Warner Bros. and DC Comics made the conscious choice--after the mixed bag of MAN OF STEEL--to double down on the Zack Snyder jackhammer-punch approach.
In 12 minutes, I talk about DC past and recent and explain towards the end why I'm not consuming this Event kicking off the DC Expanded Universe:
http://youtu.be/VghPBAUiQx0
Hoping for better results with the upcoming SUICIDE SQUAD and WONDER WOMAN.
Showing posts with label Zack Snyder. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zack Snyder. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Monday, November 30, 2015
BATMAN V SUPERMAN: the film of the decade?
http://www.movingpictureblog.com/2015/11/batman-v-superman-teaser-trailer.html
The 1989 Tim Burton BATMAN was tagged with the blurb THE FILM OF THE DECADE.
And certainly, there was a must-see factor due to its trailer showcasing the stunt casting of Jack Nicholson (in his only superhero outing to date) as The Joker.
But there wasn't the enormous burden of artistic/financial expectations as there are for Zack Snyder's BATMAN V SUPERMAN.
Warner Brothers and DC have managed to devalue the DC Comics brand on-screen for more than twenty years--starting with the decision to dropkick Burton after the blend of genuine subversiveness (the Penguin and Catwoman scenes) and going-through-motions that was BATMAN RETURNS; the studio chose to hand off to the more pliant Joel Schumacher (it should be noted that parents weren't complaining about disturbing content the way they did during the original release of BATMAN RETURNS) for two films that tried to fuse 90s camp (nipples on the Batsuit) with the more obvious burlesque humor of the 60s Adam West/Burt Ward ABC series.
There's no need to discuss at length Bryan Singer's heartfelt but too leisurely attempt to provide a coda to the Richard Donner/Christopher Reeve era of SUPERMAN.
But it's still a mystery to me why WB/DC decided to double down on Zack "punch through three layers of concrete" Snyder (who admittedly made a mostly effective film of WATCHMEN) after he too gave the world an uneven SUPERMAN reboot with a way-overdone climax. And Snyder/WB/DC tripled down on retaining Henry Cavill as Superman (during the making of B V S, the Guy Ritchie MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. co-starring Cavill underperformed due in part to young audience unfamiliarity with the old TV series that birthed it).
Some people I follow on Twitter are beginning to salivate over BATMAN V SUPERMAN--perhaps in hopes the "adult comic book" ethos and fresh-for-the-time feel of the Burton BATMAN duo will again be realized (within the limits of the PG-13 rating as it's now enforced).
Maybe the miracle will happen. But I'm not so sure we'll see a franchise rejuvenation like, say, the good-but-not-great CREED or the so-far-wonderful trailers/clips for JJ Abrams' STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS.
The 1989 Tim Burton BATMAN was tagged with the blurb THE FILM OF THE DECADE.
And certainly, there was a must-see factor due to its trailer showcasing the stunt casting of Jack Nicholson (in his only superhero outing to date) as The Joker.
But there wasn't the enormous burden of artistic/financial expectations as there are for Zack Snyder's BATMAN V SUPERMAN.
Warner Brothers and DC have managed to devalue the DC Comics brand on-screen for more than twenty years--starting with the decision to dropkick Burton after the blend of genuine subversiveness (the Penguin and Catwoman scenes) and going-through-motions that was BATMAN RETURNS; the studio chose to hand off to the more pliant Joel Schumacher (it should be noted that parents weren't complaining about disturbing content the way they did during the original release of BATMAN RETURNS) for two films that tried to fuse 90s camp (nipples on the Batsuit) with the more obvious burlesque humor of the 60s Adam West/Burt Ward ABC series.
There's no need to discuss at length Bryan Singer's heartfelt but too leisurely attempt to provide a coda to the Richard Donner/Christopher Reeve era of SUPERMAN.
