This one came from an comment on social media but it perfectly puts into perspective how comics fans should regard Bill Maher's insipid comments about the form:
"He's a pot head drug addict who bangs strippers looking down on people who find entertainment, comfort...escape...in ways that don't harm themselves or others"
Showing posts with label Spider-Man. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Spider-Man. Show all posts
Tuesday, January 29, 2019
Thursday, November 29, 2018
Bill Maher's Predictible Reaction.
Last week, I posted my thoughts on Bill Maher's response to the way people were reacting to the death of the beloved face of Marvel Comics and movies, Stan Lee. In that piece I discussed how any hostile response to what he wrote would only fuel Maher's resolve that he was indeed correct about comics being useless, disposable kiddie fare. Well, never one to disappoint when it comes to showing his ass in the most misguided manner possible, Maher did what Maher does and dug in.
In an interview with Larry King, who I thought was long gone from the airwaves, he said,
"...I don’t read comic books. I didn’t even read them when I was a child. What I was saying is: A culture that thinks that comic books and comic book movies are profound meditations on the human condition is a dumb fucking culture. And for people to, like, get mad at that just proves my point.”
As I mentioned in my previous post, Maher believes intellectualism has a narrow definition. And apparently inconsistencies are irrelevant.
For instance, Maher clearly wrote in his post that pissed off the world, “Now, I have nothing against comic books — I read them now and then when I was a kid and I was all out of Hardy Boys,” he explained. “But the assumption everyone had back then, both the adults and the kids, was that comics were for kids, and when you grew up you moved on to big-boy books without the pictures.”
The second half of his point is well-taken; until the Eighties, comics were mostly for kids and teens. However, the first part of his point jumps out because he contradicts it in his comments to Larry King when he says he didn't read comics as a child. Clearly Maher is more interested in making a point than in being accurate, so let's move on to that point.
As I wrote before, somewhere buried in his dismissive claptrap is a salient point. You can read or reread that post for more details on what I mean. Still, Maher is hopelessly stuck in the past when it comes to comics. He has no idea what has been done with them in the modern era and, in typical Maher fashion, he doesn't really give a rat's ass. He is right because he is right because he is Bill Maher.
Instead of being a true intellectual and saying to himself, "Wow. Even setting aside the less well-thought out, angry reactions, an awful lot of intelligent people made some rather impassioned and reasoned points. Maybe I should look into this further." Sadly, that would entail the ability to admit one is wrong and to learn new things that challenge the old things we thought we knew.
I suppose that's where the real disappointment lies. Maher was once an entertaining, albeit arrogant comedian and TV host who encouraged open discussion of issues. His snarky jokes were often biting and incisive. Somewhere along the way, he became too full of himself and decided to be the self-appointed guardian of intellectualism, a job for which he is not at all qualified. This could have been his moment. Bill Maher could have actually stepped out of his own ass for once and admitted he was narrow-minded. Even if he'd still mostly stood by what he said, Maher still could have made room for other ways of thinking. By not doing so, he reveals himself to be no better than the conservatives he criticizes on a weekly basis.
Or, y'know, maybe I just proved his point, too.
In an interview with Larry King, who I thought was long gone from the airwaves, he said,
"...I don’t read comic books. I didn’t even read them when I was a child. What I was saying is: A culture that thinks that comic books and comic book movies are profound meditations on the human condition is a dumb fucking culture. And for people to, like, get mad at that just proves my point.”
As I mentioned in my previous post, Maher believes intellectualism has a narrow definition. And apparently inconsistencies are irrelevant.
For instance, Maher clearly wrote in his post that pissed off the world, “Now, I have nothing against comic books — I read them now and then when I was a kid and I was all out of Hardy Boys,” he explained. “But the assumption everyone had back then, both the adults and the kids, was that comics were for kids, and when you grew up you moved on to big-boy books without the pictures.”
The second half of his point is well-taken; until the Eighties, comics were mostly for kids and teens. However, the first part of his point jumps out because he contradicts it in his comments to Larry King when he says he didn't read comics as a child. Clearly Maher is more interested in making a point than in being accurate, so let's move on to that point.
