• Following Us

  • Categories

  • Check out the Archives









  • Awards & Nominations

Should There Be a Distinction Between The Best Picture and the Best Director Oscar?

Ignoring the fact that, in practice, the Best Director Oscar simply exists to be a “runner-up” award in a really tight Best Picture race (like with Crash and Brokeback Mountain), with there being a huge overlap between the winners in both categories, I have been thinking a bit recently about whether there should be a more practical distinction between the two. Perhaps we should divorce the two awards, and decouple them in public consciousness. Of course, this is a purely academic argument (as the Academy voters will continue to associate them), but is the link between the two yet another indication of Hollywood’s director-centric culture?

Is it two for one?

 

Continue reading

When Average Just Isn’t Good Enough: Do Better Directors Have Further to Fall?

I watched Cop Out at the weekend, and I have to admit it was just about okay. It wasn’t terrible, but it wasn’t consistently funny. It had moments of wit, but they were separated by pointless and boring scenes. It had a talented cast, but didn’t do anything with them. I wouldn’t describe it as a bad film, but I wouldn’t advise you to rent it (or otherwise seek it out). However, there was a stronger and more bitter taste in the air. There was something especially disappointing about the film, because of its director. Cop Out was a Kevin Smith film, and it actually felt a bit worse than it arguably should have because I knew the director was capable of so much more. Am I the only one who tends to be more disappointed by an average film from a talented filmmaker than perhaps even a bad film from an untalented director?

Feels like a bit of a cop out...

 

Continue reading

Thoughts on Snyder’s Superman

It has been over a week since the news that Zack Snyder would be directing the Superman reboot was announced. And what a week it has been. No sooner was the movie announced than details started flooding in – Luthor would not be the main villain, it would be an origin story of sorts, it would not share continuity, Zod would be the primary antagonist, Brandon Routh would not return. That’s quite a bit of news to get straight out of the gate, and I took a while to really shape my opinion of it all. And I’m optimistic, just very cautiously so.

Look! Up in the sky!

Continue reading

Lex is More: Bringing Lex Luthor to the Screen…

I’ve been swamped with real-world work this week, so announcing that Zach Snyder would be directing the new Superman movie and that General Zod would be the primary bad guy on Monday (and a plot synopsis on Tuesday) really threw me for a loop. Anyway, I cobbled together some thoughts on bringing Superman to the big screen. I’ll hopefully have some more general thoughts early next week.

Lex Luthor shouldn’t be so hard to get right on the big screen. I mean, it’s not from lack of trying. The character is more than just Superman’s arch-enemy, he’s a member of his supporting cast. More than the Joker to Batman, Luthor is inexorably linked to the Man of Steel – no matter which enemy is invading Metropolis, Luthor is usually helping them or hindering them or figuring out a way to turn the events to his advantage. As such, he has appeared in all but one of the live action Superman films released over the past three-and-a-half decades, even where he isn’t the main adversary (as in Superman II, where he attempts to manipulate Zod’s vendetta against Superman). And yet, despite being portrayed by two incredibly talented actors – Kevin Spacey and Gene Hackman – the big screen never managed to essence of Luthor’s character. Zack Snyder was earlier this week named director of the Nolan Superman reboot, and although General Zod was named the villain of the film I’d be fairly certain that Luthor will put in an appearance. So, how do you do Lex Luthor right?

Green there and done that?

Continue reading

Oh My Zod: Nolan’s Superman Movie Gets Its Villain…

It had been quite an exciting day for Superman fans. First, director Zack Snyder was confirmed as the man who will be helming the movie under the tutelage of Christopher Nolan. It was then suggested Brandon Routh would not be returning to the role. And then we got some supervillain confirmation. Thankfully it looks like the movie won’t be featuring Lex Luthor as its primary antagonist, but will feature General Zod.

I'm Zod-ding in approval...

Continue reading

Bats isn’t in my Belfry: Nolan’s Batman & Superman and the Inevitable Justice League Film…

Word filtering through the grapevine is that we can expect a “big announcement” from Warner Brothers and DC comics in the next few weeks. Two words seem to be on everybody’s mind at the moment: Justice League. I mean, it makes sense. Warner Brothers are in real need of a new cashcow franchise. There’s only so long they can pump out Harry Potter movies (the final one is due out next year), and the DC comics titles offer a nearly bottomless pile of untapped fantasy-esque cookie-cutter blockbuster-ready properties that they can churn out with instant-ready popularity and geek appeal. And, let’s face it, Marvel has demonstrated with at least Iron Man and Iron Man 2 (if not The Incredible Hulk) that a shared film universe is a profitable investment. Warner and DC certainly missed the train on that one. They must regard their rivals with envious eyes, and slowly and surely they drew their plans against them. And, to be frank, DC is in a much better position than Marvel to exploit this team-up. Marvel sold the Fantastic Four, the X-Men (including Wolverine) and Spider-Man to different companies, effectively meaning that they can’t be included in Marvel’s on-screen universe. However, DC hasn’t sold any big names. However, it has a problem. Christopher Nolan – the man in charge of both Batman and Superman – has decided that he doesn’t want to share. And maybe that’s not a bad thing, after all. 

