After long months of anticipation (I'm a relatively new fan, so I can't claim to have waited the many years that long-time fans can), apprehension over whether it would do the book justice, and worry over whether the movie would even be released at all, I made my way to the movie theater to watch Watchmen on Sunday. Thanks to its wide release (largest ever for an R-rated film), it was even playing at my small town's local theater, though I kind of wished it wasn't so I'd have an excuse to drive 40 minutes to a larger theater with a larger screen; as it was, my friend Lucy with whom I was going to see the movie was understandably not interested in driving that extra distance.
I really liked the movie. It has received very mixed reviews from critics, but I thought Zack Snyder et al. did a very good job with it. It was not the greatest comic book movie of all time, and it did not transform the genre, but it was an entertaining, satisfying adaptation that for the most part did justice to the complex characters and thought-provoking situations that were in the book. (Much of what I thought was great about the movie is also what I thought was great about the graphic novel). And I wasn't really expecting much more than that. I don't think Watchmen could have played the same role in film that it did for comic books. The two media are totally different, so what works wonders in one cannot be expected to revolutionize another. And their timings were also different--by decades. I wonder if the movie would have played differently if it had come out last year, i.e., before The Dark Knight came out last summer. Watchmen might have seemed more innovative to audiences; Dark Knight already gave us a taste of a dark and gritty movie about masked heroes (though not nearly so gruesome as Watchmen) with a healthy dose of moral ambiguity (though not quite as devastating as in Watchmen). After The Dark Knight, we simply may not have needed Watchmen as much as we might have last year. This is not to say that Watchmen doesn't go anywhere that The Dark Knight doesn't. It is far more brutal, the characters are I believe more complex (and there are more of them), and the stakes are much higher. But I'm also not saying that Watchmen would have been better had it not followed The Dark Knight; the movie as it is would have still had difficulties, like some of the viewers who had not read the book finding the plot to be convoluted and confusing.
So what did I like in the movie and what didn't I like? I really loved the opening credit sequence. It was beautifully done, showing key moments throughout the history of the masked hero; in most cases, these moments were captured in photos worthy of the front page of a newspaper. The montage was an efficient, effective way to show us that this was an alternate reality much like our own, except for the fact that masked vigilantes have become a part of the culture.My favorite clip was of Silhouette kissing the nurse at the end of WWII in the fashion of the famous photo of the kiss in Times Square. This was a great bit that wasn't in the book that helped to integrate the history of Watchmen into our own history.
One of the biggest changes made for the movie was there was no giant squid. They had made it clear in advance that the giant squid in the graphic novel would not make an appearance in the movie, likely so fans could prepare themselves to see a major change. I think it was a good choice; the squid would have worked less well in the movie than it worked in the comic book, and it helped to streamline the story in that they didn't have to bring in the genetic (and artistic) experimentation. Using the same science fiction established with Dr. Manhattan made the ending catastrophe... tidier. However, Veidt's genetically-engineered lynx Bubastis was left in the movie. Her sudden appearance after Veidt kills the scientists in Antarctica was a little jarring. "Whoa, where did that CGI cat come from?" I wonder if she was supposed to be introduced in a previous scene that didn't make the final cut. In any case, she was still out of place in the movie, because her existence was related to Veidt's genetic experiments that lead to the squid. Taking out the squid made her an unexplained anomaly. I guess Veidt needed someone to talk to and stroke as he sat in his chair watching all the TV screens. It would have been sad and lonely without Bubastis. And the fans might have missed her.
Another thing that worked better in the book than the movie but would probably have been missed by fans was the flamethrower. You know... Archie's flamethrower. It was silly in the comic book, but it was really, really silly in the movie. Especially since in the comic book, the frame with the flamethrower going off was done in lieu of showing any actual action. The movie was not afraid to embrace its R rating and show some action, making the flamethrower extraneous.
One of my favorite lines from the book is Jon's reply to Adrian when he asks if he did the right thing.
Adrian: I did the right thing, didn't I? It all worked out in the end.
Jon: "In the end?" Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends.
As Adrian desperately tries to ask him what he means, Jon disappears. It is chilling. Adrian, for all his faults, truly has the best interests of human kind at heart, but he has just done something horrible and needs Jon's affirmation that it was the right thing to do. With Jon's emotionless and ominous response, Adrian and the reader both feel doubt and dread. Snyder et al. clearly liked this line a lot, decided they wanted it in the movie, but wanted it to have a more prominent position at the end of the movie. It is in fact the last line spoken by one of the major characters in the movie, just before the final scene at the New Frontiersman office. But the line is spoken by Laurie: "I know what Jon would say. Nothing ends. Nothing ever ends." The placement is nice, but the line loses its chilling kick when it is not delivered by Jon and not delivered to Adrian. I don't know how they could have gotten around that problem, but it was a slight disappointment.
Overall, I think the Watchmen movie is as good as I had hoped it would be. It had a great story and characters to begin with, of course. The long story was skillfully cut down to a reasonable movie length. The cast did a great job. Jackie Earle Haley was amazing, particularly in all the prison scenes. The action was brutal and stylized, and I thought it was pretty cool. I thought the slow-mo shots were used well, capturing the comic book feel. There were plenty of pleasingly-composed shots, just as the comic frames were well composed. The scenery and costumes were very good realizations of those in the comic book. I was very impressed with the job they did, and I came out of the movie feeling a bit giddy (well, and somewhat somber).
Watchmen had a hugely successful opening day on Friday, March 6, taking in $25 million. It was therefore a bit of a surprise when the movie failed to meet analysts' predictions (and failed to beat the opening weekend $70.9 million of Snyder's 300 two years ago) with a weekend total of $55.2 million. I bet it is pretty uncommon for a movie to make more on its opening Friday than on Saturday, though with a highly anticipated fanboy movie like this, I guess it makes sense; the fans want to be there on opening day. Without universal high praise from critics, I think it has been and will continue to be difficult for Watchmen to catch on with a wider audience; people who are not particular comic book fans may figure they already saw the good comic book movie last summer, and besides, this one is a gory R. Still, I would recommend this movie, provided that the viewer is not too squeamish (I have to say, even I wince at the sight of protruding broken bones or severed limbs). The action is exciting, the story is challenging, the characters are intriguing, and it's a good time overall. But I'd also say, Read the book.
Showing posts with label The Dark Knight. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Dark Knight. Show all posts
Monday, March 9, 2009
Monday, February 23, 2009
The 81st Annual Academy Awards
I am happy to report that I did not end up watching the Oscars show alone. I started out with about five other people watching it with me, though by the end there was just one other person who had lasted the > 3 hour ceremony.
The relevant results:
Slumdog Millionaire was the big winner of the night, taking home eight statues from its ten nominations, for best picture, director Danny Boyle, adapted screenplay, cinematography, editing, music, song, and sound (mixing). The only two nominations it lost were sound editing to The Dark Knight and best song to itself (it had two noms in the category). Benjamin Button, which had received the most nominations, was left to pick up Slumdog's scraps, in best art direction, makeup, and visual effects. Milk enjoyed two big wins for best actor Sean Penn and for original screenplay. Dark Knight, which had received eight nominations, won two for sound editing and best supporting actor; Heath Ledger's parents and sister accepted the award on behalf of his daughter Matilda. Wall-E, which had received 6 nominations, won only for best animated feature film. Kate Winslet won her first Oscar (it was her sixth nomination) for best actress in The Reader; Penelope Cruz won her first Oscar for best supporting actress in Vicky Cristina Barcelona. The Dutchess won for costumes. Doubt and Frost/Nixon both left empty-handed. Overall, the results lived up to the awards predictions. The only surprise of the night was the Best Foreign Language Film award, which went to Japan's Okuribito, not to either of the more recognized front-runners, Israel's Waltz with Bashir and France's The Class.
The production of the Oscar show:
The Academy Awards show itself was structured to tell the story of the process of making a movie. This was fine, though there were some categories--animated feature and short, feature and short documentaries, and foreign film--that didn't fit in with the story, and the supporting acting categories were sprinkled around as well, breaking with the overall structure. Plus, the best director award had to come near the end, which in the structure of the story seemed a bit contrived. The acting category presentations were very long. For each acting award, five previous winners would stand in a semi-circle on stage and make a little tribute speech for each of the five nominees, then welcome the winner as a new member of their fraternity/sorority. I suppose if you were one of the nominees it might have been sweet to have Sophia Loren flatter you or Alan Arkin mess up your name, but it took too long and was kind of boring. Luckily, the other categories were done fairly efficiently, particularly since several were grouped together with the same presenters.
The show had a bunch of montages, but I wasn't particularly interested by most of them. Romances from the past year's movies? Lame. I wonder if they managed to attract more young viewers by parading Robert Pattinson, Zac Efron, and Vanessa Hudgens across the stage. I also have to complain about the use of the random blue-tinted clips on a five-second loop that they used to fill in the gaps of the screen whenever it cut to show shrunken shots of nominees/presenters (they're hard to describe, but if you watched the show, you saw it many times). For the most part, I was not aware of the clips, which I think was the point (they shouldn't distract me from the presenter or nominee). But my friend and I both found the Kung Fu Panda clip very distracting. If I see Po catching that thing in his mouth one more time... Yeah, we were pretty sick of seeing that every five seconds throughout the show.
Hugh Jackman didn't have that much to do (I guess less host filler helps move the show along), though he did do two song and dance numbers. I really liked the opening medley about selected nominated movies--Anne Hathaway as Nixon in a Frost/Nixon romance was great, and the bit about The Reader ("I haven't seen The Reader") was hilarious. But I do tend to like musicals, so I'm not sure what other people's reactions will be. Presenter Ben Stiller took an easy jab at Joaquin Phoenix, gum and all. Freida Pinto had a really nice blue dress. Dev Patel is adorable, and he looked so excited and elated each time Slumdog won an award. And the little children got up on the stage at the end when it won Best Picture! So cute!
I thought it was a good show overall. Could have been better, and shorter, of course. And over the credits at the end, they showed some preview clips from upcoming 2009 films. Let the new Oscar race begin!
some of my frock; take what you're given
The relevant results:
Slumdog Millionaire was the big winner of the night, taking home eight statues from its ten nominations, for best picture, director Danny Boyle, adapted screenplay, cinematography, editing, music, song, and sound (mixing). The only two nominations it lost were sound editing to The Dark Knight and best song to itself (it had two noms in the category). Benjamin Button, which had received the most nominations, was left to pick up Slumdog's scraps, in best art direction, makeup, and visual effects. Milk enjoyed two big wins for best actor Sean Penn and for original screenplay. Dark Knight, which had received eight nominations, won two for sound editing and best supporting actor; Heath Ledger's parents and sister accepted the award on behalf of his daughter Matilda. Wall-E, which had received 6 nominations, won only for best animated feature film. Kate Winslet won her first Oscar (it was her sixth nomination) for best actress in The Reader; Penelope Cruz won her first Oscar for best supporting actress in Vicky Cristina Barcelona. The Dutchess won for costumes. Doubt and Frost/Nixon both left empty-handed. Overall, the results lived up to the awards predictions. The only surprise of the night was the Best Foreign Language Film award, which went to Japan's Okuribito, not to either of the more recognized front-runners, Israel's Waltz with Bashir and France's The Class.
The production of the Oscar show:
The Academy Awards show itself was structured to tell the story of the process of making a movie. This was fine, though there were some categories--animated feature and short, feature and short documentaries, and foreign film--that didn't fit in with the story, and the supporting acting categories were sprinkled around as well, breaking with the overall structure. Plus, the best director award had to come near the end, which in the structure of the story seemed a bit contrived. The acting category presentations were very long. For each acting award, five previous winners would stand in a semi-circle on stage and make a little tribute speech for each of the five nominees, then welcome the winner as a new member of their fraternity/sorority. I suppose if you were one of the nominees it might have been sweet to have Sophia Loren flatter you or Alan Arkin mess up your name, but it took too long and was kind of boring. Luckily, the other categories were done fairly efficiently, particularly since several were grouped together with the same presenters.
The show had a bunch of montages, but I wasn't particularly interested by most of them. Romances from the past year's movies? Lame. I wonder if they managed to attract more young viewers by parading Robert Pattinson, Zac Efron, and Vanessa Hudgens across the stage. I also have to complain about the use of the random blue-tinted clips on a five-second loop that they used to fill in the gaps of the screen whenever it cut to show shrunken shots of nominees/presenters (they're hard to describe, but if you watched the show, you saw it many times). For the most part, I was not aware of the clips, which I think was the point (they shouldn't distract me from the presenter or nominee). But my friend and I both found the Kung Fu Panda clip very distracting. If I see Po catching that thing in his mouth one more time... Yeah, we were pretty sick of seeing that every five seconds throughout the show.
Hugh Jackman didn't have that much to do (I guess less host filler helps move the show along), though he did do two song and dance numbers. I really liked the opening medley about selected nominated movies--Anne Hathaway as Nixon in a Frost/Nixon romance was great, and the bit about The Reader ("I haven't seen The Reader") was hilarious. But I do tend to like musicals, so I'm not sure what other people's reactions will be. Presenter Ben Stiller took an easy jab at Joaquin Phoenix, gum and all. Freida Pinto had a really nice blue dress. Dev Patel is adorable, and he looked so excited and elated each time Slumdog won an award. And the little children got up on the stage at the end when it won Best Picture! So cute!
I thought it was a good show overall. Could have been better, and shorter, of course. And over the credits at the end, they showed some preview clips from upcoming 2009 films. Let the new Oscar race begin!
some of my frock; take what you're given
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Random thoughts on a rainy Sunday
Three little things on my mind at the moment.