As I wrote before, somewhere buried in his dismissive claptrap is a salient point. You can read or reread that post for more details on what I mean. Still, Maher is hopelessly stuck in the past when it comes to comics. He has no idea what has been done with them in the modern era and, in typical Maher fashion, he doesn't really give a rat's ass. He is right because he is right because he is Bill Maher.
Instead of being a true intellectual and saying to himself, "Wow. Even setting aside the less well-thought out, angry reactions, an awful lot of intelligent people made some rather impassioned and reasoned points. Maybe I should look into this further." Sadly, that would entail the ability to admit one is wrong and to learn new things that challenge the old things we thought we knew.
I suppose that's where the real disappointment lies. Maher was once an entertaining, albeit arrogant comedian and TV host who encouraged open discussion of issues. His snarky jokes were often biting and incisive. Somewhere along the way, he became too full of himself and decided to be the self-appointed guardian of intellectualism, a job for which he is not at all qualified. This could have been his moment. Bill Maher could have actually stepped out of his own ass for once and admitted he was narrow-minded. Even if he'd still mostly stood by what he said, Maher still could have made room for other ways of thinking. By not doing so, he reveals himself to be no better than the conservatives he criticizes on a weekly basis.
Or, y'know, maybe I just proved his point, too.
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
Thoughts on the Late Stan Lee.
We all knew it was going to happen. Most of us kept telling ourselves it wouldn't anytime soon but Stan "The Man" Lee was old when many of us were young and each year he remained on this Earth was a gift to fanboys and fangirls alike.
Nobody could deny his infectious enthusiasm for the comics medium and all it has accomplished and still can. To say he became the face of comics is a given. Was it really his fault that those who were not in the know failed to grasp the contributions of so many others to his and Marvel Comics' success? How many people notice the producers and bandmembers behind the frontman/woman when they idolize a singer? Who pays attention to the names in the end credits when the movie is over? Does anyone ask for the name of the anesthesiologist after the operation?
Obviously some people do, and if you're reading this, you're probably one of them. But for those who don't, Jack Kirby's contributions have gone largely unnoticed and unacknowledged. The man defined the look of Marvel for decades to come and the argument has been made (by him as well) that he did most of the work while Lee added words here and there. Further, one could make the argument that Lee refined Kirby's work in ways the artist lacked the skill to do, a claim that becomes more credible when looking at Kirby's early 1970s work for DC.
There's also the claims of Steve Ditko, the recently deceased artist behind Spiderman's look and aesthetic. Lee has never denied that the famous artist designed Spidey's look and contributed greatly to the overall concept. We do know Kirby took a shot at the character first but Lee didn't care for what he came up with.
To be honest, I spent years having issues with Stan Lee. They grew in intensity during the 2000s when I realized younger generations had no idea about the controversy surrounding the credit he'd been given and, going strictly by his generally wonderful cameos in the films of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, had assumed he was the sole creator behind it all. To see their faces when they found out he had nothing to do with the creation of Captain America was truly a sight to behold. I wonder how they'd feel knowing Thanos was created after Lee had become little more than a figurehead in his own organization?
It seems as if those of us that fall in the middle, Gen-X'ers mainly, had the biggest gripe with Lee's rampant glory hogging. We were alive when the Old School genuineness such as Kirby and Ditko were still vibrant and vocal enough to make their points clear. We were there when a new generation of artists broke away from Marvel and formed Image Comics, a creator-owned concept that has somehow reinvented itself and remained relevant. And even though Image wasn't formed as a "screw you" to Lee directly, it was his tendency towards not speaking up when undue credit was thrown his way in the supposed name of advancing the brand that created the environment in which those artists found themselves.
Unlike "Star Trek" creator Gene Roddenberry, there didn't seem to be an arrogance or maliciousness to Lee's credit-taking. In fact, he seemed rather non-plussed by Kirby's apparent rage and Ditko's disgust. If he can be accused of anything, it's most likely good-natured obliviousness. Unlike William Shatner whose ego was off the charts, Lee meant well. You could tell by the sentiments expressed in his "Stan's Soapbox" column. And despite how disappointed I was to learn he was no longer writing the column bearing his name in the Seventies, the early, Lee penned pieces are a look inside what made the man who he was.
