decisions that ended up hurting the show in the long run. It started when they decided the pilot episode, which introduced the characters and explained why they were on the Firefly-class ship Serenity, would not be aired, and instead they would air the second episode first. This haphazard airing of the show would plague it for the rest of its short life. The promos didn't help either, trying to make it look like an action show, when it clearly was not. The final nail in the coffin was FOX airing it during the Friday night death slot. With all these problems combined, Firefly was practically DOA. So why do so many fans still cherish it today?
For many Browncoats, the main reason they love Firefly is the characters. People love Mal, Wash, Zoe, Kaylee, Jayne, and the rest. Their interactions and traits felt very identifiable to many people. None of them were evil, and none of them were saints either. They were just people trying to survive in an unforgiving world, something most us have gone through at one time or another. Another reason is the humor, a staple of most Whedon productions. However, the most surprising reason is also partly the reason for its demise: the world. Many people find it an interesting, new world, that feels identifiable, unlike worlds like Star Trek's. To clarify, these are Browncoat opinions, not mine. I'm trying to leave my bias out of this, though it is difficult. But whatever the reason, all Browncoats agree that cancelling Firefly was the dumbest thing FOX ever did. So what did they do about it?
Once Firefly's cancellation was announced, the Browncoats joined together in outrage and sadness. FOX received hundreds of e-mails and petitions pleading for the show to return. None were successful, though they eventually did convince FOX to put the series on DVD. Sales went through the roof. Pre-sales topped the charts of even Amazon.com. Two years later, Universal got into contact with Whedon about making a movie, and he chose to continue Firefly through a feature film. On Spetember 30, 2005, Serenity premiered. After an opening weekend of $10.1 million, the movie would eventually gross $38 million worldwide. Sadly, this was just shy of its $39 million budget, and a sequel has yet to be announced. DVD sales once again saved the day, but the damage was done. On the screen, Firefly was dead. It only lived on through novels, comic books, and an RPG.
While cancellation of cult shows is a common thing these days, the Browncoats made Firefly into more than another short-lived show. The Browncoats have turned Firefly into a symbol for cults everywhere. Sure, the Trekkies were what kept Star Trek alive until the movies, but the franchise was successfully revived, and remains the most popular cult to this day. The Browncoats weren't so lucky. They didn't become a symbol for people who fought the network and won, they became the people who fought the network and lost. Many have noted that their plight is similar to that of Captain Malcolm Reynolds: they fought their hardest, and lost. But they still try to keep the dream alive in what little way they can. Firefly is a symbol of sadness, but also one of hope. Because even now, nearly ten years after the show's death, the fanbase remains strong
So what are Browncoats? Well, if it isn't obvious by this point, yes, I am one, so a lot of bias is going into this. However, that doesn't mean I can't recognize the negative aspects of the fanbase. So what do I think? I think the Browncoats are a little bit obsessed, but I do think most of them have a good head on their shoulders. Ultimately they're just people who are passionate about a show that was killed before it even had a chance, and, like Trekkies, Jedi, Bronies, and all other cult followings, are going to do whatever they can to keep it around. If it weren't for them, the family that developed during the making of the show wouldn't have had a chance to get back together. If it weren't for them, the show would indeed, be dead. And let's not forget, the general public has often done the same thing as the Browncoats. Why does I Love Lucy continue to air, decades after it ended? Why does Doctor Who still persist, even after its cancellation in 1989? Because the people who loved it refused to let it truly die. The Browncoats are doing the same thing. The Browncoats still love the show, and still watch it, and still spread it to people. And in that way, the show remains alive. The fans have done what the cast and crew couldn't, and the networks wouldn't: they've kept the light of Firefly aglow.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Watchmen Book Report
Well, this requires an explanation. My mom has decided that in order to get me to read more over the summer, I have to read a book every week and write up a book report. Since I was already reading Watchmen, she allowed it to count. Since I figured more blogging experience would be beneficial, I also managed to bargain for blogging rights on the reports. So this is going to be a bit different from my usual posts, in that it's going to sound a little more formal, and it's going to provide a more detailed synopsis. So, onto the report.
Watchmen was written by Alan Moore, illustrated by Dave Gibbons, and colored by John Higgins. The book was edited by Len Wein and Barbara Kesel. There were 12 issues, published from September 1986 to October 1987. Later that year, all the issues were collected and published as a graphic novel. The comic received universal acclaim, with Time Magazine even going as far as to call it one of the greatest novels of all time.
The main characters of Watchmen are Edward Blake, a.k.a. The Comedian, Dan Dreiberg, a.k.a. Nite-Owl II, Adrian Veidt, a.k.a. Ozymandias, Laurie Juspeczyk, a.k.a. Silk Spectre II, Jon Osterman, a.k.a. Doc Manhattan, and Rorschach, a.k.a. Walter Kovacs. Important supporting characters are Hollis Mason, a.k.a. Nite-Owl I, Sally Jupiter, a.k.a. Silk Spectre I, Captain Metropolis, Hooded Justice, Bernard, the newspaper stand-owner, and Bernard, the pirate comic reader. The story takes place in 1985, in an America where superheroes first appeared in the 1940's, and again in the 70's. Their existence allowed America to win the Vietnam War, and has shaped the political situation during the Cold War.
The story begins when the Comedian is murdered, which Rorschach investigates. His investigation leads him to conclude that the murderer may be targeting superheroes and former masked heroes. He goes to warn Dreiberg, his former partner, Veidt, a successful businessman and athlete with a reputation for being the smartest man in the world, Manhattan, a scientist who fell into a nuclear reactor and became the only superhero to have genuine superpowers (that border on godhood), and Juspeczyk, who is living with Manhattan. All but Manhattan and Rorschach have retired from 'adventuring' as they call it, due to an act which banned superheroes, unless they were working with the government. After the Comedian's funeral, Manhattan is accused of giving people he interacted with cancer, which causes him to teleport to Mars. Laurie, now without a home, eventually moves in with Dreiberg, and the two become lovers. Meanwhile, an assassin attempts to kill Veidt, but fails. Spurred on by the recent events, Rorschach continues to investigate his mask killer theory. He finds an old supervillain, Moloch, murdered in his home, and is taken in by the police for murder. An psychiatrist interviews him, and eventually learns that he was an abused child, who was eventually rescued. He became Rorschach over many years, though the event that finally drove him was attempting to help a little girl who was kidnapped. Unfortunately, he failed to arrive in time, and the girl was fed to her kidnapper's dogs. After this, Rorschach began killing the criminals he fought. He colored his mask in black and white, but with no grey, to symbolize his moral code. Eventually, after donning their costumed identities again, Dreiberg and Laurie spring Rorschach, and continue to investigate the mask hunter. However, Manhattan returns, and brings Laurie to Mars to debate whether or not humanity is worth saving. During their debate, Laurie realizes her father was The Comedian, a fact she finds repulsive, as the Comedian tried to rape her mother once. However, this was consensual, a fact that disturbs, depresses, and confuses her. The idea that such an unlikely union could happen and sprout Laurie convinces Manhattan that humans are indeed special, and to return to Earth. Meanwhile, Rorschach and Dreiberg discover that Veidt may be linked to the murders, and fly to his Antarctic base. Upon their arrival, they discover that Veidt plans to use a manufactured alien threat as a means to halt increasing international tension, and stop nuclear war. His plan involves teleporting a genetically altered giant squid to NYC, which will die upon arrival, as will half the inhabitants of the city, due to a problem with the teleportation device. Veidt then reveals that they are to late, as he already enacted his plan thirty-five minutes ago. Manhattan and Laurie arrive, and are appalled by the death toll. However, the news channels reveal that Veidt's plan worked, and the world is unifying in the face of an alien threat. Everyone but Rorschach agrees to remain silent on the matter. Because Rorschach refuses to compromise, Dr. Manhattan is forced to kill him. Manhattan leaves to create life in another galaxy, and Dreiberg and Laurie continue to live and work together as heroes. However, unbeknownst to anyone, Rorschach left his journal with a right-wing newspaper before leaving for the Antarctic. Originally tossed into the 'crank pile', it remains undisturbed until an assistant is given the choice on what to run for some free space. This choice is never shown.