The first is the news that The Dark Knight has passed the $1 billion mark in worldwide box office take (Variety, IMDb). It is the fourth film to do so, after Titanic, RotK, and the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie. Its re-release in IMAX following the Oscar nominations as well as new grosses in Ecuador helped it top $1 bil. Pretty impressive.
The second thing is the new Mass Effect 2 teaser. A teaser indeed. An unnecessarily cruel teaser. How long do we have to wait for this thing? Between this teaser, the far-off promise of Diablo III, and the delay of DAO to Q4 2009, I'm going out of my mind with anticipation. I need a new game right now to take my mind off of things. Now!
The third thing on my mind is the Academy Awards show tonight. Who will win? What beautiful dresses will we see? What horrendous dresses will we see? What is the deal with all these surprises the show organizers have hinted at? I'm excited to see Hugh Jackman and whoever else singing and dancing. I hope it won't be a letdown. We'll see what kind of an audience they get, but I'll certainly be watching tonight. If I liked to throw parties, I'd have thrown an Oscar party. But seeing as I'm way too lazy to do that, I'll put on some fancy clothes and watch the show with maybe one or two friends. If they're interested. Which they may not be. Oh well, whatever. It's not like it would be pathetic for me to sit alone in front of a TV for three hours wearing a fancy dress to watch an awards show to which I have no real relation. Right?
Addendum (Thoughts on what briefly turned into a snowy Sunday and then suddenly became a very sunny Sunday):
I have not blogged about the second episode of Dollhouse. I haven't really made a habit of blogging weekly about episodes of the dozen or so TV shows that I watch. But since the subject has come up... This week's Dollhouse put Echo into a "Most Dangerous Game" situation (spoiler: she doesn't die) and introduced what it seems will become a recurring plot involving an ex-Active called Alpha. Mysterious. In his review of the first episode of Dollhouse in Entertainment Weekly, Ken Tucker had expressed concern that, because each week Echo would be given a new personality, audiences would find themselves oddly detached with "no consistent hero to root for every week." I think with this second episode, we start to see what that's going to be like, and I think it's going to work. Eliza Dushku's new characters have been readily likable and interesting, but there is also clearly some element of her that isn't being totally erased, and we the audience can latch onto that part of her that is fighting to persist and to be recognized. We have also gained some insight into her relationship with her handler Langdon, which I think will be another consistency to keep us emotionally engaged with the show. Let's hope they can keep it up.
The first is the news that The Dark Knight has passed the $1 billion mark in worldwide box office take (Variety, IMDb). It is the fourth film to do so, after Titanic, RotK, and the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie. Its re-release in IMAX following the Oscar nominations as well as new grosses in Ecuador helped it top $1 bil. Pretty impressive.
The second thing is the new Mass Effect 2 teaser. A teaser indeed. An unnecessarily cruel teaser. How long do we have to wait for this thing? Between this teaser, the far-off promise of Diablo III, and the delay of DAO to Q4 2009, I'm going out of my mind with anticipation. I need a new game right now to take my mind off of things. Now!
The third thing on my mind is the Academy Awards show tonight. Who will win? What beautiful dresses will we see? What horrendous dresses will we see? What is the deal with all these surprises the show organizers have hinted at? I'm excited to see Hugh Jackman and whoever else singing and dancing. I hope it won't be a letdown. We'll see what kind of an audience they get, but I'll certainly be watching tonight. If I liked to throw parties, I'd have thrown an Oscar party. But seeing as I'm way too lazy to do that, I'll put on some fancy clothes and watch the show with maybe one or two friends. If they're interested. Which they may not be. Oh well, whatever. It's not like it would be pathetic for me to sit alone in front of a TV for three hours wearing a fancy dress to watch an awards show to which I have no real relation. Right?
Addendum (Thoughts on what briefly turned into a snowy Sunday and then suddenly became a very sunny Sunday):
I have not blogged about the second episode of Dollhouse. I haven't really made a habit of blogging weekly about episodes of the dozen or so TV shows that I watch. But since the subject has come up... This week's Dollhouse put Echo into a "Most Dangerous Game" situation (spoiler: she doesn't die) and introduced what it seems will become a recurring plot involving an ex-Active called Alpha. Mysterious. In his review of the first episode of Dollhouse in Entertainment Weekly, Ken Tucker had expressed concern that, because each week Echo would be given a new personality, audiences would find themselves oddly detached with "no consistent hero to root for every week." I think with this second episode, we start to see what that's going to be like, and I think it's going to work. Eliza Dushku's new characters have been readily likable and interesting, but there is also clearly some element of her that isn't being totally erased, and we the audience can latch onto that part of her that is fighting to persist and to be recognized. We have also gained some insight into her relationship with her handler Langdon, which I think will be another consistency to keep us emotionally engaged with the show. Let's hope they can keep it up.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Candy Land, GL, Nannerl, Nolan, and Dollhouse
Here it is, my not quite periodical post on the various entertainment news items that have caught my interest recently.
Universal Pictures is developing a live-action movie based on the Candy Land board game (Variety). I remember playing this game as a little kid, though I have played it as recently as last December (I was babysitting my boss's six-year-old son for some extra Christmas cash). I wonder what the movie will be like... I hope it'll have a dash of Tim Burton-esque weirdness to cut the sweet (as long as it doesn't turn out like Strawberry Shortcake...). Etan Cohen (Madagascar 2, Tropic Thunder) will write the script, and Kevin Lima (Enchanted) is set to direct. This is the latest confection to come out of last February's Universal-Hasbro deal to turn at least four of Hasbro's toy properties into movies (Variety). So far, I've heard that Monopoly, Battleship, and Ouija movies are also in the works, though luckily I've heard nothing about a Stretch Armstrong movie... yet.
Martin Campbell, who recently directed Casino Royale, is in negotiations to direct Warner Bros.' live-action Green Lantern movie (Variety). DC superhero movies have had trouble maintaining support in recent years (with one big exception), so we'll see if the current top DC movie projects--the other being Jonah Hex, which has Josh Brolin attached to star--can manage to get made. I'm not a particular GL fan, but I like the DC characters in general and would like to see more comic book movies.
A biopic about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's sister, Nannerl, will be made with Rene Feret set to direct (IMDb). This is mainly relevant to me because in my class's fourth grade play, I was Nannerl. This play was a kiddie musical called "Of Mice and Mozart", which tells the story of Mozart entirely in couplet rhymes (easy for kids to remember, annoying for parents to listen to), narrated by the mice who lived in the woodwork of Mozart's house. I took great pride in my role, mainly because I was one of two people in the whole fourth grade who did not have to wear either mouse ears or a goofy cotton ball wig for the play. I sang a handful of songs, but my only speaking lines were these:
Hello, everyone, Nannerl is my name.
Being Wolfgang's sister is my claim to fame.
I also love music and never get bored
For I spend hours playing my clavichord.
If you think it's odd that I remember that, ask me to recite my lines from my third-grade play. Anyway... yeah, it's about time Nannerl got a little respect with her own biopic.
After the astounding commercial and critical success of The Dark Knight, one might expect a sequel to be rushed to the head of Warner Bros.' slate. But Christopher Nolan has yet to commit--I would imagine he wants to make sure any sequel will be done right; Dark Knight is a tough act to follow. In the meantime, Warner Bros. has secured Nolan to direct his own script "Inception" (Variety). The studio describes it as contemporary sci-fi action. I'm certainly interested to learn more about Nolan's next project.
Joss Whedon's new show Dollhouse premiered last Friday with reasonable but not great audience numbers (Variety). The fact that it was the No. 1-downloaded TV show on iTunes on Monday doesn't mean much to the studios who make much more money from advertisers that want over-the-air viewers. I enjoyed last week's Dollhouse--I think it's smart, fun, and unique, and I hope that it will be able to continue its run. To do that, it needs the ratings. So watch Dollhouse tomorrow! On Fox Friday at 9/8c.
Universal Pictures is developing a live-action movie based on the Candy Land board game (Variety). I remember playing this game as a little kid, though I have played it as recently as last December (I was babysitting my boss's six-year-old son for some extra Christmas cash). I wonder what the movie will be like... I hope it'll have a dash of Tim Burton-esque weirdness to cut the sweet (as long as it doesn't turn out like Strawberry Shortcake...). Etan Cohen (Madagascar 2, Tropic Thunder) will write the script, and Kevin Lima (Enchanted) is set to direct. This is the latest confection to come out of last February's Universal-Hasbro deal to turn at least four of Hasbro's toy properties into movies (Variety). So far, I've heard that Monopoly, Battleship, and Ouija movies are also in the works, though luckily I've heard nothing about a Stretch Armstrong movie... yet.
Martin Campbell, who recently directed Casino Royale, is in negotiations to direct Warner Bros.' live-action Green Lantern movie (Variety). DC superhero movies have had trouble maintaining support in recent years (with one big exception), so we'll see if the current top DC movie projects--the other being Jonah Hex, which has Josh Brolin attached to star--can manage to get made. I'm not a particular GL fan, but I like the DC characters in general and would like to see more comic book movies.
A biopic about Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's sister, Nannerl, will be made with Rene Feret set to direct (IMDb). This is mainly relevant to me because in my class's fourth grade play, I was Nannerl. This play was a kiddie musical called "Of Mice and Mozart", which tells the story of Mozart entirely in couplet rhymes (easy for kids to remember, annoying for parents to listen to), narrated by the mice who lived in the woodwork of Mozart's house. I took great pride in my role, mainly because I was one of two people in the whole fourth grade who did not have to wear either mouse ears or a goofy cotton ball wig for the play. I sang a handful of songs, but my only speaking lines were these:
Hello, everyone, Nannerl is my name.
Being Wolfgang's sister is my claim to fame.
I also love music and never get bored
For I spend hours playing my clavichord.
If you think it's odd that I remember that, ask me to recite my lines from my third-grade play. Anyway... yeah, it's about time Nannerl got a little respect with her own biopic.
After the astounding commercial and critical success of The Dark Knight, one might expect a sequel to be rushed to the head of Warner Bros.' slate. But Christopher Nolan has yet to commit--I would imagine he wants to make sure any sequel will be done right; Dark Knight is a tough act to follow. In the meantime, Warner Bros. has secured Nolan to direct his own script "Inception" (Variety). The studio describes it as contemporary sci-fi action. I'm certainly interested to learn more about Nolan's next project.
Joss Whedon's new show Dollhouse premiered last Friday with reasonable but not great audience numbers (Variety). The fact that it was the No. 1-downloaded TV show on iTunes on Monday doesn't mean much to the studios who make much more money from advertisers that want over-the-air viewers. I enjoyed last week's Dollhouse--I think it's smart, fun, and unique, and I hope that it will be able to continue its run. To do that, it needs the ratings. So watch Dollhouse tomorrow! On Fox Friday at 9/8c.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Academy Awards Nominations!
Don't be sad, the Season of Giving is not over yet: the 81st Annual Academy Awards nominations were announced this morning! And I, um, still haven't seen any of the nominees in the six major categories (i.e., picture, director, and lead and supporting actors and actresses), save for Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. In a somewhat poignant coincidence, his nomination for Best Performance by and Actor in a Supporting Role (isn't it diplomatic that the official title doesn't say who is actually the best actor, just who gave the best performance of the year) comes exactly one year after his untimely death. And he is one of the surest bets of the year; it would be a huge upset if he doesn't win. In any other year, I would be rooting for Robert Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder, but not this year. Not against Ledger.
Well, the fact that I haven't seen many of the nominees puts me in a strange position. I am always reading about the movie business, so I feel well acquainted with the nominees and want to talk about them like everyone else. But I don't actually have informed opinions of my own about any of them. I guess I will talk about what opinions I have, anyway, as well as whatever I find interesting about the nominations.
Benjamin Button was the big winner in the Oscar nominations, with a hefty total of 13--the same number that Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King received (though it is not expected to win all of them, as RotK did). The Best Picture nominees are The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader, Milk, and Frost/Nixon. They all also received nominations for their directors and screenwriters (Milk for original screenplay, the others for adapted). Revolutionary Road, which had fared well at the Golden Globes with nominations for picture, director, and lead actor and actress (for which Kate Winslet won), received only one major category nomination for supporting actor Michael Shannon. Leonardo DiCaprio was the only actor who received a Golden Globe nomination for leading role in a drama who did not get an Oscar nod; Richard Jenkins received the honor instead for The Visitor. Similarly, Kate Winslet's Golden Globe-winning performance in Revolutionary Road was ousted in the Oscar nominations and replaced by... Kate Winslet in The Reader, for which Winslet had actually won a supporting actress Golden Globe. As has happened before, the Golden Globes and Oscars disagreed on what constitutes a lead and a supporting role. Also in the lead actress category, Melissa Leo was nominated for Frozen River in place of Golden Globe nominee Kristin Scott Thomas.
Wall-E received a nomination for Best Animated Feature, but it also received nominations in original screenplay, original score, original song, sound, and sound editing, setting a Pixar record in number of nominations and tying Beauty and the Beast as the most nominated animated film. I hope they cook up something cute for the awards show when Wall-E accepts its animated feature award (which there is little doubt it will do).
The PGA and DGA nominations got my hopes up about The Dark Knight, but The Reader slipped into its place. Or Milk stole Revolutionary Road's place, if you're looking at the Golden Globes, but that would be silly... even though I just did that a whole bunch in my discussion of the acting categories above. Anyway, Dark Knight did get a respectable 8 nominations. In addition to best supporting actor, it received nods for cinematography, film editing, art direction, makeup, sound, sound editing, and visual effects. After all the fuss over whether it should be eligible for best score (it was disqualified, then requalified), it didn't end up with a nomination in that category.
