Posts
SPEED RACER - The Awesome Anti-American Anthem
Okay, so I kinda have to agree with Robert Kirkman about what a damn fine movie SPEED RACER is. It's way over the top, and super-CGI heavy, but one thing I'll grant the Watchowskis: whenever they tackle the visual side of things, it never looks like what anyone else is doing. This movie may seem, from the trailer alone, to be the epitome of brain-dead eye-candy in the shape of story cinema, but it is far from that in effect.
The story itself is classic, a coming-of-age tale with every well-loved cliche rolled into one. There's the overbearing lovable bear of a dad, the older sibling who failed before, the younger who now has to prove his mettle, the choice between the love of a thing and the corporate greed and abuse of a thing, adults that don't fight quite hard enough and youth that often acts upon overly-naive convictions, propelled by the belief that their go-get'em gumption will mass the masses to to 'em.
Admittedly, the "evil corporation" comes across as a somewhat empty villain, seeing as how this is the Watchowskis and a huge-budget studio flick. If corporations were truly okay with having their mentality exposed as anything more biting than cookie-cutter cartoon biblical style evil, then IDIOCRACY would have been treated better. Hmmm...come to think of it, SPEED RACER didn't exactly have the right backing and promotion necessary in these entertainment-saturated times to become a hit. It just kinda came and went. The moral? America, darling, you're the enemy. The rest of the world? The wide-eyed youth that believes spirit and passion can win him everything? That's what we kill. Daily. In our pursuit of greed and gadgets. I am not talking about our corporations. I'm talking about YOU. Our corporations may be THE corporation of the film, but we're Taejo, the driver that turns a blind eye to how the actions of his family and company do away with all sportsmanlike virtues, and even, ultimately, the sport itself. America, these movies aren't doing well. We don't like them. We ignore them. I wonder why? It's no mistake the villain was American (albeit with a British accent, which I suppose was the attempt at camouflage) and the semi-villain was Japanese.
SPEED RACER is a half kid's-movie, and reminded me greatly of the Hoskins/Hopper SUPER MARIO BROS. flick in tone, but its oh-so-much fun, and every actor, especially the child actors, are so INTO the movie and enjoying what they're doing, you can't help but be strung along. On the subject of the visuals, seriously, what other movie on earth looks like this:
Maybe ZARDOZ, a choice few Boorman and Ken Russell masterpieces, but that's about it.
The CGI is wondefully artful, like a sci-fi Willy Wonka, it actually stands reminiscent of TRON, mixed with of course the more modern slow-mo stuff a la THE MATRIX and 300. Yet the charming part is that the CGI is meant to look like CGI. They make it look hyper-real and fake, and beautifully so. Unlike such rainbow colored bowel movements as 300, wherein the CGI was meant to stun, and startle, and shake, no nuance or sense of actual love or craft apparent (just manipulation), SPEED RACER is the CGI equivalent of stop-motion CLASH OF THE TITANS type grandeur. It's wonderfully unreal, exquisitely so. It's awesome to watch because for all its excessive qualities, it's NEW. It's truly DIFFERENT and something we havent' yet seen before.
So check this one out. If you're a Yank, this movie is at its heart against everything you are and do currently, but it yearns for a spirit no capitalist culture has truly maintained as its grown into the global bloated beast it stands as today. It's headier than it thinks it is, is our Speed Racer. It's mind and swirling, sizzling, streaking matter. It's bloody awesome is what it is. --Dave B.
Sean Connery as James Bond - my first exposure
Okay, I admit it, I've been a recalcitrant pop-culturalist: I've never watched a single Bond film before Pierce Brosnan's GOLDENEYE. Well, I have vague memories of a Roger Moore Bond, and one Timothy Dalton Bond, both circa 1980-something, having watched a few scenes when I was a tyke and my mom had them playing in the background, but I was far too young to retain specifics and don't acutely recall a damn thing about either. So James Bond, as a viewing entertainment experience, for me, began with the Brosnan years.