If you sat through and read all that, thank you. Watchmen is a very complicated story, and I didn't even get into the backstory of the original superheroes, the pirate comic, and a lot of other stuff. However, that's also one of the book's greatest strengths. It feels like a fully realized world, one where decisions can have major repercussions. Another great thing about the book is that the morals are constantly questioned with out taking a direct stance on which is correct. The book wants you to think, not accept its own message. It also features a lot of recurring symbols, and many transitions often come of similar lines of dialogue, helping everything tie together.
My favorite character is (Dull surprise!) Rorschach. I know, way to pick the fan favorite, but he's the favorite for a reason. He may not be the most likeable person, but he's the most interesting. He sees the world in pure black and white, and refuses to allow for grey. He does things we would find horrible, but he also is capable of good, and is working towards what he believes is a worthy cause. In his quest to defeat evil, he's become more and more jaded, and that's very powerful. I think another thing that makes him my favorite is that I agree with him that the world deserves to know about Ozymandias' plan. And even if you don't agree with him, you can't fault his ethics on that one. Sadly, his inability to compromise cost him his life, and was one of the reasons Manhattan decided to leave Earth.
Overall, Watchmen is a great novel, and definitely a watershed moment for the comic industry. While it does sadden me that so many people tried to imitate it without understanding what truly made it great, I am glad that they at least saw the book's quality. If you think comics are just silly pieces of fluff that never have any weight behind them, this is definitely the comic for you. If you love comic books and everything about them, this is for you. If you're a casual comic fan, this is for you. Really, this book is for everyone, except may be people 14 & under, but that's not my decision. The point is, no matter what your interests, you could pick up Watchmen and enjoy it. It's a universal story, and hopefully it will stand the test of time.
Watchmen was written by Alan Moore, illustrated by Dave Gibbons, and colored by John Higgins. The book was edited by Len Wein and Barbara Kesel. There were 12 issues, published from September 1986 to October 1987. Later that year, all the issues were collected and published as a graphic novel. The comic received universal acclaim, with Time Magazine even going as far as to call it one of the greatest novels of all time.
The main characters of Watchmen are Edward Blake, a.k.a. The Comedian, Dan Dreiberg, a.k.a. Nite-Owl II, Adrian Veidt, a.k.a. Ozymandias, Laurie Juspeczyk, a.k.a. Silk Spectre II, Jon Osterman, a.k.a. Doc Manhattan, and Rorschach, a.k.a. Walter Kovacs. Important supporting characters are Hollis Mason, a.k.a. Nite-Owl I, Sally Jupiter, a.k.a. Silk Spectre I, Captain Metropolis, Hooded Justice, Bernard, the newspaper stand-owner, and Bernard, the pirate comic reader. The story takes place in 1985, in an America where superheroes first appeared in the 1940's, and again in the 70's. Their existence allowed America to win the Vietnam War, and has shaped the political situation during the Cold War.
The story begins when the Comedian is murdered, which Rorschach investigates. His investigation leads him to conclude that the murderer may be targeting superheroes and former masked heroes. He goes to warn Dreiberg, his former partner, Veidt, a successful businessman and athlete with a reputation for being the smartest man in the world, Manhattan, a scientist who fell into a nuclear reactor and became the only superhero to have genuine superpowers (that border on godhood), and Juspeczyk, who is living with Manhattan. All but Manhattan and Rorschach have retired from 'adventuring' as they call it, due to an act which banned superheroes, unless they were working with the government. After the Comedian's funeral, Manhattan is accused of giving people he interacted with cancer, which causes him to teleport to Mars. Laurie, now without a home, eventually moves in with Dreiberg, and the two become lovers. Meanwhile, an assassin attempts to kill Veidt, but fails. Spurred on by the recent events, Rorschach continues to investigate his mask killer theory. He finds an old supervillain, Moloch, murdered in his home, and is taken in by the police for murder. An psychiatrist interviews him, and eventually learns that he was an abused child, who was eventually rescued. He became Rorschach over many years, though the event that finally drove him was attempting to help a little girl who was kidnapped. Unfortunately, he failed to arrive in time, and the girl was fed to her kidnapper's dogs. After this, Rorschach began killing the criminals he fought. He colored his mask in black and white, but with no grey, to symbolize his moral code. Eventually, after donning their costumed identities again, Dreiberg and Laurie spring Rorschach, and continue to investigate the mask hunter. However, Manhattan returns, and brings Laurie to Mars to debate whether or not humanity is worth saving. During their debate, Laurie realizes her father was The Comedian, a fact she finds repulsive, as the Comedian tried to rape her mother once. However, this was consensual, a fact that disturbs, depresses, and confuses her. The idea that such an unlikely union could happen and sprout Laurie convinces Manhattan that humans are indeed special, and to return to Earth. Meanwhile, Rorschach and Dreiberg discover that Veidt may be linked to the murders, and fly to his Antarctic base. Upon their arrival, they discover that Veidt plans to use a manufactured alien threat as a means to halt increasing international tension, and stop nuclear war. His plan involves teleporting a genetically altered giant squid to NYC, which will die upon arrival, as will half the inhabitants of the city, due to a problem with the teleportation device. Veidt then reveals that they are to late, as he already enacted his plan thirty-five minutes ago. Manhattan and Laurie arrive, and are appalled by the death toll. However, the news channels reveal that Veidt's plan worked, and the world is unifying in the face of an alien threat. Everyone but Rorschach agrees to remain silent on the matter. Because Rorschach refuses to compromise, Dr. Manhattan is forced to kill him. Manhattan leaves to create life in another galaxy, and Dreiberg and Laurie continue to live and work together as heroes. However, unbeknownst to anyone, Rorschach left his journal with a right-wing newspaper before leaving for the Antarctic. Originally tossed into the 'crank pile', it remains undisturbed until an assistant is given the choice on what to run for some free space. This choice is never shown.
If you sat through and read all that, thank you. Watchmen is a very complicated story, and I didn't even get into the backstory of the original superheroes, the pirate comic, and a lot of other stuff. However, that's also one of the book's greatest strengths. It feels like a fully realized world, one where decisions can have major repercussions. Another great thing about the book is that the morals are constantly questioned with out taking a direct stance on which is correct. The book wants you to think, not accept its own message. It also features a lot of recurring symbols, and many transitions often come of similar lines of dialogue, helping everything tie together.
My favorite character is (Dull surprise!) Rorschach. I know, way to pick the fan favorite, but he's the favorite for a reason. He may not be the most likeable person, but he's the most interesting. He sees the world in pure black and white, and refuses to allow for grey. He does things we would find horrible, but he also is capable of good, and is working towards what he believes is a worthy cause. In his quest to defeat evil, he's become more and more jaded, and that's very powerful. I think another thing that makes him my favorite is that I agree with him that the world deserves to know about Ozymandias' plan. And even if you don't agree with him, you can't fault his ethics on that one. Sadly, his inability to compromise cost him his life, and was one of the reasons Manhattan decided to leave Earth.