A Best Picture and/or Best Director would have been nice for The Dark Knight, and it might have helped the Oscar show's lagging ratings of late. I would never support the Academy pandering to the masses by throwing in a nomination for a huge box office hit just to get more viewers--their job is to give the recognition for achievement in film that box office dollars cannot give. Nor would I even suggest that the Academy is shamefully out of touch with mainstream tastes; judging by last weekend's box office receipts, mainstream tastes can themselves be shameful. I would just feel better knowing that the Academy is not prejudiced against comic book films simply because of lingering fanboy stigma. They showed that they could accept a great fantasy film, but RotK was a full five years ago. Since I haven't seen any of the actual Best Picture nominees, I can't say which should give up its place to The Dark Knight (though the DGA and PGA say The Reader). Still, the five nominees all ooze Oscar bait. It would have been refreshing to see a dark knight on the list with them.
Well, the fact that I haven't seen many of the nominees puts me in a strange position. I am always reading about the movie business, so I feel well acquainted with the nominees and want to talk about them like everyone else. But I don't actually have informed opinions of my own about any of them. I guess I will talk about what opinions I have, anyway, as well as whatever I find interesting about the nominations.
Benjamin Button was the big winner in the Oscar nominations, with a hefty total of 13--the same number that Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King received (though it is not expected to win all of them, as RotK did). The Best Picture nominees are The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader, Milk, and Frost/Nixon. They all also received nominations for their directors and screenwriters (Milk for original screenplay, the others for adapted). Revolutionary Road, which had fared well at the Golden Globes with nominations for picture, director, and lead actor and actress (for which Kate Winslet won), received only one major category nomination for supporting actor Michael Shannon. Leonardo DiCaprio was the only actor who received a Golden Globe nomination for leading role in a drama who did not get an Oscar nod; Richard Jenkins received the honor instead for The Visitor. Similarly, Kate Winslet's Golden Globe-winning performance in Revolutionary Road was ousted in the Oscar nominations and replaced by... Kate Winslet in The Reader, for which Winslet had actually won a supporting actress Golden Globe. As has happened before, the Golden Globes and Oscars disagreed on what constitutes a lead and a supporting role. Also in the lead actress category, Melissa Leo was nominated for Frozen River in place of Golden Globe nominee Kristin Scott Thomas.
Wall-E received a nomination for Best Animated Feature, but it also received nominations in original screenplay, original score, original song, sound, and sound editing, setting a Pixar record in number of nominations and tying Beauty and the Beast as the most nominated animated film. I hope they cook up something cute for the awards show when Wall-E accepts its animated feature award (which there is little doubt it will do).
The PGA and DGA nominations got my hopes up about The Dark Knight, but The Reader slipped into its place. Or Milk stole Revolutionary Road's place, if you're looking at the Golden Globes, but that would be silly... even though I just did that a whole bunch in my discussion of the acting categories above. Anyway, Dark Knight did get a respectable 8 nominations. In addition to best supporting actor, it received nods for cinematography, film editing, art direction, makeup, sound, sound editing, and visual effects. After all the fuss over whether it should be eligible for best score (it was disqualified, then requalified), it didn't end up with a nomination in that category.
A Best Picture and/or Best Director would have been nice for The Dark Knight, and it might have helped the Oscar show's lagging ratings of late. I would never support the Academy pandering to the masses by throwing in a nomination for a huge box office hit just to get more viewers--their job is to give the recognition for achievement in film that box office dollars cannot give. Nor would I even suggest that the Academy is shamefully out of touch with mainstream tastes; judging by last weekend's box office receipts, mainstream tastes can themselves be shameful. I would just feel better knowing that the Academy is not prejudiced against comic book films simply because of lingering fanboy stigma. They showed that they could accept a great fantasy film, but RotK was a full five years ago. Since I haven't seen any of the actual Best Picture nominees, I can't say which should give up its place to The Dark Knight (though the DGA and PGA say The Reader). Still, the five nominees all ooze Oscar bait. It would have been refreshing to see a dark knight on the list with them.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Batman, Iron Man, Narnia, a starry movie, porn, and more
Happy New Year!
I haven't been posting much lately because of holiday break (I spent Christmas with my family at my parents' house) and because I've been busy writing my Statements of Purpose for my grad school applications. I don't know what my purpose is (do I even have a purpose? Do any of us?), so that makes writing a ~1000 word essay stating my purpose rather difficult. Luckily I have a pretty good sense of the kinds of things admissions committees might like to hear, so I managed to find something to write.
Anyway, here's some interesting recent entertainment news. There's a lot, since it's been a while...
Reports suggest that some key roles in the third Christopher Nolan Batman movie have been filled. Rachel Weisz has reportedly been cast as Catwoman, Eddie Murphy is lined up for The Riddler, and Shia Labeouf is supposedly set for the role of Robin (IMDb). I recall reading at some point that Christian Bale said he would drop out of the series if they ever brought Robin in, but I suppose he could have had a change of heart. This coming movie has a lot to live up to--I imagine it will be nearly impossible for it to match the critical or commercial success of its predecessor The Dark Knight. If it is as good as Batman Begins, though, I will be satisfied. The sequel is slated for release in 2010.
The economic downturn has affected even blockbuster franchises. Disney has dropped the third installment of the Chronicles of Narnia series, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, from its slate, leaving co-producers Walden Media to find another studio to co-finance the film (IMDb). The first Narnia movie, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, made around $745 million worldwide, bolstered in large part by churchgoers interested in the story's strong Christian themes and parallels. The second, last year's Prince Caspian, made only $419 million. For most movies, this would be a success, but these films reportedly each cost around $200 million to produce. In the current economic climate, Disney apparently did not want to risk another $200 million if there is a chance they could earn even less than they did on Prince Caspian. I have never read Voyage of the Dawn Treader, so I have no particular reason to worry about this movie specifically, but as a fan of fantasy movies in general, I am concerned if what once seemed a hit franchise is being dropped by a major studio. What will happen to the smaller franchises? Some suggest even Harry Potter is not immune to the recession (The Independent). Hard to believe, but it's enough to make me nervous.
Evan Rachel Wood is trying to convince her Across the Universe co-star to star with her again in the stage musical version of Spider-Man as the Peter Parker to her Mary Jane (IMDb). While I do genuinely like both comic book heroes and Broadway musicals, I've sort of tracking this story mostly as a joke, because, I mean... it's Spider-Man singing and dancing on stage! But Wood insists that Spider-Man: The Musical is not a joke and has assured us that the character will never sing in tights--he will only sing as Peter Parker. Bono and The Edge wrote the songs. And director Julie Taymor of course did amazing things with the stage in The Lion King, so there is promise for some amazing web-slinging theatrics. My apologies; I will withhold my judgment.
As the summer blockbuster that was also a critical darling, The Dark Knight had some early awards buzz, but after many awards groups declined to give it a nomination for best picture, it seemed mostly out of the running for an Oscar nod. Until now. The Producers Guild of America has announced their nominees for best picture of the year, and The Dark Knight is in, along with Frost/Nixon, Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Milk (IMDb). And this is a big deal because the PGA nominees and winner frequently predict the movies that will receive the same honors from the Academy. I'm definitely hoping for a little comic love from the Academy Awards. We'll see how the Oscar nominees turn out on the 22nd.
Head down to your local grocery store and pick up a pair of 3-D glasses to watch... a commercial. Dreamworks Animation is going all out and spending what is probably tens of millions of dollars on a huge promotional campaign for upcoming film Monsters vs. Aliens. A three-minute three-dimensional clip of the movie will be shown during the Super Bowl commercials. 150 million pairs of 3-D glasses will be distributed free of charge at 28,000 locations including grocery, drug, and electronics stores and big-box retailers (IMDb). Not as cool as beaming the movie to Alpha Centauri (see previous post), but a pretty cool (and likely more effective) promotional move nonetheless. I have a couple reasons I am interested in this movie and concerned about its success, one of which you might not think of--I may post on it at some point--so I'm interested to see how this promotional campaign turns out. The best thing about the glasses is that apparently the following night, you can use them to watch a 3-D episode of NBC's Chuck. Hopefully they will have some appropriate effects on that night's episode to warrant the 3-D treatment.
This is the first I've heard about it, but there is an independent 3-D animated film being made in conjunction with NASA called Quantum Quest (Variety). The main character is a photon who lives in the sun. Yes. The movie will fuse Digimax animation with actual space imagery from NASA. It's going to have a star-studded voice cast, with two Captain Kirks (William Shatner and Chris Pine) and two Darth Vaders (James Earl Jones and Hayden Christiansen) signed to lend their voices along with Mark Hamill, Samuel L. Jackson, Amanda Peet, Sandra Oh, Abigail Breslin, and astronaut Neil Armstrong. The film has apparently been in the works since 1996, but they have been waiting for footage from the Cassini/Huygens to arrive. Sweet.
Mickey Rourke is in talks to play the villain in the Iron Man sequel (Variety). I find this mildly interesting because the talk this year has been all about the unlikely comebacks of Mickey Rourke and Robert Downey Jr. (who, in case you are living under a rock, is the star of the new Iron Man movie franchise). I became a fan of the latter after seeing 2005's Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, and I was introduced to the former in 2005's Sin City, but those were either not big enough hits or big enough roles to count as real comebacks. Anyway, Iron Man 2 may be a face-off between the two comeback kings of 2008. Sam Rockwell is also in talks to play a villain in the movie, which is slated for release in summer 2010.
And lastly, my little gem of the day. Porn moguls Larry Flynt and Joe Francis are asking Congress for a $5 billion bailout for the troubled porn industry (IMDb). Adult DVD sales are apparently down 22 percent from 2007 sales, which Flynt attributes to American citizens being so worried about their finances that they don't have the time to think about sex. Quote: "It's time for Congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America." Yeah, I don't know why Congress didn't get on that sooner. Flynt and Francis say that the porn industry is important to the American economy just as the auto industry is, though I think it may still be a tough sell to get Congress to spend taxpayers' dollars on reviving porn. But I guess the fact that there is a male majority may help. I don't really care what happens to the porn industry, but as a fan of Avenue Q, I can't help but think of a certain important moment in that musical. When it turns out that Trekkie Monster has $10 million to donate to Kate Monster's school for monsters, and everyone in shock asks him how he has so much money when all he seems to do is sit in his apartment and watch porn, he declares, "In volatile market, only stable investment is PORN!" So now I have become deeply concerned about our economy. If even porn needs a bailout, we must be doomed!
Ah, what a start to 2009.
I haven't been posting much lately because of holiday break (I spent Christmas with my family at my parents' house) and because I've been busy writing my Statements of Purpose for my grad school applications. I don't know what my purpose is (do I even have a purpose? Do any of us?), so that makes writing a ~1000 word essay stating my purpose rather difficult. Luckily I have a pretty good sense of the kinds of things admissions committees might like to hear, so I managed to find something to write.
Anyway, here's some interesting recent entertainment news. There's a lot, since it's been a while...
Reports suggest that some key roles in the third Christopher Nolan Batman movie have been filled. Rachel Weisz has reportedly been cast as Catwoman, Eddie Murphy is lined up for The Riddler, and Shia Labeouf is supposedly set for the role of Robin (IMDb). I recall reading at some point that Christian Bale said he would drop out of the series if they ever brought Robin in, but I suppose he could have had a change of heart. This coming movie has a lot to live up to--I imagine it will be nearly impossible for it to match the critical or commercial success of its predecessor The Dark Knight. If it is as good as Batman Begins, though, I will be satisfied. The sequel is slated for release in 2010.
The economic downturn has affected even blockbuster franchises. Disney has dropped the third installment of the Chronicles of Narnia series, The Voyage of the Dawn Treader, from its slate, leaving co-producers Walden Media to find another studio to co-finance the film (IMDb). The first Narnia movie, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, made around $745 million worldwide, bolstered in large part by churchgoers interested in the story's strong Christian themes and parallels. The second, last year's Prince Caspian, made only $419 million. For most movies, this would be a success, but these films reportedly each cost around $200 million to produce. In the current economic climate, Disney apparently did not want to risk another $200 million if there is a chance they could earn even less than they did on Prince Caspian. I have never read Voyage of the Dawn Treader, so I have no particular reason to worry about this movie specifically, but as a fan of fantasy movies in general, I am concerned if what once seemed a hit franchise is being dropped by a major studio. What will happen to the smaller franchises? Some suggest even Harry Potter is not immune to the recession (The Independent). Hard to believe, but it's enough to make me nervous.
Evan Rachel Wood is trying to convince her Across the Universe co-star to star with her again in the stage musical version of Spider-Man as the Peter Parker to her Mary Jane (IMDb). While I do genuinely like both comic book heroes and Broadway musicals, I've sort of tracking this story mostly as a joke, because, I mean... it's Spider-Man singing and dancing on stage! But Wood insists that Spider-Man: The Musical is not a joke and has assured us that the character will never sing in tights--he will only sing as Peter Parker. Bono and The Edge wrote the songs. And director Julie Taymor of course did amazing things with the stage in The Lion King, so there is promise for some amazing web-slinging theatrics. My apologies; I will withhold my judgment.