With the coming of the MCU, Lee rose to a prominence perhaps greater than what he'd experienced in the Sixties and Seventies. He was once again a household name and his ubiquitous mug was showing up all over the place. His cameos became an expected part of the Marvel movie experience. Lee had officially graduated from hip representative of the Mod Comics Scene to Grandmaster and Elder statesman who made all of this possible. He also, in his advancing years, started giving credit to his collaborators. It doesn't take a cynic to see why Disney would be more comfortable letting the credit rest with a single, identifiable person rather than worrying about having to split the royalties with several others.
Stan Lee became that beloved cool grandpa many of us never had, the old dude who never acted old and who got us. The extra added benefit of him actually helping to create the things that shaped our lives made him even cooler. The messages embedded in his work, social justice, anti-bullying, anti-racism, taking women seriously as individuals, and always the little guy, will survive him.
My relationship with Stan Lee was a complicated one but, in the end, it was a loving and respectful one and that, I think, is that.
'Nuff said~
Nobody could deny his infectious enthusiasm for the comics medium and all it has accomplished and still can. To say he became the face of comics is a given. Was it really his fault that those who were not in the know failed to grasp the contributions of so many others to his and Marvel Comics' success? How many people notice the producers and bandmembers behind the frontman/woman when they idolize a singer? Who pays attention to the names in the end credits when the movie is over? Does anyone ask for the name of the anesthesiologist after the operation?
Obviously some people do, and if you're reading this, you're probably one of them. But for those who don't, Jack Kirby's contributions have gone largely unnoticed and unacknowledged. The man defined the look of Marvel for decades to come and the argument has been made (by him as well) that he did most of the work while Lee added words here and there. Further, one could make the argument that Lee refined Kirby's work in ways the artist lacked the skill to do, a claim that becomes more credible when looking at Kirby's early 1970s work for DC.
There's also the claims of Steve Ditko, the recently deceased artist behind Spiderman's look and aesthetic. Lee has never denied that the famous artist designed Spidey's look and contributed greatly to the overall concept. We do know Kirby took a shot at the character first but Lee didn't care for what he came up with.
To be honest, I spent years having issues with Stan Lee. They grew in intensity during the 2000s when I realized younger generations had no idea about the controversy surrounding the credit he'd been given and, going strictly by his generally wonderful cameos in the films of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, had assumed he was the sole creator behind it all. To see their faces when they found out he had nothing to do with the creation of Captain America was truly a sight to behold. I wonder how they'd feel knowing Thanos was created after Lee had become little more than a figurehead in his own organization?
It seems as if those of us that fall in the middle, Gen-X'ers mainly, had the biggest gripe with Lee's rampant glory hogging. We were alive when the Old School genuineness such as Kirby and Ditko were still vibrant and vocal enough to make their points clear. We were there when a new generation of artists broke away from Marvel and formed Image Comics, a creator-owned concept that has somehow reinvented itself and remained relevant. And even though Image wasn't formed as a "screw you" to Lee directly, it was his tendency towards not speaking up when undue credit was thrown his way in the supposed name of advancing the brand that created the environment in which those artists found themselves.
Unlike "Star Trek" creator Gene Roddenberry, there didn't seem to be an arrogance or maliciousness to Lee's credit-taking. In fact, he seemed rather non-plussed by Kirby's apparent rage and Ditko's disgust. If he can be accused of anything, it's most likely good-natured obliviousness. Unlike William Shatner whose ego was off the charts, Lee meant well. You could tell by the sentiments expressed in his "Stan's Soapbox" column. And despite how disappointed I was to learn he was no longer writing the column bearing his name in the Seventies, the early, Lee penned pieces are a look inside what made the man who he was.