Overall, Watchmen is a great novel, and definitely a watershed moment for the comic industry. While it does sadden me that so many people tried to imitate it without understanding what truly made it great, I am glad that they at least saw the book's quality. If you think comics are just silly pieces of fluff that never have any weight behind them, this is definitely the comic for you. If you love comic books and everything about them, this is for you. If you're a casual comic fan, this is for you. Really, this book is for everyone, except may be people 14 & under, but that's not my decision. The point is, no matter what your interests, you could pick up Watchmen and enjoy it. It's a universal story, and hopefully it will stand the test of time.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
I just watched Dollhouse Season 2 episode 11
My mind is blown. I mean, seriously blown. I'm having a BSOD moment. I'm probably typing this just to stay sane. I'm in shock. Of all plot twists I've ever seen, this one is the one that's thrown me for the biggest loop. I'm completely baffled. This is absolutely crazy. My mind has been blown. My mind has been blown. My Mind Has Been Blown. MI MIND has been blown. my mind has been blown.
Monday, June 24, 2013
A Look Back at the Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase One Part 4: Thor
Thor was yet another Marvel film that was stuck in development hell. Originally meant to be a made-for-TV movie for UPN, Sony eventually bought the film rights. Through more legal shenanigans, the rights to make the film ended up with Marvel, while Sony got the distribution rights. After trying for years to find a director and a script writer, eventually the story was written by Mark Protosevich and J. Michael Straczynski, who had a successful run writing for both Thor and Spider-Man, in addition to being the creator of Babylon 5. The script itself was written by Ashley Edward Miller, Zack Stentz, and Don Payne. Knowing that they needed a director who could capture the Shakespearean elements of the story, Kenneth Branagh was finally approached to direct, and the pre-production work was over. Now all that was needed was the cast.
After a failed audition, Chris Hemsworth was called back to read again, at was eventually given the part of Thor. For the part of Loki, Branagh brought in Tom Hiddleston, whom he had worked with before. Eventually Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgard, Anthony Hopkins, Kat Dennings, Jamie Alexander, Ray Stevenson, Joshua Dallas, Tadanobu Asano, Colm Feore, and Idris Elba were cast as main and supporting characters. Samuel L. Jackson and Clark Gregg were brought on to reprise their roles as Nick Fury and Agent Coulson, and the filming began.
When creating the effects for the Bifrost Bridge, many of the visuals took inspiration from pictures from the Hubble telescope. These effects were worked on by BUF Compagnie and Digital Domain. While the film was filmed in regular 2-D, the effects were shot with 3-D in mind, a format Branagh believed would be to the movie's benefit. The Frost Giants were created through Motion Capture CGI.
The film was released on May 6, 2011. While the box office score wasn't out of the park, it was still very successful, and nearly tripled its $150 million budget, and currently holds fourth place among the MCU films for worldwide gross. Critically, it received mostly positive reviews, though some figures like Roger Ebert, and A.O. Scott disliked it. On Rotten Tomatoes it received a 77%, being hailed as a 'mighty Marvel achievement'. As for me?
Thor is a very different film from the Iron Man movies and The Incredible Hulk. The scope is enormous, stretching across three dimensions. However, one thing that makes it similar to its predecessors (except for Iron Man 2) is that the heart of the film is the main character's journey, and his relationship with the people around him. This is one of the reasons Branagh was an absolutely brilliant choice to direct because the family dynamic between Thor, Loki, and Odin is something that genuinely feels like it was plucked from a lost Shakespeare play. Their story is incredibly moving, as they go from close to strained, to all-out brawling with each other. The supporting cast does well too. Stellan Skarsgard is brilliant as Selvig, portraying a character who, while cautious and skeptical, is very likeable, and his viewpoint is easy to understand. Kat Dennings does a good job with the comic relief, though beyond that she has little to do in the film. Sif and the Warriors Three do what they can with what they have, but unfortunately they receive little screen time. However, the real show-stealer is Idris Elba as Heimdall, who makes every single scene count. In about six minutes of screen time, he turns in one of the most memorable performances of the movie. However, now the main characters need to be addressed. Starting with the most normal of the four, Natalie Portman does a fairly good job as Jane Foster, but for some reason. I can't help but feel she falls a little flat. Maybe it's the writing, maybe it's the acting, maybe it's the direction, I don't know. Something just doesn't sell me with her character. Odin, played by Anthony Hopkins, is yet another case of 'I make what little I'm in count' as he's the main cast member with the least screen time. Though we probably shouldn't be surprised that he does well, because, well, it's Anthony Hopkins. Tom Hiddleston knocks it out of the park as Loki, managing to turn an annoying, bratty twat of a villain from the source material into a genuinely sympathetic character. Sure, he may be doing things that are wrong, but you can understand where he comes from. This is part of what makes the final fight of the film so engaging. While as an action piece it's nothing we haven't seen before, it ripples with raw emotion. You're so engaged in both characters, you can't help but feel a sense of futility in the fight, that all this could've been avoided. However, this brings us to Thor. Chris Hemsworth brings his A-game, as Thor starts out the film brash and arrogant, yet still charming and likeable. You really get a sense for why he and the Warriors Three are such good friends. His growth as a person feels natural, and leaves us all the more engaged in the aforementioned final fight. Also, kudos to the writers for using the scene where Thor smashes the mug not only for comic relief, but also character development. As a character piece, this film is very solid. However, the romance between Foster and Thor felt a little forced, and it was definitely their scenes that were the low point of the movie. They weren't bad, there just wasn't much chemistry there. Where the film really works is Thor's relationship with Loki, and how it deteriorates over the course of the film. When I first saw it, I genuinely believed Loki when he said Odin was dead, and nearly bought into his ruse. He was a difficult one to predict, which is a very welcome change, considering the last several villains. The fight scenes were pretty good to, though sadly the first one is the highlight. The visual creativity behind Jotenheim was astounding, and definitely deserved an award. This really helped the fight, as it was clear that all of the budget and then some was on display. The Destroyer battle is powerful in it's representation of Thor's growth, but other than that it's nothing really special. The same can be said for the final battle with Loki, though the emotions ratchet up further. Overall, Thor was a success, even if it felt more like an epic fantasy than a super hero movie.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as a truck driver trying to pull Thor's hammer out of the ditch.
Before the UPN movie, Sam Raimi approached studios with an idea for a Thor movie. They didn't get it, and subsequently rejected the notion.
Guillermo del Toro was in talks to direct, but backed down to work on The Hobbit.
Joshua Dallas, who played Fandral of the Warriors Three, was unable to return for Thor: The Dark World due to schedule conflicts. He will be replaced by Zachary Levi. Ironically, Levi was the original choice for the part, but also left for scheduling reasons. I love the twists and turns of life.
Samuel L. Jackson nearly didn't appear in the movie, though once again, negotiations ended up working out.
The post-credits scene with Dr. Selvig and Nick Fury discussing a cube that could potentially be an unlimited energy source was directed by Joss Whedon.
After a failed audition, Chris Hemsworth was called back to read again, at was eventually given the part of Thor. For the part of Loki, Branagh brought in Tom Hiddleston, whom he had worked with before. Eventually Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgard, Anthony Hopkins, Kat Dennings, Jamie Alexander, Ray Stevenson, Joshua Dallas, Tadanobu Asano, Colm Feore, and Idris Elba were cast as main and supporting characters. Samuel L. Jackson and Clark Gregg were brought on to reprise their roles as Nick Fury and Agent Coulson, and the filming began.