As the summer blockbuster that was also a critical darling, The Dark Knight had some early awards buzz, but after many awards groups declined to give it a nomination for best picture, it seemed mostly out of the running for an Oscar nod. Until now. The Producers Guild of America has announced their nominees for best picture of the year, and The Dark Knight is in, along with Frost/Nixon, Slumdog Millionaire, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Milk (IMDb). And this is a big deal because the PGA nominees and winner frequently predict the movies that will receive the same honors from the Academy. I'm definitely hoping for a little comic love from the Academy Awards. We'll see how the Oscar nominees turn out on the 22nd.
Head down to your local grocery store and pick up a pair of 3-D glasses to watch... a commercial. Dreamworks Animation is going all out and spending what is probably tens of millions of dollars on a huge promotional campaign for upcoming film Monsters vs. Aliens. A three-minute three-dimensional clip of the movie will be shown during the Super Bowl commercials. 150 million pairs of 3-D glasses will be distributed free of charge at 28,000 locations including grocery, drug, and electronics stores and big-box retailers (IMDb). Not as cool as beaming the movie to Alpha Centauri (see previous post), but a pretty cool (and likely more effective) promotional move nonetheless. I have a couple reasons I am interested in this movie and concerned about its success, one of which you might not think of--I may post on it at some point--so I'm interested to see how this promotional campaign turns out. The best thing about the glasses is that apparently the following night, you can use them to watch a 3-D episode of NBC's Chuck. Hopefully they will have some appropriate effects on that night's episode to warrant the 3-D treatment.
This is the first I've heard about it, but there is an independent 3-D animated film being made in conjunction with NASA called Quantum Quest (Variety). The main character is a photon who lives in the sun. Yes. The movie will fuse Digimax animation with actual space imagery from NASA. It's going to have a star-studded voice cast, with two Captain Kirks (William Shatner and Chris Pine) and two Darth Vaders (James Earl Jones and Hayden Christiansen) signed to lend their voices along with Mark Hamill, Samuel L. Jackson, Amanda Peet, Sandra Oh, Abigail Breslin, and astronaut Neil Armstrong. The film has apparently been in the works since 1996, but they have been waiting for footage from the Cassini/Huygens to arrive. Sweet.
Mickey Rourke is in talks to play the villain in the Iron Man sequel (Variety). I find this mildly interesting because the talk this year has been all about the unlikely comebacks of Mickey Rourke and Robert Downey Jr. (who, in case you are living under a rock, is the star of the new Iron Man movie franchise). I became a fan of the latter after seeing 2005's Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, and I was introduced to the former in 2005's Sin City, but those were either not big enough hits or big enough roles to count as real comebacks. Anyway, Iron Man 2 may be a face-off between the two comeback kings of 2008. Sam Rockwell is also in talks to play a villain in the movie, which is slated for release in summer 2010.
And lastly, my little gem of the day. Porn moguls Larry Flynt and Joe Francis are asking Congress for a $5 billion bailout for the troubled porn industry (IMDb). Adult DVD sales are apparently down 22 percent from 2007 sales, which Flynt attributes to American citizens being so worried about their finances that they don't have the time to think about sex. Quote: "It's time for Congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America." Yeah, I don't know why Congress didn't get on that sooner. Flynt and Francis say that the porn industry is important to the American economy just as the auto industry is, though I think it may still be a tough sell to get Congress to spend taxpayers' dollars on reviving porn. But I guess the fact that there is a male majority may help. I don't really care what happens to the porn industry, but as a fan of Avenue Q, I can't help but think of a certain important moment in that musical. When it turns out that Trekkie Monster has $10 million to donate to Kate Monster's school for monsters, and everyone in shock asks him how he has so much money when all he seems to do is sit in his apartment and watch porn, he declares, "In volatile market, only stable investment is PORN!" So now I have become deeply concerned about our economy. If even porn needs a bailout, we must be doomed!
Ah, what a start to 2009.
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Best and Worst 8 of 2008
As we reach the end of 2008, I'd like to look back and reflect on what I consider the Top 08 Best and Worst Stories of '08. While not personal stories (e.g., the saga of our well water), they are my personal take on what counts as the "Top" stories; that is, they may or may not be that important to the Real World, but they were all notable to me personally. Also, I kind of had some order in my mind as I wrote them, but I didn't really intend for the order they are listed to be important (note: I didn't number them), so don't read too much into it.
The Best
The Election
Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert were at the top of their respective games this fall, with the election providing them with all the material they could have hoped for. Even SNL, with Tina Fey's brilliant Sarah Palin impression, rose to heights it hadn't reached in a long time. Thanks to these folks, the election was hilarious and fun. Though the icing on the cake for me was definitely the Real-World side of it: Barack Obama won. I don't really want to get into a discussion of politics, but whatever your political leanings, it is at least historical that after 42 white people at the head of the country, we finally are starting to show our true colors.
The Dark Knight
This summer, The Dark Knight swept the nation and the world to reap the second highest box office take of all time (disregarding inflation), after Titanic. But not only was it successful, it was also really good. With some brilliant performances, tough moral dilemmas, and overall topnotch storytelling, Dark Knight earned significant critical notice. Heath Ledger is poised to earn an Oscar nomination, perhaps even the award, for his portrayal of the Joker, and who knows, The Dark Knight might become a dark horse and earn some Oscar recognition itself.
LOST is good again!
After a disenchanting second and third season, Lost got back on track in Season 4, bringing mind-bending flash-forwards, touching drama, and new mysteries with each question it answered. And in the season finale, they frickin' moved the Island! I am awaiting Lost's return in its penultimate season most anxiously.
Battlestar Galactica Season 4.0
Speaking of huge cliffhangers, in BSG, they found Earth! It's frakkin' there! And it's... not as we remember it. BSG's last season was split in half by the writers' strike last year, so the final ten episodes will be showing this winter/spring. This show keeps me on the edge of my seat even more than Lost, so I really can't wait for this one to come back.
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Joss Whedon (and his brothers). Neil Patrick Harris, Nathan Fillion, Felicia Day. Singing. About an evil super-villain. The concept is both utterly wacky and perfectly brilliant at the same time. The three-installment movie came out hilarious and touching and catchy, and they put it up online free of charge this past summer. And then they made a DVD with great extras including Commentary: The Musical with more varied, catchy, and insightful songs. Dr. Horrible is further proof that unorthodox business models can be successful. Never before have horses seemed so frightening, nor has taking over the world seemed like such a sweet gesture.
Mass Effect on PC
So I guess Mass Effect first came out in 2007, but it wasn't on PC until 2008, so it didn't enter my radar until this year. And what a great game it is. BioWare knows how to make a good game, and this one had a strong main storyline, interesting side quests, lots of tough and important choices, fun characters, impressive acting--from both the voice actors and the animated characters--good combat, and a brilliantly imagined sci-fi world (well, galaxy). The most smooth and enjoyable game I'd played in a while. I hope the planned movie version won't tarnish its image (unlikely, but we won't have to worry about it for several years at least).
Wall-E
Adorable, innovative, moving, challenging. Pixar, which has consistently delivered great animated films, outdid even itself with this masterpiece. People had questioned whether kids would be able to make it through the long period at the beginning which had practically no dialogue and only a lonely, dirty robot in a world junkyard, but as someone who took three young boys (one of whom has ADD) to see the movie, I can attest to the fact that even the kiddies were riveted throughout the film. A beautiful movie that deserves every award it gets.
Diablo III, SW:TOR MMORPG announced
This summer brought two computer game announcements that made me squirm in my seat with excitement. Blizzard would finally be coming out with a sequel to Diablo II, and BioWare is making a sort of sequel to its Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic game. We've been fed selected footage of Diablo III, and it looks pretty cool. TOR is said to have more story content than all of BioWare's previous games combined (that's a lot!), but it has yet to reach a stage to have much to show. I am excited for these two games, though without a release date for either, I think they will both be a long time coming.
The Worst
Heroes sucks
The characters in Heroes act out of character, the plot contradicts itself, very little makes actual sense within the world they've created, and every week the point of the show's existence becomes less and less clear. Its first season was good, making a superhero TV show water-cooler gossip worthy. The second season was considerably worse, but we were promised that the third season would redeem it. They didn't deliver. Still, there's hope yet, as first season collaborator Bryan Fuller returns now that he's free of other commitments because
Pushing Daisies is canceled
Oh, ABC. I know you tried. Still, I am bitter that you canceled one of the few truly unique shows on network TV. It is whimsical, adorable, bright, clever, funny, and sweet, with a great cast, great creative team, and great production. It is just so tragic that it had to go. I guess we can blame it mostly on
The WGA strike
The writers' strike began in 2007, but it carried over into 2008 enough to really screw things up for TV shows. The spring was full of reality shows and reruns and--actually, I'm not sure what it was full of, since I mostly wasn't watching because I knew there wasn't anything worth watching. Even when the strike was over, most of the networks decided not to bring back their shows until the fall, feeling that coming back for four or five shows in the spring would seem disjointed and not be worth it. CBS, which did bring its shows back for a few spring episodes, got to feel all smug in the fall, when its shows regained their audiences and the other networks' shows didn't. This was the death of Pushing Daisies, which had been a modest success with audiences and a critical darling. Other shows I watch, such as Chuck and Heroes, also took serious hits to their audiences. It is unclear if they will ever regain their pre-strike numbers. And with a SAG strike looming, who knows which shows will be able to survive 2009?
Watchmen litigation
In February 2008, after filming of Warner Bros.' movie adaptation of the famous graphic novel Watchmen was complete and the film was in post-production, 20th Century Fox filed a suit against Warner Bros. alleging that Fox actually had the copyright to the Watchmen movie. On Christmas Eve, a federal judge ruled that Fox indeed had the right to distribute the movie. Worst case scenario is that Fox will prevent the movie from ever being released. Hopefully, they'll settle to take a chunk of the profits from a movie they hadn't shown any interest in making since maybe the early '90s.
The Death of Flagship Studios
I've been sort of silent on this matter, saddened and perhaps embarrassed that I let myself get hooked on a doomed game, but I am a fan of Hellgate: London, and this summer's news that its fledgling producer had folded was unwelcome news indeed. Flagship was started by a handful of the people who had been major players in the development of Diablo II, and Hellgate: London was designed to have all the appeal of the Diablo games with the absorbing action of a first person shooter. Furthermore, while HG:L would function completely as a single-player game offline, users could play multi-player online for free (though a monthly fee would give you considerable bonus content). My brothers and I enjoyed hours of "sibling bonding time" chatting about random stuff while slaying countless demons. The game wasn't perfect, with lots of bugs and scenery that could get a little monotonous, but they were continually fixing bugs and adding new scenes and content. And, in my humble opinion, the action was considerably more entertaining than that of Diablo II. Unfortunately, bad luck and bad business did the company in. The servers will be shut down on January 31, 2009, and my brothers and I, and all the others who have come to love this game, will have to find something else like HG:L. Unfortunately, there is not at present anything quite like it.
Sarah Palin
Sure, we owe her for the memorable and hilarious Tina Fey impression, and it's not cool to beat up on the loser, but please, Sarah Palin, go away. I really don't think we've seen the last of her, and that seriously worries me.
Heath Ledger's death
Lots of people died this year, of course, and you can't really compare tragedies, so singling out one death for my Worst list is somewhat unfair. But I really liked Heath Ledger. The fact that he was one of the most respected actors of my generation made me feel somehow invested in his career, and his death on January 22, 2008 was heartbreaking. By age 28, he had already racked up more varied and notable performances than some stars do in a lifetime, earning an Oscar nod for his performance in Brokeback Mountain and giving another Oscar-worthy performance in The Dark Knight. But his career was just beginning, and in addition to promising more and even better future performances as he matured, he was looking into directing and taking part in other aspects of the creative process. He was adorable and charming, with a beautiful little daughter that he loved. He was a movie star but a serious actor who was not as much of a tabloid topic as he might have been; he managed to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that catch many other young stars. Basically, he was one of the ones who had it together. And boy was he talented. But his shocking accidental death cut it all off. It was devastating and tragic.
The economy
And all the other crap going on in the world--you know, wars and things that really matter. I'd like to think that it can't get any worse, but it could. Hopefully 2009 will make most things better. But either way, we'll have Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert finding ways to make us laugh through--and even about--our troubles. Here's to 2008!
The Best
The Election
Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert were at the top of their respective games this fall, with the election providing them with all the material they could have hoped for. Even SNL, with Tina Fey's brilliant Sarah Palin impression, rose to heights it hadn't reached in a long time. Thanks to these folks, the election was hilarious and fun. Though the icing on the cake for me was definitely the Real-World side of it: Barack Obama won. I don't really want to get into a discussion of politics, but whatever your political leanings, it is at least historical that after 42 white people at the head of the country, we finally are starting to show our true colors.
The Dark Knight
This summer, The Dark Knight swept the nation and the world to reap the second highest box office take of all time (disregarding inflation), after Titanic. But not only was it successful, it was also really good. With some brilliant performances, tough moral dilemmas, and overall topnotch storytelling, Dark Knight earned significant critical notice. Heath Ledger is poised to earn an Oscar nomination, perhaps even the award, for his portrayal of the Joker, and who knows, The Dark Knight might become a dark horse and earn some Oscar recognition itself.
LOST is good again!
After a disenchanting second and third season, Lost got back on track in Season 4, bringing mind-bending flash-forwards, touching drama, and new mysteries with each question it answered. And in the season finale, they frickin' moved the Island! I am awaiting Lost's return in its penultimate season most anxiously.