I saw and enjoyed GOLDENEYE and then TOMORROW NEVER DIES, but fell off and heard far too many awful things about the third and fourth Pierce/Bond flicks. I have watched and feel happy enough with CASINO ROYALE - I'm not completely in love with what's-his-face (Daniel Craig) as the new "gritty" Bond, but it works well enough, and ultimately I realized - I had no idea what the flying $^&k I was comparing any of it to! I've never seen any other Bond!
Were any of these quote-unquote "good Bond films"? I guess I've never really been able to say. When people mention that Sean Connery is the best Bond, I can't imagine the guy without a white beard. Time I rectified that.
I saw and enjoyed GOLDENEYE and then TOMORROW NEVER DIES, but fell off and heard far too many awful things about the third and fourth Pierce/Bond flicks. I have watched and feel happy enough with CASINO ROYALE - I'm not completely in love with what's-his-face (Daniel Craig) as the new "gritty" Bond, but it works well enough, and ultimately I realized - I had no idea what the flying $^&k I was comparing any of it to! I've never seen any other Bond!
Were any of these quote-unquote "good Bond films"? I guess I've never really been able to say. When people mention that Sean Connery is the best Bond, I can't imagine the guy without a white beard. Time I rectified that.
So I've plowed through Connery's years, and here's my thought on the first three:
First came DR. NO, and it was...okay. The first half was mesmerizing in its dated, sexist, racist, but nevertheless thrilling attempts at gritty pulp fare, but the second half slipped into over the top nonesense that really did make little to no sense. The villain was ominous, but ultimately ineffectual at doing villainous thing, and the climax/final big fisticuff was slow and mostly weird, a dud - which I suppose is poetic as it was about defusing a nuclear attack. The iconic white bikini chick - the first poster Bond girl - was a simply tossed in there character, appearing at the last half hour and sporting a laughable "origin" (a seaside drop dead gorgeous [well, for the time] orphan running around crazy free? Wait, what from where and why? Brrrprrprrprrp, trill the lips of my poor overtaxed brain).
Connery, though, I'd admit, made a suave Bond. His cool-as-cucumber posture coupled with his alarmingly agressive, straight-on glare at everyone who crossed his path gave him menace and charm, which is what Bond is all about. The deadpan quips with just a *touch* of lift at the end - par excellance.
Then came FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, hands down the very best the Connery Bonds ever achieved, and so I was on board to stay after this one. Connery was now form-fitted into the role, which had yet to balloon into sheer ridiculousness. The villains were fantastic, while also being sympathetic, the "Girl" of the story wonderfully three-dimensional while nevertheless fitting the 2-D plot device mold which allowed the movie to still be, at its core, a simple Bond movie. SPECTER is introduced, the fighting sequences were brilliantly choreographed with rough-and-tumble "realistic" half brawling boxing, half fine-tuned martial art moves. The story itself was the most coherent and twisty; this one seemed to have the perfect blend of pulp and grit, of real and surreal. It reminded me of the BOURNE films, and truly I see a lot that BOURNE stole/was inspired by from RUSSIA. This would collapse in its entirety with GOLDFINGER.
Yes, GOLDFINGER...I really wanted to like this one more than I did. It's the quintessential Bond flick, the one that set the mold for all to come: lunatic villains with bizarre prowess (in this case a touch that turns to gold), unforgettably lethal henchmen (Odd Job!), "Girl" names that must be heard from the lips of the actors themselves to be believed (Pussy Galore!), lines quotable for decades to come ("I don't expect you to talk, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!"), and action that moves waaaaaay past the realms of anything resembling "the world". And it was boring. Or, well, it was...weak.
Lots of gooniness, an admittedly great battle bewteen Connery and Odd Job at the climax, but beyond that, the movie just wanders and does little to cement itself - more in love with the brilliance of its MOMENTS rather than its whole. The great moments have already been shared via oral tradition and everything else is forgettable. Connery as well, especially when he's strapped to a table or otherwise not in motion, can literally be SEEN thinking "hmmm...I wonder what else I can do with my career...?"
