Prometheus - Movie Review - Ridley Scott

The Collapsed - Movie review.

How Captain America can change the modern screen hero

I was thinking the other day how the superhero movie landscape has changed with the success of the Marvel-produced superhero movies. One non-Marvel hero I really love from my childhood is Superman (a DC comics character), but I've been dismayed by talk from Warner Bros., and even fandom, that Superman is an antiquated character with an outdated do-gooder, boyscout personality that wouldn't appeal to today's audience. People who make this argument labour under the assumption that society is so bad that we cannot accept characters in our fiction that do good deeds and help people simply because People who make this point believe that characters like Superman are not believable, because if you had powers, would you help people or would it be more believable that you would go on a power trip of death and destruction simply because you can? People who think that Superman is too much of a do-gooder might also think that cops, firefighters and doctors help people simply to get paid, rather than sincerly wanting to save lives, and people like Gandhi and Mother Teresa are merely anomalies. Batman is believable because he's prepetually tortured by tradgedy and beats up villains, and Superman is not believable because he doesn't have angst and uses his powers to help rather than hinder -- and who the hell would do that if they had super powers? Right?

I've always been troubled by the assumption that Superman could not work on screen anymore (even though he has in the past --  to legendary success) because nobody believes in moral superheroes anymore. And then Captain America: The First Avenger came out last year and, frankly, showed how to do a moral character right.

Steve Rogers (a.k.a. Captain America) was depicted in Captain America: The First Avenger as an honest, true hero who didn't want to kill but would still fight for his country because he "hates bullies". He's shown defending the troops in combat during WWII when a heckler disparages the war effort in a movie theatre during rousing images of troops fighting Nazis in a news reel. Rogers is a skinny, short guy and has no chance against this heckler, gets beat up by him eventually, but still stood his ground. Later, a grenade is tossed at Rogers and a bunch of army recruits, and while the grenade is not live (unbeknownst to anyone), every troop scatters to save themselves while Steve Rogers throws himself on the grenade, sacrificing himself to save his comrades. Through out Captain America: The First Avenger, Steve Rogers is portrayed as an honest hero with morals and ethics who would lay down his life for truth, justice and the American way -- and at no time at all was there an eye-rolling moment of cheesiness, corniness or jingoism. There was not one uncomfortable moment which felt out-dated or out of touch with today's view of heroism. Captain America: The First Avenger proved that there is room for morally altruistic heroes at the box office. It doesn't have to be protrayed in a corny way. People lay down their lives to save others every day, from the Red Cross sergeon in a war torn country to the cop on the street.

Superman: The Man of Steel is currently in production (as of this writing) for a 2013 release. So far, the Marvel-produced films have displayed heart and an uncanny ability to portray their characters with personality, charm and heroism in a way that isn't forced. I really hope Warner Bros. is taking notes and that Superman isn't needlessly "edgey" and panderingly "cool" in a manufactured way in Superman: The Man of Steel. I really hope the character is good natured, moral and fights for truth, justice and the American way. Captain America: The First Avenger proved that a superhero doesn't have to be dark and brooding to be a success at the box-office. Hopefully, Superman can follow suit next year.

-Deceptisean

Ray Bradbury - RIP

Snow White and the Huntsman - Movie review.

Men in Black...III

So, they made another Men in Black movie.  It's actually a little surprising to me, considering that it had been 10 years since MIB II and if memory serves, it wasn't really all that well received. At least by me. I didn't care for #2...it seemed the story really wasn't that great and it wasn't as much fun as the first one.  Actually, I can remember nothing about #2, other than J went to find K who was working at the post office with a bunch of aliens...I don't remember the main villain or anything.  Needless to say, didn't even see it in the theatre which is dry, considering Men in Black 1 was one of my first DVD's.  So, I went to see this one and you know what?


It actually was pretty good!  I don't think it was as good as the first one for sure, that movie is just so much fun, it's ridiculous. However, this one is pretty good, nevertheless.  There's a ton of aliens again and there's a lot of humour as well, I think the humour fell sort of flat in MIB 2, but it really works on this one.  I find that Smith and Jones are pretty good foils for one another and the fact that Tommy Lee Jones plays everything dead straight no matter how ridiculous the situation is just awesome.  His eulogy for Zedd is great!


I was a little nervous about him going back in time because you would lost the whole Smith/Jones dynamic and it's true, I don't think Brolin and Smith are as good together as Smith and Jones, but then again, Jones' face is impossible to duplicate.  I will say this for Brolin though, his impression of Tommy Lee Jones is scary and I mean SCARY good.  When he was talking, if you closed your eyes, you would think it was Tommy Lee Jones speaking.  It's that insane.  