Battlestar Galactica Season 4.0
Speaking of huge cliffhangers, in BSG, they found Earth! It's frakkin' there! And it's... not as we remember it. BSG's last season was split in half by the writers' strike last year, so the final ten episodes will be showing this winter/spring. This show keeps me on the edge of my seat even more than Lost, so I really can't wait for this one to come back.
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Joss Whedon (and his brothers). Neil Patrick Harris, Nathan Fillion, Felicia Day. Singing. About an evil super-villain. The concept is both utterly wacky and perfectly brilliant at the same time. The three-installment movie came out hilarious and touching and catchy, and they put it up online free of charge this past summer. And then they made a DVD with great extras including Commentary: The Musical with more varied, catchy, and insightful songs. Dr. Horrible is further proof that unorthodox business models can be successful. Never before have horses seemed so frightening, nor has taking over the world seemed like such a sweet gesture.
Mass Effect on PC
So I guess Mass Effect first came out in 2007, but it wasn't on PC until 2008, so it didn't enter my radar until this year. And what a great game it is. BioWare knows how to make a good game, and this one had a strong main storyline, interesting side quests, lots of tough and important choices, fun characters, impressive acting--from both the voice actors and the animated characters--good combat, and a brilliantly imagined sci-fi world (well, galaxy). The most smooth and enjoyable game I'd played in a while. I hope the planned movie version won't tarnish its image (unlikely, but we won't have to worry about it for several years at least).
Wall-E
Adorable, innovative, moving, challenging. Pixar, which has consistently delivered great animated films, outdid even itself with this masterpiece. People had questioned whether kids would be able to make it through the long period at the beginning which had practically no dialogue and only a lonely, dirty robot in a world junkyard, but as someone who took three young boys (one of whom has ADD) to see the movie, I can attest to the fact that even the kiddies were riveted throughout the film. A beautiful movie that deserves every award it gets.
Diablo III, SW:TOR MMORPG announced
This summer brought two computer game announcements that made me squirm in my seat with excitement. Blizzard would finally be coming out with a sequel to Diablo II, and BioWare is making a sort of sequel to its Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic game. We've been fed selected footage of Diablo III, and it looks pretty cool. TOR is said to have more story content than all of BioWare's previous games combined (that's a lot!), but it has yet to reach a stage to have much to show. I am excited for these two games, though without a release date for either, I think they will both be a long time coming.
The Worst
Heroes sucks
The characters in Heroes act out of character, the plot contradicts itself, very little makes actual sense within the world they've created, and every week the point of the show's existence becomes less and less clear. Its first season was good, making a superhero TV show water-cooler gossip worthy. The second season was considerably worse, but we were promised that the third season would redeem it. They didn't deliver. Still, there's hope yet, as first season collaborator Bryan Fuller returns now that he's free of other commitments because
Pushing Daisies is canceled
Oh, ABC. I know you tried. Still, I am bitter that you canceled one of the few truly unique shows on network TV. It is whimsical, adorable, bright, clever, funny, and sweet, with a great cast, great creative team, and great production. It is just so tragic that it had to go. I guess we can blame it mostly on
The WGA strike
The writers' strike began in 2007, but it carried over into 2008 enough to really screw things up for TV shows. The spring was full of reality shows and reruns and--actually, I'm not sure what it was full of, since I mostly wasn't watching because I knew there wasn't anything worth watching. Even when the strike was over, most of the networks decided not to bring back their shows until the fall, feeling that coming back for four or five shows in the spring would seem disjointed and not be worth it. CBS, which did bring its shows back for a few spring episodes, got to feel all smug in the fall, when its shows regained their audiences and the other networks' shows didn't. This was the death of Pushing Daisies, which had been a modest success with audiences and a critical darling. Other shows I watch, such as Chuck and Heroes, also took serious hits to their audiences. It is unclear if they will ever regain their pre-strike numbers. And with a SAG strike looming, who knows which shows will be able to survive 2009?
Watchmen litigation
In February 2008, after filming of Warner Bros.' movie adaptation of the famous graphic novel Watchmen was complete and the film was in post-production, 20th Century Fox filed a suit against Warner Bros. alleging that Fox actually had the copyright to the Watchmen movie. On Christmas Eve, a federal judge ruled that Fox indeed had the right to distribute the movie. Worst case scenario is that Fox will prevent the movie from ever being released. Hopefully, they'll settle to take a chunk of the profits from a movie they hadn't shown any interest in making since maybe the early '90s.
The Death of Flagship Studios
I've been sort of silent on this matter, saddened and perhaps embarrassed that I let myself get hooked on a doomed game, but I am a fan of Hellgate: London, and this summer's news that its fledgling producer had folded was unwelcome news indeed. Flagship was started by a handful of the people who had been major players in the development of Diablo II, and Hellgate: London was designed to have all the appeal of the Diablo games with the absorbing action of a first person shooter. Furthermore, while HG:L would function completely as a single-player game offline, users could play multi-player online for free (though a monthly fee would give you considerable bonus content). My brothers and I enjoyed hours of "sibling bonding time" chatting about random stuff while slaying countless demons. The game wasn't perfect, with lots of bugs and scenery that could get a little monotonous, but they were continually fixing bugs and adding new scenes and content. And, in my humble opinion, the action was considerably more entertaining than that of Diablo II. Unfortunately, bad luck and bad business did the company in. The servers will be shut down on January 31, 2009, and my brothers and I, and all the others who have come to love this game, will have to find something else like HG:L. Unfortunately, there is not at present anything quite like it.
Sarah Palin
Sure, we owe her for the memorable and hilarious Tina Fey impression, and it's not cool to beat up on the loser, but please, Sarah Palin, go away. I really don't think we've seen the last of her, and that seriously worries me.
Heath Ledger's death
Lots of people died this year, of course, and you can't really compare tragedies, so singling out one death for my Worst list is somewhat unfair. But I really liked Heath Ledger. The fact that he was one of the most respected actors of my generation made me feel somehow invested in his career, and his death on January 22, 2008 was heartbreaking. By age 28, he had already racked up more varied and notable performances than some stars do in a lifetime, earning an Oscar nod for his performance in Brokeback Mountain and giving another Oscar-worthy performance in The Dark Knight. But his career was just beginning, and in addition to promising more and even better future performances as he matured, he was looking into directing and taking part in other aspects of the creative process. He was adorable and charming, with a beautiful little daughter that he loved. He was a movie star but a serious actor who was not as much of a tabloid topic as he might have been; he managed to avoid a lot of the pitfalls that catch many other young stars. Basically, he was one of the ones who had it together. And boy was he talented. But his shocking accidental death cut it all off. It was devastating and tragic.
The economy
And all the other crap going on in the world--you know, wars and things that really matter. I'd like to think that it can't get any worse, but it could. Hopefully 2009 will make most things better. But either way, we'll have Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert finding ways to make us laugh through--and even about--our troubles. Here's to 2008!
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Golden Globe Nominees 2009
*It's the hap-happiest season of all...*
Ah, 'tis the season of giving: Awards Season!
A handful of movie awards have already been handed out, but the nominees for the 2009 66th Annual Golden Globe Awards were announced this morning. Before I discuss the nominees, let me first take a moment to reflect on last year's Golden Globes. Hmm, that's strange, I don't remember them at all. Oh, that's right--last year's Golden Globe ceremony was canceled and replaced with what was essentially a press conference announcing the winners, thanks to the WGA strike. No one really cared about whether the writers were going to be at the ceremony anyway, but since the stars whom people actually do care about weren't interested in crossing picket lines, the Golden Globe extravaganza was tragically called off. And where are we this year? SAG is now on the verge of a strike vote, with ballots to authorize a strike going out to members on January 2. Luckily for the Golden Globes (and broadcaster NBC), the ballots will not be counted until January 23, meaning that the January 11 ceremony is safe. Phew! The Oscars, of course, are not so fortunately free of worries in that regard.
Now as for this year's nominees. (They are listed in their entirety a number of places, such as IMDb, so I won't list them all but merely discuss whatever interests me.) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Frost/Nixon lead the pack with five nominations including Best Picture - Drama; Doubt also received five nominations, including four acting nods, but no nod for best picture. The five best picture nominees, which in addition to Frost/Nixon and Button were Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader, and Revolutionary Road, got the five nominations for their directors; all but Revolutionary Road also got nominations for their screenwriters (Doubt got the fifth Screenplay nod). Meryl Streep got nominations for both Mamma Mia! and Doubt, and Kate Winslet also got two with Revolutionary Road and The Reader.
Milk, which seemed to be among the front-runners for best picture, surprisingly only received a nod for Sean Penn as best actor in a drama. The Dark Knight only got a nomination for Heath Ledger as best supporting actor. James Franco got a surprise nod for his role in Pineapple Express, though no recognition for his praised role in Milk. Robert Downey Jr. got a deserved supporting actor nomination for his role in Tropic Thunder, but perhaps the funniest surprise of the morning was that Tom Cruise was nominated in the same category for his Tropic Thunder performance. I will be watching the results of that category with great interest.
The list of nominees, though, has made me realize just how little I have seen this year. The only nominees I have actually seen are
Heath Ledger for The Dark Knight, Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Motion Picture
WALL-E, Best Animated Film
House M.D., Best Television Series - Drama
Hugh Laurie for "House M.D.", Best Performance by an Actor in a Television Series - Drama
Neil Patrick Harris for "How I Met Your Mother", Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Series, Mini-Series or Motion Picture Made for Television
That's it. House and HIMYM aren't even really "My Shows". I have been watching House this season because it stands between Jeopardy and Fringe on Tuesday nights and one of my housemates is a fan; I enjoy it well enough, but it is mildly annoying, and it never did let me in on the secret that it's actually that good. I have only seen this season and half of Season 1 of HIMYM, though I love what I've seen, especially Neil Patrick Harris' Barney, and if I had the time and DVDs I would happily make it one of "My Shows". Still, since I haven't seen even half of the episodes, I hardly count myself a true follower.
In regards to the TV nominees, I can somewhat fairly grumble about the lack of Pushing Daisies, Lost, Desperate Housewives, Battlestar Galactica, or other possible nominees, though not having cable means that I haven't been able to watch many of the actual nominees and thus can't refute their merit. But in the movie categories, I just haven't been to the theater enough. Beyond WALL-E and Dark Knight, I haven't seen anything that would really deserve a nomination.
Frost/Nixon is probably at the top of my list of movies I'd like to see. Milk and Benjamin Button are also high on the list, and I'd see Doubt if it were at a local theater. I would have seen Rachel Getting Married if it had come to a local theater. But it didn't. And there lies one of the problems. Our local four-screen theater only gets the most mainstream (and usually boring and bad) movies. Current offerings: Bolt, Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa, Twilight, Quantum of Solace, Four Christmases. Those choices aren't really that bad, considering the dismal offerings throughout the fall. The next closest theater, 25 minutes away, has screens the size of some people's home theaters, and the only additional film it offers is Role Models. I have to drive nearly an hour to get to a theater that has any chance of showing Frost/Nixon. And my chances of finding a friend who wants to drive an hour to see something bleak like Doubt are, well, doubtful. All right, I'll stop complaining. I'll see some of these movies eventually, somehow, I hope.
Well, we'll see how this awards season plays out. Will I make it to the theater to see any of the nominees? Will a strike disrupt the Academy Awards? Will there be any viewers around to notice? Time (and I) will tell.
*It's the most wonderful time of the year!*
Ah, 'tis the season of giving: Awards Season!
A handful of movie awards have already been handed out, but the nominees for the 2009 66th Annual Golden Globe Awards were announced this morning. Before I discuss the nominees, let me first take a moment to reflect on last year's Golden Globes. Hmm, that's strange, I don't remember them at all. Oh, that's right--last year's Golden Globe ceremony was canceled and replaced with what was essentially a press conference announcing the winners, thanks to the WGA strike. No one really cared about whether the writers were going to be at the ceremony anyway, but since the stars whom people actually do care about weren't interested in crossing picket lines, the Golden Globe extravaganza was tragically called off. And where are we this year? SAG is now on the verge of a strike vote, with ballots to authorize a strike going out to members on January 2. Luckily for the Golden Globes (and broadcaster NBC), the ballots will not be counted until January 23, meaning that the January 11 ceremony is safe. Phew! The Oscars, of course, are not so fortunately free of worries in that regard.
Now as for this year's nominees. (They are listed in their entirety a number of places, such as IMDb, so I won't list them all but merely discuss whatever interests me.) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Frost/Nixon lead the pack with five nominations including Best Picture - Drama; Doubt also received five nominations, including four acting nods, but no nod for best picture. The five best picture nominees, which in addition to Frost/Nixon and Button were Slumdog Millionaire, The Reader, and Revolutionary Road, got the five nominations for their directors; all but Revolutionary Road also got nominations for their screenwriters (Doubt got the fifth Screenplay nod). Meryl Streep got nominations for both Mamma Mia! and Doubt, and Kate Winslet also got two with Revolutionary Road and The Reader.
Milk, which seemed to be among the front-runners for best picture, surprisingly only received a nod for Sean Penn as best actor in a drama. The Dark Knight only got a nomination for Heath Ledger as best supporting actor. James Franco got a surprise nod for his role in Pineapple Express, though no recognition for his praised role in Milk. Robert Downey Jr. got a deserved supporting actor nomination for his role in Tropic Thunder, but perhaps the funniest surprise of the morning was that Tom Cruise was nominated in the same category for his Tropic Thunder performance. I will be watching the results of that category with great interest.