But it's still a mystery to me why WB/DC decided to double down on Zack "punch through three layers of concrete" Snyder (who admittedly made a mostly effective film of WATCHMEN) after he too gave the world an uneven SUPERMAN reboot with a way-overdone climax. And Snyder/WB/DC tripled down on retaining Henry Cavill as Superman (during the making of B V S, the Guy Ritchie MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E. co-starring Cavill underperformed due in part to young audience unfamiliarity with the old TV series that birthed it).
Some people I follow on Twitter are beginning to salivate over BATMAN V SUPERMAN--perhaps in hopes the "adult comic book" ethos and fresh-for-the-time feel of the Burton BATMAN duo will again be realized (within the limits of the PG-13 rating as it's now enforced).
Maybe the miracle will happen. But I'm not so sure we'll see a franchise rejuvenation like, say, the good-but-not-great CREED or the so-far-wonderful trailers/clips for JJ Abrams' STAR WARS: THE FORCE AWAKENS.
Friday, June 14, 2013
HOLLYWOOD ELSEWHERE commenter on superhero comics vs. their movie adaptations.
Turning the floor over to Jay Shooke--context is a HOLLYWOOD ELSEWHERE website commenter discussion re Joe Queenan's dismissal of the superhero film genre in THE GUARDIAN:
This is the kind of whining that comes from having no awareness of the comics industry at all. Like its already been mentioned, comics haven't been "cheap" or disposable for 25 years, or since they changed the distribution model to the direct market. Comics are now niche collectibles, printed on extremely high quality paper, cost 3 to 4 bucks a pop, and only available at small specialty stores. But that's besides the point...
The problem with superhero movies (and I want to make this distinguished, comics are a vast medium that tell many, very disparate types of stories) is not the source material being vapid or inferior, but in the poor adaptation of them. Comics, even superhero comics, have been home for some of the most out-there, cerebral and and almost inaccessibly dense genre stories being published. Writers like Grant Morrison, Warren Ellis, and Jonathan Hickman are pushing incredibly daring and literary ideas, they just happen to be illustrated by some intensely eye-popping illustrative and graphic design work. Its the studios dumbing down the source material to hit all four quadrants [meaning every age level of moviegoer], and that's when you get repetitive narratives and senseless violence.
I get the complaints against the assault of cape movies every summer, but there's a reason they keep getting made. People love em, and its certainly not just geeks keeping them afloat. The most popular comic books are lucky if they sell 90k copies every month. Man of Steel is going to make around 300 million dollars domestic, so obviously its not just the basement dweller set making them happen. Average people want to see grand spectacle and larger than life characters when they plop down 12 bucks, and this is the type of movie that delivers that.
This is the kind of whining that comes from having no awareness of the comics industry at all. Like its already been mentioned, comics haven't been "cheap" or disposable for 25 years, or since they changed the distribution model to the direct market. Comics are now niche collectibles, printed on extremely high quality paper, cost 3 to 4 bucks a pop, and only available at small specialty stores. But that's besides the point...
The problem with superhero movies (and I want to make this distinguished, comics are a vast medium that tell many, very disparate types of stories) is not the source material being vapid or inferior, but in the poor adaptation of them. Comics, even superhero comics, have been home for some of the most out-there, cerebral and and almost inaccessibly dense genre stories being published. Writers like Grant Morrison, Warren Ellis, and Jonathan Hickman are pushing incredibly daring and literary ideas, they just happen to be illustrated by some intensely eye-popping illustrative and graphic design work. Its the studios dumbing down the source material to hit all four quadrants [meaning every age level of moviegoer], and that's when you get repetitive narratives and senseless violence.
I get the complaints against the assault of cape movies every summer, but there's a reason they keep getting made. People love em, and its certainly not just geeks keeping them afloat. The most popular comic books are lucky if they sell 90k copies every month. Man of Steel is going to make around 300 million dollars domestic, so obviously its not just the basement dweller set making them happen. Average people want to see grand spectacle and larger than life characters when they plop down 12 bucks, and this is the type of movie that delivers that.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Blog post about woman-to-woman sexism in slam poetry community.
