Saturday, March 26, 2016
So, "Batman V Superman" finally came out, and as expected, audiences are pretty much polarized. What wasn't expected was all the hate seemingly being thrown at the film. Yes we get it: it's not a Marvel movie. It's dark, and gritty, and rarely holds back. It has a pair of balls on it the size of the fucking Statue of Liberty. Coming off of "Man of Steel", a film in which Superman killed Zod, we have a film with a brutal Batman and even features a dream sequence in which Batman kills people and Superman burns insurgents alive.
Yeah, this isn't a typical take on either character. You know what though? Maybe that's a good thing. Maybe it's just me, but I've grown kind of tired of the bubblegum, lightweight universe of the Marvel films. I'm not shitting on them, I've just gotten bored with them: in the end, they're all the same shit. "Age of Ultron", "Ant-Man", "Thor: The Dark World", and even "Guardians of the Galaxy" to a much lesser extent, all bored me to tears.
You can say whatever you want to about "Batman V Superman", but one thing it isn't is boring. It's not a perfect film by any stretch of the imagination. There's editing problems, big story problems, plot holes aplenty, and some big leaps in logic. That being said, it's still a live-action comic book brought to life, which is what these films are supposed to be in the first place. Ben Affleck is surprisingly wonderful as Batman, Jeremy Irons is awesome as Alfred, Jesse Eisenberg isn't too bad as Luthor, and when Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman first appears...well, I won't lie, I had a nerdgasm. Seeing Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman all on screen at the same time made me smile ear to ear. That in itself is an accomplishment.
So yeah, if you didn't like "Man of Steel", you won't like "Batman V Superman" one bit. If you did however like "Man of Steel"...you'll more than likely dig this more. Either way, don't believe all the haters. Check it out and see for yourself.
Saturday, March 19, 2016
It's pretty safe to assume that by now that you've all seen "Deadpool" by now. Any negative thoughts I had about it in the past were thankfully put to rest, and the film is a highly enjoyable blast. The massive and surprising box office reception it's gotten appears to have paved the way for R-rated comic book films to be the next big thing. So big that apparently we're getting a Blu-ray release of an R-rated version of "Batman V Superman" somewhere down the line, and we might get that "Lobo" movie we all deserve, and for fuck's sake, we're probably getting an R-rated "Wolverine" flick too.
Now this isn't the first time we've seen an R-rated comic book movie. We've had "The Crow", "Kick Ass", "The Punisher", "Watchmen", and more besides. Their box office returns were between middling and okay, but never anything earth-shattering and unexpected like "Deadpool" was. Granted, "Deadpool" had no budget, it's own studio didn't believe in it (yet somehow managed to market the holy living shit out of it), and it would have never seen the light of day were it not for that "leaked" test footage that Ryan Reynolds probably paid somebody to leak because he hasn't been in anything worth a shit in over a decade.
Regardless, "Deadpool" happened. Everyone loves it...my god does everyone love it. I haven't seen a movie get this much of a self-masturbatory celebration in a while, maybe even more so than "Force Awakens". And yeah, it's enjoyable and all, but come the fuck on, "Deadpool" isn't the greatest thing ever for fuck's sake. Then again, this is part of the nerd/geek culture we now live in...anytime a movie comes out featuring a property that people get nerdy about, there's always a little bit of pessimism associated with it right before release...then it comes out, ends up being surprisingly not bad, and people go nuts about it.
Now this isn't necessarily a problem...well, maybe. It's just like I said, "Deadpool" is enjoyable as hell, but it isn't anything really great. It's just seeing people go so damn gaga over it can be mind-boggling. "Force Awakens" suffers from the same fate, so do just about all the mainstream Marvel movies. We put this shit on a geek pedestal, and most times we put it up way higher than we really should. Are these kind of flicks enjoyable? Absolutely they are. They bring out all our inner-12 year olds and give us a sense of escapism for a couple hours, which in itself is a good thing I guess. But still, seeing the overwhelmingly positive receptions that some of these things get, which are honest to fucking god average at best most of the time, really just makes things a tad bit...yawn inducing.
Or wait, maybe I'm just super fucking jaded and old and all this shit just bores me to tears anymore.
Yeah...that's probably it.
Friday, March 4, 2016
Oh Dario, Dario, where art thou Dario?
You know what? Don't answer that. After seeing the last few films Dario Argento has made, I'm convinced he's lost to us forever, but that's a story for another day.
Anyway, one of the most beloved and cherished horror films in cinematic history is Argento's 1977 masterpiece, "Suspiria". A film that features brilliant storytelling, gut-wrenching gore, lush set design and colors, and gorgeous cinematography. It's a classic of the horror genre, and nothing Argento had done since can even come close to reaching the greatness that "Suspiria" managed to do.
So of course, it needs a remake, right?
Well tough shit folks, we're getting a remake of "Suspiria".
That's right, and it looks like it's happening here pretty damn soon. So soon in fact that casting is already underway. I had heard that so far we're getting Dakota Johnson (who I'm told showed her boobs in the adaptation of soccer mom porn for morons "50 Shades of Grey") in the lead, as well as Tilda Swinton, who I assume will be the big evil bitch of the film (and I don't have a problem with Swinton, she can literally do anything).
Now, here's the thing: "Suspiria" is a film that is definitely not for everyone. In terms of its storytelling, it didn't spell out everything for the viewer. There's a lot of elements in that film that are either kept ambiguous or are just told through the film's direction. Movies, especially mainstream American ones, don't do that anymore. Instead, we'll more than likely be getting a dumbed down, hastily-put together take on the film by a crew and producers who simply don't get the source material or rather don't want to...because intelligent filmmaking, especially in horror, doesn't appeal to the masses.
This happens all the time: just look at the recent "The Witch"; an intelligent and thought provoking horror flick that has been shit on by the general public because it doesn't spell things out and isn't easy to digest. "Suspiria" is such a film, and an American-ized modern day remake will more than likely be flat out crippled by stupidity. I'm going to list some horror flicks, most of them classics, that have been remade in the past decade or so and totally miss the mark that was set by the films they were adapted from:
Assault on Precinct 13
Dawn of the Dead (okay, this isn't that bad, it just ignores any kind of social commentary that the original had)
Texas Chainsaw Massacre (like four times)
Yeah, you see where I'm going with this right? This remake of "Suspiria" will end up having the same result. It's fucking clownshoes.
In other words, fuck this, and fuck it hard.