When creating the effects for the Bifrost Bridge, many of the visuals took inspiration from pictures from the Hubble telescope. These effects were worked on by BUF Compagnie and Digital Domain. While the film was filmed in regular 2-D, the effects were shot with 3-D in mind, a format Branagh believed would be to the movie's benefit. The Frost Giants were created through Motion Capture CGI.
The film was released on May 6, 2011. While the box office score wasn't out of the park, it was still very successful, and nearly tripled its $150 million budget, and currently holds fourth place among the MCU films for worldwide gross. Critically, it received mostly positive reviews, though some figures like Roger Ebert, and A.O. Scott disliked it. On Rotten Tomatoes it received a 77%, being hailed as a 'mighty Marvel achievement'. As for me?
Thor is a very different film from the Iron Man movies and The Incredible Hulk. The scope is enormous, stretching across three dimensions. However, one thing that makes it similar to its predecessors (except for Iron Man 2) is that the heart of the film is the main character's journey, and his relationship with the people around him. This is one of the reasons Branagh was an absolutely brilliant choice to direct because the family dynamic between Thor, Loki, and Odin is something that genuinely feels like it was plucked from a lost Shakespeare play. Their story is incredibly moving, as they go from close to strained, to all-out brawling with each other. The supporting cast does well too. Stellan Skarsgard is brilliant as Selvig, portraying a character who, while cautious and skeptical, is very likeable, and his viewpoint is easy to understand. Kat Dennings does a good job with the comic relief, though beyond that she has little to do in the film. Sif and the Warriors Three do what they can with what they have, but unfortunately they receive little screen time. However, the real show-stealer is Idris Elba as Heimdall, who makes every single scene count. In about six minutes of screen time, he turns in one of the most memorable performances of the movie. However, now the main characters need to be addressed. Starting with the most normal of the four, Natalie Portman does a fairly good job as Jane Foster, but for some reason. I can't help but feel she falls a little flat. Maybe it's the writing, maybe it's the acting, maybe it's the direction, I don't know. Something just doesn't sell me with her character. Odin, played by Anthony Hopkins, is yet another case of 'I make what little I'm in count' as he's the main cast member with the least screen time. Though we probably shouldn't be surprised that he does well, because, well, it's Anthony Hopkins. Tom Hiddleston knocks it out of the park as Loki, managing to turn an annoying, bratty twat of a villain from the source material into a genuinely sympathetic character. Sure, he may be doing things that are wrong, but you can understand where he comes from. This is part of what makes the final fight of the film so engaging. While as an action piece it's nothing we haven't seen before, it ripples with raw emotion. You're so engaged in both characters, you can't help but feel a sense of futility in the fight, that all this could've been avoided. However, this brings us to Thor. Chris Hemsworth brings his A-game, as Thor starts out the film brash and arrogant, yet still charming and likeable. You really get a sense for why he and the Warriors Three are such good friends. His growth as a person feels natural, and leaves us all the more engaged in the aforementioned final fight. Also, kudos to the writers for using the scene where Thor smashes the mug not only for comic relief, but also character development. As a character piece, this film is very solid. However, the romance between Foster and Thor felt a little forced, and it was definitely their scenes that were the low point of the movie. They weren't bad, there just wasn't much chemistry there. Where the film really works is Thor's relationship with Loki, and how it deteriorates over the course of the film. When I first saw it, I genuinely believed Loki when he said Odin was dead, and nearly bought into his ruse. He was a difficult one to predict, which is a very welcome change, considering the last several villains. The fight scenes were pretty good to, though sadly the first one is the highlight. The visual creativity behind Jotenheim was astounding, and definitely deserved an award. This really helped the fight, as it was clear that all of the budget and then some was on display. The Destroyer battle is powerful in it's representation of Thor's growth, but other than that it's nothing really special. The same can be said for the final battle with Loki, though the emotions ratchet up further. Overall, Thor was a success, even if it felt more like an epic fantasy than a super hero movie.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as a truck driver trying to pull Thor's hammer out of the ditch.
Before the UPN movie, Sam Raimi approached studios with an idea for a Thor movie. They didn't get it, and subsequently rejected the notion.
Guillermo del Toro was in talks to direct, but backed down to work on The Hobbit.
Joshua Dallas, who played Fandral of the Warriors Three, was unable to return for Thor: The Dark World due to schedule conflicts. He will be replaced by Zachary Levi. Ironically, Levi was the original choice for the part, but also left for scheduling reasons. I love the twists and turns of life.
Samuel L. Jackson nearly didn't appear in the movie, though once again, negotiations ended up working out.
The post-credits scene with Dr. Selvig and Nick Fury discussing a cube that could potentially be an unlimited energy source was directed by Joss Whedon.
Tuesday, June 4, 2013
A Look Back At The Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase One Part Three: Iron Man 2
After the success of Iron Man, a sequel was guaranteed. Marvel announced immediately that Iron Man 2 was in the works, and managed to get Jon Favreau, Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, and Paul Bettany, the voice of J.A.R.V.I.S., back. This time, however, the story would be written by Favreau and Downy Jr. themselves, with the screenplay itself being written by Justin Theroux, co-writer of Tropic Thunder. RDJ personally recommended him due to their experience together on that film, and thus the script was written. Due to contract negotiation failures, Terrance Howard declined to return for the film, and was replaced by Don Cheadle. After a near breakdown in negotiations with Samuel L. Jackson, a deal was (thankfully) struck for him to appear in up to nine movies. As for the Black Widow, a.k.a. Natasha Romanoff, Emily Blunt was originally intended to play the role, but complications with another contract arose, and she had to back out. Meanwhile, Sam Rockwell and Mickey Rourke were signed on as villains Justin Hammer and Ivan Vanko, respectively. On the same day Rourke accepted, Scarlett Johansson signed on to play the Black Widow, in a deal that would allow her to appear in multiple films with the possibility of an appearance in The Avengers. Clark Gregg would also return as Agent Coulson, and would begin to play a larger role in the shaping of the MCU.
After filming was completed, merchandising and special FX work began. ILM continued on the work from the last movie, and began upgrading the designs of the suits. A comic prequel was released, along with numerous toys, and a video game. The film was eventually released on May 7, 2010. The critics had mostly good things to say about it, though pretty much everyone said it wasn't as good as the original. A common criticism was that the plot was convoluted, however, many also said that RDJ continued to excel in the role of Tony Stark, In terms of box office success, the movie opened to the fifth-highest opening weekend of the time, and made back roughly three times its budget. So, what did I think?