With the coming of the MCU, Lee rose to a prominence perhaps greater than what he'd experienced in the Sixties and Seventies. He was once again a household name and his ubiquitous mug was showing up all over the place. His cameos became an expected part of the Marvel movie experience. Lee had officially graduated from hip representative of the Mod Comics Scene to Grandmaster and Elder statesman who made all of this possible. He also, in his advancing years, started giving credit to his collaborators. It doesn't take a cynic to see why Disney would be more comfortable letting the credit rest with a single, identifiable person rather than worrying about having to split the royalties with several others.
Stan Lee became that beloved cool grandpa many of us never had, the old dude who never acted old and who got us. The extra added benefit of him actually helping to create the things that shaped our lives made him even cooler. The messages embedded in his work, social justice, anti-bullying, anti-racism, taking women seriously as individuals, and always the little guy, will survive him.
My relationship with Stan Lee was a complicated one but, in the end, it was a loving and respectful one and that, I think, is that.
'Nuff said~
Wednesday, March 28, 2018
I Rate the MCU: Phase Three
And now we come to the end as of now. Since Phase 3 is still in progress, I'm obviously stopping at the most recent film but I will add to it as the later ones are released. This time around, you'll likely notice a diminished enthusiasm and a creeping annoyance in my tone.
Captain America: Civil War- The Law of Diminishing Returns is, as the hipsters say, a "thing" and nowhere is it more obvious than this third Captain America outing. Hats off to Marvel for making a dozen films before this became the case but damn! They really saved it all up for this disappointment. My criticisms are numerous, yet the real irony is that I can still find enough enjoyment in this movie to watch it from time to time. Still, it's an over-crowded mess filled with sub-plots galore, absurd contrivances and easily the most anti-climatic showdown in the franchise's history. The much touted battle royale between titans is reduced to little more than a stalling action for the main plot and a parking lot brawl with little actual consequence. Iron Man 2 is often maligned for being an obvious franchise bridge yet for whatever reason this one gets a pass? Fanboys, I disdainfully shake my head at you!
Doctor. Strange- A brief restoration of sanity and quality to the MCU, this long-awaited origin film featuring Benedict Cumberbatch as the Sorcerer Supreme almost feels like a DC movie, and that's not an insult coming from me. This is a wonderfully absurd piece of thoughtful filmmaking that provides a nice rest for all the obnoxious franchise building going on in the other films. Ironically, this nice break would continue with
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2- Something happened on the way to the GOTG sequel. I sat in the theater and loved every minute of it! How, after my unimpressed reaction to the first movie, this one was such a great experience is either a testament to my incredible open-mindedness (Doubtful!) or the fact that James Gunn et. al. improved upon every single criticism I had of the first film and delivered an incredible sequel. I am now a fan of this franchise.
Spider-Man: Homecoming- And here endeth the honeymoon! Marvel spent years trying to finagle the rights away from Sony (who was absolutely destroying Spider-Man with those awful Andrew Garfield movies) and they finally got him, recast him, made him a kid again and threw him awkwardly but enjoyably into the mix in Civil War. Expectations were high for a movie that finally got the character just right and delivered the MCU goods in new and exciting ways. And on paper, it was all there to happen. Tom Holland is a great Peter Parker and Michael Keaton's Vulture was the most refreshing villain since Loki. But then a hit and miss script seemingly more concerned with the trials and tribulations of teenage existence was chosen and what could have been the best MCU movie since the Avengers turned out to be enjoyable but shockingly mediocre.
Thor: Ragnarok: An enjoyable threequel, this Thor installment eschews the melodrama of the previous installment and builds on the humor of the first with mostly satisfying results. Chris Hemsworth knows his character well enough to poke fun at him, although the poking gets a tad obnoxious at times. Tony Stark's influence aside, I often had difficulty with the wacky line deliveries but the story worked and the interplay of the characters sold the film's minor shortcomings.
Black Panther: I really enjoyed the first three fourths of "Black Panther" but the Third Act was a bit of a mess. It didn't make it a bad movie but I do find it mildly overrated. It went from potentially great to sort of hackneyed and cheesy. One thing Marvel keeps doing that bothers me is handing these important films to directors who have never made a big budget film before. Sometimes it pays off, usually it has mixed results and this one was no exception.