Thankfully, the series picks up a bit better in THUNDERBALL and YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, and even the break-from-Connery-for-a-single-movie George Lazenby as Bond ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE does some wild but inspired visual storytelling. GOLDFINGER set the standard, but mirroring the dynamic between DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, what came next figured out how to do it better. I'll talk about those some day soon. --Dave B.
Connery, though, I'd admit, made a suave Bond. His cool-as-cucumber posture coupled with his alarmingly agressive, straight-on glare at everyone who crossed his path gave him menace and charm, which is what Bond is all about. The deadpan quips with just a *touch* of lift at the end - par excellance.
Then came FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, hands down the very best the Connery Bonds ever achieved, and so I was on board to stay after this one. Connery was now form-fitted into the role, which had yet to balloon into sheer ridiculousness. The villains were fantastic, while also being sympathetic, the "Girl" of the story wonderfully three-dimensional while nevertheless fitting the 2-D plot device mold which allowed the movie to still be, at its core, a simple Bond movie. SPECTER is introduced, the fighting sequences were brilliantly choreographed with rough-and-tumble "realistic" half brawling boxing, half fine-tuned martial art moves. The story itself was the most coherent and twisty; this one seemed to have the perfect blend of pulp and grit, of real and surreal. It reminded me of the BOURNE films, and truly I see a lot that BOURNE stole/was inspired by from RUSSIA. This would collapse in its entirety with GOLDFINGER.
Yes, GOLDFINGER...I really wanted to like this one more than I did. It's the quintessential Bond flick, the one that set the mold for all to come: lunatic villains with bizarre prowess (in this case a touch that turns to gold), unforgettably lethal henchmen (Odd Job!), "Girl" names that must be heard from the lips of the actors themselves to be believed (Pussy Galore!), lines quotable for decades to come ("I don't expect you to talk, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die!"), and action that moves waaaaaay past the realms of anything resembling "the world". And it was boring. Or, well, it was...weak.
Lots of gooniness, an admittedly great battle bewteen Connery and Odd Job at the climax, but beyond that, the movie just wanders and does little to cement itself - more in love with the brilliance of its MOMENTS rather than its whole. The great moments have already been shared via oral tradition and everything else is forgettable. Connery as well, especially when he's strapped to a table or otherwise not in motion, can literally be SEEN thinking "hmmm...I wonder what else I can do with my career...?"
Thankfully, the series picks up a bit better in THUNDERBALL and YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE, and even the break-from-Connery-for-a-single-movie George Lazenby as Bond ON HER MAJESTY'S SECRET SERVICE does some wild but inspired visual storytelling. GOLDFINGER set the standard, but mirroring the dynamic between DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE, what came next figured out how to do it better. I'll talk about those some day soon. --Dave B.
Nightwatch - Daywatch - Wanted? Moby Dick the Action-Adventure Graphic Novel Mov...ie...uh...what the fuck is WRONG with us!?!
Okay, so here's a connect-the-dots eureka that everyone is well aware of but likely this'll still come as an oh-my-god-that-still-took-me-by-surprise-and-makes-me-feel-really-really-bad kind of thing.
So Timur Bekmambetov, the director of WANTED, also directed the Russian smash box office hits (in Russia, mind you, still pretty decent successes in the States and abroad as well, though) NIGHTWATCH and DAYWATCH, the first and second offerings in the Nightwatch "Trilogy" of films:
Now, there are four novels all together insofar as the original Nightwatch series is concerned, of which the movies are then based on, but the first AND the second movie cover only - I shit you not - the first TWO-THIRDS of the FIRST NOVEL alone, no matter that the second movie shares the same title as the second novel, and so THAT is worrisome enough as it is. Nevertheless, the movies are fantastic, the first flick the most so, a perfect example to American producers and directors on how to craft a wild fantasy spectacle via creativity, ingenuity, and an indy-sized budget. On Daywatch, Bekmambetov had a much more sizable piggy bank to dip into and it shows: Matrix-style effects dominate a script that really could have stood a finer polish (or any polish at all).