Iron Man 2 was a troubled movie. It was funny and well-acted, but the script was all over the place, and the action scenes are over just two minutes after they began. The problem with this movie is its script. If you need any more evidence, let me sum up the plot of the movie. Tony Stark is dealing with the after-affects of revealing his identity as Iron Man, with the government wanting him to hand over his suit. An element used in the arc reactor is slowly poisoning his blood, and will eventually kill him. He also has to deal with a business rival, Justin Hammer, S.H.E.I.L.D.'s ongoing investigations of his capability for the Avengers Initiative, and his new feelings for Pepper. Meanwhile, the son of an associate of Tony's father has made his own arc reactor, and is out for revenge. That's six different plot threads, and it just overstuffs the movie. It's basically the Spider-Man 3 of the Iron Man movies. And while I do enjoy Spider-Man 3, that doesn't change the fact that it's flawed, nor does the fact that I enjoyed parts of this movie change its flaws. However, the plot is not the only problem. If you watch the scene where Tony is celebrating his birthday by partying drunk in the suit, the way Rhodey and Pepper react implies that the scene is supposed to be dramatic, and we should be horrified by how Tony is abusing the suit. But the tone is completely comical, and all he's doing is smashing bottles and a watermelon. And this just continues on into the fight between Rhodes and Tony, which should be showing us just how far Tony's fallen, but instead tries to make the tone upbeat with pop songs. While we're on the subject of action scenes, they're VERY short. The longest one, at the end of the movie, barely takes more than three minutes. They're very rushed, and we never have any time to get excited. And let's face it, with everything going on in the story, there's little time to get invested in anything. And on a minor nitpick, how can the government force Tony to give them the Iron Man suit? I'm pretty sure that's unconstitutional. Which therefore makes Rhodes a thief, and Tony is simply to lazy to do anything about it. Quite frankly, this movie either needed to remove Vanko and his sub-plot, or remove Justin Hammer and War Machine. If either of these had been done, it would've allowed the movie a lot more time to focus on a few specific things, rather than dabbling all over, and not really amounting to anything. Quite frankly, I think there was a miscommunication between the script writer and Favreau and RDJ. While it's clear the story wants to be dramatic, so many scenes and lines make this feel like a comedy, like Tropic Thunder. But I suppose I should talk about what I liked in this movie now.
The FX, when used, are very good, and feel very polished. The suits and drones all looked like they were really there, and the CGI on Whiplash's whips were great. However, let's all be honest, it's Robert Downey Jr. we all came to see, and it's him who carries the movie. That's not to say the other cast member don't do well, especially Don Cheadle, who very capably replaced Terrance Howard. Gwyneth Paltrow continues to do well, and Jon Favreau makes the most of what little screen time he has. Clark Gregg stands out, however, as the best supporting cast member. It takes a lot of guts to walk into Tony Stark's armory, where he keep several suits that could easily kill you, and tell him that if he doesn't do what you tell him, you'll tase him and put on Supper Nanny. It was a lot of fun to see him again, and you really get the feeling that this guy has seen it all. Samuel L. Jackson gets to expand his role as Nick Fury, and it's basically him being awesome, but that's what he's best at, so we'll let him continue. Scarlett Johansson does well with what little she's given, but the problem is there's just not much we find out about her. Still, she does well in her fight scene, which, sadly, is the best one in the movie. As for the villains, it's a mixed bag. Again, they do what they can, but they're not given much. They're really at their best interacting with each other, because on their own they just don't have enough weight to carry their roles through. But they were very funny together, and that helps a little. Still, it continues to share one thing with the last Iron Man movie, that being the villains were only passable. Well hey, with Ben Kingsly playing the Mandarin in the next movie, maybe we will finally get a good solid villain. I can't wait to see what he does with the role. Why are you all looking at me like that?
In conclusion, Iron Man 2 limps along, but it's got enough little fun bits that you should be entertained for a while. However, next time we'll bring the hammer down on Thor, and decide if the god of thunder deserves his reputation, or if it's just another light show.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as a man mistaken for Larry King.
Captain America's prototype shield returns, this time much more obvious.
Footage from the scene in The Incredible Hulk where the military tries to capture Hulk at Culver University is shown on a news channel, meaning that the first half of the movie runs concurrent with the events of Iron Man 2.
Tony Stark is recruited as a consultant for the Avengers Initiative, which leads into his appearance the end of The Incredible Hulk.
After the credits, Coulson arrives at a sight in New Mexico where Thor's hammer has crashed.
After filming was completed, merchandising and special FX work began. ILM continued on the work from the last movie, and began upgrading the designs of the suits. A comic prequel was released, along with numerous toys, and a video game. The film was eventually released on May 7, 2010. The critics had mostly good things to say about it, though pretty much everyone said it wasn't as good as the original. A common criticism was that the plot was convoluted, however, many also said that RDJ continued to excel in the role of Tony Stark, In terms of box office success, the movie opened to the fifth-highest opening weekend of the time, and made back roughly three times its budget. So, what did I think?
Iron Man 2 was a troubled movie. It was funny and well-acted, but the script was all over the place, and the action scenes are over just two minutes after they began. The problem with this movie is its script. If you need any more evidence, let me sum up the plot of the movie. Tony Stark is dealing with the after-affects of revealing his identity as Iron Man, with the government wanting him to hand over his suit. An element used in the arc reactor is slowly poisoning his blood, and will eventually kill him. He also has to deal with a business rival, Justin Hammer, S.H.E.I.L.D.'s ongoing investigations of his capability for the Avengers Initiative, and his new feelings for Pepper. Meanwhile, the son of an associate of Tony's father has made his own arc reactor, and is out for revenge. That's six different plot threads, and it just overstuffs the movie. It's basically the Spider-Man 3 of the Iron Man movies. And while I do enjoy Spider-Man 3, that doesn't change the fact that it's flawed, nor does the fact that I enjoyed parts of this movie change its flaws. However, the plot is not the only problem. If you watch the scene where Tony is celebrating his birthday by partying drunk in the suit, the way Rhodey and Pepper react implies that the scene is supposed to be dramatic, and we should be horrified by how Tony is abusing the suit. But the tone is completely comical, and all he's doing is smashing bottles and a watermelon. And this just continues on into the fight between Rhodes and Tony, which should be showing us just how far Tony's fallen, but instead tries to make the tone upbeat with pop songs. While we're on the subject of action scenes, they're VERY short. The longest one, at the end of the movie, barely takes more than three minutes. They're very rushed, and we never have any time to get excited. And let's face it, with everything going on in the story, there's little time to get invested in anything. And on a minor nitpick, how can the government force Tony to give them the Iron Man suit? I'm pretty sure that's unconstitutional. Which therefore makes Rhodes a thief, and Tony is simply to lazy to do anything about it. Quite frankly, this movie either needed to remove Vanko and his sub-plot, or remove Justin Hammer and War Machine. If either of these had been done, it would've allowed the movie a lot more time to focus on a few specific things, rather than dabbling all over, and not really amounting to anything. Quite frankly, I think there was a miscommunication between the script writer and Favreau and RDJ. While it's clear the story wants to be dramatic, so many scenes and lines make this feel like a comedy, like Tropic Thunder. But I suppose I should talk about what I liked in this movie now.
The FX, when used, are very good, and feel very polished. The suits and drones all looked like they were really there, and the CGI on Whiplash's whips were great. However, let's all be honest, it's Robert Downey Jr. we all came to see, and it's him who carries the movie. That's not to say the other cast member don't do well, especially Don Cheadle, who very capably replaced Terrance Howard. Gwyneth Paltrow continues to do well, and Jon Favreau makes the most of what little screen time he has. Clark Gregg stands out, however, as the best supporting cast member. It takes a lot of guts to walk into Tony Stark's armory, where he keep several suits that could easily kill you, and tell him that if he doesn't do what you tell him, you'll tase him and put on Supper Nanny. It was a lot of fun to see him again, and you really get the feeling that this guy has seen it all. Samuel L. Jackson gets to expand his role as Nick Fury, and it's basically him being awesome, but that's what he's best at, so we'll let him continue. Scarlett Johansson does well with what little she's given, but the problem is there's just not much we find out about her. Still, she does well in her fight scene, which, sadly, is the best one in the movie. As for the villains, it's a mixed bag. Again, they do what they can, but they're not given much. They're really at their best interacting with each other, because on their own they just don't have enough weight to carry their roles through. But they were very funny together, and that helps a little. Still, it continues to share one thing with the last Iron Man movie, that being the villains were only passable. Well hey, with Ben Kingsly playing the Mandarin in the next movie, maybe we will finally get a good solid villain. I can't wait to see what he does with the role. Why are you all looking at me like that?