Captain America: Civil War- The Law of Diminishing Returns is, as the hipsters say, a "thing" and nowhere is it more obvious than this third Captain America outing. Hats off to Marvel for making a dozen films before this became the case but damn! They really saved it all up for this disappointment. My criticisms are numerous, yet the real irony is that I can still find enough enjoyment in this movie to watch it from time to time. Still, it's an over-crowded mess filled with sub-plots galore, absurd contrivances and easily the most anti-climatic showdown in the franchise's history. The much touted battle royale between titans is reduced to little more than a stalling action for the main plot and a parking lot brawl with little actual consequence. Iron Man 2 is often maligned for being an obvious franchise bridge yet for whatever reason this one gets a pass? Fanboys, I disdainfully shake my head at you!
Doctor. Strange- A brief restoration of sanity and quality to the MCU, this long-awaited origin film featuring Benedict Cumberbatch as the Sorcerer Supreme almost feels like a DC movie, and that's not an insult coming from me. This is a wonderfully absurd piece of thoughtful filmmaking that provides a nice rest for all the obnoxious franchise building going on in the other films. Ironically, this nice break would continue with
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2- Something happened on the way to the GOTG sequel. I sat in the theater and loved every minute of it! How, after my unimpressed reaction to the first movie, this one was such a great experience is either a testament to my incredible open-mindedness (Doubtful!) or the fact that James Gunn et. al. improved upon every single criticism I had of the first film and delivered an incredible sequel. I am now a fan of this franchise.
Spider-Man: Homecoming- And here endeth the honeymoon! Marvel spent years trying to finagle the rights away from Sony (who was absolutely destroying Spider-Man with those awful Andrew Garfield movies) and they finally got him, recast him, made him a kid again and threw him awkwardly but enjoyably into the mix in Civil War. Expectations were high for a movie that finally got the character just right and delivered the MCU goods in new and exciting ways. And on paper, it was all there to happen. Tom Holland is a great Peter Parker and Michael Keaton's Vulture was the most refreshing villain since Loki. But then a hit and miss script seemingly more concerned with the trials and tribulations of teenage existence was chosen and what could have been the best MCU movie since the Avengers turned out to be enjoyable but shockingly mediocre.
Thor: Ragnarok: An enjoyable threequel, this Thor installment eschews the melodrama of the previous installment and builds on the humor of the first with mostly satisfying results. Chris Hemsworth knows his character well enough to poke fun at him, although the poking gets a tad obnoxious at times. Tony Stark's influence aside, I often had difficulty with the wacky line deliveries but the story worked and the interplay of the characters sold the film's minor shortcomings.
Black Panther: I really enjoyed the first three fourths of "Black Panther" but the Third Act was a bit of a mess. It didn't make it a bad movie but I do find it mildly overrated. It went from potentially great to sort of hackneyed and cheesy. One thing Marvel keeps doing that bothers me is handing these important films to directors who have never made a big budget film before. Sometimes it pays off, usually it has mixed results and this one was no exception.
Sunday, November 12, 2017
Rating the 2017 Releases: (Updated)
The following is a list of films released in 2017 that
I have actually seen. Some were seen theatrically, others using the magic of
borrowed library DVDs:
Hidden
Figures- This is one of those wonderfully acted and written
Oscar-bound based on a true story movies that the cynic in me wants to cast
aspersions on. But that would do a disservice to a wonderful film filled with
incredible performances. This was easily one of the better movies of this year
and it came out during the first few weeks.
I
am Not Your Negro- I learned more about James Baldwin than I
ever knew before and I came away considering him a national treasure and an
incredible human being. There isn’t a dull, plodding moment in this
documentary.
John
Wick: Chapter Two- Action movie sequels are an iffy
proposition. Sometimes you get a quality production such as “Lethal Weapon 2”
but usually you get a mediocre followup such as “Taken 2” which makes you
reconsider the flawed original film in negative ways. Fortunately, that’s not
the case with this one. The mythology surrounding the title character it rich, fascinating
and compelling and this sequel throws the audience right back into it with
delightful abandon.