THEN...to make matters as bad as they (theoretically) could possibly be (oh, how naive we can be! To think we've reached the bottom when it's only a giant land mass floating atop free-flowing high-speed lava!) an American producer contacted Bekmambetov and offered to finance the third and final Nightwatch entry...on the condition that it was shot with an entirely English cast and in English to boot. I mean, who the &*$k would watch a Russian language movie over an English one? Subtitles or dubbing be damned? Better to have the third be in English, even though first and second weren't, because things (including trilogies) get better exponentially on WHATEVER small part of it can be transformed into English, language of the past, present, and future.
So, okay, that's pretty shitty, right? To be taken over by Hollywood and to have the insanely uneducated demands begun before the film is even past its conception point. BUT...Bekmambetov didn't make any third Nightwatch film, did he? Well...uhm...no, wait wait he did make something, though. Ooooohhhh. Right. He made WANTED. Well, that's okay (depending on your open-minded definition of "okay"). Hollywood shuffled him over to another project to prove his worth before really pouring money into something as ludicrous as the thir entry in a non-English fantasy trilogy. That makes sense. I don't cheer the approach, but I can follow the general reasoning.
But this isn't what happened. Bekmambetov ultimately revealed: the third Nightwatch movie BECAME "Wanted". The English movie with an English cast directed by Bakmambetov through the producers that approached him shsuffled THE PROJECT ITSELF into a mindless comic book popcorn thing. And then Bekmambetov admitted that he didn't know if - and didn't think it likely that - the third Nightwatch would ever be made.
Thanks, Hollywood. Thanks, America. Oh, country that I love for its...uh...well dash it all for its something I'm sure. That's pretty troubling I can't think of anything off the top of my head that isn't shared by SOME other country(ies) as well, and nothing whatsoever that's more than a single something, and therefore definiteively shared by others but...hmm....
And then it gets really, REALLY BETTER.
To quote the press release:
"Bekmambetov to direct 'Moby Dick'
Universal steers reimagining of Melville classic
Universal Pictures has made a splashy preemptive buy of "Moby Dick," a reimagining of the Herman Melville whale tale that Timur Bekmambetov ("Wanted") will direct.
Studio paid high six figures to Adam Cooper and Bill Collage to pen the screenplay. The writers revere Melville’s original text, but their graphic novel-style version will change the structure. Gone is the first-person narration by the young seaman Ishmael, who observes how Ahab’s obsession with killing the great white whale overwhelms his good judgment as captain. This change will allow them to depict the whale’s decimation of other ships prior to its encounter with Ahab’s Pequod, and Ahab will be depicted more as a charismatic leader than a brooding obsessive.
"Our vision isn’t your grandfather’s ‘Moby Dick,’ " Cooper said. "This is an opportunity to take a timeless classic and capitalize on the advances in visual effects to tell what at its core is an action-adventure revenge story."
Scott Stuber is producing with Jim Lemley and Cormac and Marianne Wibberley. Both Stuber and Bekmambetov have deals at Universal. Bekmambetov will look to apply the visual flourish he displayed on the U summer hit "Wanted."
"We wanted to take a graphic novel sensibility to a classic narrative," said Collage. They brought it to the Wibberlys, the "National Treasure" scribes who are branching into producing and will team with Stuber. The project then caught the fancy of Bekmambetov and Lemley, who teamed with the helmer on "Wanted."
I love how this is considered the quote-unquote GRAPHIC NOVEL-esque take on the tale. THIS, my comic book brethren, is what "the mainstream" thinks our art form is. How blockheaded, how blind, how bass-ackward they...oh...wait...
Yeah, picture's worth a thousand, eh? This will likely be closer to the reality of the film, though:
Has anyone here seen IDIOCRACY, the latest Mike Judge film which uber-corporate braindead Fox treated like crap because the film treated them like crap? Well, if you haven't seen it, see it. 
"Isn't the book basically Melville's meditation on America and an examination of the human character?"
Point, set, and match. We are well and truly fucked, and apparently this is a natural evolution that cannot and will not be stopped. --Dave B.