In conclusion, Iron Man 2 limps along, but it's got enough little fun bits that you should be entertained for a while. However, next time we'll bring the hammer down on Thor, and decide if the god of thunder deserves his reputation, or if it's just another light show.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as a man mistaken for Larry King.
Captain America's prototype shield returns, this time much more obvious.
Footage from the scene in The Incredible Hulk where the military tries to capture Hulk at Culver University is shown on a news channel, meaning that the first half of the movie runs concurrent with the events of Iron Man 2.
Tony Stark is recruited as a consultant for the Avengers Initiative, which leads into his appearance the end of The Incredible Hulk.
After the credits, Coulson arrives at a sight in New Mexico where Thor's hammer has crashed.
Friday, May 17, 2013
A Look Back At The Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase One Part Two: The Incredible Hulk
In 2003, Universal Pictures released Hulk, which was based off the Marvel character created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby. Unfortunately, the film was not as successful as Marvel would've liked. Widely panned by fans, and simply 'meh'd' by the general public, it was a modest box office success. Despite these problems, Marvel and Universal still wanted to make a sequel. Unfortunately, (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it) the production was not started in time, and the filming rights reverted back to Marvel. Now that they had the character back, it was decided to reboot the franchise with a new director, cast, and a new direction. After convincing Louis Leterrier to direct, they set off trying to convince Edward Norton to play the title character of the movie, The Incredible Hulk.
Originally worried that no film could do the character he had loved from childhood justice, Norton was unsure. However, when he met with Leterrier and read Zak Penn's script, he agreed to join the cast, on the condition that he would get to rewrite large portions of the dialogue. After casting Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, and William Hurt, the movie was set for production.
Eventually, it was released on June 13, 2008, about a month after the release of the surprise smash-hit Iron Man. It was announced that both films would share the same universe, something no comic book movie franchise had ever done before. It opened strongly, but died down as the weeks went on. Over all, it was a moderate success, in that it made back its budget, but didn't exactly set the world on fire. Personally, I think part of the reason for this is too many people were confused on whether or not it was a sequel to Ang Lee's Hulk. The people who didn't like it were afraid to go see this because they were worried it would continue from a bad movie, and the people that did like it were afraid to go see this because they didn't want a reboot. It didn't help that Marvel was intentionally vague on the subject, with one of the producers going as far as to say it was a 'requel'. Another problem is that while the Bill Bixby show may have been popular, nowadays people aren't as into the Hulk as they once were. Hulk certainly didn't help, probably convincing people that the story would be too complicated for them. Now, a lot of this is just speculation on my part, but I think there's some ground to it. If you don't, that's fine, this is just me theorizing why the movie made such a small wave.
The critics weren't big fans either, as it got a 67% on Rotton Tomatoes, and a 61 on Metacritic. So this is basically a film where everyone has said "It's okay, but it isn't special." So what did I think of it?
I'm gonna be in the minority here, but I think this was the best single-hero film of Phase One. I know, it may seem weird, but hear me out. Let's start with what it does wrong, and get that out of the way.
The military is given a pretty negative portrayal here. Now I know a lot of people don't like the military, but as the son of a former soldier, I think I can provide a unique perspective. The military hates war. As strange as that may sound, it's true. No soldier wants to go into combat and kill people. All they want is to protect their country. Yes, they may not always have the right idea, but it's the American people who are foremost in their mind. As such, the idea that they want to capture Banner to use him to make weapons is a very poor script decision. Now I could buy that the military would go after him because they believe Hulk is a threat to public safety, but the idea that they want to make Hulk a weapon is both uninformed and underutilized. If they want him as a sort of deterrent, that would make sense, and be somewhat understandable. Sure, not everyone agrees with the idea of nuclear deterrent, but it would make sense. But we have no idea how they intend to use the Hulk. As such, it makes the military look like warmongers, which couldn't be further from the truth.
I will say that the film doesn't focus on this too much, and you do get the sense that part of the reason that Ross is hunting Banner is that he hurt his daughter, and probably made him look bad to his superiors. There's a lot of subtext there, but we may have to wait until the sequel to see it confirmed. Also, I think it's worth noting that after the fight with Abomination, the military gives up hunting Bruce. I think that once they saw just what they were getting into playing God, they realized it would be better to step away.
Now that I'm done with my soapbox, let's get to what makes the movie good. Edward Norton. Oh my goodness, what a perfect casting choice. This guy absolutely gets who Banner is, and what it's like to be in his position. It probably helps that not only is he a life-long fan of the character, from the comics to the show, but he also helped write the script. The guy just gels in every scene he's in, and from just the first 15 minutes, we have him completely figured out. The rest of the cast doesn't slouch either. Liv Tyler's chemistry with Norton is absolutely palpable, and she clearly is willing to do anything for him. Tim Roth is the bad guy you love to hate, and yet still understand. He wants to beat the ultimate challenge. He wants to stand toe-to-toe with the impossible and conquer it. That's not necessarily a bad trait, it's just aimed improperly, rather like the Hulk himself. Another neat thing was the way the movie acknowledges Hulk's history in pop culture. If you look for them, their are a lot of nods to Bill Bixby's show, whether it's the obvious 'Don't make me angry' joke, or the little tweaking of 'The Lonely Man' theme, or even just some visual nods, it's clear these guys wanted to take what made the show successful and run with it. I also love the nod to the Hulk: Ultimate Destruction video game when the Hulk rips apart a car and uses it as boxing gloves. But what about the big, green monster himself? He's actually given a very interesting portrayal here, as while Banner doesn't remember being the Hulk, it is still a part of him. The Hulk still wants to be left alone, and even more importantly, he still loves Betty. The problem is not that the Hulk is an uncontrollable monster, the problem is that Banner continues to fight him, and thus the Hulk remains uncontrollable. However, by the end of the movie, he transforms voluntarily to fight Abomination, and the Hulk doesn't harm anyone else (unless property damage counts). When he accepts it as a part of himself, the Hulk is able to do good. And of course by the end of the movie, he's figured this out and begins trying to transform, embracing the fact that he and the Hulk are two sides of the same coin. Then the movie ends with him wanting to transform, and succeeding. This was a brilliant character decision, and it was definitely the biggest reason the movie was as great as it was. This film was absolutely a stroke of genius, and it's a shame it wasn't more successful. Until next time with Iron Man 2, I'm James Picard and this has been another look back at Phase One.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as the man who drank from the bottle that Banner's blood spilled into.
The military secretly revived the super-soldier experiments used during WW2, but with gamma radiation being tried as a substitute. Bruce Banner was brought onto these experiments, believing them to be attempts at reducing or negating harmful effects of radiation. These experiments instead turned him into the Hulk.
Stark Industries designed the sonic cannons used against the Hulk. Tony himself appears at the end of the movie, talking to Ross about building a 'team'. The short contained on the Captain America: The First Avenger DVD, 'The Consultant' reveals that Agent Coulson sent Tony in an attempt to sabotage his superiors plans to recruit Abomination.
Dr. Samuel Sterns may become The Leader, a popular villain from the comics known for his gigantic head, and equally large intellect.
S.H.E.I.L.D. allows Ross to use their databases to track down Mr. Blue.
Edward Norton was asked to play Banner in Ang Lee's Hulk, but turned it down after reading the script. He was interested in playing Banner in The Avengers, but contract negotiations fell through.
Lou Ferrigno, the actor who played the Hulk in the Bill Bixby show, returns to voice the character. He also cameos as the security guard Banner bribes with pizza.