The
Lego Batman Movie- The trailers made this movie look unfunny
and rather stupid. To my surprise, it was neither. Simply put, this was the
funniest movie I’ve seen in a while. Featuring fully realized characters, an
actual plot and a plethora of successful gags, this one actually outshines “The
Lego Movie” with its brilliance.
The
Great Wall- Reports of supposed whitewashing with this
movie were greatly overblown. Matt Damon’s character was not the hero nor did
he save the day in any way, shape or form. Instead, this was a very enjoyable
period fantasy with solid acting, good direction and great action.
Logan-
A
contender for best movie I’ve seen all year, this was the Wolverine film fans
of the comics and movies were waiting for. The changes that were made to the “Old
Man Logan” story actually improved on the concept. Instead of a bunch of
jarring inclusions of Marvel characters, the focus is kept narrowed to Logan
and Professor Xavier. The acting is top notch as is the story. I have only been
able to see it once so far because the emotions were too much.
Kong:
Skull Island- I unapologetically LOVED this movie. I
went in with modest expectations and wound up seeing it two more times. Talk
about pitch perfect kaiju movie making. I’ve always been critical of Western
attempts to make watchable movies about giant monsters; what the Japanese make
look effortless generally failed in American hands. But King Kong is ours and
even the Japanese didn’t do him justice with their attempts in the 1960s and
1970s. This was the film that should have started the shared universe rather
than that pathetically morose “Godzilla” movie from 2014. Kong got everything right
from tone to plot to characterization and action. It even made me re-watch
Gareth Edwards’ version of Godzilla to catch the connections.
Beauty
and the Beast- Anyone who knows me knows I consider
Disney to be pure evil. If you don’t, you’re either blissfully unaware or not paying enough attention. So their live-action remakes of their own animated movies which are,
in turn, adaptations of the work of others, seem rather self-serving, cynical
and manipulative to me. And even though the Cinderella live-action turned out
to relatively good, such was not the case with “Beauty and the Beast.” Based on
one of the more annoying films of the so-called “Disney Renaissance Era,” this
version seems hell-bent on replicating what made the first abomination
marketable rather than following the Cinderella example of doing something different.
Same stupid songs sung by worse singers and the ugliest CGI versions of the
non-human characters conceivable made this so unpleasant and obnoxious I couldn’t
even finish watching it.
Ghost
in the Shell- Once more the reports of whitewashing were greatly exaggerated. The main protaganist isn't Asian. She was, but the artificial body she currently inhabits was not. The original anime and its even better sequel are two of my favorite films, so my expectations weren't exactly high for this Western live-action version. I was pleasantly surprised that what resulted was an enjoyable, thoughtful film with good performances and an intelligent script. It's nowhere near as good as the anime but it's still good.
Guardians
of the Galaxy Vol. 2- I'm on record as not being too fond of the jokey, uneven tone of the first film in this series, so when I realized I was enjoying myself watching the second go-round, nobody was more surprised than I. In fact, I loved this movie. Everything I found fault with in the first movie was present in the sequel, but it was balanced well and integrated into the plot. Instead of another uneven mess with some appealing moments, this was a wonderful ride with more fully realized characters and a better story.
The
Mummy- People were poised to hate this one before it was even released. Tom Cruise has become a popular target of late in spite of a consistent high quality output over the past decade or more. Then there are those who actually think the Stephen Sommers films were somehow definitive versions of the mummy story. So even though the movie was entertaining and a mostly decent start to a shared universe franchise that is now dead in the water, it barely survived at he box office.
Spider-Man:
Homecoming- This one falls under the "Liked it, Wanted to Love it, didn't" category. It was a good effort by Marvel Studios, but considering how long it took them to reacquire the rights to their own character from Sony's recent butcherings, I was hoping for something more. The approach basically boils down to John Hughes movie meets the back-end of the Marvel Universe while a man-child learns a valuable life lesson. Lots of good acting and funny moments don't overshadow the lack of compelling action and adventure. Even the boat scene pales by comparison to the train sequence in "Spider-Man 2."
War
for the Planet of the Apes- I left the theater with tears in my eyes. This was an incredibly somber, fatalistic film that could have only ended one way. Kudos to Matt Reeves for making the journey getting there so compelling and tragic.