The list of nominees, though, has made me realize just how little I have seen this year. The only nominees I have actually seen are
Heath Ledger for The Dark Knight, Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Motion Picture
WALL-E, Best Animated Film
House M.D., Best Television Series - Drama
Hugh Laurie for "House M.D.", Best Performance by an Actor in a Television Series - Drama
Neil Patrick Harris for "How I Met Your Mother", Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role in a Series, Mini-Series or Motion Picture Made for Television
That's it. House and HIMYM aren't even really "My Shows". I have been watching House this season because it stands between Jeopardy and Fringe on Tuesday nights and one of my housemates is a fan; I enjoy it well enough, but it is mildly annoying, and it never did let me in on the secret that it's actually that good. I have only seen this season and half of Season 1 of HIMYM, though I love what I've seen, especially Neil Patrick Harris' Barney, and if I had the time and DVDs I would happily make it one of "My Shows". Still, since I haven't seen even half of the episodes, I hardly count myself a true follower.
In regards to the TV nominees, I can somewhat fairly grumble about the lack of Pushing Daisies, Lost, Desperate Housewives, Battlestar Galactica, or other possible nominees, though not having cable means that I haven't been able to watch many of the actual nominees and thus can't refute their merit. But in the movie categories, I just haven't been to the theater enough. Beyond WALL-E and Dark Knight, I haven't seen anything that would really deserve a nomination.
Frost/Nixon is probably at the top of my list of movies I'd like to see. Milk and Benjamin Button are also high on the list, and I'd see Doubt if it were at a local theater. I would have seen Rachel Getting Married if it had come to a local theater. But it didn't. And there lies one of the problems. Our local four-screen theater only gets the most mainstream (and usually boring and bad) movies. Current offerings: Bolt, Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa, Twilight, Quantum of Solace, Four Christmases. Those choices aren't really that bad, considering the dismal offerings throughout the fall. The next closest theater, 25 minutes away, has screens the size of some people's home theaters, and the only additional film it offers is Role Models. I have to drive nearly an hour to get to a theater that has any chance of showing Frost/Nixon. And my chances of finding a friend who wants to drive an hour to see something bleak like Doubt are, well, doubtful. All right, I'll stop complaining. I'll see some of these movies eventually, somehow, I hope.
Well, we'll see how this awards season plays out. Will I make it to the theater to see any of the nominees? Will a strike disrupt the Academy Awards? Will there be any viewers around to notice? Time (and I) will tell.
*It's the most wonderful time of the year!*
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Reflections on Watchmen
When I finished reading Watchmen this past weekend, I was so beside myself with a dizzying mix of intense emotions that I couldn't gather my thoughts together into anything nearing coherency. Hence the delay of this post.
It's been a long time since I've read anything so sharp, challenging, moving, or beautiful. I have to admit that when I first heard of Watchmen, I found it surprising that Time Magazine would put a graphic novel on its list of 100 Best Novels (all English language novels 1923-2006). I mean, this is the list that has To Kill a Mockingbird, Catch-22, Invisible Man, and all those other books you read in high school English class (as well as The Lord of the Rings and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe). A glorified comic book on a list with these greats? But now that I've read it, I see that it deserves its spot on the list.
I am a far cry from an avid comic book reader--I could count the number of comic books I've read on one hand (leaving the binary count-to-31 trick aside)--so while I cannot evaluate Watchmen's impact on the world of comics or compare its content and presentation to other prominent graphic novels, I can comment on my reaction to Watchmen as (like the average person) a genre outsider. Dave Gibbons' art was a perfect visual complement to Alan Moore's dialogue. Dialogue continuing over flashback panels, cuts back and forth between scenes, intertwining a fitting comic book throughout the novel, the use of motifs--I was struck by the artfulness of the presentation. Various characters provided striking insight in unexpected places. A section at the end of each installment provided newspaper or magazine clippings, personal invoices, chapters of an autobiography, and collections of other tidbits, which was a clever way of giving the reader a better understanding of the characters and the world in which they lived. And I loved the little details, such as the short quotes slipped in at the end of each chapter as relevant commentary on the events in the chapter. It all seemed to me to be everything that a graphic novel should be, a perfect display of the format--I cannot begin to imagine it as an unillustrated novel.
The story was incredibly powerful. It takes place in a world just like ours up to the point that a handful of people suddenly decided to put on costumes and fight crime (or promote it) as masked vigilantes. The other major event that threw this world in a different direction from our own was a scientific experiment accident that yielded an enormously powerful individual who can single-handedly end a war as well as develop new technologies at a super-human rate. In the present day (1985) of this world, masked heroes are illegal, forcing most into retirement. The murder of one of the masked heroes leads others to believe that there may be a mask killer hunting them down, but there is something much bigger being set into motion. Watchmen is a fascinating study of psychology and morality. What kinds of people become masked heroes? What do such people do when they retire? How do they think? What means can be justified in the pursuit of a noble cause? What is a person worth?
I wouldn't have thought I would describe the experience of reading a comic book with these words, but between the engaging, challenging story and its artful presentation, I found Watchmen to be breathtakingly beautiful.
The following are a couple of my reflections on specific issues in the story.
HERE BE SPOILERS until next set of asterisks
******
Reflection 1: People as Miracles
Dr. Manhattan's ultimate reason for returning to Earth was his realization that every single human being is a miracle; considering the chances of our parents and their parents and each of their parents, etc. meeting and procreating, coupled with the probability of each particular sperm meeting each egg to produce each person in every step of the process, the chances of each of us being born seems infinitely small. I have considered this idea before, though not in the context presented in Watchmen. I am familiar with the concept as a part of a philosophy of religion argument, an argument that had led me to dismiss the notion that each person is a miracle. The argument goes something like this: What are the chances of the fundamental constants and properties of the universe being such that we can have a solar system like ours and a planet like ours with just the right characteristics to foster life? The chances are so infinitely small, how could it be an accident? It cannot. Therefore, there must be some greater power that created the universe in this specific way. The response (let's see if I can do a reasonable summary; trust me that the argument is at least somewhat convincing if explained well): This question is irrelevant since we would not be around to ask it if the universe hadn't worked out the way it did. Consider the infinitesimal chance of my birth. Should I assume that a higher power specifically orchestrated every single occurrence, every single sperm movement throughout history such that I would be born? Such an assumption would be extremely conceited. Had events played out differently someone else would merely be here to wonder at the tiny chance that she was born. Since it doesn't make sense to assume that a higher power guided events leading to my birth, it does not make sense simply to assume that such a power guided the creation of the universe. And so I had grudgingly concluded that, though it may seem that way at first, each person's existence is not a miracle. But Dr. Manhattan's conclusion made me think about the issue again--I did not like finding my reasoning challenged by one such as he--and I realized that the philosophical argument is not actually contrary to Dr. Manhattan's conclusion. The argument merely says that my birth is a miracle of chance, rather than one of active guidance. I suppose we can each be considered miracles, after all.
Reflection 2: If the end is right...
Ah, the big philosophical elephant in the room, or, shall we say, the giant octopus in the city: Can any means be justified by a great enough end? When all is said and done, it is difficult to find a fault in Adrian Veidt's goodness (which is not to say whether or not his actions were right, simply that it is hard to dismiss him as evil). He knows that he has done a horrible thing to countless people. Millions in New York killed in a moment of pain and terror by the monster he created, plus all the people who helped him create the monster murdered by him as well. But he remembers them, honors them, tries to picture their faces, feel the pain that he made them feel. And it was all to bring about world peace. How many more did he save by (apparently) unifying the world in peace when it was on the brink of nuclear war? In the end, only Rorschach could find fault in Adrian's actions. At least, while the others may have found fault in Veidt's actions, given what had already occurred only Rorschach was still willing to bring Adrian to justice for the wrongs he had committed. Viewing the morality of the issue in black and white, like the mask through which he views the world, Rorschach saw no room for compromise. Morality is not black and white, but that is not to say that Rorschach was wrong. I think readers are meant to take his side; he is the most popular character from the novel even though he is, well, a bit crazy. But is Veidt actually the crazy one? To hatch a plot like his and see it through... Is it insanity or clarity that allows him to drop the bomb on the chance that it will save more lives than it destroys? The position that Dan and Laurie find themselves holding is extremely complex. Had they been able to, they would have stopped Adrian's plan. But given that they failed to stop it, they are not willing to expose his crime and see him punished. This middle ground, this compromise, is maddening. Were they right? Was Veidt right? Was Rorschach right? These three possibilities are mutually exclusive. Ultimately, the issue is left open ended. "In the end? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends."
******
END OF SPOILERS
It will be interesting to see how the movie turns out (assuming that it turns out at all). The casting choices were intriguing. Some of the age castings were odd; Matthew Goode, 30, was cast as Adrian Veidt, who is supposed to be 46. Of course, the story hops through time so much, I suppose they had to cast the actors and let makeup age them appropriately, knowing that they'd be the right age for at least one scene. I think the casting of relative unknowns was a good choice, and I look forward to seeing how the actors do. Still, I wonder if the movie can possibly do justice to the graphic novel. Alan Moore, in his typical disdain for Hollywood, has washed his hands of the movie, saying that there are elements of Watchmen that can only work in graphic novels, and no movie adaptation could--or should--attempt to do it justice. I already know the comic-book-series-within-a-comic-book-series will not be in the movie, though it will apparently be an extra on the DVD. How many other clever bits had to be cut? What can a movie version of Watchmen bring to the story that the graphic novel could not? Will it be enough to compensate for what is lost? The Lord of the Rings movie adaptations did what few adaptations are able to accomplish: while cutting out significant portions of the story, they were able to add enough to the experience to validate the transformation of the book to the film medium (e.g., I felt more sympathy for Gollum in the movie than I'd ever thought to feel while reading the book). Can the Watchmen movie do the same? Already a graphic novel, it is perhaps more difficult achieve this goal. A tall order, indeed.
The Watchmen graphic novel revolutionized the genre. Watchmen movie director Zack Snyder has said that the movie will similarly turn the comic book movie genre on its head; for people who think that comic book movies are unintelligent fluff, this movie will prove them wrong and validate the comic book movie as a respectable genre. The thing is, this summer's The Dark Knight was a phenomenal success with both critics and the general public. If Dark Knight already accomplished what Snyder hopes Watchmen will accomplish, this may not be the climate in which he wants to introduce his movie. I am a little concerned about this fact. Of course, Batman: The Dark Knight Returns was published immediately before Watchmen (February - June 1986 vs. Watchmen's September 1986 - October 1987) and was heaped with praise, and there was still room for Watchmen to be recognized for its greatness. Movies are a different business, but still, there's hope. Hope, assuming the movie is good. I will be one of the fans in line to see how it turns out.
It's been a long time since I've read anything so sharp, challenging, moving, or beautiful. I have to admit that when I first heard of Watchmen, I found it surprising that Time Magazine would put a graphic novel on its list of 100 Best Novels (all English language novels 1923-2006). I mean, this is the list that has To Kill a Mockingbird, Catch-22, Invisible Man, and all those other books you read in high school English class (as well as The Lord of the Rings and The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe). A glorified comic book on a list with these greats? But now that I've read it, I see that it deserves its spot on the list.
I am a far cry from an avid comic book reader--I could count the number of comic books I've read on one hand (leaving the binary count-to-31 trick aside)--so while I cannot evaluate Watchmen's impact on the world of comics or compare its content and presentation to other prominent graphic novels, I can comment on my reaction to Watchmen as (like the average person) a genre outsider. Dave Gibbons' art was a perfect visual complement to Alan Moore's dialogue. Dialogue continuing over flashback panels, cuts back and forth between scenes, intertwining a fitting comic book throughout the novel, the use of motifs--I was struck by the artfulness of the presentation. Various characters provided striking insight in unexpected places. A section at the end of each installment provided newspaper or magazine clippings, personal invoices, chapters of an autobiography, and collections of other tidbits, which was a clever way of giving the reader a better understanding of the characters and the world in which they lived. And I loved the little details, such as the short quotes slipped in at the end of each chapter as relevant commentary on the events in the chapter. It all seemed to me to be everything that a graphic novel should be, a perfect display of the format--I cannot begin to imagine it as an unillustrated novel.
The story was incredibly powerful. It takes place in a world just like ours up to the point that a handful of people suddenly decided to put on costumes and fight crime (or promote it) as masked vigilantes. The other major event that threw this world in a different direction from our own was a scientific experiment accident that yielded an enormously powerful individual who can single-handedly end a war as well as develop new technologies at a super-human rate. In the present day (1985) of this world, masked heroes are illegal, forcing most into retirement. The murder of one of the masked heroes leads others to believe that there may be a mask killer hunting them down, but there is something much bigger being set into motion. Watchmen is a fascinating study of psychology and morality. What kinds of people become masked heroes? What do such people do when they retire? How do they think? What means can be justified in the pursuit of a noble cause? What is a person worth?
I wouldn't have thought I would describe the experience of reading a comic book with these words, but between the engaging, challenging story and its artful presentation, I found Watchmen to be breathtakingly beautiful.
The following are a couple of my reflections on specific issues in the story.