Originally worried that no film could do the character he had loved from childhood justice, Norton was unsure. However, when he met with Leterrier and read Zak Penn's script, he agreed to join the cast, on the condition that he would get to rewrite large portions of the dialogue. After casting Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, and William Hurt, the movie was set for production.
Eventually, it was released on June 13, 2008, about a month after the release of the surprise smash-hit Iron Man. It was announced that both films would share the same universe, something no comic book movie franchise had ever done before. It opened strongly, but died down as the weeks went on. Over all, it was a moderate success, in that it made back its budget, but didn't exactly set the world on fire. Personally, I think part of the reason for this is too many people were confused on whether or not it was a sequel to Ang Lee's Hulk. The people who didn't like it were afraid to go see this because they were worried it would continue from a bad movie, and the people that did like it were afraid to go see this because they didn't want a reboot. It didn't help that Marvel was intentionally vague on the subject, with one of the producers going as far as to say it was a 'requel'. Another problem is that while the Bill Bixby show may have been popular, nowadays people aren't as into the Hulk as they once were. Hulk certainly didn't help, probably convincing people that the story would be too complicated for them. Now, a lot of this is just speculation on my part, but I think there's some ground to it. If you don't, that's fine, this is just me theorizing why the movie made such a small wave.
The critics weren't big fans either, as it got a 67% on Rotton Tomatoes, and a 61 on Metacritic. So this is basically a film where everyone has said "It's okay, but it isn't special." So what did I think of it?
I'm gonna be in the minority here, but I think this was the best single-hero film of Phase One. I know, it may seem weird, but hear me out. Let's start with what it does wrong, and get that out of the way.
The military is given a pretty negative portrayal here. Now I know a lot of people don't like the military, but as the son of a former soldier, I think I can provide a unique perspective. The military hates war. As strange as that may sound, it's true. No soldier wants to go into combat and kill people. All they want is to protect their country. Yes, they may not always have the right idea, but it's the American people who are foremost in their mind. As such, the idea that they want to capture Banner to use him to make weapons is a very poor script decision. Now I could buy that the military would go after him because they believe Hulk is a threat to public safety, but the idea that they want to make Hulk a weapon is both uninformed and underutilized. If they want him as a sort of deterrent, that would make sense, and be somewhat understandable. Sure, not everyone agrees with the idea of nuclear deterrent, but it would make sense. But we have no idea how they intend to use the Hulk. As such, it makes the military look like warmongers, which couldn't be further from the truth.
I will say that the film doesn't focus on this too much, and you do get the sense that part of the reason that Ross is hunting Banner is that he hurt his daughter, and probably made him look bad to his superiors. There's a lot of subtext there, but we may have to wait until the sequel to see it confirmed. Also, I think it's worth noting that after the fight with Abomination, the military gives up hunting Bruce. I think that once they saw just what they were getting into playing God, they realized it would be better to step away.
Now that I'm done with my soapbox, let's get to what makes the movie good. Edward Norton. Oh my goodness, what a perfect casting choice. This guy absolutely gets who Banner is, and what it's like to be in his position. It probably helps that not only is he a life-long fan of the character, from the comics to the show, but he also helped write the script. The guy just gels in every scene he's in, and from just the first 15 minutes, we have him completely figured out. The rest of the cast doesn't slouch either. Liv Tyler's chemistry with Norton is absolutely palpable, and she clearly is willing to do anything for him. Tim Roth is the bad guy you love to hate, and yet still understand. He wants to beat the ultimate challenge. He wants to stand toe-to-toe with the impossible and conquer it. That's not necessarily a bad trait, it's just aimed improperly, rather like the Hulk himself. Another neat thing was the way the movie acknowledges Hulk's history in pop culture. If you look for them, their are a lot of nods to Bill Bixby's show, whether it's the obvious 'Don't make me angry' joke, or the little tweaking of 'The Lonely Man' theme, or even just some visual nods, it's clear these guys wanted to take what made the show successful and run with it. I also love the nod to the Hulk: Ultimate Destruction video game when the Hulk rips apart a car and uses it as boxing gloves. But what about the big, green monster himself? He's actually given a very interesting portrayal here, as while Banner doesn't remember being the Hulk, it is still a part of him. The Hulk still wants to be left alone, and even more importantly, he still loves Betty. The problem is not that the Hulk is an uncontrollable monster, the problem is that Banner continues to fight him, and thus the Hulk remains uncontrollable. However, by the end of the movie, he transforms voluntarily to fight Abomination, and the Hulk doesn't harm anyone else (unless property damage counts). When he accepts it as a part of himself, the Hulk is able to do good. And of course by the end of the movie, he's figured this out and begins trying to transform, embracing the fact that he and the Hulk are two sides of the same coin. Then the movie ends with him wanting to transform, and succeeding. This was a brilliant character decision, and it was definitely the biggest reason the movie was as great as it was. This film was absolutely a stroke of genius, and it's a shame it wasn't more successful. Until next time with Iron Man 2, I'm James Picard and this has been another look back at Phase One.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as the man who drank from the bottle that Banner's blood spilled into.
The military secretly revived the super-soldier experiments used during WW2, but with gamma radiation being tried as a substitute. Bruce Banner was brought onto these experiments, believing them to be attempts at reducing or negating harmful effects of radiation. These experiments instead turned him into the Hulk.
Stark Industries designed the sonic cannons used against the Hulk. Tony himself appears at the end of the movie, talking to Ross about building a 'team'. The short contained on the Captain America: The First Avenger DVD, 'The Consultant' reveals that Agent Coulson sent Tony in an attempt to sabotage his superiors plans to recruit Abomination.
Dr. Samuel Sterns may become The Leader, a popular villain from the comics known for his gigantic head, and equally large intellect.
S.H.E.I.L.D. allows Ross to use their databases to track down Mr. Blue.
Edward Norton was asked to play Banner in Ang Lee's Hulk, but turned it down after reading the script. He was interested in playing Banner in The Avengers, but contract negotiations fell through.
Lou Ferrigno, the actor who played the Hulk in the Bill Bixby show, returns to voice the character. He also cameos as the security guard Banner bribes with pizza.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
A Look Back at the Marvel Cinematic Universe: Phase 1 Part 1: Iron Man
Thanks to the Marvel Cinematic Universe, or MCU, nearly every one in the world knows the Marvel heroes. Iron Man, Captain America, Hulk, and Thor are household names now. However, while the characters origins may be simple, the origin of the MCU is not. Today we'll go back, and see the events that lead to one of the most successful film series of all time, while also giving time for reviews for each of the Phase One films.
In 1990, Universal Studios bought the film rights to Iron Man, and began plans to release the gold-plated hero to the silver screen. However, due to lackluster scripts, changes in rights ownership, and budget concerns, the movie never seemed to get off the ground. Eventually the new owners of New Line Cinema caved in and relinquished the rights back to Marvel. By this point, Marvel had already found a way to self produce their own movies, using Marvel Studios. It was at this point where they started not only looking for scripts for the Iron Man movie, but also to gain back the film rights to characters like Thor and the Hulk.
After a long process, Jon Favreau was brought on to direct, and the film was rushed into production. With the script being incomplete, and without time to be finished before the release date, they needed a main actor who could improvise extremely well. Enter Robert Downy Jr., who was selected through a massive screening process, in part because of his checkered past. Then add Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrance Howard, and Jeff Bridges, and the main cast was complete. After an intense production and lots of post-filming work, the movie managed to make it May 2 release, with plenty of press coverage. And what was the result? A massive hit. The film made back more than four times its budget, and RDJ's career took a major upswing. But how do I view the start of Phase 1?