Should Superman sit this one out?

Continue reading

The Fish Bites Back: James Cameron & Piranha 3D

I kinda sorta almost want to see Piranha 3D. Not because I think it will be good, you see, but because I genuinely want some cheap, visceral 3D action. After all, what’s the point of 3D if it’s simply adding several layours to your 2D watching experience. I realise this makes me sound like an uncultured slob (which, let’s face it, if the glove fits…) but I really want to see a tacky exploitative bit of 3D cinema where things fly out of the screen at me a make me jump out of my seat. It’s not a feeling I’m particularly proud of, but it’s there. Anyway, James Cameron seems to hate me, and people like me. When asked about Piranha 3D, he offered this snippet:

I tend almost never to throw other films under the bus, but that is exactly an example of what we should not be doing in 3-D. Because it just cheapens the medium and reminds you of the bad 3-D horror films from the 70s and 80s, like Friday the 13th 3-D. When movies got to the bottom of the barrel of their creativity and at the last gasp of their financial lifespan, they did a 3-D version to get the last few drops of blood out of the turnip. And that’s not what’s happening now with 3-D. It is a renaissance—right now the biggest and the best films are being made in 3-D. Martin Scorsese is making a film in 3-D. Disney’s biggest film of the year — Tron: Legacy — is coming out in 3-D. So it’s a whole new ballgame.

Okay, I can’t quite argue with that, but it still seems a little bit harsh.

From the looks of it, what James Cameron wants to do to Piranha 3D...

Continue reading

By Gordon! Is Commissioner Gordon the Central Character of Nolan’s Batman?

We have to save Dent! I… have to save Dent!

– Commissioner Gordon, at the climax of The Dark Knight

It was Joss Whedon himself – the man now helming The Avengers – who once argued that the problem in bringing DC adaptations to the screen was that the traditional line-up was somewhat difficult for the audience to relate to and engage with (as compared to identifying with the X-Men’s status as social outcasts or Peter Parker’s nerdy little troubles):

Because, with that one big exception (Batman), DC’s heroes are from a different era. They’re from the era when they were creating gods.

And the thing that made [rival publisher] Marvel Comics extraordinary was that they created people. Their characters didn’t living in mythical cities, they lived in New York. They absolutely were a part of the world. Peter Parker’s character (Spider-Man) was a tortured adolescent.

DC’s characters, like Wonder Woman and Superman and Green Lantern, were all very much removed from humanity. Batman was the only character they had who was so rooted in pain, that had that same gift that the Marvel characters had, which was that gift of humanity that we can relate to.

Of course, he cites Batman as the excpetion, but you can’t help but wonder just how easy it is to relate a billionaire playboy who is focused on avenging the loss of his parents to the exclusion of all else. The wonderful thing that Christopher Nolan has done with the Batman mythos is to render it so wonderfully accessible. And perhaps he’s done that by making James Gordon, as wonderfully played by Gary Oldman, the centre of his saga.

Gordon lights up the movie...

Continue reading

In Defense of Jim Carrey’s Riddler…

I had the misfortune of sitting through Batman Forever a few weeks ago. I also stumbled upon it at the weekend with the better half, who was curious to know what a “terrible” Batman film looked like. We got as far as the intimate “Bat-ass shot” before we simply gave up and tried to wipe our short-term memories. However, I found myself sticking up for a most unlikely part of the production: Jim Carrey as the Riddler.

Surprise! Something's that not that terrible about Batman Forever!

Continue reading

Anatomy of a Backlash: Intercepting Inception Criticisms…

It’s always interesting to watch the reaction to a highly anticipated blockbuster. Sure, most of the time it hits like a drop in the ocean: there’s a moment of anticipation as it travels through the air and a slight reverberation as it joins the rather sizeable pool of existing movies, quickly forgotten or accepted. However, sometimes – if the movie is big enough – you get a slightly more complex reaction. That second before it hits the water becomes longer, the audience holds its breath even tighter and then, when it hits… there are reactions. The first wave, usually one of acceptance – the geekery, the exotic embrace, the types of reviews that push a Rotten Tomatoes score up to 100% before it even gets a wide release. Then there’s the second wave, as a few high-profile commentators dare to speak out against the film – usually reviewers from prestigious publications, usually as release day dawns. There’s a third movement, perhaps in direct response to the above – the rapid fanboy passion, one determined to lock down any criticism, sometimes aggressive, just sometimes caught up in the moment. And, if the film is really big, there’s a fourth wave, the public backlash against the film itself. It’s interesting to watch a movie cycle through these four basic events, like Inception certainly has of late. There are ripples across the internet, and waves of discussion and engagement, which is always great to see. However, it’s somewhat less exciting to witness how bitter criticisms and arguments can become.

It's all a bit topsy-turvy...

Continue reading