In a world where, one day, we'll likely find out that Chris Brown has recoupled with Rihanna--here's a blog entry about one female poet describing how a peer of hers dressed her down in terms the latter's standards of proper attire and behavior:
http://www.radiuslit.org/2011/03/24/on-asking-for-it-an-examination-of-misogyny-in-the-slam-community/
To change the subject slightly, a female poster on Twitter (who follows cinematic goings-on) mentioned how Hailee Steinfeld will follow up her impressive, gutsy performance as Mattie Ross in the Coen Brothers' TRUE GRIT--by playing Sleeping Beauty.
Another case history: Amanda Seyfried drops out of SUCKER PUNCH (which looks to have been a wise career move)--only to find herself in a TWILIGHT-centric reimagining of RED RIDING HOOD.
In short, whether it's poetry or cinema or music, there seems to be more enthusiastic support for herding women back into a retrograde, dress-our-way-not-yours-and-walk-two-steps-behind-the-alpha-male corral--from men and women alike.
http://www.radiuslit.org/2011/03/24/on-asking-for-it-an-examination-of-misogyny-in-the-slam-community/
To change the subject slightly, a female poster on Twitter (who follows cinematic goings-on) mentioned how Hailee Steinfeld will follow up her impressive, gutsy performance as Mattie Ross in the Coen Brothers' TRUE GRIT--by playing Sleeping Beauty.
Another case history: Amanda Seyfried drops out of SUCKER PUNCH (which looks to have been a wise career move)--only to find herself in a TWILIGHT-centric reimagining of RED RIDING HOOD.
In short, whether it's poetry or cinema or music, there seems to be more enthusiastic support for herding women back into a retrograde, dress-our-way-not-yours-and-walk-two-steps-behind-the-alpha-male corral--from men and women alike.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Warner Bros. and Zack Snyder and the hiding-of-sorts of SUCKER PUNCH from reviewers--even fanboys.
Here's an early review of un film de Zack Snyder (300, WATCHMEN) SUCKER PUNCH:
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/2011/mar/23/bc-suckerpunch-movie-review-adv25fr-_-entertainmen/?entertainment&national-entertainment
Actually liked Snyder's Canadian redo of George Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD.
I missed 300 in theaters--fell asleep in a hotel room when watching the edited-for-TNT version.
WATCHMEN was a combination of brilliant and what-the-heck-was-that moments.
Didn't bother with the CGI owl cartoon.
SUCKER PUNCH no doubt will have the caffeine-for-the-eyes visuals and bam-bam-bam violence (within PG-13 limitations) of Snyder's earlier work.
But it gives one pause when the reviewer linked to above resorts to the "turn your brain off" cliche--which sounds like a bit of punch-pulling to keep from losing access to future WB cinematic amusement park rides.
UPDATE 3/24/11: The reviews are now flooding in: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sucker-punch-2010/
And here's Jeffrey Wells' I-REALLY-didn't-like-this take on the film:
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2011/03/punched_but_no.php
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/2011/mar/23/bc-suckerpunch-movie-review-adv25fr-_-entertainmen/?entertainment&national-entertainment
Actually liked Snyder's Canadian redo of George Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD.
I missed 300 in theaters--fell asleep in a hotel room when watching the edited-for-TNT version.
WATCHMEN was a combination of brilliant and what-the-heck-was-that moments.
Didn't bother with the CGI owl cartoon.
SUCKER PUNCH no doubt will have the caffeine-for-the-eyes visuals and bam-bam-bam violence (within PG-13 limitations) of Snyder's earlier work.
But it gives one pause when the reviewer linked to above resorts to the "turn your brain off" cliche--which sounds like a bit of punch-pulling to keep from losing access to future WB cinematic amusement park rides.
UPDATE 3/24/11: The reviews are now flooding in: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sucker-punch-2010/
And here's Jeffrey Wells' I-REALLY-didn't-like-this take on the film:
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2011/03/punched_but_no.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)