Iron Man was a major step forward for superhero movies. This was one of the first where it felt like the man behind the suit was more important than the guy who went out punching. Tony's growth as a person is a great thing to see, and RDJ does a magnificent job of portraying Tony Stark as both a snide, sarcastic genius, and a human who realizes his entire world-view is wrong. Terrance Howard and Gwyneth Paltrow are great to, and you can really feel their exasperation with Tony, but also their happiness that he's on the right path, and doing something for more than just money or a good time. However, the villains were fairly weak. The leader of the Ten Rings movement (a possible [I haven't seen Iron Man 3 yet, so please, no spoilers!] hint at The Mandarin) has no real presence or effect on the plot, and Stane? Well, all I can say is they tried, but something just didn't click. Part of it may have been that Bridges was just a little TOO good at pretending to be Tony's friend, that it made it hard to accept it when he goes completely villainous. Bridges does a good job what he's given, but it's his character that really shows the parts where the script was incomplete. Conversely, a lot of Tony's lines definitely seem improvised, but in a way that feels natural to the character. It's not a knock on Bridges, it's really the script's fault. Clark Gregg, Agent Coulson, also is great, and really pops in what little screen time he's given. You can really see why he's the guy that ties everything together. So the cast was pretty good, how about the visual effects? In a word, breath-taking. You can never really tell where the CGI starts and where the practical parts stop, they're integrated so seamlessly. I never once found myself thinking 'This is so unrealistic', I could seriously buy that this suit existed. A big help to that was the sound editing as well, with the servos constantly moving and adjusting. The effects on both the Iron Man suit and the Iron Monger were just fantastic, and everything worked perfectly. Overall, it was a great movie. It may have had a few bumps in the road, but it was a definite game changer for superhero movies. Heck, one could almost say 2008 was the year of the superhero movie, with successes like Hellboy 2 and The Dark Knight also coming out. But we can't forget that one last one, and the next step in Phase One, The Incredible Hulk.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as a man Tony believes to be Hugh Hefner.
One person in the running for director before Jon Favreau was selected was Joss Whedon, who would go on to direct The Avengers.
Tom Cruise and Nicholas Cage both expressed interest in playing the role of Tony in the 1990 film, and Quentin Terrintino was approached to write and direct.
After the credits, Samuel L. Jackson appears as Nick Fury, director of S.H.E.I.L.D. Another reference to the Avengers was Tony having a prototype of Captain America's shield.
In 1990, Universal Studios bought the film rights to Iron Man, and began plans to release the gold-plated hero to the silver screen. However, due to lackluster scripts, changes in rights ownership, and budget concerns, the movie never seemed to get off the ground. Eventually the new owners of New Line Cinema caved in and relinquished the rights back to Marvel. By this point, Marvel had already found a way to self produce their own movies, using Marvel Studios. It was at this point where they started not only looking for scripts for the Iron Man movie, but also to gain back the film rights to characters like Thor and the Hulk.
After a long process, Jon Favreau was brought on to direct, and the film was rushed into production. With the script being incomplete, and without time to be finished before the release date, they needed a main actor who could improvise extremely well. Enter Robert Downy Jr., who was selected through a massive screening process, in part because of his checkered past. Then add Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrance Howard, and Jeff Bridges, and the main cast was complete. After an intense production and lots of post-filming work, the movie managed to make it May 2 release, with plenty of press coverage. And what was the result? A massive hit. The film made back more than four times its budget, and RDJ's career took a major upswing. But how do I view the start of Phase 1?
Iron Man was a major step forward for superhero movies. This was one of the first where it felt like the man behind the suit was more important than the guy who went out punching. Tony's growth as a person is a great thing to see, and RDJ does a magnificent job of portraying Tony Stark as both a snide, sarcastic genius, and a human who realizes his entire world-view is wrong. Terrance Howard and Gwyneth Paltrow are great to, and you can really feel their exasperation with Tony, but also their happiness that he's on the right path, and doing something for more than just money or a good time. However, the villains were fairly weak. The leader of the Ten Rings movement (a possible [I haven't seen Iron Man 3 yet, so please, no spoilers!] hint at The Mandarin) has no real presence or effect on the plot, and Stane? Well, all I can say is they tried, but something just didn't click. Part of it may have been that Bridges was just a little TOO good at pretending to be Tony's friend, that it made it hard to accept it when he goes completely villainous. Bridges does a good job what he's given, but it's his character that really shows the parts where the script was incomplete. Conversely, a lot of Tony's lines definitely seem improvised, but in a way that feels natural to the character. It's not a knock on Bridges, it's really the script's fault. Clark Gregg, Agent Coulson, also is great, and really pops in what little screen time he's given. You can really see why he's the guy that ties everything together. So the cast was pretty good, how about the visual effects? In a word, breath-taking. You can never really tell where the CGI starts and where the practical parts stop, they're integrated so seamlessly. I never once found myself thinking 'This is so unrealistic', I could seriously buy that this suit existed. A big help to that was the sound editing as well, with the servos constantly moving and adjusting. The effects on both the Iron Man suit and the Iron Monger were just fantastic, and everything worked perfectly. Overall, it was a great movie. It may have had a few bumps in the road, but it was a definite game changer for superhero movies. Heck, one could almost say 2008 was the year of the superhero movie, with successes like Hellboy 2 and The Dark Knight also coming out. But we can't forget that one last one, and the next step in Phase One, The Incredible Hulk.
Trivia:
Stan Lee cameos as a man Tony believes to be Hugh Hefner.
One person in the running for director before Jon Favreau was selected was Joss Whedon, who would go on to direct The Avengers.
Tom Cruise and Nicholas Cage both expressed interest in playing the role of Tony in the 1990 film, and Quentin Terrintino was approached to write and direct.
After the credits, Samuel L. Jackson appears as Nick Fury, director of S.H.E.I.L.D. Another reference to the Avengers was Tony having a prototype of Captain America's shield.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
So Apparently I was Wrong About WordPress!
Don’t worry guys, my blog will still be running on my regular Blogger account. I’m just using this as a means to reach more readers. Posts will be up the same time here as they are on my regular blog. I’ll also post updates on my video reviews, which are on my youtube channel. Nothing is changing other than me using two sites at once. We’re a-okay. For those who want to check it out, the link is http://jeanlucpicard10.wordpress.com/ And as for an update on the video reviews, I still haven’t edited the footage, and I have no excuse for not keeping up to task. I make no promises on when it will be finished, but you’ll be the first to know when I do. As for the surprise event, scripting is coming along nicely, so that’s at least some progress. I’m hoping to make more, and to get some good content out there. I’ll also be joined by a special guest from time to time, but I won’t be telling you any more than that. Also, Jae Onasi, my mom, is working on a new cooking show, which will feature us together. If you like, you can check out Confessions of a Geeky Mom for more information. And, in one week, we’ll be celebrating the two-year anniversary of COGS! No definitive plans yet, but I’ll definitely be doing something to celebrate. So that’s it for this update, see you around!
Friday, January 18, 2013
Video Update (sort of)
Well, in all honesty, I just keep forgetting to use my Mom's computer when I get the chance. Also, with finals and two separate plays the past couple of weeks, it's been a little hectic. But, I have finished the script for the surprise review, and I started another one following that. Actually, the surprise review turned into a series of reviews from the same show, so be ready when it premieres. All I can say now is the show has a following on the internet, and it's possible you may have heard of it. But until then, I'll try to get the Transformers review edited soon. Sorry for the delay!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)