HERE BE SPOILERS until next set of asterisks
******
Reflection 1: People as Miracles
Dr. Manhattan's ultimate reason for returning to Earth was his realization that every single human being is a miracle; considering the chances of our parents and their parents and each of their parents, etc. meeting and procreating, coupled with the probability of each particular sperm meeting each egg to produce each person in every step of the process, the chances of each of us being born seems infinitely small. I have considered this idea before, though not in the context presented in Watchmen. I am familiar with the concept as a part of a philosophy of religion argument, an argument that had led me to dismiss the notion that each person is a miracle. The argument goes something like this: What are the chances of the fundamental constants and properties of the universe being such that we can have a solar system like ours and a planet like ours with just the right characteristics to foster life? The chances are so infinitely small, how could it be an accident? It cannot. Therefore, there must be some greater power that created the universe in this specific way. The response (let's see if I can do a reasonable summary; trust me that the argument is at least somewhat convincing if explained well): This question is irrelevant since we would not be around to ask it if the universe hadn't worked out the way it did. Consider the infinitesimal chance of my birth. Should I assume that a higher power specifically orchestrated every single occurrence, every single sperm movement throughout history such that I would be born? Such an assumption would be extremely conceited. Had events played out differently someone else would merely be here to wonder at the tiny chance that she was born. Since it doesn't make sense to assume that a higher power guided events leading to my birth, it does not make sense simply to assume that such a power guided the creation of the universe. And so I had grudgingly concluded that, though it may seem that way at first, each person's existence is not a miracle. But Dr. Manhattan's conclusion made me think about the issue again--I did not like finding my reasoning challenged by one such as he--and I realized that the philosophical argument is not actually contrary to Dr. Manhattan's conclusion. The argument merely says that my birth is a miracle of chance, rather than one of active guidance. I suppose we can each be considered miracles, after all.
Reflection 2: If the end is right...
Ah, the big philosophical elephant in the room, or, shall we say, the giant octopus in the city: Can any means be justified by a great enough end? When all is said and done, it is difficult to find a fault in Adrian Veidt's goodness (which is not to say whether or not his actions were right, simply that it is hard to dismiss him as evil). He knows that he has done a horrible thing to countless people. Millions in New York killed in a moment of pain and terror by the monster he created, plus all the people who helped him create the monster murdered by him as well. But he remembers them, honors them, tries to picture their faces, feel the pain that he made them feel. And it was all to bring about world peace. How many more did he save by (apparently) unifying the world in peace when it was on the brink of nuclear war? In the end, only Rorschach could find fault in Adrian's actions. At least, while the others may have found fault in Veidt's actions, given what had already occurred only Rorschach was still willing to bring Adrian to justice for the wrongs he had committed. Viewing the morality of the issue in black and white, like the mask through which he views the world, Rorschach saw no room for compromise. Morality is not black and white, but that is not to say that Rorschach was wrong. I think readers are meant to take his side; he is the most popular character from the novel even though he is, well, a bit crazy. But is Veidt actually the crazy one? To hatch a plot like his and see it through... Is it insanity or clarity that allows him to drop the bomb on the chance that it will save more lives than it destroys? The position that Dan and Laurie find themselves holding is extremely complex. Had they been able to, they would have stopped Adrian's plan. But given that they failed to stop it, they are not willing to expose his crime and see him punished. This middle ground, this compromise, is maddening. Were they right? Was Veidt right? Was Rorschach right? These three possibilities are mutually exclusive. Ultimately, the issue is left open ended. "In the end? Nothing ends, Adrian. Nothing ever ends."
******
END OF SPOILERS
It will be interesting to see how the movie turns out (assuming that it turns out at all). The casting choices were intriguing. Some of the age castings were odd; Matthew Goode, 30, was cast as Adrian Veidt, who is supposed to be 46. Of course, the story hops through time so much, I suppose they had to cast the actors and let makeup age them appropriately, knowing that they'd be the right age for at least one scene. I think the casting of relative unknowns was a good choice, and I look forward to seeing how the actors do. Still, I wonder if the movie can possibly do justice to the graphic novel. Alan Moore, in his typical disdain for Hollywood, has washed his hands of the movie, saying that there are elements of Watchmen that can only work in graphic novels, and no movie adaptation could--or should--attempt to do it justice. I already know the comic-book-series-within-a-comic-book-series will not be in the movie, though it will apparently be an extra on the DVD. How many other clever bits had to be cut? What can a movie version of Watchmen bring to the story that the graphic novel could not? Will it be enough to compensate for what is lost? The Lord of the Rings movie adaptations did what few adaptations are able to accomplish: while cutting out significant portions of the story, they were able to add enough to the experience to validate the transformation of the book to the film medium (e.g., I felt more sympathy for Gollum in the movie than I'd ever thought to feel while reading the book). Can the Watchmen movie do the same? Already a graphic novel, it is perhaps more difficult achieve this goal. A tall order, indeed.
The Watchmen graphic novel revolutionized the genre. Watchmen movie director Zack Snyder has said that the movie will similarly turn the comic book movie genre on its head; for people who think that comic book movies are unintelligent fluff, this movie will prove them wrong and validate the comic book movie as a respectable genre. The thing is, this summer's The Dark Knight was a phenomenal success with both critics and the general public. If Dark Knight already accomplished what Snyder hopes Watchmen will accomplish, this may not be the climate in which he wants to introduce his movie. I am a little concerned about this fact. Of course, Batman: The Dark Knight Returns was published immediately before Watchmen (February - June 1986 vs. Watchmen's September 1986 - October 1987) and was heaped with praise, and there was still room for Watchmen to be recognized for its greatness. Movies are a different business, but still, there's hope. Hope, assuming the movie is good. I will be one of the fans in line to see how it turns out.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Challenges of The Dark Knight
I know, I know, here I am talking about the record-breaking Dark Knight again. But now I've actually seen it. I would have seen it opening weekend, but my family had agreed to wait to see it until we all got to Hawaii, so our first day there, we didn't hit the beach, we hit the theater. And yes, the hype isn't just hype. It's that good. And yes, Heath Ledger is, indeed, very creepy and very good. And this is the same guy who did Ennis Del Mar and Casanova? Such a shame to lose such a talent. Anyway...
The moral dilemmas presented in the movie really stood out to me. How Batman was in part at fault for the drastic measures of Gotham's criminals, the Joker's deal to stop killing if Batman revealed himself, the morality of killing one man to save many, the choice to save one of two people, a variation of the Prisoner's Dilemma, plus the questionable tactics that the good guys were willing to use to bring down the Joker, including invasion of privacy, telling horrible lies to loved ones...
(SPOILER ALERT this paragraph only, for the last 3 human beings on the planet who haven't seen the movie; also a Mass Effect spoiler for any who haven't yet visited a beautiful little paradise called Virmire but intend to at some point): The situation in Dark Knight that resonated most with me was when Batman had to make a choice to save either Harvey Dent or Rachel. He only had time to make it to one of them, and the police were obviously not competent enough to save the other one (there can be only one Bat-Pod). Mass Effect recently put me in a situation like this: the enemies are closing in both at the perimeter of the Virmire base, where one of your dear friends is staked out, and in the base landing zone, where another of your friends has just set a nuke to blow the entire base and perimeter area to Hades Gamma. Both of these NPCs have been with you since the intro mission. You only have time to save one of them from attackers while Joker (um, a different Joker entirely--your pilot) flies your ship in to whisk you off before the nuke blows. I was shouting at the game in disbelief as I realized the choice I had to make. Ultimately, the choice was no harder for me than Batman's choice--I was romancing one of the characters, so naturally, I had to save him. This did not, however, make me feel any better about my decision (I become very attached to my NPCs), especially since said love interest just had to point out that now we had to live with the fact that Ashley died because of our feelings for each other. Just tear my heart out, why don't you? Anyway, Mass Effect luckily had no Joker twist where you save the WRONG ONE (though in a video game, this wouldn't be a problem: just RELOAD; movies, like Real Life, have no reload). I don't know why I didn't expect that Rachel would be the one to die and Dent the one saved (I did know, of course, that he would live, but that didn't mean that Rachel would necessarily die!), but when Batman burst in to the room with Harvey Dent, it just about killed me. Can you imagine?! It must be one of the most unbearable tortures to live with the knowledge that you could have saved a loved one but instead unintentionally signed their death sentence. The Joker knew exactly what he was doing.
Anyway, Dark Knight was an amazing movie. It has so far repeatedly blown away all records: biggest opening weekend, fastest to $200 million, fastest to $300 million, fastest to $400 mil... The big challenge will be beating Titanic's total box office take. They say it all depends on repeat viewings. Unfortunately, this puts Batman at a disadvantage. While fanboys are one of the most fanatic audiences out there, nothing compares to teenage girls in love with Leo. I was in middle school at the time, and I remember girls boasting about how many times they'd seen it, like it upped their cool factor or something.
"I saw Titanic 8 times."
"That's nothing. I saw it 10 times!"
"Well, my cousin said she saw it 16 times."
I am pleased to say that I saw it only once. Which made me some kind of freak. No joke: I remember seeing a cartoon around the time, can't remember what comic strip it was, but it had these mock freak show displays, where in place of the bearded woman and such it had "freaks" that each provided some silly commentary. One of them was a girl sitting in a chair with a book (and wearing glasses, of course) who was labeled "Teenage girl who saw Titanic only once".
It is unlikely that Dark Knight will best the Titanic domestic box office receipts, but here's hoping. It certainly deserves any titles it gets.
The moral dilemmas presented in the movie really stood out to me. How Batman was in part at fault for the drastic measures of Gotham's criminals, the Joker's deal to stop killing if Batman revealed himself, the morality of killing one man to save many, the choice to save one of two people, a variation of the Prisoner's Dilemma, plus the questionable tactics that the good guys were willing to use to bring down the Joker, including invasion of privacy, telling horrible lies to loved ones...
(SPOILER ALERT this paragraph only, for the last 3 human beings on the planet who haven't seen the movie; also a Mass Effect spoiler for any who haven't yet visited a beautiful little paradise called Virmire but intend to at some point): The situation in Dark Knight that resonated most with me was when Batman had to make a choice to save either Harvey Dent or Rachel. He only had time to make it to one of them, and the police were obviously not competent enough to save the other one (there can be only one Bat-Pod). Mass Effect recently put me in a situation like this: the enemies are closing in both at the perimeter of the Virmire base, where one of your dear friends is staked out, and in the base landing zone, where another of your friends has just set a nuke to blow the entire base and perimeter area to Hades Gamma. Both of these NPCs have been with you since the intro mission. You only have time to save one of them from attackers while Joker (um, a different Joker entirely--your pilot) flies your ship in to whisk you off before the nuke blows. I was shouting at the game in disbelief as I realized the choice I had to make. Ultimately, the choice was no harder for me than Batman's choice--I was romancing one of the characters, so naturally, I had to save him. This did not, however, make me feel any better about my decision (I become very attached to my NPCs), especially since said love interest just had to point out that now we had to live with the fact that Ashley died because of our feelings for each other. Just tear my heart out, why don't you? Anyway, Mass Effect luckily had no Joker twist where you save the WRONG ONE (though in a video game, this wouldn't be a problem: just RELOAD; movies, like Real Life, have no reload). I don't know why I didn't expect that Rachel would be the one to die and Dent the one saved (I did know, of course, that he would live, but that didn't mean that Rachel would necessarily die!), but when Batman burst in to the room with Harvey Dent, it just about killed me. Can you imagine?! It must be one of the most unbearable tortures to live with the knowledge that you could have saved a loved one but instead unintentionally signed their death sentence. The Joker knew exactly what he was doing.
Anyway, Dark Knight was an amazing movie. It has so far repeatedly blown away all records: biggest opening weekend, fastest to $200 million, fastest to $300 million, fastest to $400 mil... The big challenge will be beating Titanic's total box office take. They say it all depends on repeat viewings. Unfortunately, this puts Batman at a disadvantage. While fanboys are one of the most fanatic audiences out there, nothing compares to teenage girls in love with Leo. I was in middle school at the time, and I remember girls boasting about how many times they'd seen it, like it upped their cool factor or something.
"I saw Titanic 8 times."
"That's nothing. I saw it 10 times!"
"Well, my cousin said she saw it 16 times."
I am pleased to say that I saw it only once. Which made me some kind of freak. No joke: I remember seeing a cartoon around the time, can't remember what comic strip it was, but it had these mock freak show displays, where in place of the bearded woman and such it had "freaks" that each provided some silly commentary. One of them was a girl sitting in a chair with a book (and wearing glasses, of course) who was labeled "Teenage girl who saw Titanic only once".
It is unlikely that Dark Knight will best the Titanic domestic box office receipts, but here's hoping. It certainly deserves any titles it gets.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Huge upset on IMDb rankings - Dark Knight
Stop the presses! Sure, Dark Knight made the record for biggest opening weekend box office take, but Spider-Man 3 had done that barely more than a year ago. The real shock, which has shaken reality as I know it, is the IMDb user rating of Dark Knight. It currently stands at a staggering 9.5 (from regular voters--total voters gives an average of 9.7), putting it at #1--ahead of Godfather, Shawshank Redemption, and other well-loved, long-established IMDb favorites. I don't expect it to remain there. Movies generally descend the IMDb rankings as they grow older, with many films that debuted on the top 250 falling off the list by the end of their first year. The people who rush to see the movie when it comes out are the ones most likely to enjoy it and rank it highly. Hence, as a more general audience, without such predispositions, eventually sees the movie--just before it leaves the theaters, on an airplane, on TV, or on DVD--more conservative rankings bring the average down. But still, I don't remember even the Lord of the Rings movies, which I believe each debuted in the Top 10 but have since fallen to ranks 14, 20 and 31, unseating the great Godfather/Shawshank Redemption duo. Dark Knight has done what seemed impossible. I wonder how long it can retain its crown.
> Update 8/11/08: I haven't been watching it closely, but by now Dark Knight has slipped to #3 in the IMDb rankings. Phew! The world can now go back to turning eastward.