The storyline is okay, the main villain is actually really memorable (the wildman Kieran from Dinner for Schmucks) and it has a nice nostalgia to it as most of the film takes place in 1969.  That means the MIB run into Andy Warhol, there's more racism, the cars are different, the technology is different, it's just a different time and place and I guess it was one way to breathe life back into the franchise.  To be honest, I think this might be the end of the Men in Black films, at least in this incarnation and if so, then they wrapped everything up really well.  


If you skipped this one because you weren't that impressed with #2, that's perfectly understandable.  Men in Black II was a huge misstep, but they're back with a vengeance in this one and they really went out and tried to make this movie fun again.  There's a lot of aliens, there's gadgets and there's laughs.  That's all you really need in these types of movies.  So, catch in on DVD if you can, it's one of those movies that doesn't try and be anything other than a fun movie and really, what more can you ask?


Rating: 4 out of 5 stars. 


- Stephenstein

Total Film's 50 most hated movies of all time - Sex and the City 2

I can't believe I am writing about a Sex and the City movie.  I look up at the top and there's the Sex and the City poster.  How low I have gone.  Pretty soon, I will be writing about every rom-com movie that has come out in the past 3 years.  Anyhow, Total Film put this on their most hated list.  I was not surprised, because I mean, a guy made this list, so he's going to have absolutely no qualms about putting this movie on the list. However, his reasons were both obvious and a little...weird.  They're below:


"Well, the fellas would have hated it regardless, but even female fans turned on a show that had lost its bite for xenophobic cheap shots and self-parody."  


So...let me start out with my take on the movie: I have no take on the movie.  I did not see the movie.  I know it's not geared to people like me and I luckily do not have a girlfriend and thus was not dragged to see this film. You see, there are benefits for being single, sometimes.  So, can't say I hate the movie, didn't see it.  However, even if I were dragged to this movie, I still would probably not have hated it just because it's a chick flick.  Listen, this movie is directed at women.  That's obvious.  The television show was geared towards women.  Once again, didn't need an advertisement for that, it was pretty clear.  For me to hate this movie, I would also have to hate every movie aimed at black folks (Tyler Perry, Spike Lee) or gay people or people who are fans of a television series I haven't watched or people who are fans of a book I haven't read.  Every movie has a demographic.  Even though I'm not a kid anymore, for instance, I don't hate kid movies.  I understand there is an audience for certain movies and I'm not that particular audience.  That's fine.  Not every film is made for me.  Talk about egocentric and self-centred.  It's a wonder this guy can leave his house every day, his head is so damned big. 


The rest of the comment though...is weird to me.  First, he mentions that female fans turned on the show.  Is he talking about the movie?  Because there was a television show that ended before this movie.  This guy knows this right?  He's talking about the movie, not the Sex in the City show?  Oh, he doesn't?  He doesn't even know what he's talking about?  Well, after over twenty reviews of his list, I have to agree.  He doesn't. That comment makes it sound like he's talking about the last season of the television show that was on HBO. not the movie.  Holy confused.


Then he mentions that there are "xenophobic" cheap shots.  Now, I am an educated man (as I hope you've realized from reading these posts), but I do not know what xenophobia is. I had to look it up.  So, thanks again Mr. Total Film for jumping into the dictionary.  You say films are muffled and there are xenophobic comments.  Who are you trying to impress?  The Rock?  'Cause, he ain't impressed!  Neither am I! Xenophobic...okay, xenophobia is "an unreasonable Fear or hated of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange" (thanks Wikipedia).  So, to me, this is a really PC way of saying there's racism in the movie and that is not cool.  At all.  I haven't seen the film so I can't judge if this is just their interpretation of the film or if that stuff is actually in there, but if it is, then yeah, I would find that justifiable grounds for hating the film.  There's no place for that sort of stuff in the world, I don't care if it's for laughs or what. I did a little research and it appears the critics say that it is...but then, the critics see a boom mike shadow in a shot and go on endlessly about the amateurish production values, so they're not what I would call reliable witnesses.


Then there's the self-parody part and for that, I have no comment.  I have no frame of reference and I doubt the yahoo who added this to the list does either, so it's not worth my time. 


So, there you have Sex and the City 2.  Not having seen the movie, I can't say that I disliked it or not, I don't know if fans of the show did, I'm sure more disliked than liked it based on what I'm hearing, but it probably still has it's supporters who like anything to do with the original show, regardless of content.  For me, hating it just because you're male makes no sense, just because it's not targeting you doesn't mean you have to hate something, it's the racism stuff that would rate as a yes in the hate category for me. 


Worth the hatred?  If the racism comments are true, than yes, but guys hating it just because it exists is not grounds for hatred.


- Stephenstein