The
Dark Tower- I read all eight of Stephen King's Dark tower novels and I still don't know what the hell this was. I know the idea was to make a sequel to the novels (if you've read them, you know how that could work) but what we got was a skeletal, superficial outline of a greater tale. Idris Alba is one of the most overrated actors working in film and his wooden performance is stiff to the point of hilarity. The 90-minute running time didn't help matters much. What a waste.
It- What more can I say about this terrible piece of garbage? I hated it too much to offer much in the way of coherent criticism except to say this: Worst movie I saw all year.
Blade
Runner 2049- Remember what I wrote about "It?" Well, the opposite applies to this film. A sublime masterpiece.
Get Out- Wait, maybe "It" wasn't the worst movie I saw this year. It was definitely the worst one I saw theatrically, but Jordan Peele's mind-numbingly awful attempt at social criticism through blatantly ripping off "The Stepford Wives" gives it a run for its money. As uneven as the tone of "It" was, at least it had more than one. "Get Out" has one long, boring, unchanging tone that tries to mix things up during a ludicrous, asinine climax. For a brilliant comedian like Peele to create such sub-standard, pretentious rubbish, there is hope for all writers.
Get Out- Wait, maybe "It" wasn't the worst movie I saw this year. It was definitely the worst one I saw theatrically, but Jordan Peele's mind-numbingly awful attempt at social criticism through blatantly ripping off "The Stepford Wives" gives it a run for its money. As uneven as the tone of "It" was, at least it had more than one. "Get Out" has one long, boring, unchanging tone that tries to mix things up during a ludicrous, asinine climax. For a brilliant comedian like Peele to create such sub-standard, pretentious rubbish, there is hope for all writers.
American
Made- Say what you will about Scientology's Favorite Son, Tom Cruse's output has been of remarkably high quality for a very long time now. It's difficult to remember the last time he made a bad movie and this latest Doug Liman film about an actual CIA pilot who also worked for Colombian drug cartels is at once funny, engaging and brilliant.
Thor: Ranganork- I'm not going to say this is probably the best Marvel film since "Winter Soldier" but I just did so I'm sticking with it. The self-deprecation works here because the hero us supposedly untouchable and perfect. The action is great, the acting is, too and all the elements of a solid superhero film are present.
Murder on the Orient Express- I'm always amazed when I meet someone who doesn't know the answer to the mystery of this classic story, but they exist and there are enough of them to warrant a remake. This time it's under the gifted guidance of Kenneth Branagh, whose eye for detail and insistence on strong performances pays off handsomely with this riveting period piece. All of t he actors are wonderful as is the direction and the cinematography. This time around, the filmmakers wisely focus on Agatha Cristie's genius detective's views on how life should work and the moral dilemma he faces when it doesn't fit his narrative.
Justice League- I'd been waiting all my life for this damn movie and I wasn't disappointed. The actors are well-cast, the action feels new in places, and the marriage of Zack Snyder's dark imagery and Joss Whedon's character-driven writing are an excellent one. This is easily my favorite team superhero movie to date.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi- Easily the most divisive Star Wars movie since the first two prequels, Rian Johnson's film is a wonderful addition to the canon that angers all the right people. The franchise had fallen into a comfortable malaise with Disney's acquisition and it's good to see buttons being pushed and fan-imposed boundaries being torn down. I enjoy having my expectations upended. I like my comfort zone being disturbed. This installment does that and more, adding a dimensionality to the tale that has been missing since "Revenge of the Sith" rolled end credits.
Labels:
Avengers,
Batman,
Captain America,
Chris Hemsworth,
christopher nadeau,
comics,
DCEU,
DECU,
Flash,
Iron Man,
Justice League,
lists,
MCU,
opinions,
sci fi,
Spider-Man,
Superman,
Thor,
Wonder Woman,
Writing
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
I was by no means a fan of his writing. I found it stilted and flat. His stories were often meandering apologist tripe seemingly accusing sc...
-
Well, okay maybe not. But the following questionnaire is a good time waster until I post my next masterstroke and it does give you a glimp...