> Update 8/11/08: I haven't been watching it closely, but by now Dark Knight has slipped to #3 in the IMDb rankings. Phew! The world can now go back to turning eastward.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Weekend box office comments - 7/20/08 - Dark Knight
Word on the street is that Dark Knight is set to make a whopping $155 million this weekend, breaking the current record of opening weekend box office sales held by Spider-Man 3 by about $4 million. Dark Knight did have the advantage of hugely favorable reviews and great buzz surrounding the masterful performance of Heath Ledger, but Spider-Man 3 had what seemed to be the more important advantage of a lighter tone (though both are PG-13, Spidey seems more kid-friendly) and two box office uber-champion prequels, as opposed to Dark Knight's one merely hugely successful prequel. Dark Knight had the advantage of debuting in the middle of the summer, when kids aren't worrying about going to school on Monday, but Spidey's early May opening was considered a greater advantage, as the summer kickoff would see little competition and fresh, non-superhero wearied audiences. Just before the weekend the analysts were predicting Dark Knight would come in behind Spidey 3. But it looks like they were wrong (not such a huge surprise). I am very pleased by this result, because Spider-Man 3 was kind of lame. A deserved triumph.
> Update, Monday 7/21/08 3 pm: The official final tally for Batman's opening weekend is an even more impressive $158.3 million. Wow!
One time in college, I had a good-natured Batman vs. Spider-Man argument with a friend. He was on the side of Spider-Man; I was on the side of Batman. His argument included a statement to the effect of "Spider-Man is better because it is an underdog story--Batman isn't at all." At the time, I conceded this, merely pointing out that Bruce Wayne didn't exactly have a peaches and cream childhood either, but we were soon distracted by other things going on at the time. But not long after that, I thought of the following rejoinder, though I never had a chance to bring up the argument again. And I guess that fact still bothers me to this day, since here I am about to present it in my blog:
Yes, Spider-Man is the underdog story, because Peter Parker grew up a poor orphan, makes his living selling pictures of himself to a newspaper, but has acquired this amazing power that he uses to fight crime. Bruce Wayne, on the other hand, while growing up an orphan as well, has always had more money than he could ever use and people fawning over him because of it. But here's the thing: Peter Parker was given superhuman powers when that spider bit him. And, as Uncle Ben said, with great power comes great responsibility. With his great power, he has a responsibility to use it to help humanity. Frankly, if I suddenly had a remarkable power that made me perfectly suited to fight crime, I would give it a go. I really think I would, for better or for worse. But look at Bruce Wayne. No spider bit him. He has no powers. He made himself a crime-fighter. If I were in his position, I would maybe feel the need to donate money to good causes and do assorted charity work, but I definitely would not try to fight crime, because I wouldn't see myself as equipped to do so. And in that sense, lacking any superpowers, Batman is the underdog, not the super-agile, web-slinging, spider-sensing Spider-Man.
Anyway, with Dark Knight's triumph over Spider-Man 3--at the box office (read: the general public) as well as with critics--I feel vindicated in regards to this argument with my friend so many years ago over whether the Spider-Man or Batman movies were better. Given the most recent installments... I win.
> Update, Monday 7/21/08 3 pm: The official final tally for Batman's opening weekend is an even more impressive $158.3 million. Wow!
One time in college, I had a good-natured Batman vs. Spider-Man argument with a friend. He was on the side of Spider-Man; I was on the side of Batman. His argument included a statement to the effect of "Spider-Man is better because it is an underdog story--Batman isn't at all." At the time, I conceded this, merely pointing out that Bruce Wayne didn't exactly have a peaches and cream childhood either, but we were soon distracted by other things going on at the time. But not long after that, I thought of the following rejoinder, though I never had a chance to bring up the argument again. And I guess that fact still bothers me to this day, since here I am about to present it in my blog:
Yes, Spider-Man is the underdog story, because Peter Parker grew up a poor orphan, makes his living selling pictures of himself to a newspaper, but has acquired this amazing power that he uses to fight crime. Bruce Wayne, on the other hand, while growing up an orphan as well, has always had more money than he could ever use and people fawning over him because of it. But here's the thing: Peter Parker was given superhuman powers when that spider bit him. And, as Uncle Ben said, with great power comes great responsibility. With his great power, he has a responsibility to use it to help humanity. Frankly, if I suddenly had a remarkable power that made me perfectly suited to fight crime, I would give it a go. I really think I would, for better or for worse. But look at Bruce Wayne. No spider bit him. He has no powers. He made himself a crime-fighter. If I were in his position, I would maybe feel the need to donate money to good causes and do assorted charity work, but I definitely would not try to fight crime, because I wouldn't see myself as equipped to do so. And in that sense, lacking any superpowers, Batman is the underdog, not the super-agile, web-slinging, spider-sensing Spider-Man.
Anyway, with Dark Knight's triumph over Spider-Man 3--at the box office (read: the general public) as well as with critics--I feel vindicated in regards to this argument with my friend so many years ago over whether the Spider-Man or Batman movies were better. Given the most recent installments... I win.
Sunday, July 13, 2008
My Favorite Things
It may be our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities, but as far as this blog is concerned, my interests are what define me. So here are a few of my favorite things.
******
BOOKS
Lord of the Rings (ah, the classics)
Harry Potter (Rowling is amazing, pulling kids of all ages away from their TV and computer screens and making them actually read a book)
His Dark Materials (I wish The Golden Compass movie had done better, since I think the other two could make better movies... though notice that it was a huge hit on the international markets)
Wheel of Time (at least the early ones... what's going to happen now?)
Shannara ("Sword" is a total LotR ripoff, but a couple others had some more original story lines)
Redwall (my tweenage introduction to the world of fantasy... I owe it so much)
Watchmen (I don't have much experience with graphic novels but holy crap, this one's amazing)
TV
Firefly (tragically short)
Battlestar Galactica (the new series, naturally... nothing puts me on edge like a good BSG episode)
LOST (back on its game in Season 4)
Heroes (please make Season 3 good again)
Pushing Daisies (Kristin Chenowith bursts into song--what more do I need to fall in love with a show?)
Sarah Connor Chronicles (yay, Summer Glau!)
Chuck (yay, Adam Baldwin!)
I also started watching Desperate Housewives last season, which was kind of out of the blue (okay, it was because I saw Nathan Fillion)
MOVIES
This is actually kind of difficult. It's not like TV shows or book series where I choose a few stories to follow and devote significant time to them. I see so many movies (I have over 200 rated on my IMDb account, and these are just the ones that I took the time to grade), and because I spend so much of my free time doing things other than re-watching movies (see the final category), I love lots of movies that I don't necessarily own or view over and over again. Also, this category is definitely the least restricted by genre. Below are a few notable favorites, though the list is hardly exhaustive.
Lord of the Rings (all three without a doubt, my favorite movies of all time)
Star Wars (I'll even watch the new ones--I don't care if they're bad)
Serenity (naturally)
Pirates of the Caribbean (mainly the first one... it was such a surprise when it turned out to be good)
The Matrix (definitely just the first one)
Batman Begins (a revelation compared to the previous installments)
The Dark Knight (a dark masterpiece)
Iron Man (I knew Robert Downey Jr. was awesome ever since seeing...)
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
X-Men (particularly the first two)
Garden State
Robin Hood: Men in Tights
COMPUTER GAMES
Baldur's Gate (especially Shadows of Amn, though as a complete saga it is unparalleled)
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (I loved both 1 and 2, though the first holds a special place in my heart)
Neverwinter Nights (I played the original and its two expansions; all three were a bit disappointing in terms of story, but I liked them anyway)
Neverwinter Nights 2 (I really liked how Mask of the Betrayer worked out; the original campaign was pretty good)
Diablo II (though I was really just a sorceress enthusiast; I couldn't get into any of the others)
Morrowind (I enjoyed it, but I haven't exactly snatched up Oblivion)
Hellgate: London (I used to play with my brothers online, but now the servers have been shut down. Very sad.)
Mass Effect (awesome. just... awesome)
I mostly don't do console games these days (since I'm kind of lacking in the console department), though I did grow up with a Sega Genesis (I was a master at Streets of Rage 2). The following two games deserve a mention on the list, since I did spend a long time completing them:
Final Fantasy Tactics (on my little brother's PlayStation)
Pokémon (when I was your age, there were only 150 Pokémon... and I caught them all)
So for the most part, I do RPGs and action RPGs (and in middle school I did whatever Pokémon counts as). I've dabbled in RTS and TBS (emphasis on "dabbled"... but I did a few missions here and there in Warcraft 2 and 3 and Heroes of Might and Magic 3, for instance, back in the day), but I've never gotten into a good FPS. And I've definitely never done an MMORPG. That is intentional; I'd like to keep my soul for now, thank you very much. (Note: to anyone who doesn't know what these abbreviations mean, look them up--it's good for you. I was kind enough to write out full computer game titles, at least.)
******
While some may say that it is not who we are underneath but what we do that defines us, knowing which movies and books I like and which games I've played can give a person a good look inside my head. These favorites may not show who I am, but they show who I want to be. They show what my daydreams are, and what is more our own--more ourselves--than our dreams?
All right, I'm getting a little cheesy-philosophical (on a totally unrelated note, I tried to explain to a visiting Japanese woman yesterday what "cheesy" meant... it was very difficult, especially when I tried to compare it to "corny"--big mistake), and I now seem to be digressing extensively. It's time for bed. Eleni out.
******
BOOKS
Lord of the Rings (ah, the classics)
Harry Potter (Rowling is amazing, pulling kids of all ages away from their TV and computer screens and making them actually read a book)
His Dark Materials (I wish The Golden Compass movie had done better, since I think the other two could make better movies... though notice that it was a huge hit on the international markets)
Wheel of Time (at least the early ones... what's going to happen now?)
Shannara ("Sword" is a total LotR ripoff, but a couple others had some more original story lines)
Redwall (my tweenage introduction to the world of fantasy... I owe it so much)
Watchmen (I don't have much experience with graphic novels but holy crap, this one's amazing)
TV
Firefly (tragically short)
Battlestar Galactica (the new series, naturally... nothing puts me on edge like a good BSG episode)
LOST (back on its game in Season 4)
Heroes (please make Season 3 good again)
Pushing Daisies (Kristin Chenowith bursts into song--what more do I need to fall in love with a show?)
Sarah Connor Chronicles (yay, Summer Glau!)
Chuck (yay, Adam Baldwin!)
I also started watching Desperate Housewives last season, which was kind of out of the blue (okay, it was because I saw Nathan Fillion)
MOVIES
This is actually kind of difficult. It's not like TV shows or book series where I choose a few stories to follow and devote significant time to them. I see so many movies (I have over 200 rated on my IMDb account, and these are just the ones that I took the time to grade), and because I spend so much of my free time doing things other than re-watching movies (see the final category), I love lots of movies that I don't necessarily own or view over and over again. Also, this category is definitely the least restricted by genre. Below are a few notable favorites, though the list is hardly exhaustive.
Lord of the Rings (all three without a doubt, my favorite movies of all time)
Star Wars (I'll even watch the new ones--I don't care if they're bad)
Serenity (naturally)
Pirates of the Caribbean (mainly the first one... it was such a surprise when it turned out to be good)
The Matrix (definitely just the first one)
Batman Begins (a revelation compared to the previous installments)
The Dark Knight (a dark masterpiece)
Iron Man (I knew Robert Downey Jr. was awesome ever since seeing...)
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
X-Men (particularly the first two)
Garden State
Robin Hood: Men in Tights
COMPUTER GAMES
Baldur's Gate (especially Shadows of Amn, though as a complete saga it is unparalleled)
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (I loved both 1 and 2, though the first holds a special place in my heart)
Neverwinter Nights (I played the original and its two expansions; all three were a bit disappointing in terms of story, but I liked them anyway)
Neverwinter Nights 2 (I really liked how Mask of the Betrayer worked out; the original campaign was pretty good)
Diablo II (though I was really just a sorceress enthusiast; I couldn't get into any of the others)
Morrowind (I enjoyed it, but I haven't exactly snatched up Oblivion)
Hellgate: London (I used to play with my brothers online, but now the servers have been shut down. Very sad.)
Mass Effect (awesome. just... awesome)
I mostly don't do console games these days (since I'm kind of lacking in the console department), though I did grow up with a Sega Genesis (I was a master at Streets of Rage 2). The following two games deserve a mention on the list, since I did spend a long time completing them:
Final Fantasy Tactics (on my little brother's PlayStation)
Pokémon (when I was your age, there were only 150 Pokémon... and I caught them all)
So for the most part, I do RPGs and action RPGs (and in middle school I did whatever Pokémon counts as). I've dabbled in RTS and TBS (emphasis on "dabbled"... but I did a few missions here and there in Warcraft 2 and 3 and Heroes of Might and Magic 3, for instance, back in the day), but I've never gotten into a good FPS. And I've definitely never done an MMORPG. That is intentional; I'd like to keep my soul for now, thank you very much. (Note: to anyone who doesn't know what these abbreviations mean, look them up--it's good for you. I was kind enough to write out full computer game titles, at least.)
******
While some may say that it is not who we are underneath but what we do that defines us, knowing which movies and books I like and which games I've played can give a person a good look inside my head. These favorites may not show who I am, but they show who I want to be. They show what my daydreams are, and what is more our own--more ourselves--than our dreams?
All right, I'm getting a little cheesy-philosophical (on a totally unrelated note, I tried to explain to a visiting Japanese woman yesterday what "cheesy" meant... it was very difficult, especially when I tried to compare it to "corny"--big mistake), and I now seem to be digressing extensively. It's time for bed. Eleni out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)